or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Lone Ranger Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Lone Ranger Thread

post #1 of 650
Thread Starter 

I tried to get excited (cowboys! trains!), but then there's Johnny Depp with a bird on his head, and juggalo makeup.  As someone who is 1/32 native American, I am mock-outraged.

 

I also have a confession:  I don't like Ruth Wilson at all.  Not even in Luthor.

post #2 of 650

This is the one where the guy who played Emperor Pu-yi in The Last Emperor takes over for Strider, right?

 

(I apologize.)

post #3 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber View Post

I also have a confession:  I don't like Ruth Wilson at all.  Not even in Luthor.

I suspect you also hate America!

post #4 of 650
I'll see this. Because I just gotta.
post #5 of 650
I was as over and done with Johnny Depp after Pirates 3: Endless Political Machinations of the Phantom Menace as I suspect the rest of the country will be after this, so I'm not going to bother, but it does look like a pretty amazing train wreck waiting to happen.
post #6 of 650

Hey for all the gold Johnny Depp gave us in the 90s and getting nothing back for it , he deserves to actually make money once in a while.

 

And try to imagine this movie without Johnny Depp as Tonto with a bird on his head. We wouldn't even be talking about it.

post #7 of 650

Depp may deserve the cash but I don't deserve to pay to see this!

post #8 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

And try to imagine this movie without Johnny Depp as Tonto with a bird on his head. We wouldn't even be talking about it.
I'll give you that, but something being memorable doesn't necessarily make it good.
post #9 of 650

So... what I'm hearing is that this isn't a sequel to Jonah Hex?!

post #10 of 650
I believe this will be a John Carter sized bomb. I literally forget this movie even exists if I stop thinking about it for more than a minute. Each time I see a reference to it it's like, "oh yeah, that's really coming out this summer? Weird."
post #11 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post

I believe this will be a John Carter sized bomb. I literally forget this movie even exists if I stop thinking about it for more than a minute. Each time I see a reference to it it's like, "oh yeah, that's really coming out this summer? Weird."

 

Dr Harford, I think box office prognosticators might sue you for... malpractice for that prediction!  Truly a... Depplorable guess!  The Lone Ranger will say "Hi-yo, Silver!" all the way to... box office gold!  Saying a Johnny Depp... blockbuster will suffer the same fate as a Taylor Kitsch film is... Tontomount to... treason in my book!

post #12 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

Dr Harford, I think box office prognosticators might sue you for... malpractice for that prediction!  Truly a... Depplorable guess!  The Lone Ranger will say "Hi-yo, Silver!" all the way to... box office gold!  Saying a Johnny Depp... blockbuster will suffer the same fate as a Taylor Kitsch film is... Tontomount to... treason in my book!
duke fleed? Is that you?
post #13 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

 

Dr Harford, I think box office prognosticators might sue you for... malpractice for that prediction!  Truly a... Depplorable guess!  The Lone Ranger will say "Hi-yo, Silver!" all the way to... box office gold!  Saying a Johnny Depp... blockbuster will suffer the same fate as a Taylor Kitsch film is... Tontomount to... treason in my book!


If is is treason to say a movie will bomb for coasting on casting and big budget set pieces, then I say let us make the most of it!!!!!!

post #14 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

duke fleed? Is that you?

 

Well, either that or duke is starting to assimilate the rest of the boards......kemosabe.

 

OH, DEAR GOD!

post #15 of 650

Alright, I'll say it: I'm digging those trailers, and I've got hope for the real thing. Is the potential for massive failure there? Sure. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that freed of the shackles of mandatory sequel-itis, this recaptures some of that old Pirates of the Caribbean magic. If nothing else Rango has bought Verbinski and Depp enough cred for a curiosity ticket.

post #16 of 650

Yeah, I mean if nothing else Verbinski and Depp with a bird on his head will make this film enough fun that'll it'll be one of those cult classics that future generations will say, "What the fuck were people's problem in 2013?"

post #17 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

Yeah, I mean if nothing else Verbinski and Depp with a bird on his head will make this film enough fun that'll it'll be one of those cult classics that future generations will say, "What the fuck were people's problem in 2013?"

 

To be fair, it apparently is (sorta) grounded in history outside of the one specific painting that keeps getting referenced:

 

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/article/johnny-depps-tonto-continued-some-indians-did-wear-birds-on-their-heads-111149

 

I also think it's easy to forget (it was for me) that even after 3, and if I was a betting man, probably 4 pretty underwhelming cash-grab sequels, that first Pirates movie is pretty damn good, and Depp was pretty damn good in it even as the character was subsequently run into the ground. Plus, like I said, I'm digging the trailers. I like the weird stuff with the horse, I like the gag with the hat, the train scene looks great (I especially like him riding the horse thru the train). I don't know, it's just hitting the right vibes for me, I'm hoping it'll fall into the same big, broad action spectacle gap as something like The Mask of Zorro

post #18 of 650

Hey, I agree with you. I think people are just being too pessimistic about stuff like this calling it a cash grab while praising a sixth Fast and the Furious sequel for all its fun stupidity. It's a funny world we live in.

post #19 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splatoon View Post

Alright, I'll say it: I'm digging those trailers, and I've got hope for the real thing. Is the potential for massive failure there? Sure. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that freed of the shackles of mandatory sequel-itis, this recaptures some of that old Pirates of the Caribbean magic. If nothing else Rango has bought Verbinski and Depp enough cred for a curiosity ticket.

 

I totally agree.  Caught the new trailer with Fast 6, and I'm really digging Armie Hammer now that we finally get to see more than 2 seconds of him.  And it feels more like it will have that fun vibe the first Pirates did--sort of the same vibe Avengers had last year. 

 

Fourth of July is probably the best Summer weekend to open this--call it the "ID4 bump" for pseudo-patriotic rousers.  If word of mouth is there, I could see this doing better than most everyone predicted.  And in two years we'll get a bloated sequel with needless mythology.

post #20 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

Hey, I agree with you. I think people are just being too pessimistic about stuff like this calling it a cash grab while praising a sixth Fast and the Furious sequel for all its fun stupidity. It's a funny world we live in.
Wait, are people calling this a cash grab? It looks insane and extremely ill-advised, but it doesn't look crassly commercial, to me...
post #21 of 650

"Cash grab" might not be quite the right term.   But "cynical attempt to manufacture a new franchise based around a recognizable character that nobody was particularly clamoring for an update of" is a little too verbose.

post #22 of 650
Gotcha.
post #23 of 650

I hope this bombs because if nothing else maybe Hollywood will stop spending the equivalent of the GDP of a small country on their movies.  All in this is probably going to cost close to $400M ($250M production budget, probably $100 - $150M marketing).

post #24 of 650

You know, I was just thinking to myself "I'm surprised that Ambler hasn't commented here yet seeing as this is the type of soulless, overblown, factory-produced Hollywood movie he absolutely hates" and then I refreshed my browser and....

post #25 of 650

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

"Cash grab" might not be quite the right term.   But "cynical attempt to manufacture a new franchise based around a recognizable character that nobody was particularly clamoring for an update of" is a little too verbose.


Hey, it worked for The Passion Of The Christ.

post #26 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

You know, I was just thinking to myself "I'm surprised that Ambler hasn't commented here yet seeing as this is the type of soulless, overblown, factory-produced Hollywood movie he absolutely hates" and then I refreshed my browser and....

 

The CHUD civil war over Star Trek Into Suckage burned me out for a while...

post #27 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

 

The CHUD civil war over Star Trek Into Suckage burned me out for a while...

 

*Passes Ambler the bottle of water and the towel* Keep the fight going, my friend!

post #28 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

Wait, are people calling this a cash grab? It looks insane and extremely ill-advised, but it doesn't look crassly commercial, to me...

How would you know when everything looks crassly commercial these days.
post #29 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

Wait, are people calling this a cash grab? It looks insane and extremely ill-advised, but it doesn't look crassly commercial, to me...
How would you know when everything looks crassly commercial these days.
True enough, but...I dunno. I haven't been following this closely enough to really know what's going on, but that first trailer looked more like something went terribly wrong in the development stage of what might have been a sincere project. The really cynical factory films don't get as colossally bad as this looks; they just get boring and dumb and indistinguishable. But...Johnny Depp of the KISS tribe? Mystic hoo-ha? $200 million budget for what looks like a SyFy production? I'll grant you that this was probably only greenlit because it looked like Westerns were gonna be a thing for a while there, but...this kind of screw-up generally only happens in the hands of someone who really means it. Like Battlefield Earth, like Cleopatra. I dunno, we'll see how it all shakes out.
post #30 of 650
I'm of the camp which feels like this might be POTC Black Pearl good.

I'll wait for the reviews though because it also feels like it might be POTC Dead Man's Chest shithouse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

... it looked like Westerns were gonna be a thing for a while there ...

I don't remember this Commodore. Was it after the 3:10 To Yuma remake made half a bill? What am I forgetting?
post #31 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

... it looked like Westerns were gonna be a thing for a while there ...
I don't remember this Commodore. Was it after the 3:10 To Yuma remake made half a bill? What am I forgetting?
You know, I'm really not sure...it just seemed like for a brief period they were going to be a thing, and then Cowboys & Aliens flopped and they weren't going to be a thing anymore.
post #32 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

... and then Cowboys & Aliens ...

HA! I had completely blocked the existence of that movie from my memory banks.
post #33 of 650
I'm sorry but to me this looks like the polar opposite of the restrained, classical and character based Mask of Zorro.
post #34 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

I'm of the camp which feels like this might be POTC Black Pearl good.

 

The thing is, Black Pearl wasn't that good. It had two incredibly fun performances (Depp, before he had gone to this well 15 times, and Rush), two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads, and a few fun sequences. Rewatching it of late, I've fast-forwarded through big chunks of it.

post #35 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

The thing is, Black Pearl wasn't that good. It had two incredibly fun performances (Depp, before he had gone to this well 15 times, and Rush), two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads, and a few fun sequences. Rewatching it of late, I've fast-forwarded through big chunks of it.

Thing is, Black Pearl is so good that even with two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads it's still rip-roaring fun. And other thing is, Lone Ranger doesn't have two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads, it has one exquisitely carved Armie Hammer. Plus WILLIAM FICHTNER AND BARRY PEPPER!!!

But to be fair (because as everyone knows, I'm always fair) I haven't seen Black Pearl for a few years and you've seen it of late, so you got me on that one.
post #36 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post


Thing is, Black Pearl is so good that even with two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads it's still rip-roaring fun. And other thing is, Lone Ranger doesn't have two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads, it has one exquisitely carved Armie Hammer. Plus WILLIAM FICHTNER AND BARRY PEPPER!!!

But to be fair (because as everyone knows, I'm always fair) I haven't seen Black Pearl for a few years and you've seen it of late, so you got me on that one.

 

There's just some long slow stretches and shoddy CGI that really haven't aged well. And some sequences - the blacksmith shop swordfight is a good example - that go on at least twice as long as they should. The roots of what went wrong in World's End are in Black Pearl, they just hadn't been beaten to death yet.

post #37 of 650

Yeah.  Black Pearl DEFINITELY goes on too long.


But back then, just seeing the freshness of Depp doing his thing (along with an amped up take on pirate swashbuckling) really covered for it.  Also, the score sounded really rushed and cheap.  But the catchiness of the main theme covered for that too.

 

I've always been most fond of DEAD MAN'S CHEST.  It got loonier with its sequences (which were still over-extended), introduced Nighy as Davey Jones, had a richer score, and made PROMISES.... which AT WORLD'S END failed to keep.  Ugh, so boring.

post #38 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

Thing is, Black Pearl is so good that even with two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads it's still rip-roaring fun. And other thing is, Lone Ranger doesn't have two exquisitely carved blocks of wood as leads, it has one exquisitely carved Armie Hammer. Plus WILLIAM FICHTNER AND BARRY PEPPER!!!
Barry Pepper was in Battlefield Earth, you know. Just sayin'.

But yeah, the first Pirates of the Carribean was pretty good. Not without its problems, but it had enough energy to be fun in spite of them, and struck exactly the right balance with its tongue-in-cheek approach to the buckling of swashes without getting into either flat-out screwball slapstick or the obnoxious hipster "irony" one would expect from an attempt to turn a theme-park ride into a movie (had they invented hipsters in 2000? Maybe we were just spared by timing.)
post #39 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

Barry Pepper was in Battlefield Earth, you know. Just sayin'.

So you openly admit to watching Battlefield Earth Commodore?

Iiiiiiiiiinteresting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

There's just some long slow stretches and shoddy CGI that really haven't aged well. And some sequences - the blacksmith shop swordfight is a good example - that go on at least twice as long as they should. The roots of what went wrong in World's End are in Black Pearl, they just hadn't been beaten to death yet.

Fine Ben Grimm, I'll find my dvd of Black Pearl and dissolve it in acid then set it on fire then feed it to killer whales then shoot those killer whales into a black hole.

HAPPY NOW?!?!?
post #40 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

So you openly admit to watching Battlefield Earth Commodore?

Iiiiiiiiiinteresting.
I'm a connoiseur of shit movies, man. I was on bad-movie boards long before I found my way here. And as terrible as that movie is, it's one of the few modern examples of the big-budget auteur catastrophe - as Ken Begg of Jabootu has often opined, you just don't see movies like that anymore, with serious money thrown behind a singular, personal vision that just so happens to be colossally wrong and terrible. Nowadays bad movies are mostly boring committee pablum; Battlefield Earth is gloriously horrible.

'Sides, if I couldn't bring myself to watch the movie, I couldn't savor the Rifftrax.
post #41 of 650

I will cop to seeing Battlefield Earth in the Thee-atah. And I'll also cop to liking bits of it. The basic idea is sound: Aliens blow the shit out of everything, decades later Humanity is back to Cave Man times, but one alien (for reasons I can't remember) captures one Human and puts him in a speed learning machine, thus giving him the gift of knowledge! Human then gathers an army, brushes off some tech that's lying around, and the explosions begin! But man Travolta and Whittaker must have been paid in canned Hams for this movie. Oh yeah also it really sucks.

 

Back to Lone Ranger.....I don't see this as anything but the most generic, "let's re-make an old Property new again" film by committee bullshit. It's trying real real hard to scream "FUN!" at me but it just seems lame. I'll see what the reviews say but I'm thinking I'll (hopefully) just watch Man of Steel a couple of times instead.

post #42 of 650

Oh man... Battlefield Earth's awfulness is so glorious...

post #43 of 650
Even with The Power of Pepper I couldn't get more than 20 minutes into it if I remember rightly.

Which is about 8 minutes further than I got into Watchmen.
post #44 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

Even with The Power of Pepper I couldn't get more than 20 minutes into it if I remember rightly.

Which is about 8 minutes further than I got into Watchmen.
Then you've never gotten to see John Travolta play a fey, campy drunk Klingon? My friend, you have never lived.
post #45 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

Then you've never gotten to see John Travolta play a fey, campy drunk Klingon? My friend, you have never lived.

No, I did see that part Commodore. That's more than 20 minutes in?

I guess like the old saying goes, time flies when your soul is being smothered.
post #46 of 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucho View Post

Fine Ben Grimm, I'll find my dvd of Black Pearl and dissolve it in acid then set it on fire then feed it to killer whales then shoot those killer whales into a black hole.

HAPPY NOW?!?!?

 

Did you perform the proper binding rituals? If you don't do everything just right, on the third day we'll get an announcement of a new unnecessary sequel.

 

I don't dislike Black Pearl, or think it's bad; I think it's just a bit uneven and has some pacing issues and has lost what made it sort of special. Ten years ago, the pirate genre was seen as exceptionally dead, Johnny Depp didn't really headline blockbusters, it was based on a theme park ride, and it was an incredibly fresh movie that was interesting in part for how different it was. Now, since a lot of what made it interesting then is no longer true, it just doesn't hold up as well on its own as a film. And it's also kind of hard not to think of the consistently declining sequels, however hard I've tried.

post #47 of 650

I don't like Geofrey Rush's performance in Black Pearl. I like Depp but the rest of it is too cartoony and frenetic. I didn't care for Black Pearl when I first saw it. Have not felt the need to watch it again. Then the sequels showed up and even Depp's fun character turn had worn out it's welcome.

post #48 of 650
I dunno. If you make a pirate movie without a performance like Rush's, I don't think you're allowed to actually call it a pirate movie. He's easily the pirate-iest thing in the entire film.
post #49 of 650

I didn't appreciate Rush's performance in Black Pearl as much as I should've.  But Depp's flash probably ended up overshadowing it in the first movie.  Then the act got stale and I totally ate up Rush's performance in AT WORLD'S END.  His performance and the score is all I really adored from that movie. 

 

Though, I DO feel that Rush really just cut loose on the 3rd movie.  In the first movie, he had the scenery chewing, but he was playing a cursed soul.  In the 3rd, he's just having a ball.

post #50 of 650
Thread Starter 

The newer trailers have a Disneyland Thunder Mountain rollercoaster vibe to some of the action scenes that I dig.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Lone Ranger Thread