• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

The Lone Ranger - Part 2

I do agree that it could of been better, but I enjoyed most of the humor. It probably seems peculiar to jump between comic beats and violent death , but it was done so they could get away with more. I could just imagine Armie's character dropping to knees after accidentally killing those two henchmen and screaming like Superman while Tonto tried to comfort him. It just wouldn't have worked.

I have no problem having a scene to lighten the mood like the scenes with the kid or in the case but there's no reason to take something like
burying the Rangers and make it a joke.
I agree I don't see the scene bullets mentioned as being played serious as it is in the movie. But in my opinion the way it is in the movie it's out of character.
I mean they make a joke out of TLR killing two guys but later he knocks Tonto out with a shovel because he's going to kill Cavendish. Not to mention when the Rangers enter the canyon John wont take a gun from Dan because he wont use one.

I wanted to like TLR but for me it falls way short of the mark. As I said before if the movie had just been out and out bad I would have been less disapointed. I actually don't mind TLR not wearing his trade mark outfit in the movie. I would be lying if I didn't say a part of me doesn't like the change in outfits. I don't know if they've said why they changed it but I can see how the classic LR outfit could come off tacky. I've bought two tickets to see the movie and the soundtrack but I don't see myself buying the Blu Ray. By the way I'm 31 and I really don't remember not being a fan of TLR.
 
Don't get me wrong. I know some Lone Rangers fans who happen to be younger than I am. My comment about no one caring was more directed at the studio.
 
I have no problem having a scene to lighten the mood like the scenes with the kid or in the case but there's no reason to take something like
burying the Rangers and make it a joke.
I agree I don't see the scene bullets mentioned as being played serious as it is in the movie. But in my opinion the way it is in the movie it's out of character.
I mean they make a joke out of TLR killing two guys but later he knocks Tonto out with a shovel because he's going to kill Cavendish. Not to mention when the Rangers enter the canyon John wont take a gun from Dan because he wont use one.

I wanted to like TLR but for me it falls way short of the mark. As I said before if the movie had just been out and out bad I would have been less disapointed. I actually don't mind TLR not wearing his trade mark outfit in the movie. I would be lying if I didn't say a part of me doesn't like the change in outfits. I don't know if they've said why they changed it but I can see how the classic LR outfit could come off tacky. I've bought two tickets to see the movie and the soundtrack but I don't see myself buying the Blu Ray. By the way I'm 31 and I really don't remember not being a fan of TLR.
It isn't a joke about burying the Rangers. It is a joke on Tonto's warped sense of being and how unworthy Reid seems. I don't understand the problem with it. John had his emotional moment with his brother. Tonto doesn't really know or care about these men and he is the one burying them.It isn't like it was John or Dan's wife.

It is dark humor, but it isn't disrespectful.

And on the trick shot scene.

John's reluctance to use a gun, doesn't mean he won't. He had already shown he would point a loaded gun at those pointing loaded guns. In this situation, the others were going to draw on him. He would have killed, and tried to kill, to protect Rebecca and Will. He just didn't believe in unarmed executions. He believed once a man was in custody, you follow through.
 
Last edited:
The movie is ridiculously disrespectful toward the character of the lone ranger
 
Guess that means The Mask of Zorro was ridiculously disrespectful to the character of Zorro too. They were treated the same way. Didn't see anyone balk at Banderas acting a fool and being the butt of Hopkin's jokes until the end of the movie they way they're doing with Hammer.
 
Better than the first Pirates? I'm not sure it's better than the third Pirates. And I HATED the third Pirates!
I love the first Pirates. Keira Knightley is my all time crush. I have only seen this once, but right now, I think I like it better.

I don't hate Depp. ****, I even disliked Dark Shadows vehemently, but praised his performance. He is a great actor, even in boring films (cough-Alice in Wonderland-cough). However, his performance this time was just blah. It wasn't what killed the movie though. What killed it is how lifeless and joyless it was constructed around it. The first Pirates had a wink and charm to it. This is more like the bloated sequels. All CGI and overbudgeted stunts with no plot that does a disservice to its characters.
Thought Depp was great. Probably liked his Tonto better then his Jack Sparrow. I liked that his strange, while there, wasn't really the focal point. Cunning like Jack Sparrow, without being quite as bumbling. I also think it played well with the idea of [BLACKOUT]his emotional scars he was covering up with his childlike beliefs[/BLACKOUT].

I thought this film was full of life and charm, and wasn't weighed down by a not so charismatic Orlando Bloom as the leading male.

And there was plenty of plot and character. The film is kinda of straight forward in that regard, while still providing the twist and turns at the end of the second act. Not sure how anyone could say there was no plot. It isn't even super convoluted like the Pirate sequels. And I am all for calling something bloated when it is. King Kong, The Hobbit, the 3 Pirate sequels, etc.. This really zipped by for me. The only real superfluous bits were HBC's and I enjoyed them. Didn't drag the film down at all for me. I even really enjoyed the framing device.

And the all CGI and stunts thing is such bull. Doesn't even make sense considering the actual content of the film. There are great, incredible action sequences, but they don't even take of 30% of the film.

P.S. If it was referencing older westerns, I'd look more to John Ford. Besides being shot in Monument Valley (like nearly every Ford western), they co-op the plot of Armie Hammer coming to town after being gone a near-decade and finding his brother has married his childhood sweetheart who he is in love with. There is even some suspicion if the child is his. Very Searchers.
Monument Valley is also where Once Upon a Time in the West was shot. There are definitely a lot of Ford references as well, but the ones that stuck out the most for me were the Leone ones.

The shot of Rebecca getting water, the reference to the desert walk from TGtBtU. Even the station shot, when they are waiting for the train was more OUaTitW, then it was High Noon. The trench coats on the platform.

And the overall plot reminded me of OUaTitW. The buzz word being progress, and the disappearance of the old west because of it. The train, the "real" source of wealth, [BLACKOUT]the fake tribe attacks[/BLACKOUT], etc.

Then of course there was the score, which not unlike many other Zimmer scores, references Morricone's score from OUaTitW. Harmonica and other general themes are all over this.

Also, I heard Bruckheimer say that Armie Hammer brings a "Jimmy Stewart" quality, which tells me they were thinking of their Lone Ranger as a version of Jimmy Stewart's character from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence...a city boy with high ideals roughed up by the reality of the West, with Tonto in place of John Wayne.
John was definitely the least Leone thing about this film. No doubt there. He wasn't rough enough.

But I saw Tonto more as a more badass Cheyenne and [BLACKOUT]Latham Cole[/BLACKOUT] as more of a Frank. A [BLACKOUT]thug attempting to go legit, but doing so by thuggish means[/BLACKOUT]. He even keeps his office on the train.

Still does not make it a good movie, however.
I thought it was a great film.
 
Guess that means The Mask of Zorro was ridiculously disrespectful to the character of Zorro too. They were treated the same way. Didn't see anyone balk at Banderas acting a fool and being the butt of Hopkin's jokes until the end of the movie they way they're doing with Hammer.
Because it is time to hate on the latest Depp film. :o
 
Just watched it. I liked it. IT was great fun, and I love the duo of Hammer and Depp.

The hate the movie is getting is to much. Reading reviews it seems like this is the worst movie ever made. Critics hated the movie even before they saw it.

PS: Best horse in a movie, ever!
 
I didn't know that was James Badge Dale playing the brother until after the fact. Dude is on fire, this is like the third summer flick he's been in this year.
 
I didn't know that was James Badge Dale playing the brother until after the fact. Dude is on fire, this is like the third summer flick he's been in this year.
Same here. Couldn't even recognize him. He also great in this.
 
Guess that means The Mask of Zorro was ridiculously disrespectful to the character of Zorro too. They were treated the same way. Didn't see anyone balk at Banderas acting a fool and being the butt of Hopkin's jokes until the end of the movie they way they're doing with Hammer.

Come on, Banderas' Zorro had waaaay more badass moments than Hammer's Lone Ranger did. Way more. Mask of Zorro got the balance between the humor and darkness of the story just right. This film didn't.
 
Elliott and Rossio are known for basically making self aware action comedy. I don't think they've ever done a completely straightforward screenplay.
 
I have no problem with that genre, either, but there are good films in that genre and there are bad ones.
 
And this was a great one.

Also, I am curious. Yes funny stuff happens to John, but how is the character treated with disrespect? His biggest problem is his belief in justice. That is what gets him into trouble.
 
Thought Depp was great. Probably liked his Tonto better then his Jack Sparrow. I liked that his strange, while there, wasn't really the focal point. Cunning like Jack Sparrow, without being quite as bumbling. I also think it played well with the idea of [BLACKOUT]his emotional scars he was covering up with his childlike beliefs[/BLACKOUT].

I thought this film was full of life and charm, and wasn't weighed down by a not so charismatic Orlando Bloom as the leading male.

And there was plenty of plot and character. The film is kinda of straight forward in that regard, while still providing the twist and turns at the end of the second act. Not sure how anyone could say there was no plot. It isn't even super convoluted like the Pirate sequels. And I am all for calling something bloated when it is. King Kong, The Hobbit, the 3 Pirate sequels, etc.. This really zipped by for me. The only real superfluous bits were HBC's and I enjoyed them. Didn't drag the film down at all for me. I even really enjoyed the framing device.
Agree with a lot of this (save for I didn't find Hobbit or the 3 Pirate sequels bloated ;), just IMO though), especially the bolded. throughout the beginning of the movie I was wondering in the back of my mind, are we going to get the story of the crow on his head and then we finally get that story and I thought that it just.....worked.

Yes both Tonto and Jack Sparrow are broken characters, but they're broken in very different ways, and I think that Tonto's backstory as well as what's going on with the Comanche in the rest of the film is just... the sad truths about atrocities done in the history of this nation :( I'm glad Verbinski put that in, he didn't try to sugarcoat it. If that makes sense.

I also enjoyed the framing device too.... it gave it kind of an episodic feel to me, you get some pieces early on (Tonto starting the story with the bank robbery) and get the payoff/explanation later in the film.
 
And this was a great one.

Also, I am curious. Yes funny stuff happens to John, but how is the character treated with disrespect? His biggest problem is his belief in justice. That is what gets him into trouble.

I don't know about disrespect, but I feel like the character really never took off and became the full on legendary hero I was expecting him to be. He's the slapstick humor guy for most of the movie. Whenever he takes out a villain, [blackout]it seems to be by accident[/blackout]. Even the villain who [blackout]killed his brother in a horrifically dark manner[/blackout] doesn't get a badass come-uppance from the Lone Ranger. Instead [blackout]the Lone Ranger just jumps off the train before it crashes... I mean, what? Anticlimactic.[/blackout]

And then there's the issue with the whole [blackout]Spirit-Walker / Ghost angle[/blackout] of his character. The bad guys are terrified of the Lone Ranger for a few scenes, which makes him seem really badass, but all that is removed a scene or two later when they [blackout]find out who he is, etc. and more slapstick antics ensue.[/blackout] What advantage did the mask give him anyways? Everyone knew who he was. Everyone.

Compare this to the Mask of Zorro. In that film, there were slapstick antics, but [blackout]his enemies were terrified of him, he got some sweet justice for his brother's death in a satisfying climactic duel, he had plenty of badass moments, the person who turned him into a hero didn't overwhelm the movie and steal the entire spotlight, the humor complimented and balanced the darkness of the story instead of clashing with it, and by the end we felt the hero was actually the legend he was meant to be.[/blackout]
 
Saw this last night. I really enjoyed it.
 
I love the first Pirates. Keira Knightley is my all time crush. I have only seen this once, but right now, I think I like it better.


Thought Depp was great. Probably liked his Tonto better then his Jack Sparrow. I liked that his strange, while there, wasn't really the focal point. Cunning like Jack Sparrow, without being quite as bumbling. I also think it played well with the idea of [BLACKOUT]his emotional scars he was covering up with his childlike beliefs[/BLACKOUT].

I thought this film was full of life and charm, and wasn't weighed down by a not so charismatic Orlando Bloom as the leading male.

And there was plenty of plot and character. The film is kinda of straight forward in that regard, while still providing the twist and turns at the end of the second act. Not sure how anyone could say there was no plot. It isn't even super convoluted like the Pirate sequels. And I am all for calling something bloated when it is. King Kong, The Hobbit, the 3 Pirate sequels, etc.. This really zipped by for me. The only real superfluous bits were HBC's and I enjoyed them. Didn't drag the film down at all for me. I even really enjoyed the framing device.

And the all CGI and stunts thing is such bull. Doesn't even make sense considering the actual content of the film. There are great, incredible action sequences, but they don't even take of 30% of the film.


Monument Valley is also where Once Upon a Time in the West was shot. There are definitely a lot of Ford references as well, but the ones that stuck out the most for me were the Leone ones.

The shot of Rebecca getting water, the reference to the desert walk from TGtBtU. Even the station shot, when they are waiting for the train was more OUaTitW, then it was High Noon. The trench coats on the platform.

And the overall plot reminded me of OUaTitW. The buzz word being progress, and the disappearance of the old west because of it. The train, the "real" source of wealth, [BLACKOUT]the fake tribe attacks[/BLACKOUT], etc.

Then of course there was the score, which not unlike many other Zimmer scores, references Morricone's score from OUaTitW. Harmonica and other general themes are all over this.


John was definitely the least Leone thing about this film. No doubt there. He wasn't rough enough.

But I saw Tonto more as a more badass Cheyenne and [BLACKOUT]Latham Cole[/BLACKOUT] as more of a Frank. A [BLACKOUT]thug attempting to go legit, but doing so by thuggish means[/BLACKOUT]. He even keeps his office on the train.


I thought it was a great film.

All I can say is give it some time. See if you like it better in a year after the newness has worn off. Because the first Pirates still holds up 10 years on. I highly doubt this one will. Also, you mention Keira Knightley? While Elizabeth Swann is not a great role, it is a fun one when handled correctly, which it was in the first movie. Dan's widow (I already forgot her name) in this film feels tacked on just to have a love interest and has almost zero personality or importance to the plot other than a need to be rescued.

It is more like the Pirates sequels because while there is a lot of "twists" and turns of betrayals and super-obvious double crosses, they're all relatively predictable and a lot of hot air. They don't really amount to anything as the core narrative is the same: buddy cop film. It feels like the movie is spinning its wheels between overly done and overbudgeted action sequences.

For example, you ask where is it bloated. Take out the entire Helena Bonham Carter character. Take out the brothel scene and the action that goes with it. The movie is 15 minutes shorter and doesn't lose a single thing. Next, take out the framing device with the kid. It adds nothing and gives the story a needless bitt of melancholy undertones. That's why they had to tack on the "Hi-Yo, Silver!" bit at the end after 1933 Tonto flies away as a crow. It is a dumb downer. And that was the payoff of 15 extra minutes of pacing-killing interruptions?!

The movie had one really great moment: the climax. The use of the William Tell Overture and the visuals were fun. It's what the whole movie should have been. It is essentially what the first Pirates movie was or The Mask of Zorro. But we had to wait over 2 hours to get a glimpse of fun. Way too little and far too late.

But yes, I do see your point on Leone. I still think Ford was a huge influence as well, because Monument Valley was practically his turf. And setting a Texan story in the Utah part of the valley that includes a sister-in-law the hero loved a long time ago, a child who may be his getting kidnapped, and "Indians" (real in the Searchers, fake in TLR) raiding the homestead all are very similar. And John's character arc is very Liberty Valence.

But you are right about other influences, as well.
 
Yeah, I agree with you DarthSkywalker on a lot of things, but I just didn't feel this movie at all. I just can't shake the feeling I had after leaving the theatre: "that was it?"
 
Saw it last night.

I liked it.

Could have used less humor and less "Captain Jack" Tonto.

But over all it was good, that last scene "Hi ho silver away" and what follows I must say was the best thing I have seen in a while.
 
Guess that means The Mask of Zorro was ridiculously disrespectful to the character of Zorro too. They were treated the same way. Didn't see anyone balk at Banderas acting a fool and being the butt of Hopkin's jokes until the end of the movie they way they're doing with Hammer.

Hahahaha what? Banderas was never a buffoon in Mask of Zorro. They used his drunkenness as a joke a few times but never ever did they disrespect the character for a joke. Never did they degrade him for a cheap laugh. The Lone Ranger is the worst hero on screen in quite some time, they make him so useless its not even funny. Mask of Zorro is how you do a fun period adventure piece, not this movie.
 
Yeah, I agree with you DarthSkywalker on a lot of things, but I just didn't feel this movie at all. I just can't shake the feeling I had after leaving the theatre: "that was it?"

I'm the same. I actually agree about Tonto being better than Sparrow and its much better to watch since the actors are more charismatic than Bloom and Knightley but still didn't really like it at all
 
I got a free pass to see this last night and I still feel ripped off. First of all, I will admit I have like no knowledge of the Lone Ranger character as I am 25 so it was before my time. But this movie is pretty bad and a waste of 2 hours and 30 mins. My main complaint is with the run time, it's completely too freaking long did Gore learn nothing from Pirates 2 and 3? Stuffing the movie with a convoluted plot and characters to pad the run time doesn't make it better.

The tone is also an issue with it having dark elements and then goofy humor. It just doesn't mesh well. The only decent thing about this is a few action scenes and Johnny Deep as a few funny moments. But honestly, he is just playing Jack Sparrow as a Native American. Other than that this is nonsense and it definitely doesn't make the Lone Ranger cool or relevant.

6/10 and that solely for a few action scenes and Johnny Deep.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,694
Messages
21,788,264
Members
45,616
Latest member
stevezorz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"