Originally Posted by JSUL
Some iconic symbols are best left alone.
The Lone Ranger is one of them.
Had they taken a more serious tone, like great westerns of past cinema, they could have hit paydirt.
They did not choose that path, and thus got a big pile of monopoly money in return.
The Lone Ranger might be iconic to american audiences, but for the rest of the world it isn't. Which might also explain the film's $171 million overseas, Johnny Depp's star power included. Like John Carter, I didn't really know anything about TLR before hearing about the film, that's when I learned that it was an "iconic" character. Yet it meant nothing to me. After seeing it (yes, I confess, I blind bought it!) and being a fan of westerns, imo there are more than a few things that are enjoyable in this film. Visually, they put an amazing attention to detail with great sets and costumes, I enjoy WIlliam Fichtner in pretty much every movie he's in, the same with Tom Wilkinson. My problem with this movie is its tone, it should have been darker. There are great moments with Tonto, and it's obvious Depp could have played it more dramatic, it's not like he lacks skills in that department. There are hints of Tonto's troubled life and I wanted to know more, I wanted him to be more vengeful. While he did have some welcome funny lines, his character seemed the most important of all, so it called for more seriousness as well, considering his personal journey and desire for vengeance. I liked the "surreal" feel of the 1933 scenes and the ending, simple in its nature and yet rather symbolic. But it is a Disney/Bruckheimer production, not a touchstone drama... So I kinda expected the lighter tone in the first place, but at times I wanted something else. I have to admit that what disappointed me in the film still not kept me from enjoying most of it. But it should have been "better", whatever that means. Armie Hammer was fine imo, while he did have the title role, nothing can change the fact that Johnny Depp was actually the true "lead character" of the movie. That's another problem, and it's not Hammer's fault.
I remember when the film came out Depp, Hammer said the media destroyed the film from the beginning, with the budget problems, casting etc (and the fact that John Carter just proved to be a major commercial flop back then). I tend to agree with them actually, it certainly didn't help.
I tried to put aside everything I knew about the film's failure before watching it.