Disney's "The Lone Ranger"

Okay, now I want to see it.

So people is angry because an American Native isn't Christian enough?

Uhhhh, all riteeeeee...

the army is killing Indians

Unlike in real life, where they gently asked the Indians to go over to those comfortable refuges spreaded everywhere in their longtime historical domains, where those evil Injuns drove themselves to near extinction to sully the good white men's name.

edited 5th Jul '13 8:53:56 AM by NapoleonDeCheese

Thank God I'm not the only one who's been picking up on that complaint.

It wasn't that people were upset that they were killing Natives. It's like I said before, the entire movie is supposed to be a huge case of really incompetent Mood Whiplash. They go from brutal slaughter of natives directly to the two leads acting like goofballs and cracking stupid jokes, which is what people were annoyed at.

I wasn't commenting on that, but on how the fundamentalists are angry about having Indian massacres. I doubt those groups, unlike fans, care at all about the Mood Whiplash.

Poor Armie Hammer, he tries so hard, I guess he's this year's Taylor Kitsch. And I know the weekend isn't over yet, but I think The Lone Ranger is gonna join the list of Disney's failed attempts to create a new franchise, next to The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Prince of Persia and John Carter, the jury is still out on Tron since they keep saying they do want to make another one.

I kinda wanna watch the movie but more of a morbid fascination to witness a colossal trainwreck, in the metaphorical sense not the the literal one, but two and a half hours? That's way too much, why are summer movies so long now when they have so little to tell?

I'm not surprised that there's some group protesting the...Native American-ness of the movie (however inaccurate it may be). Among fundamentalists there tend to be varying degrees of tolerance for magic and stuff, but the zero-tolerance ones tend to yell the loudest. Doesn't matter if it's Chronicles of Narnia or Buffy the Vampire Slayer to them — as long as there's something remotely supernatural that's not attributed directly to God, it gets crucified.

Honestly, it's best just to ignore that. If nobody listens, they'll probably go away.

Is it just me, or has there not been a single live action Disney movie (TRON Legacy aside) that ended up being a hit in the past few years?

Now that you mention it, I don't think there has. Prince of Persia could have been better. John Carter was killed by advertising (and also could have been better). And now this. Am I missing anything?

Stream of bad decisions, I think. It almost feels like they're trying too hard to recapture POTC, which was a lightning in the bottle moment. I definitely saw the Pirates influence on Prince of Persian and Lone Ranger obviously had the same since it was also directed by the original Pirates director.

The Avengers?

Most people consider Avengers to be a Marvel film rather than a Disney film.

Alice in Wonderland was financially successful despite getting poor reviews, but nothing in the "PG-13 adventure flick" subgenre outside of Pirates has managed to catch on.

edited 5th Jul '13 7:54:00 PM by Mort08

How well did Oz The Great And Powerful do, again?

-checks- Not as well as Disney was expecting, but well enough to get a sequel greenlit.

Oz wasn't a smash hit, but it made a profit.

Why is the Mood Whiplash such a problem for people? It's an action-comedy; intercutting scenes of people getting killed with scenes of the two leads acting goofy is pretty much a staple of the genre.

Not when the action scenes are brutal and feel like they're from an entirely different movie.

Brutal how? What makes the Indian massacre or the ambush of the rangers more brutal than any of the other fight scenes, except that we're rooting for the people being killed instead of the people doing the killing?

I haven't seen it yet, but from what I gather, it's because the action is PG-13 from back when PG-13 actually meant something.

edited 5th Jul '13 9:21:10 PM by Mort08

The vibe of this movie kind of reminded me of the Indiana Jones movies, so that makes sense (though there was nothing near as violent as a guy getting shredded by a plane's propellor).

I don't think The Lone Ranger was an action comedy originally, I mean would you consider Pirates Of The Caribbean or Indiana Jones an action comedy just because it has humor in it? And there is also the "indecisive comedy" line, where a story takes turns being dramatic and funny rather than letting it flow organically. That to me is what the complaints seem to be about, that the movie doesn't know what tone they are going for.

edited 5th Jul '13 10:03:41 PM by KJMackley

Is the film being released under the headline Disney brand, or under Touchstone? As far as I recall, the latter label used to release films that were a bit harder core than the traditional Disney family... stuff.

No it's the Disney label.

Maybe that's why folks are confused by the tone of the movie. They come expecting what they usually get in a Disney film and just aren't getting it.

That's Disney's fault of course.

It's not the label's fault if you can't stomach the content.

On that note I consider John Carter's content to worth a lot more incomes than it actually got.