Tonto was as much involved in the plot as John was, if not more so and was instrumental in saving John's life on multiple occasions. Tonto was the one who came up with all the ideas, he was the one that led John to Cavendish. Cavendish and Cole were the enemy because of Tonto's past more than John's and it was Tonto who had the last laugh.
If anything John is the sidekick.
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders!
It's not about how involved with the plot a character was. Consider Sherlock Holmes. Despite the level of Watson's involvement, despite the fact that Watson saves Sherlock's life, Watson is still the sidekick. If this was Tonto's story, with John as the sidekick, why does Tonto start his story with "John Reid is on a train, about to meet Tonto" and not "Tonto is on a train, about to meet John Reid"? The problem is not the balance of the story, but that by giving us the framing device, the arc of the story becomes a reflection of how Tonto views himself in that story. And the arc of the story is the story of John Reid, not Tonto. If it were Tonto's arc, people would be commenting on how, with 2.5 hours, they still manage to jump into the middle of the story, rather than starting at the beginning.
For me, personally, I feel that it was a bad choice of goal from the get-go. The story is called "The Lone Ranger" after all. That doesn't leave room for anything but sidekicks, supporting characters and villains outside of the main character. But that's the goal they set, and they didn't reach it. Again, that has nothing to do with how important Tonto is or is not to the story. As we see from Watson, being the sidekick does not keep you from being vital to the story. But from the way the studio chose to structure things, even Tonto doesn't see himself as the main character. In case, of you don't call him a sidekick, what do you call him?
My alignment is Chaotic Cute.
I should add that I find the ultimate problem with the movie is that it is the product is the result of choices that were not thought out. I have run across one review that agrees with you that Tonto is not a sidekick, but more of the actual main character, with the Ranger being the sidekick. But that just raises other issues. It makes the story arc make even less sense. Why does the main character need a someone else to defeat the villain? Why is he defining his own story arc by someone else? Why is the main focus of his story 'How I created the Lone Ranger'?" All considering Tonto the main character does is move us from "failure to make him something other than the sidekick" to "Native character needs a white guy around to have a story worth telling."
My alignment is Chaotic Cute.
If anything I felt like John was the sidekick, which raises other problems, as Terrie said.
ok boomerLeave a Comment:
Fails at one of its stated goals
When the controversy about the film first started, a lot of the defense of the film centered around Depp's stated desire to make Tonto, and Native characters in general, less of a sidekick. Come the final movie, we're given a framing device where Tonto tells a little boy the story of... the white guy. So not only is Tonto still the sidekick, but the character even thinks of himself as the sidekick. The fact that a guy who explicitly stated he was trying to make a movie that would challenge the standard stereotypes ended up making a movie that is full of the standard stereotypes pretty much confirms a lot of the concerns that social justice activists have raised about how pervasive media images shape people's perceptions without them even realizing it.