1/10
The producers wanted publicity & sure got it -- but all bad!
5 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
No need to belabor the excellent points brought up by posters who have already rightly panned this poor excuse of a movie (and disgrace to an American legend). Klinton Spilsbury? Not only an untalented actor who's voice was so bad they had to dub over, but his on-set and off-set antics fairly screamed "unprofessional". According to reliable sources, this was his only motion picture credit, though Wikipedia does say he had a few bit roles in soap operas before making "Lone Ranger". Actually the most interesting (an unintentionally humorous) thing in his Wikipedia article was this: "An article about him in The Los Angeles Times in 1989 revealed that he had spent some time in Europe and was working as a model. He had hopes to revive his career as an actor, but admitted in the article that he was not having much luck..." Hmmmm -- "revive his career"? WHAT career? To paraphrase, "One movie not maketh a career".

Of course the thing most people remember about this wretched movie (if they remember it at all) is the injunction against 1950's Lone Ranger actor Clayton Moore from wearing his mask in public. The resulting negative publicity pretty much insured this movie would fail at the box office. In an odd twist, they had the right idea in appealing to Baby Boomers with a Lone Ranger remake, but you don't then jeopardize that same target audience by persecuting the man who WAS the Lone Ranger for a whole generation! A truly GOOD movie might have overcame such a handicap... but this movie simply wasn't good enough to save itself.

As the for legal case -- it was a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge named Vernon Foster who was the culprit in "unmasking" Clayton Moore with an injunction. The judge's action was highly questionable from a legal standpoint, as Clayton Moore had freely used the mask and term "Lone Ranger" for 22 years without any objection from the copyright holder of "The Lone Ranger(the Wrather Corp. of Beverly Hills). From 1957 when Moore ended his association with the Ranger, all the way up to 1979 when the injunction was sought, Wrather Co. never attempted to challenge or block Clayton Moore in literally hundreds of public appearances -- because his use actually kept up at least SOME interest in their franchise, including television syndication, and brought them profits. Then suddenly in 1979 -- and only when a "major box-office motion picture" was in the works -- did Wrather find his persona of the Lone Ranger "objectionable".

In 1985 a California Court of Appeals finally set aside Judge Foster's injunction as a violation of two basic legal doctrines. The first is of "Laches" which in equity means "a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right." The Appellate court found that 22 years was simply too long for the Wrather Corp. to allow such characterization by Moore without making a legal effort to assert their copyright against him. Moreover, during those years, Moore's defense proved that Wrather Corp had benefited financially from Moore's use of their "copyrighted" name and image (the mask), all while suffering no detriment. The other well-established legal doctrine the appellate court found protected Moore's use was the "Fair Use Doctrine". Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights-holders, in certain circumstances. So finally, after 6 years was "justice served" and Clayton Moore allowed to resume his full persona as The Lone Ranger, upholder of justice in the Old West. Too bad Judge Foster shamed himself by failing to serve justice and throw those Wrather Corp. lawyers out on their butts -- their request for injunction denied.

Ironically, by 1985 "The Legend of the Lone Ranger" had long sunk beneath the waves without a trace... a forgotten failure (like Mr. Spilsbury's so-called "career"). Whether Clayton Moore could run around in a mask or not was pretty much "mooted" (as even the losing Wrather Corp lawyers had to admit after the verdict). But the final irony was that, while "Legend" lost for Universal Studios and it's production company ITC (Sir Lew Grade) millions of dollars, it was the Wrather Corp ONLY that actually made money on the film -- they were paid upfront for selling their "Ranger" copyright to ITC!
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed