This is better than the whole Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy for the same director, star and production company. And this is the one that really needed sequels!
Despite a bird over his head, and a heavy make-up, Johnny Depp is funny. The way how the script dealt with his character in its oldness is magical and smart. Armie Hammer proves that he's one of the most unluckiest leading men in Hollywood history, because he has charisma, talent, and sense of humor, though he's not that Hollywood leading man yet. Hans Zimmer's creation was fantastic, especially during the climactic sequence. The action sequences were many, huge and great, being complicatedly choreographed, and excellently executed. And director Gore Verbinski did a glamorous job that amazed me. It's clear that when he doesn't work in absurd stuff (Yes, I mean Pirates of the Caribbean 2 and 3!), he delivers enjoyably. So why did this movie receive generally negative reviews, and become one of the biggest box-office bombs of all time?!
I think it's mainly in the script. It's heavy, with an attempt to include many conflicts' parties, as if it's a historic drama about the west in the 1860s end. You'll encounter evil railroad tycoon, mountain full of silver ore in exchange for a pocket watch, mass slaughter of the Comanches, cavalry corruption, crimes of war, traditional gangs, and Hell on Wheels brothel. Well, this is too much. Hence, with 149 running time, it turned into a cross between buddy action comedy like Richard Donner's Lethal Weapon movies, and epic Western like Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West. You can see that clearly in the second half, which - added to the above - presents an origin story for Tonto, who's - yes - the sidekick not the title character, but - also - the movie's bigger star!
It has too violent touches along the way as well, which is strange for a PG-13 Disney movie, with a cannibal (who was mentioned once, and never again!), rape attempt, killer that cuts out the heart of a Ranger and eats it, someone vomiting for 30 seconds on screen, and talking about losing a reproductive organ in battle! Grrrrr, it's a Lone Ranger kids movie, you blood-thirsty repulsive moviemakers!
Aside from that script's heaviness and brutality, I didn't see appropriately how the clumsy lawyer John Reid transformed into that heroic vigilante Lone Ranger, or how he and his brother's widow went to be lovers. Maybe among this ocean of bad guys, different conflicts and action pieces, the 3 scriptwriters forgot writing these dramatic highlights. Or maybe they just didn't have more space to include them; otherwise it would have been 3 hours movie!
Director of cinematography Bojan Bazelli's neutral colors bugged me. If the goal was evoking the black and white look of The Lone Ranger old TV shows, then it was so naïve, and - most of all - killed big part of the movie's visual impressiveness. Ok, in terms of toying with the image in blockbusters lately, I have had enough of pedantry. From a dull yellow image in Taken 3 (2014) and Spectre (2015), to lethal dark one in Max Payne (2008) and Suicide Squad (2016), it's not that entertaining, or meaningful, it's rather agonizing!
Regardless of all that, this is an action classic. Sorrowfully, it didn't have its deserved share of critical praise, and commercial success. However, I'm sure that it'll be re-evaluated fairly in the near future, having a lot of kemosabes too.
Despite a bird over his head, and a heavy make-up, Johnny Depp is funny. The way how the script dealt with his character in its oldness is magical and smart. Armie Hammer proves that he's one of the most unluckiest leading men in Hollywood history, because he has charisma, talent, and sense of humor, though he's not that Hollywood leading man yet. Hans Zimmer's creation was fantastic, especially during the climactic sequence. The action sequences were many, huge and great, being complicatedly choreographed, and excellently executed. And director Gore Verbinski did a glamorous job that amazed me. It's clear that when he doesn't work in absurd stuff (Yes, I mean Pirates of the Caribbean 2 and 3!), he delivers enjoyably. So why did this movie receive generally negative reviews, and become one of the biggest box-office bombs of all time?!
I think it's mainly in the script. It's heavy, with an attempt to include many conflicts' parties, as if it's a historic drama about the west in the 1860s end. You'll encounter evil railroad tycoon, mountain full of silver ore in exchange for a pocket watch, mass slaughter of the Comanches, cavalry corruption, crimes of war, traditional gangs, and Hell on Wheels brothel. Well, this is too much. Hence, with 149 running time, it turned into a cross between buddy action comedy like Richard Donner's Lethal Weapon movies, and epic Western like Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West. You can see that clearly in the second half, which - added to the above - presents an origin story for Tonto, who's - yes - the sidekick not the title character, but - also - the movie's bigger star!
It has too violent touches along the way as well, which is strange for a PG-13 Disney movie, with a cannibal (who was mentioned once, and never again!), rape attempt, killer that cuts out the heart of a Ranger and eats it, someone vomiting for 30 seconds on screen, and talking about losing a reproductive organ in battle! Grrrrr, it's a Lone Ranger kids movie, you blood-thirsty repulsive moviemakers!
Aside from that script's heaviness and brutality, I didn't see appropriately how the clumsy lawyer John Reid transformed into that heroic vigilante Lone Ranger, or how he and his brother's widow went to be lovers. Maybe among this ocean of bad guys, different conflicts and action pieces, the 3 scriptwriters forgot writing these dramatic highlights. Or maybe they just didn't have more space to include them; otherwise it would have been 3 hours movie!
Director of cinematography Bojan Bazelli's neutral colors bugged me. If the goal was evoking the black and white look of The Lone Ranger old TV shows, then it was so naïve, and - most of all - killed big part of the movie's visual impressiveness. Ok, in terms of toying with the image in blockbusters lately, I have had enough of pedantry. From a dull yellow image in Taken 3 (2014) and Spectre (2015), to lethal dark one in Max Payne (2008) and Suicide Squad (2016), it's not that entertaining, or meaningful, it's rather agonizing!
Regardless of all that, this is an action classic. Sorrowfully, it didn't have its deserved share of critical praise, and commercial success. However, I'm sure that it'll be re-evaluated fairly in the near future, having a lot of kemosabes too.