Look, I've read the reviews. One says it's nothing but 2.5 hours of air conditioning. Another describes it as complicated but ultimately satisfactory. But most narrative on this film seems to delight in Disney's failing and possible financial loss on the movie.
I walked into the theater today with a completely open mind. First off, I am always very interested in being entertained. If there's fun to be had, I'm not going to shun it because some reviewer said it wasn't there.
That said, Disney's The Lone Ranger was not all that bad. By which I mean, it wasn't at all as bad as the bad reviews say it was. It wasn't a perfect movie. But I enjoyed the experience quite a lot. There were gripping action sequences. The chemistry between Hammer and Depp was genuine. The cinematography was simply stunning. There were also large laughs. Anyone interested in being entertained without a pre-conceived agenda to the contrary should succeed.
I fear this movie was judged against an unfair standard from the start. Most Superhero movies quickly tell how the Superhero became a Superhero and then let us watch him do his work. This movie instead tells a heartfelt story of two men
I am disappointed that the poor reception of the movie will probably preclude any chance of this duo appearing in a sequel. I should very much have liked to see them ride together again.
No comments about the PoC representation problem? Almost every review I've seen of this movie features the problematic casting in it. Not just Johnny Depp (Mr. one-sixteenth-native) but the writing of the character Tonto. The original Lone Ranger had some racial problems and this update is really no better. Tonto is a strange mish-mash of many different Native tribes labeled as Comanche (I think).
ReplyDeleteI agree that the plot and the rest were not that bad, though.