Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp are not pleased that their blockbuster money-grab film The Lone Ranger bombed in such a huge way. As I keep saying, I thought The Lone Ranger looked like a hot mess, but I thought the pull of Depp in a big-budget action/adventure would be enough to bring in some major money. I was wrong. Audiences hated it. Critics hated it. Everybody is over Disney Depp and no one really knows what to make of Armie Hammer. So when Armie and Johnny were doing a joint interview in England, they ended up blaming… the critics. Yes, it’s the critics’ fault.
American film critics “slit the jugular” of ‘Lone Ranger’, according to star Armie Hammer. Yahoo! Movies sat down with ‘Ranger’ stars Hammer, Johnny Depp, producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Gore Verbinski in the aftermath of the film’s disappointing US opening. The team all agreed that US critics were the reason for it’s not-too-impressive $29 million box office haul, and that reviewers pre-judged the film based on behind-the-scenes problems.
“I think the reviews were written 7-8 months before we released the film,” said Johnny Depp. “I think the reviews were written when they heard Gore [Verbinksi] and Jerry [Bruckheimer] and me were going to do ‘The Lone Ranger’. They had expectations that it must be a blockbuster. I didn’t have any expectations of that. I never do.”
Ignoring his disapproving publicist, Hammer agreed with his co-star. “I have a delightful opinion about that that she’s gonna get mad to me about sharing [his publicist]. But I’m going to tell you. This is the deal with American critics: they’ve been gunning for our movie since it was shut down the first time, that’s when most of the critics wrote their initial reviews. If you go back and read the negative reviews, most of them aren’t about the content of the movie, but more what’s behind it. It’s got to the point with American critics where if you’re not as smart as Plato, [you’re] stupid. That seems like a sad way to live your life.
“While we were making it we knew people were gunning for it. I think it was the popular thing when the movie hit rocky terrain they jumped on the bandwagon to try and bash it. They tried to do the same thing with to
World War Z’, it didn’t work, the movie was successful. Instead they decided to slit the jugular of our movie.”
Yes, I was going to bring up World War Z as well, only as a way to disprove Armie’s argument about the critics. EVERYONE was gunning for WWZ. WWZ seemed like it was going to be a bloated mess of a film, a total disaster. Many, many critics and industry professionals predicted it would be a box office disaster. But then people went to see it, and they liked it. Despite all of the messiness around the production, Brad really did make an engaging and entertaining film. Was the production still a bloated mess? Sure. But the studio will make their money back and then some. The situation was different with The Lone Ranger because they fundamentally did not make a good movie. Critics bashed the film because it was a BAD MOVIE. But sure, whatever you need to say to justify it, I guess.
As for Hammer’s future, he had this to say in another interview:
Hammer is now tipped for several other projects, including the role of Batman in the next Superman movie, which will feature both superheroes. Hammer was once due to play Batman in a Justice League film before the project fell apart during the 2007 Hollywood writers’ strike but he dismisses the new rumours.
‘I’m not actually a big fan of superhero films,’ he says. ‘If you have a guy who is supposed to be invulnerable, then what’s the point?’ Anyway, he adds, he’s ruled himself out of doing a film with Superman by signing up to Guy Ritchie’s The Man From U.N.C.L.E. alongside Henry Cavill, the current Man of Steel. ‘I think if Henry and I did that film and then a superhero film straight after, people might start to wonder about us…’
What, romantically? ‘I wish! God, he’s dreamy!’
Armie as Batman? Ugh, no. And I do like Armie, but NO. That would be an awful choice. If he ever wants to play a superhero, it would have to be somebody… I don’t know… just not Batman.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Boo to movie stars who think the general public are stupid.
If a movie stinks, people won’t pay to see it.
Exactly!
I distinctly remember The Lone Ranger as one of the movies that didn’t have any ratings on Rotten Tomatoes until it came out.
These late ratings seem to be true of movies with questionable quality. You can’t find the critic ratings grouped anywhere to check before going to the theatre.
So, long story short, no, there were no compilations of critics’ reviews to even look at; the film tanked on its own.
Springingforward–you are exactly right about the late reviews and questionable movies. Sometimes, studios don’t let critics preview movies, just because they feel that the movie is a dud and they don’t want early critic’s reviews to be the kiss of death.
Depp and Hammer both need to take the hit like a man. Every actor has been in a dud. Maybe not a mega-budgeted, high-profile dud like this, but their whining and passing the buck for it like five year olds is doing zip for their image.
Boy that movie dragged, but I have to admit the last 20 minutes were a blast. And honestly, Johnny depp seriously didn’t annoy me like I thought he would, I thought he was great and he didn’t seem ‘seen that’ like everyone keeps saying. I agree the critics were a little too harsh, but they should have made the movie more fun. It just wasn’t a fun or interesting movie, they tried too hard to make it ‘dark’.
I so agree with you! If they had made the movie like the last 20 mins, it would have been a smash! It was evident there was serious disagreement as to the “tone” of the movie- it was all over the place.
Can’t wait for UNCLE- pls let Armie promote it- Henry C is great looking, but interviews are not his forte. His Graham Norton appearance was saved by Amy Adams and Russell Crowe. More Armie please!
Ummm no Carolyn, sadly I only wish you were right. The Transformers sequels are among the highest grossing films of all time and Grown Ups 2 will make over 100 million. The Kardashians have careers. The general public are stupid, never doubt that.
However.
Whining about critics is pathetic. They made a movie critics hated and people didn’t want to see. No great conspiracy. Their egos got the best of them. If the Lone Ranger had an 80 million dollar budget it would be a respectable hit.
Yeah…sadly, people like a LOT of pretty awful movies.
The Kardashians are mostly there to be made fun of. Yes, they have fans, but they are there to laugh at for the most part. Their clothes and makeup are also a big part of why people pay attention to them.
The Transformers movies are fun, action filled movies about toys and cartoons that have been around for a long time. Can you really blame people for wanting to see movies in which some of their favorite characters are brought to life?
The “Grown Ups” movies are just a fun way to escape. They’re silly, funny, and probably touching at times. What’s wrong with that?
The fact that people watch these shows and movies doesn’t make them stupid, it just means they find them entertaining. Every movie does not need to be “Annie Hall”, “Schindler’s List”, or “Gone With the Wind”. People can watch movies of all kinds without it being connected in some absurd way to their intelligence.
Trek Girl, you are so right. These days, I am happy to watch silly movies and crap shows on Bravo. And I am an intelligent person. My husband gets annoyed with my choice of entertainment. But my thought is, life is hard enough and my work (and grad school) are taxing enough- and my shows and movies are how I escape. It’s probably the same reason that many of us read gossip sites like this one. Fun escapism.
@Ktx: Exactly, it’s just people doing what they are supposed to do with movies and TV: enjoy them and be entertained.
The ridiculous thing about all of this is that when people bemoan the fact that people watch “Keeping Up … Kardashians” and movies like “Transformers”, they conveniently forget the fact that people watch great shows, movies, and documentaries all the time.
How often do we hear people talking about all of those great AMC shows, Investigation Discovery shows and documentaries, reality shows involving cooking and design, PBS programs, and even international mysteries? All the time! At least I do.
Nope, they focus on the fluff shows and the movies that are meant specifically for fun and action, and they act as if it is the worst thing in the world.
He could play FLASH. He would be perfect for it
Sorry, dude. Your movie sucked. The critics did, in fact roast it, but even the audience was all, meh.
You are bigger in your head than you are in reality Mr. Actor.
I like Armie. He is a really good actor, but this movie was terrible! I regretted being in the theatre about 40 minutes in. The movie was flawed all around and too damn long. Depp has really slid downhill.
That goes for Johnny Depp too.
The thing about WWZ is that Brad Pitt is an acual movie star, and just mentioning, movie star does not equal acting ability.
Johnny’s hits have all had budgets over 100 million, some nearing 200 million, and involve HUGE CGI and other reasons to see the film.
It’s like with Will Smith + RDJ. They both have many, hugely successful movies, but 95% of those successes are because of Huge budgets meaning huge CGI, lots of action scenes, etc.
If you make a movie where you have an actor sit in a chair and do nothing for 1 whole hour, you’ll see the movie that makes the most money (relatively speaking of course, haha, I don’t think most people will want to see those movies) is the one starring the likes of a Brad Pitt as compared to a Johnny Depp.
Karen you are So right!
Spot on analysis I most say! Brad has been brilliant in his choice of movies.. He didn’t go the blockbuster way in his career..
I can actually see him as Robin. And I am totally shipping him and Cavill now!
He’s a huge 6’5″ and Robin (well, the Dick Grayson one) was an acrobat. Or am I overthinking this?
Re: the critics – if only they could genuinely cause a movie to fail!! We would have been saved from two further Transformers movies and four Twish*te sequels…
Chris O’Donnell was about Hammer’s size when he played Robin/Dick Grayson. I agree with you but let’s not pretend Hollywood cares about such details.
I could see him as Dick Grayson maybe, but I’m kind of holding out hope for Jason Todd to be in a movie. He’d fit better into the (unfortunately) darker universe WB is keeping with. And Under the Red Hood is my favorite Batman movie anyways!
I am too. I am on the fence about him in general but that last line was really funny.
Harmie? Hankie? My new favorite ship.
I’m down with Hankie 🙂
I don’t think TLR got near the attack that WWZ got. Even after someone got hurt or died on that set. TLR had worse Production problems. The film was shut down. Johnny and others took a pay cut to get the initial cost down. WWZ Production came because after viewing the movie the Producers/Paramount hated the ending. So they did what they should have done and re-shot it.
Some people are still trashing WWZ, but Brad really worked hard to promote this film in a very unique way. Johnny/Armie didn’t do that at all. Some movies make money. others don’t
This is true. Brad Pitt really put himself out there to promote the movie and was refreshingly honest about the problems it had and what they had to do to try to overcome it. I think that helped.
I agree Brad decided to promote the movie by attended multiple screenings including four cities in one day.He didnt do alot of TV promoting only GMA and yodeling on Fallon. BTW I have never seen a film because I relate to / or emphaticize with an actor’s medical situation or personal tragedy.Stallone’s son died I was emphatic but never even considered seeing his film to show my support.
Brad also had alot of positive press following his fiances masectomy and the article. I think that helped. Massively.
yeah people go see movies because a woman has surgery. or because they see children walking in an airport.
But I knew that comment was coming.
Exactly people aren’t stupid to go see a movie just because of a double mastectomy announcement or because they see a couple and their kids.. But like u said lisa I was also expecting that kind of comment.
Relax. I wasnt shading your little god. Just pointing out the obvious, the positive press raised his Q ratings and made it more likely that people who were merely aware of the film. I know I went to watch it more in support than real interest. I doubt I would have gone were it not for being so touched by the Jolie-Pitts story.
People don’t care about critics opinion, no one was interested in the lone ranger plain and simple, looks way too much like POC except in the desert, oh yes and JD in full make up again, been there done that.
+10000
But Depp is so edgy ;P
Lol “POC but in the desert” – DEAD ON.
I did got see it and regretted it. Depp was just the same goofy character he always plays, and it totally didn’t fit the tone of the movie.
Spoilers (although honestly, who cares) – there was a scene in the movie where a whole tribe of Native Americans had just been slaughtered by the army. It was extremely sad and melancholy for a few moments. All of the sudden, in the next scene, Depp and the lone ranger were jumping down the waterfall away from exploding barrels and you were supposed to be laughing, I guess.
Essentially, it was half kids’ movie and half dark, violent western. You could tell 20 different writers were fighting for control and the movie was a mess.
Call the WAHmbulance. As if critics could keep a movie from succeeding! Rotten Tomatoes even gives two separate ratings now: one for critics’ opinions and one for viwers’ opinions.
People see what they want to see regardless critics – see Adam Sandler and as mentioned WWZ. Critics and blogs said it was going to be the biggest flop of all time for months. Then some backtracked when they did something stupid – actually seeing the movie. I think people didn’t see the Lone Ranger because there was no market for it.
You know, this might not be a popular opinion, but honestly if I had a choice, I would have seen The Lone Ranger over Fast & Furious 200 or whatever number it’s on and a few other movies this summer.
I think the problem with Lone Ranger is that if you are trying honor an iconic TV show (which many young people have not seen), I don’t think it needs to be a special effects festival. The problem is, Westerns have not been doing well in the box office lately and the geniuses behind the Lone Ranger thought special effects + Johnny Depp in white makeup + Gore Verbanski=mega billions at the box office.
World War Z problems have been documented I think in both Entertainment Weekly and Vanity Fair well before it’s release. Brad Pitt went out there and honestly discussed the problems the movie encountered. And was smart enough (along with the director and studio) to do the best to turn it around. So I think people went to see that out of curiosity and the the vibe from the critics was “this is better then we thought it would be..”
But to blame the critics for the movie’s failure really is a lame excuse. Very lame. But what else are Johnny and Armie going to say? They are not going to throw the director, producers, studio or themselves under the the bus. Nor are they going to throw the audience under the bus-so it’s the critics.
It’s still a stupid lame defense, they could have say they were disappointed with the critics reactions , but still think the movie is great and hope that people will enjoy it, I think this what Baz Luhrman said regarding the GG.
The problem was that it dragged way too long, and they tried too hard to make it dark. I though the last 20 minutes really captured the tv show and they should have stuck with that. I do agree with you though: westerns aren’t that popular and people assumed Depp+Gore meant big money. But damn that movie dragged. Bad word of mouth probably didn’t help it.
I liked the movie, but it felt like two different movies to me — one that was serious, about a serious subject, and one that was campy and fun. That’s the director’s and writer’s faults, not the actors.
I thought the actors themselves were perfectly fine. They both played their role well.
The western genre can still interest people. Django is a great example of a good western movie that is well done and got solid reviews from the critics.
And as for WWZ, zombies usually don’t drag me to see a movie. As it is for many people I know. Plus, as far as I can see Johnny is a bigger box office magnet than Brad. (Particularly in the last decade with the POTC-series, while Brad didn’t go the blockbuster way.) But a friend insisted that I should go see WWZ and I was surprised that it was actually a pretty good movie.
The long knives were out for World War Z for at least a year. Just read certain blogs and others in the industry. Lone Ranger did not have that history of trashing before the fact. Vanity Fair’s hit job a few weeks before release was amazing. Hammer did not get the difference between his film and Z.
But as stated, Pitt and those involved saw the product, realized it was not up to par and did not want to release it with their names on it. They spent money to make money and did not insult the audiences’ intelligence. Depp and his crew did insult the audience and still won’t admit it and blame others.
Folks go to see bad films all the time, and sometimes critics darlings bomb badly, so critics don’t influence people that much. This crew needs to get over themselves, admit it was a mess and move on.
First of all, was there ever a huge demand to bring TLR to the big screen? I don’t think so, Mind you, whenever I watch MeTV, I’m watching the westerns- like Gunsmoke, The Big Valley, The Rifleman and Wagon Train. Adapting TLR just seem like an exercise in egotism- it’s been off the air for so long and yet, it really hasn’t stood the test of time.
As for Brad, it is a credit to him that he hasn’t said a word about the success of WWZ on opening weekend and throughout its run. He just continues to go around the world and promotes it.
One of my favorite things to watch (when I have a working VCR) is MGM: When the Lion Roars. That documentary covered a lot of ground, including the segment about how MGM would regularly sneak preview their films in surrounding small towns, get feedback and ‘fix’ their movies. While Pitt and the studios didn’t take the flawed version on a road trip, the fact that they were committed to fixing it may have resulted in some good will from potential audiences. Effort is appreciated.
Plus Pitt doesn’t really throw hissy fits when something fails. He just say that he’s disappointed and keeps it moving. People continue to expect/hope that he will keel over and die when something goes wrong-hell, people were hoping the Chanel commercial would do it, but it didn’t, even when news outlets, bloggers and posters were chanting endlessly that it should.
Pitt continues to prove that having the signoff of industry people and rabid fans isn’t necessary a good thing. Depp left his family, was papped falling down drunk, taking up with a 20-something twinkie, making regular missteps including equating being papped as rape, but he is forgiven because he always has a place within Disney. Being cushioned all the time can make a person complacent and Depp is complacent. Many others are too, but Depp is placed on a pedestal from deviating from the career trajectory that built his fanbase in the first place.
“Plus Pitt doesn’t really throw hissy fits when something fails. He just say that he’s disappointed and keeps it moving. People continue to expect/hope that he will keel over and die when something goes wrong-hell, people were hoping the Chanel commercial would do it, but it didn’t, even when news outlets, bloggers and posters were chanting endlessly that it should.”
ITA. Pitt does face failures and trashing like a man. I’m actually a Depp-fan (though I find Pitt a fine actor as well, I just like Depp more), but I’m honestly disappointed in him. Most people don’t care about critics, especially when it comes to blockbusters like TLR. And past BO-successes like Transformers and Twilight, even POTC 3+4 have proved it.
As someone already pointed out, WWZ received much harsher trashing, but Pitt & Co. made smart moves to prove them wrong.
I would’ve actually expected Depp not to care much about what critics say.
I’ve watched both TLR and WWZ, and to my regret I’ve to admit that the latter one is better. Depp reminded me of an indian version of Sparrow. I miss him in his pre-POTC days, when he did awesome indie movies.
I will say this about Armie Hammer, dude has a great stylist. The cut and color of his suits are divine.
And here I thought he was channeling Ron Burgundy.
I have seen the movie and have given it lots of love on other threads so I won’t go into detail here. But if you do see it and read the reviews, it actually does sound like many of the critics did not see the film. I hate whiny actors as much as the next person but these two happen to be right IMO.
Havent seen the movie so can’t critique. He is so baby cute but manly at the same time if that makes sense.Is he gay? He was so convincing as J.Edgars lover.
I will probably getting around to watching it on Netflix someday. It probably isn’t good, but it might be something to watch when I’m bored and there’s nothing else to do. I like both actors. No rush
I went to see the movie. It sucked.
I am a critic from the past-future?
No, what slit the throat of your movie is the fact that Hollywood is devoid of any vestige of creativity, and does nothing but churn out idiotic drivel based on comic book characters, old TV shows, and remakes of films that don’t need to be remade.
I didn’t read any reviews. Not interested in old Westerns.
Don’t talk, Armie. Just stand there. You so pretty . . .
People were gunning for WWZ because it’s based on a book that entirely un-filmable. Did they manage? Yup. Is it anything like the book? Well the title is the same and there’s some zombies. That’s about it. But it had Brad Pitt so of course people saw it.
Pacific Rim is a damn crime though–simple robot punching with Idra Elbis in a suit and not taking itself seriously and it gets beat out by an Adam Sandler movie.
Brad also really hustled for WWZ… Johnny did not go that far, even though he could have.
I do feel for Armie in a way. I mean, he hasn’t gotten bad career advice. I’m sure to his agents this was a huge get. A Johnny Depp movie! The only problem is that people seem to be over their love affair with him.
He even hustled all the way to Australia for the first time. Max Brooks isn’t complaining, his book went back to the bestsellers list after the movie came out.
God are he and Johnny Depp PRESSED about this! Your movie sucked and it tanked, dude-get over it. JD has been in the business long enough to know that not everything is going to fly, unless his ego has gotten so bloated that he thinks that he is untouchable. And Mr Hammer (who, I’m sorry, has the sex appeal of a Ken doll) better develop a thicker skin if he expects to succeed in Hollywood. Whining doesn’t become anyone, especially butthurt actors.
Maybe he thinks he won’t be considered for another big budget movie because of this disaster so he’s trying to save face. Poor guy.
Boys, tell yourself whatever makes you feel better. Critics never decide for me whether I’ll see a movie – a lot of my fave movies weren’t like by critics. I took one look at the trailer and went, “Oh, no, I’m not paying money to see that mess.” It held no appeal for me whatsoever. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
I wonder if they’re like some cheese with their whine? Or a tiny violin? Lone Ranger? All I remember about it was a cartoon from when I was a kid, and I’m 36, so we’re talking a looong time ago. And it was the cartoon I wish I could jump over but in a network with 2 channels where the only cartoon hour was from 8am to 11 am…. put up and shut up. I wouldn’t be going to see that movie based on my childhood memories alone, and Depp doesn’t help. He’s been seriously grating my nerves for a while now.
When this wreck was shut down the first time due to an INSANE overinflated budget (and, of course, Depp’s ridiculous salary demands), it should’ve been taken as a sign. But no, they carried on anyway and everyone involved got what they deserved.
2013 will be memorable in that audiences stopped drinking the Johnny Depp/Channing Tatum (“White House Down,” another megaflop) Kool-Aid.
The differences between Lone Ranger and World War Z go beyond reviews:
Brad Pitt is known around the world, whereas Armie Hammer is not.
Brad Pitt really shilled it with promos and the like, What did Johnny Depp do? But Depp is supposed to be the sidekick here, Hammer is the main vehicle, and no one outside of the US probably has any idea about his identity.
People aren’t into cowboys/westerns at this time, whereas zombies are ‘the thing’ for the moment.
I’ve never heard of Armie Hammer. What has he been in? Simpsons…The Social Network as those creepy twins? And that’s only after I consulted IMDB. Are those appearances of his deserving of a lead role? I doubt it.
He is no standout thespian, that’s certain.
I wouldn’t say WWZ was engaging or entertaining in the least. People went and saw it because ZOMBIES. And mostly came out thinking it was just okay. I think that’s why it made so much.
This is the prettiest Jennifer Aniston has looked in a long time – this ‘do totally suits her.
LOL!
So unexpected, so mean, but so effin’ funny 😉
I think he’d be great as Batman, if only for the timber of his voice. Does anyone else find his voice SSSOOOOOOOOO sexy??
Batman are you kidding ? Don’t you know Depp is fifty ? Plus enough with a Depp playing dress up.
Not Depp, silly. Armie Hammer. Just love his voice, very deep and alpha male.
Maybe Aquaman. Nobody cared much about Aquaman, but he did teach me to move the pot handles on the stove to safer places.
LOL!
Am I the only one on the entire planet who thinks Depp wearing war paint would be the same as Depp wearing blackface? If you’re wondering, he THINKS he’s less than 1/32 NA. He guesses.
I’m honestly less offended they used a white guy to play Native American than I am over the amount they paid these morons to act out this boring, old story for like the hundreth time.
Maybe nobody liked this movie because it was the same recycled trash over again? WWZ was based on a BOOK. Those movies do well because a) much of the audience wants to see on screen something they’ve read and liked and b) the rest of the audience hasn’t seen it over and over already. Most will wait to hear if something redone is any good, and catch it on rental if so.
I may be the only one who doesn’t like white man in war paint, but I can’t be the only one who gets that movies based on books have been doing very well, whether or not they’re any good.
Lots of critics dwelled on the Depp in warpaint aspect of the movie, iirc. It certainly offended me, though worse than the makeup was the way the movie treated American Indians and history in general. Oh, and the man cutting out a living man’s heart and eating it onscreen. For a PG-13 rating. Because hey, cannibalism is one thing, but at least there were no women’s nipples shown in it!
Gross, really?! Your post reminds me of the docu “This Film is not Yet Rated” that I saw on Netflix one day. Well, that and how stupid in the USA that a little nudity is soooo much more offensive than well, say, cannibalism!
My father is 3/4 Native American, so out of respect for that side of my family and due to my close proximity with the culture, I decided not to watch it ever. Still, I probably wouldn’t have yet anyway because I don’t like going to the movie theater, nor would I have read the reviews, but it is good to know someone else found that casting/costuming ludicrous.
Hell, all you have to do is say the F-word just twice and your movie is automatically slapped with an R-rating, no matter the subject. No joke. But killing people or the aforementioned cannibalism is perfectly acceptable for PG-13.
That’s how F-worded up the American ratings system is.
Show a dong and the movie gets an NC-17 rating. Ridic (riDICK?).
Ugh, so true. Dongs are beautiful too!
Joking aside, I still can’t wrap my mind around words and nipples being more offensive than murder.
RiDICK indeed.
Eh to be fair you can find worse things on the news (interesting, a few months ago there was a video surfacing of a Syrian commander eating someone’s lung and it was on the daytime news). If you ask me, the news is more traumatizing than films.
No, Nerdy, you are not the only one who was offended by Depp in warpaint. The first time I saw the poster I first, laughed my head off because he looked so ridiculous with the dead bird on his head and then I was so offended I could barely speak coherently. There are so many Native American actors out there, both young ones and veterans that picking Depp to play Tonto was blindly offensive.
Depp actually “designed” his own costume and face paint based on a painting he saw, only there was no bird on the Indian’s head, the bird was flying by but Super Smart Johnny Depp decided that Indians wore dead birds on their heads. I was so happy this mess bombed. Well deserved in my opinion.
+1 on the Native American comment. What movie was recently made where they sub all the little people parts with average size humans made to look small? This is reminiscent of that.
To the second paragraph…Gah, really? I remember when everyone thought Depp was the best thing since ice cream and I didn’t get it back then. Now, everything I hear about his personality or anything he does makes me dislike him more and more. Just, ew.
Ah, but film-Tonto is crazy, so that makes everything okay, right? Better to have a white guy play the crazy than to have a real Indian play a crazy one … that might be offensive.
No? I didn’t think it works either, but I do believe that’s the twisted-reasoning the studio was using.
Yeah we saw the preview for Lone Ranger in the movie theater and I turned to my husband then and said “There is absolutely NOTHING that I want to see in this movie. The preview basically shows the best highlights, and NOTHING I just saw makes me want to see this movie”. Nope, it wasn’t the critics…
I plan to rent it on On Demand, so there’s still that end of the income (also plane viewing rights, etc.)
You couldn’t pay me to watch World War Z though. Hideous dehumanizing crap. The whole concept struck me as a weird allegory of the 1 percent, as in “oh no, the poor are coming for our gated communities and first class section of the plane!”
The sales from On Demand, Netflix, etc. will make Disney a little more money but not enough for a profit. Disney has already written down $190M for this mess.
OTOH, WWZ will also earn more money from those sources which will make them even bigger profits.
Having seen them both, WWZ is simply a better film. LR doesn’t know what it wants to be, and ends up a confused mess.
I didn’t notice any 1% allegory, or anything unusually dehumanizing. Obviously the zombies aren’t human-like, but that’s kind of the point of a zombie flick: they’re scary because were human, but are now undead. I don’t think that really counts as dehumanizing. There are plenty of touching, human, moments involving characters who aren’t undead.
I just got home from seeing The Lone Ranger on its first day out here in Paris. We went because my husband wanted to see it, which surprised me. It’s a fun movie, with a lot of snark. The movie did knocked down some of the “myths” in the comic books and the TV series. Deadpan humour. The train wreck scenes were reminiscent of Buster Keaton’s “The General”.
I don’t pay attention to movie critics because too often I’ve hated movies critics raved about. When I used to read movie reviews regularly and had learned various critics tastes, I knew which movies I wouldn’t like based on the reviews of certain critics whose taste I did not share.
Watching zombies feels exciting and taps into our primal fears; the lone ranger is a worn out colonial stereotype.
I only read one review but it was about how terrible the movie was and never even mentioned any production problems. I wasn’t surprised by the bad review because in just one viewing of the trailer it looked ridiculous.
If only this would destroy both of their careers. Sigh. They’ll both go on to make more bloated messes, especially Depp, though hopefully they won’t be phenomenally violent and yet get PG-13 ratings.
+100000000
I saw him in San Antonio which is where his wife has a bakery. I walked in to ask if they had almond croissants (they didn’t), and he was a charmer. Not gross or unpleasant, but the kind of guy who is polite and a little bit of a flirt because they just can’t help it.
I still didn’t see the movie and neither did my POCC loving Depp obsessed 15 year old.
Both of them need to have a seat. Damn. No one liked your movie. Okay. It happens. Pull your big boy panties up and deal with it, instead of blaming other people for your poor career choices.
You know what a critic’s job is, Hammer? (Hammer Time!)
To give their critical analysis of a film and walk us through their thoughts on it. Not all critics are the same, and they are individuals with varying opinions. I don’t read any more reviews because my go-to person had always been Roger Ebert and I’m struggling to find another critic to follow– but the nice thing about critics is that if my tastes are generally in line with one, then I can discern whether or not I should spend my limited disposable income on one of hundreds of movies to come out each year. If critics universally panned your movie, then it’s not the critics fault your movie did so bad– the fault is with the movie! Why should I cough up my hard earned money on a movie that is, by all accounts, terrible? To suggest otherwise just so you can claim a success under your belt is bullshit.
As for Depp, enough with all the goddamn over-the-top costuming and makeup. You don’t even need to take a break, just try some roles that don’t rely on an overly ornate appearance. If talent is there, it doesn’t need dressing up. Anyone remember The Libertine? Depp was also excellent in Public Enemies (regardless of whether or not you liked the movie, his performance was incredible). They don’t all need to be Burton-esque.
*this*
If critics didn’t give low reviews to lowball movies, we wouldn’t call them critics. We would call them studio whores.
The problem with the movie is that they let the actors control waaay too many things, and it made it so cringe-worthy, the film-seeing public could see it a mile off.
Bullshit. That didn’t stop people from going to see all 3 Transformers films. Even people who are fans of stupid action movies hated that bloated mess of a thing. There are critics online who I watch who love exploitation stuff, action, sci-fi, wrestling… Stuff as far from Oscar-bait as you can get, and they tore the thing to shreds. And these are people who own Caligula ( if you want to talk about monster-budget films with jacked up productions and otherwise well-regarded actors) on DVD. Stop making excuses for your turd of a movie. Do critics sometimes get it wrong? Yes. But not here. It was too long, too slow, too loud, too stupid, and for some reason decided to take itself seriously while having a bird crap on Johnny Depp’s head. The End.
Uh, the critics did not make any decision for me. The studio and the idiotic costuming did. The fact that the critics, more or less, had the same problem as I did was just an afterthought.
I didn’t see it because of the awkward red-face thing going on. No, I am not complaining that they cast a white actor in a Native role (It’s not like people would have put up a stink if they cast a non-Native Hispanic actor as Tonto). It’s obnoxious that there are talented Native actors out there who could have taken the role, but got passed over because Depp is such a Big Deal, but I could have lived with the awkward casting alone.
It’s the part where he was allowed to let his little artistic spirit run free, and completely Otherized Tonto. He could have collaborated with the Comanche to present them as they want to be presented. Instead, he went with a mystical painting made by a non-Native and taped a freaking crow to his head as Tonto’s ‘totem’ or ‘spirit animal’. Oh, yeah, and slathered himself with ridiculous face paint.
I damn skippy wasn’t going to pay 10 bucks to see a movie I would just have face-palmed through.
It was a movie based on a farce of a tv show. I don’t think they were going for a serious take on the underlying issues. It wasn’t billed as the equivalent of Dancing with Wolves or the like.
Eh, I get that I am really being a pretentious nerd here, but I do think the movie genuinely was cringeworthy, and Depp totally strutted around like he expected a medallion or something for his take on Tonto.
The thing is–Depp really spun a lot of BS about his take on Tonto addressing those issues. I mean, he just waxed poetic about how ‘his’ Tonto was just so different and special and non-insulting compared to the farce TV show…simply because he didn’t stand around with his silly face-paint and that stupid crow stuck to his head and take direct orders from the Ranger or something. I don’t know how a person can miss the point as much as he did.
At any rate…even if they weren’t there to address the underlying issues, there really isn’t an excuse for such a garish presentation in this day and age. Seriously, people are just supposed to be more self-aware than that.
And ‘Dances with Wolves’ is hardly innocent of Otherizing Natives. It wasn’t slapstick and embarrassing like Depp’s Tonto, but there were abundant tropes to be found in that film.
I have such a thing for Armie. Tall, good looking, AND he can ride a horse… *swoon* 😉
Depp’s bare chest ruined it for me. He has grandpa abs, and that’s just sad.
That’s why I didn’t see it.
Depps body is not nice.
But arnie is so pretty i almost saw it just for him,
They are being interviewed — what did folks think they would say?? Yeah, the movie really sucked, don’t bother when it comes out on DVD.
For Heaven’s sake, a lot of movies make a ton of money on the secondary market, so they still need to promote. maybe they didn’t use the best words, but my guess is that they were trying to tell people to watch it on DVD despite the lack of success in the theater. They’re actors, people.
seeing as how i saw neither movie, the one thing i am certain about is that Henry Cavill is in fact very dreamy.
OH MY GOD, ARMIE HAMMER, SHUT UP!
Trashing the critics isn’t the smartest thing to do. What does he think other producers and directors and other actors (who might have the power to suggest actors to roles) are thinking? That this fool can’t be gracious and say “I’m sorry that the critics didn’t like it. I, and all the cast and crew, did our best to make a film that everyone would enjoy. I hope some people enjoyed it.” That’s it. That’s all he would’ve had to say.
And he would have AT LEAST gotten the respect of the higher ups in the industry, and they would know that he won’t trash talk ANYONE. Especially since he’s not even famous (or talented) enough to trash talk anyone without his career suffering. I wouldn’t hire him if I was a director or producer. What if the movie we shot together doesn’t do so well? Do I really want him trashing people because of it? NO.
I liked the movie…
Dear Johnny Depp: if you don’t want blockbuster expectations, don’t make a movie that cost $250+ million. Ta da! Problem solved.
that’s why there are critics.
WE NEED “KILLERS”!!
Oh for God’s sake. NO ONE LIKES WESTERNS ANYMORE. No one has a point of reference for them! Don’t these guys know that every Western since The Wild Wild West remake to Cowboys and Aliens has been a big fat flop? Who’s greenlighting these turkeys, anyway? Old guys who used to watch Bonanza? Jesus.
Hammer and Depp can bitch all they want, but this one was a dog from the get-go, and the critics were only telling the truth about it.
Considering that the studio had the final edit on The Lone Ranger, I’m beginning to wonder whether the so-called blame can also belong to the studio itself? Personally, I went in with no expectations and had a good time with that film. I read no reviews beforehand. And considering what a staid, balky subject The Lone Ranger is in terms of a remake ( and do check out the reruns of the show on Me TV if you don’t believe me about the staidness of the whole thing), they did a pretty decent job of trying to invigorate it.
How is 250 mil $ + Jerry Bruckheimer + Disney NOT a blockbuster movie, dear Johnny?
Sorry, that’s totally lame.
And Hammer comparing LR with WWZ is even lamer. LR is just a bad movie from begin with. And the budget is even more overbloated.
Johnny is now exactly what he avoided for years before: a typecasted, over-paid actor