The Lone Ranger

                Johnny Depp still stands as one of the most iconic working actors today. Ever since his debut in 1984 with Wes Craven’s “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” he’s appeared in many films that have become classic in an instant. “Fear and Loathing,” “Finding Neverland,” “Platoon,” “Donnie Brasco,” “Cry-Baby,” and “Ed Wood,” just to name the few. He’s done plenty of films to show just how good of an actor he can be and go further and beyond with it. But that doesn’t mean he’s had a share of bad films as well, like “The Man Who Cried,” “The Tourist,” “Dark Shadows,” “Ninth Gate,” and so forth.

                This time, Depp has teamed up with “Pirates of the Caribbean” director, Gore Verbinski, once again, for Disney’s big budget re-imagining to “The Lone Ranger,” marking it as the first Lone Ranger movie in over thirty years.  Now, I never actually was too big on the Lone Ranger, or even knew anyone who WAS a fan of the character, so I’m only going to be judging this film on its own. Before I even saw the film, I’ve heard SO much hatred upon this film, to where Rotten Tomatoes had it at a 25% rating. But that didn’t stop me from seeing this at the premiere showing. And yes, there are many things that I do agree with people that didn’t make the film work and falls flat…However, I didn’t really find it AS bad as people were making it out to be. Also, I’d like to point out that there are spoilers ahead, so I’d suggest you’d skip over to the rating, or continue on with reading what I have to say.

                The movie tells of John Reid, a lawyer who arrives into town to visit his brother and family, all while on the transport of Butch Cavendish, a cannibalistic outlaw. When Butch escapes, John joins his brother and his friends, now deputized as a ranger, but are then gunned down by Butch. John survives, and is told is a spirit walker by Tonto, a native that John arrested after Butch escaped, who both now want to hunt down Butch and take revenge for killing people that they held dear to them.

                First off, let’s get the obvious one out of the way, and that’s Johnny Depp. Now my problem with Depp in the role wasn’t the fact that he wasn’t Indian, and he was just saying he had ancestry and a Native mother to prove he IS part Native; I’m sick of hearing those arguments over and over again, and just the minute it comes into play just gives me a headache; no, my problem was the fact that Depp wasn’t really playing a different character, and was just playing Jack Sparrow while talking Indian. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the Jack Sparrow character, but I find it completely unnecessary outside of the “Pirates” series. It could have worked out fine if Depp kept it subtle throughout the film, but it’s there for most of the film, and it gets old really fast. Depp, we know you got an Oscar nomination for it, we don’t need to see it in EVERYTHING you’re in now.

Another thing that really didn’t work was some of the comedy moments, which really took the mood from the scene it was in, like a chase scene that has a horse drinking from a bottle of rum or a very serious back-story followed by some dumbass line. Disney, you don’t need to make this “Pirates of the Caribbean,” we already have enough of that from Depp.

                Also the story is basically a rehash of “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” and no; I’m not kidding when I say that. A hero whose apart of the law, whose brother is killed by a cartoony villain, goes after him with the help of another cartoony character, who had a thing with a sexy-redhead thrown in somewhere; that pretty much “Roger Rabbit,” with Lone Ranger characters put into the mix of things. Speaking of sexy-redhead, Helena Bonham Carter appears in this movie, and is only in the film for two scenes; and no, that one moment in the beginning where she’s seeing the railroad being built does not count. She’s supposed to be a character that helps out Reid and Tonto, especially in the third act, but with how they’ve underused her and how they’ve had other characters, all it does is make you wonder what the point of having her was, especially when her character rips off “Planet Terror.”

                Now the one thing that I felt was completely pointless were the scenes that took place in the 1930’s, which start off the film. The events of the Lone Ranger happening were told through Tonto, to a kid looking at exhibits in a fair. Those scenes didn’t really add much to the film, other than it just to be there for the sake of comedy. And it doesn’t help much that the kid’s the boy from “Spy Kids 4.”

                Also, with the Lone Ranger being a “spirit walker” in which he can’t be killed, they don’t really do much with that sort of thing. There’s even a scene where Reid doesn’t stops believing Tonto about it, and instead of having him shot to make him believe he is, they just have Tonto save Reid from that; but then again, Reid was only shot in the shoulder when he and his brother were ambushed, so I guess that breaks that argument.

                Now with all that I’ve said, what made me think this film wasn’t as bad as people made it out to be? Well for starters, William Fichtner as Butch Cavendish was very enjoyable to watch. Fichtner really knows how to bring out a good villain, being the highlights of even some of the weakest of films. Hell, the things that he does in this film, and just the amount of what they’ve shown in this film, this came pretty close to being Disney’s first R-rated movie.

While I wasn’t too big on Depp as Tonto, I got to give them props for giving them a proper back-story to why he has a vendetta against Butch, as well as explaining how the whole “spirit walker” thing came into play for him. There’s also Armie Hammer as John Reid, the Lone Ranger himself. People complained that this guy was unlikable, because he makes dumb decisions like not killing Butch and instead arresting him. Well, he’s already been established as a man of the law, so he does all those on instinct, especially when he’s admitted he’s not a cruel man. It helps within the final act when he puts all of that aside to finally do something right, and I didn’t have any problem with what they did with that.

People thought that the film should have just been called “Tonto and the Lone Ranger,” since it focused more on Tonto than it did the actual Lone Ranger himself. Yes, I do agree that is a legitimate gripe, but I felt that they explained enough about John Reid as a character throughout the first act, and you can tell in his expression that he’s been through some tough times.

                What I also enjoyed about this film were the action scenes, most notable the final action scene in the end. If anything, these are probably the best action scenes that I’ve seen in any Western flick. The stunt work, the angles, the shootouts, the tension, all of it tied with the Lone Ranger theme playing, thanks to composer Hans Zimmer bringing that to life. Even with all the problems with this film, this still stands as one of the most exciting climaxes I have ever seen. However, it barely makes up for some of the other stuff that came about, through and through. If this film had made a few adjustments, this would have been an interesting pilot for a new Lone Ranger TV series on AMC.

                Overall, while “The Lone Ranger” isn’t quite as bad as everyone made it out to be, it still doesn’t make itself a good movie. It has some redeeming qualities, but in the end it just falls flat as being a very mediocre film. But would the positives still make it worth seeing in theaters? Of course. Like I said, the Lone Ranger himself is a likable character, and there are some damn good action scenes, especially with the climax, and there are enjoyments with the villain. If this film took out all those mistakes and wasn’t bombing as badly, though it wouldn’t have been a problem if it didn’t cost $300 million, then I would have loved to see a sequel, or maybe even a full-on trilogy. But instead, we have this.

Rating: 5/10