polyhedral-paranoia said: i'm 100% sure you've read all the stuff that Gore is planning for this Lone Ranger, surely you can crap on a flick due to a boring pub photo? sure he might have gone off the "reservation" a bit on the pirates trilogy, but they all look so luscious, and i think he more than made up for "At World's End" with "Rango". Certainly the WACKY gif belongs on the "Dark Shadows" stuff, but that would be a badge of honor considering the source material.
It’s pretty hard not to draw comparisons between the worst indulgences of POTC (laziness, excessiveness, dull jokes instead of character, convoluted plotting, over-reliance on spectacle) and how this looks and sounds so far.
Yes, I’m basing it on the picture and synopsis - “infused with action and humor”, “brought to life through new eyes”, “epic surprises and humorous fiction” - all of that is studio-speak for wacky, wink-wink adventures. They want POTC fans to SEE the picture, READ the synopsis and FEEL comfortable and secure that they’ll get more of the same. The concept and legend of the Lone Ranger is incapable of luring any kind of an audience on its own; they HAVE to link it to POTC to build buzz.
And that’s fine. But it feels drab to me, uninspired. Forced. Re-treaded. Hope I’m wrong.
March 6, 2012
polyhedral-paranoia said: i need to see a Les Grossman movie, his motivations aren't nearly as important as his dance movies and his thesaurus of vulgarities. That said, I liked the 2011 prequel to The Thing, so what the hell do i know. KEEP DRINKING BOOTY SWEAT
Les Grossman is a clever character, well and surprisingly played, in a larger body of work that had other laughs, characters, and decent bits. You’re right that many will happily spend 90 more minutes with his character and have a delightful time - but I constantly question Hollywood’s motivations to recycle bits that don’t really warrant the treatment.
If one writer/director/actor can innovate the use of Tom Cruise’s abilities, why can’t someone else do it again, in a new way? Why not expend some energy and creativity and simply come up with something new?
The answer is usually money - it’s cheaper and quicker to reuse something that works than take a chance on something that’s never been done. But that’s why so much of what gets produced and reproduced is crap.
There are notable exceptions, of course. But there are far too many re-treaded movies out there that suffer from a lack of effort and thought.