 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As there seems to be a reasonable opinion around that at the very least, this movie isn't half as bad as these critics said it was, does anyone have any theories as to why there was SUCH a downer on it?
I remember seeing at least one remark that had the words "anti-american", I'm pretty sure. And the film both ups the importance of the native american, as well as painting the US Cavalry in a bad light. But these have both been done before anyway so I'm at a loss. This film is way better than ANY Star Wars prequel, and for me the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.
So. What gives?
@Paul,
not sure really, maybe people like more popcorn fluff? Although Iron Man 3 and Star Trek were pretty violent and dark too. Though you could say that the violence of LR is more 'natural and realistic' ie, on earth and historical referenced events that happened. So realistic violence is less palatable to some people. The simplest answer is the length of the picture at 149 minutes it is probably about 29 minutes too long for most people. I really think cutting out SF frames would have cut out around 20 minutes or more, (not sure how long those scenes are) and that would have improved the pace of the picture, the straightforwardness of the narrative. This would have netted better reviews and more viewers I think. Just a guess.
Your guess is certainly as good as mine or anyone else's, ado. Wierd. The violence was a little realistic for a Disney I suppose, though less harrowing than some things I could mention. Even the first Harry Potter film had me thinking how much times change. The ending to that has similarities to the original Hammer Dracula film. That was an 'x' (or 'R' in the US?)ceritficate film, yet now Harry Potter is kids' stuff.
The length of LR bothered me much less than with Man of Steel. After all that pounding non-stop action, the last segment REALLY was one more episode too many. The wife thought the same thing, and she came out saying she'd seen enough of that kind of thing again, and she loved the older Superman films, and the last Batman trilogy.
Horses for courses I suppose. No cowboy pun intended!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ paul
Well, I was on the edge about going to see Man of Steel. I finally decided not to bother seeing it, mostly cause of other reviews here like yourself. It sounded more painful and stressful than enjoyable and entertaining. Apparently some people are confusing being viscerally bludgeoned with entertainment - at least that is how MOS sounds to me. It seems like a case of hyper effects and hyper action running the whole picture. I am just not that impressed with that. Zack Snyder neither impresses me as a director, he seems like an overgrown 13 year old with $200 million to spend making a movie. (Too bad that they made enough money to make a sequel).
Comparatively Gore Verbinski (Long Ranger) is a skilled action director, sometimes he goes overboard too, in the worst cases like POTC Worlds End, but Lone Ranger has some action pieces that are well structured and shot, and that are actually understandable and very nostalgic and interesting, especially that last train sequence.
And The Lone Ranger also pauses occasionally for breath! You know, a little something else except pulse-pounding action.
It looks as though super hero films are now going to be totally full of grunting and fighting, with little else in terms of variety. Ok, the 70s Superman films are not as visually impressive, but the character has a proper cast of characters that need a bit of limelight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday my co-worker's husbands wanted to sit and watch football all day, so we went to a local $2 movie theater and watched THE LONE RANGER. Can anyone here tell me what parts of the music was written by Geoff Zanelli? I have read here that he wrote/arranged the FINALE, but did he do any other parts? The FINALE is the best part of the score. The rest of the score sounded like music that could have been composed for sequels to THE PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN and THE LAST SAMURAI. I also felt like some Morricone scores were used as a temp track in a few places. The movie was not good and the score was okay, still not worth a listen outside of the movie. I do not download music, but I might download the FINALE until I can find the CD used.
Kim Tong
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't listen to 'em folks, the movie's great! The score however is sublime.
I'm a fan of the old school. Herrmann, Morricone, Waxman, Goldsmith, Korngold. This is quite simply a great score, and one I listen to over and again. WHOEVER is responsible!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I challenge anyone to listen to the entire cd before judging.
Why do you have to listen to the CD? Listen to it how it was used in the movie. I also said could have been composed for a "Pirate" sequel.
Kim Tong
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't actually have the cd. I've listened a few times online and ordered it. But my main memory is how it was used in the movie and it's great! Absolutely love it. If there is one tiny similarity between this and the Pirates movies, it's no more than those between this and Gladiator. In other words, that slightly synth feel many Zimmer scores have. But it's no problem, it doesn't matter at all. It's great and that's it.
My response to this music, and this is usually the case, is from watching the movie, and being moved and uplifted by the score whilst watching.
That good enough for ya? 'Cause I'm being honest here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
