...are both guilty pleasure favorites of mine
Batman and Superman are over 70 years old, had radio plays, and people keep giving a shit.
Sherlock Holmes is even older.Sherlock and Batman and Superman weren't shackled to a eurotrash wannabe hollywood nut "because he made good money as a pirate" co-star playing a "re-imagined" sidekick.I mean seriously, if they crowbarred Seth Rogan into Man of Steel to play Comet the Super Horse re-imagined as a zebra, that would have tanked hard too.The problem isn't old characters. The problem is Hollywood (and especially Disney) simply have no clue what to do with them. When they do manage not to mess things up too badly it's almost by accident.
I agree with almost everything you've said - although Seth Rogan as Comet did give me a pleasant image or two. One place I have a slight quibble is that Disney really did an excellent job on the Avengers, and I don't think it was an accident. I think it was in large part by hiring Joss Whedon and getting out of the way.
But that's the point. Avengers succeeded because Disney didn't screw with it. John Carter failed because Disney did screw with it. And "re-imagining" Tonto as Johnny Depp with a dead bird on his head is most definitely screwing with the Lone Ranger.To be honest I think Disney in its hubris wanted to meddle with the Avengers, too, but was smart enough for once to realize that that would only alienate the large existing fanbase and tank the film. With older, less well known properties they don't have that concern, and so feel they are free to meddle. And that only results in flops, because no matter how clever Disney's herd of writers think they are, they will never be as good at writing for characters as the people who created those characters in the first place.
I care! There are awesome characters from back in the day, and folks would realize that if Hollywood would actually make GOOD movies.
While I agree with you (I love reading my old Doc Savage novels), there are so many better known modern heroes based on those old characters that any attempt Hollywood makes to showcase the classics will come across as cheap rip-offs to the younger generation. The fact that the characters they already know are the real copies won't help sales. That's why they bastardize the originals to try to separate them from their modern doppelgangers.
I thought the Lone Ranger film was great.
Yeah, you. You and no one else.
The Lone Rangers were radio heroes, weren't they?
Technically, yes. But they Degenerated pretty fast.
I'm less concerned about the source material and more concerned with the fact that they cast THE WHITEST MAN IN THE WORLD to play the only ethnic character in the movie.
What's the difference between getting a white actor to play a character of another race and getting an actor of another race to play a white character? Both have been and are done frequently, yet fandom seems very selective about which actors in which roles it will get in a huff over, and which it will simply let slide.
Power. Having a member of a more powerful group impersonating/replacing a member of a less powerful group is more controversial than having a member of a less powerful group impersonating/replacing a member of a more powerful group.
THANK YOU! that is exactly what I first thought when I heard that. that and this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE4XK2YZL9Y
I love Plastic Man, and if they cast a black guy to play him I wouldn't care in the slightest. Plastic Man is his powers and personality and color doesn't really matter. Tonto, on the other hand, is fairly dependent on being from the Potawatomi tribe. His defining characteristic, as such, is that he isn't white.
@Yildo That's really ridiculous treating all white people as a powerful group and all Cherokees as a weak group, it's actually pretty racist.
"the only ethnic character in the movie"As opposed to the ethnic-less people.
@ 1:12 AMTonto isn't Cherokee...Confusing Cherokee and Potawatomi is pretty racist actually.
I think Johnny Depp calling himself "part" Native is incredibly generous. It's like, 1/16 on his grandmother's side. Got a good laugh out of the to quoque from the "actually pretty racist" Anonymous users above me.
Depp is part Cherokee and/or Creek. He was also adopted into the Comanche Nation.
Only according to Depp.And no, being "adopted" by a Comanche woman acting on her sole initiative is not being "adopted into the nation".
I'm ticked off, too. Enough with the nepotism! The Lone Ranger and Green Hornet do not represent the only familial line in history!
Johnny Depp is a member of the Commanche Nation, the same tribe Tanto belongs to.
And Toni Morrison dubbed Bill Clinton "the first black president." Doesn't mean he should play Martin Luther King, Jr.
No. He is not a member of the Comanche Nation.
Tanto must be the Gobot version of Tonto.
The Gobot version would have been called something like "EN JUN"
Reporter: Let's ask Johnny Depp how he feels about this, an anonymous internet buffoon slandering his movie. Johnny?Johnny [from his alligator hide beanbag stuffed with thousand dollar bills]: Eat my nuts with a fine pesto sauce.Reporter: Indeed. Truly one of this generation's luminaries. Back to you, Mr. Tim.
Come on. after the extermination of natives in the XIX, It's not that easy to find a real native american actor to play the role. At least they choose a cool actor.