Strike 3?

Yesterday, I called the stills and new poster for 'The Lone Ranger' little more than 2 strikes and left it to the teaser trailer to redeem the marketing campaign. Here it is, and no it doesn't.

Problem 1) The voice-over is that of an unidentified speaker. I'm guessing this is Tonto, but it's not made clear or, rather, it's not clear because we don't know what Tonto sounds like, what to expect from his voice. We don't have a frame of reference, so the voice isn't immediately recognizable. It may be fairly obvious later, on analysis, but this isn't the way trailers for huge blockbusters, especially those aimed at kids, are supposed to play. (They're not for analysis, they're for bowling you over. You should have a visceral response, feel like you know what to expect and look forward to the movie after seeing the trailer one time).

It's not like it's the distinctive gravelly voice of the Dark Knight or some other instantly known character. This doesn't hit home with a prospective audience. You can't tell anything from this voice. No hook there. Doesn't grab you.

Problem 2) The train motif. Kids are supposed to turn out for this because, at one time, the locomotive train was the fastest thing around? Seriously.

Sorry, kids don't care about trains. This isn't 1940. Or 1950. Or 1960. Or...okay you get the picture. Nobody cares about trains. Not anymore.

Problem 3) The notion that the train and, more specifically, the fact a train goes fast, meant that "Time and space (were) under the mastery of man." How is that, exactly? That you could go, what?, 30 miles in a hour meant you had command of time and space? Nobody thought that. The cowpokes didn't watch a train go across the horizon and think the guy driving it had control over time and space. They probably thought something like, "There goes the train."

Further, the notion that this new technology (going from point A to B in a train) is a power that "makes emperors and kings look like fools" is something nobody will buy. Nobody will think train travel was something that brought with it the power to make emperors and kings cower. Sure, it was the future, way back in eighteen-hundred and whatever. It was a huge step toward bringing industrialization to the west. But it didn't make anybody look like a fool. That would be a magical oracle or wizard, or something like that. Make a movie about how a magic oracle makes emperors and kings look like fools and kids might want to see that. But, trains? A movie about trains?

Problem 4) There is no bad guy. No antagonist is identified. That's a bad sign. This lack of a villain means kids can't say, "Yes! I can't wait to see the Lone Ranger and Tonto kick (insert bad guy's name here)'s ass!" No over-the-top bad guy implies anybody could be the good guy. Here, it happens to be Lone/Tonto. Could have been Jeb and Wilbert just as easily seeing how the bad guy is so lame he/she/it isn't even worth including in the trailer. Not exactly inspiring.

Otherwise, this trailer doesn't have much going for it. It does nothing for me. The visuals, the dusty old west setting -- they don't move me. It does not make me want to see the movie. Reactions online are tepid. 'Reserved' might be a good word. So, yeah, I'm calling it strike 3. Not a great start for a massively expensive would-be tentpole.

Too early to call this another John Carter, but that's what I'm doing. Between kids not wanting to see this, adults not caring, the fact it's a western, the fact nobody knows who the Lone Ranger is/was, the bloated budget ($250m+ for (a problematic) production then add marketing), the probable lack of an overseas audience (except in countries where the Lone Ranger is huge), and the highly competitive summer box office race, I'm calling this Disney's 'John Carter: 2013 Edition'.

Let's hope there's only one.

.

Strike 2 -- Or -- John Carter 2013

Yesterday, we got some stills from 'The Lone Ranger' which looked just as silly as the first picture. I'm not able to see how anybody, especially kids who don't even know who/what the Lone Ranger is, will want to see this.

Today, we get a poster which reflects much the same attitude on the part of whoever designed it. This says 'so what'. "Never take off the mask" means nothing to anyone and doesn't reflect any action taken by a hero figure or theme (unless the movie is about not being known). No kid is going to say 'Look! I'm never taking this mask off!' Or, 'When I grow up I want to always wear a mask!'

It's not clear whose eyes we're looking at, which yields kind of a creepy/edgy conceptual tone that doesn't fit with this type movie. The flaking paint motif will not appeal to kids -- that just says 'old timey' and kids ain't interested in seeing that, especially considering there will be top-drawer competition vying for box office dollars come summer next year.

This poster constitutes strike 2 in a completely flat campaign that's not generating any 'buzz' other than utilitarian comments noting the movie is being prepared for release.

I've never understood this product, not as a major movie. It came as no surprise when they killed the production. But then, it came back to life. I thought for sure it would never go in front of cameras and would end up cancelled again. But, no. And, here we are a year or so later, and it's not looking great. Really, it's looking like something that should have stayed cancelled.

If the draw in this country is hard to figure, the appeal overseas, where bloated budgets tend to get paid for more and more these days, is even more difficult to pin down. Who will to want to see 'The Lone Ranger' in China? Will that mean anything to people in Germany or Russia?

We should be getting a teaser trailer soon. That'll be telling. Strike 3 or the first step in the right direction? Will this be Disney's 2013 'John Carter' or can TLR possibly score?























.

'The Lone Ranger' Smells. So Does This Dead Crow on My Head.

I couldn't believe they actually went ahead with this. Does anyone care about the Lone Ranger? Okay, best of luck and all, but -- silly title, very dumb still:

Is that a dead crow on Johnny Depp's head? What kind of hat is that? Who wears a dead crow on their head? Never mind. I'm more interested in Depp's expression -- more on that in a minute. First, though...

What's Armie Hammer wearing? (That is Armie Hammer, right? I can't tell with that mask on. [Wouldn't you get sweaty with that on all day?]) Check the cut on that tailored suit. Very nice. Relaxed fit in the shoulders, high arm holes (not great for shooting bad guys at a full gallop, but whatev), understated peaked lapels (wouldn't a nice old-west notch be more appropriate for hunting down varmints and shifty-eyed rustlers?), and a casual fitting vest. Tightly wound neck-kerchief (I wouldn't go into a bar wearing that thing, but hey...that's me. I'm not the Lone fucking Ranger). And that sterling white hat. Wow! Crisp. Nice shirt, but if you're going to go that far shouldn't you don a tie? I guess that's nitpicking. An open collar is probably fine, before six. But, then, in that case, isn't it a bit of a gaffe to wear black?

Thing is -- looking at this picture -- you know what? You know what you'd smell like after a day or two on the trail wearing that getup? In the hot-ass summer sun out in the American Old-West desert (although the white hat would reflect a lot of that heat). You know how blazing it would be all day, no shade -- wearing dark colors? How much you'd sweat? I mean, it's 105 degrees and you're wearing a three-piece (navy blue or black) suit? Day after day? On the dusty trail where there's hardly enough water to drink let alone bathe? You'd reek. I mean, the wind shifts and poor Tonto gags. It would be gnarly. Hell, you'd smell bad if you were wearing a tee-shirt, but a fucking three-piece? You'd be soaked in pure funk. Layers of it. Complex, like a good wine. Fresh funk, yesterday's beans-n-bacon funk, good ole armpit funk. You'd stink like hell.

And, that leads me back to Depp's/Tonto's expression. What's that fucking smell? he's saying. There's no getting around it -- that look says, "You need a bath, man." Of course Mr. Ranger isn't savvy. Oh, no. He's pretending to scan the horizon for bad hombres (Look at him. He's totally avoiding eye contact with Tonto). Why is that? Why won't the Lone Ranger look at Tonto. Maybe that's why Tonto looks so pissed. Lone Ranger dissing him!!

Well, maybe it cuts both ways. Lone Ranger might be stinking up the trail but, shit, Tonto's got a dead ass bird on his head. What the fuck does dead crow smell like after a few days? And, how long had that crow been dead when Tonto's crazy ass found it and decided it made the perfect head wear? Fucking crow could have been dead for days, laying out there roasting in the sun, bugs and shit growing inside, stinking so bad not even coyotes would go near it. Maybe that's why Lone can't look at Tonto. Maybe he thinks his indigenous friend's brain has been cooked by the searing sun. Maybe LR figures the T-man is one tomahawk shy of a complete set. I could understand him feeling that way. I'd think that, too. If my trail mate had a dead fucking rattlesnake or possum on his head I'd be like, 'Fuck you man. I'm riding into town, get a beer. You stay out here with dead-ass shit on your head all you want.'

These guys have issues. Nobody wants to see a movie with guys that have issues.

Sorry, but this movie looks dumb as hell. I'm not seeing it, especially if it's shown with that new smell-o-vision that's rolling out. No way, man. Fuck that.

.