aka "a bust".
Bet on it.
aka "a bust".
Bet on it.
They are confused on how to sell it. The tone is way off even from the trailers.
What mode was Depp in for Rango? It was, like the first three Pirates movies, a Verbinski (minus Bruckheimer, granted), but I'm not sure it was designed to be a blockbuster. Then again, it was THX's first fully animated movie (Prequel joke! Gitcher prequel joke right here! Only a nickel!), and it cost a shitload of money to make. I feel like they expected it to do a lot more business than it did.
Then again, Rango traded on Depp's voice. It didn't trade on his face.
Lone Ranger looks like a giant clusterfuck to me. Even the Klinton Spilsbury Legend of the Lone Ranger had the sense to ditch Tonto's Injunspeak.
I also think a lot of people will think this one looks, to use neglet's terminology, more like it's in "Tim Burton super weird mode" than "Bruckheimer blockbuster mode." If the trailer is to be believed, it does just what Burton's Dark Shadows movie does: it takes a well-known genre property that was decidedly uncomedic and infuses it with comedy.
I'm a pretty huge Lone Ranger fan. It started for me with the Klinton Spilsbury movie, but I wound up a pretty big fan all around. I have a decent collection of radio episodes, and an even more decent collection of Clayton Moore episodes. My collection of Filmation-animated episodes is slight, but I'm proud of it. In fact, fuck it, I'll go ahead and declare myself Corona's A1 Bull Goose Lone Ranger fan. I even worked the motherfucker into a Horso arc.
I like Depp, I like the Lone Ranger. I was really hoping the trailer would speak to me. It didn't. Maybe the movie will.
I need to find out before I go to see it whether or not it will feature Rossini's William Tell Overture. If it doesn't, I'll skip it.
Shit. I'll probably still go to see it. I'll be pissy about it, though.
And I'll have to endure yet another dull-as-shit Hans Zimmer score.
John Barry did the Spilsbury movie. It's good stuff. Because it's Barry, and it couldn't not be.
I may come away from this one more pissed than I come away from Man of Steel.
Probably not.
Who knows, though? Maybe I'll enjoy them both.
Fuck.
The Swollen Goi... wrote:
Shit. I'll probably still go to see it.
Jubboiter says you won't. She says you won't have any money and, besides, you must assist her in learning to stand, so that she can conquer the world.
HA ha!
What is your nearest / favourite movie theatre anyway Goits? Is it a long walk?
The nearest is a couple hundred yards away. It's an arthouse cinema with three screens, so it's unlikely to be showing it. The closest theater that's liable to show it is two-and-a-half miles away. If I walk at a leisurely pace, I can usually make it there in just under an hour.
Is that a Cobb or a UA or other?
I am not that familiar with US cinema chains. Here I mostly go Odeon if I can as their seats are comfy and they are good at removing other patrons who insist on talking into mobile phones or texting when the movie has started. Food is damned expensive though and mostly they have no bar.
We had a nice Virgin Cinema nearby but then they got sole to some French company and the whole place went to shit. Still has a bar though.
So they're about even then?
There used to be a little arthouse place nearby where they still had an intermission half way through the main feature, and you could grab a wine bottle and glass from the bar then settle back in.
That place was aces!
The arthouse theater is part of the Landmark Theatres chain. (You know they mean serious fuckin' business because of the way they spell "theatres.") The other one is part of the AMC Theatres chain. (Look at those posers, tryin' to make themselves look all refined and shit with their spelling of the word "theatres.")
The AMC theater (pardon me: THEATRE) in the nearby, incidentally, is the one determined by a colleague of mine to cater to the "urban" market. It's also right next door to the Applebee's she determined to be "pedestrian."
Question:
Is it really an arthouse theater if it belongs to a chain?
I'd probably want to ask my colleague for the answer. I wouldn't trust any answer I came up with on my own.
I think that depends on your definition of "arthouse" doesn't it? If that definition is simply "shows foreign and independent/low budget films" than yes, arthouse theaters can absolutely belong to chains. We have a few Landmark Theatres up here and I've always associated them in my head with arthouse theaters.
I dunno, there is a lot of action and essplosions and shit in the trailer. People might overlook the horses and western stuff. I mean, everyone thought a pirate flick was going to tank, too. It might also depend on what else is debuting around it.
Cowboys & Aliens had explosions, Indiana Jones, and James Bond.
Also, Lone Ranger is opening opposite Despicable Me 2. It's more than likely doomed. It'll be a miracle if it cracks $150 million domestic. It's more likely it'll come in somewhere between $120-130 million.
To be honest, it probably would have made Disney more money if they had called it Tonto. Nobody outside a handful of women and AICN Talkbackers gives a shit about Armie Hammer. People know Depp is playing Tonto, and despite the marketing's heavy concentration on his presence and his name's pole position on the posters, they're half-convinced he's in a supporting role.
Waiting in line to see Star Trek 2, my wife (who comes to me for all of her movie and film needs) saw a standee in the lobby and asked "What is Armie Hammer?".
Goiter, I'm glad you went there on the domestic gross. I didn't have the guts to. Didn't this cost them $200 million plus to make?
neglet
Location:
Posts: 1434
Posted: 10 years 47 weeks ago
I doubt it will be the blockbuster Disney hopes for, but it's hard to bet against Johnny Depp in Bruckheimer blockbuster mode (as opposed to Tim Burton super weird mode, see Dark Shadows).