If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Newser)   Who was that masked man, anyway? Perhaps it would have been better if Disney never found out. The company yesterday announced it has projected it will lose $160 million to $190 million on flop The Lone Ranger   (newser.com) divider line 122
    More: Fail, Lone Ranger, Disney, Peter Travers, Jerry Bruckheimer, Johnny Depp  
•       •       •

1427 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 07 Aug 2013 at 1:00 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



122 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-07 01:04:14 PM
That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.
 
2013-08-07 01:05:21 PM
This may mean there won't be another Pirates movie.
 
2013-08-07 01:05:31 PM
I'm sure they wont be going broke anytime soon. They will jsut jack up prices at the resort to make up the shortfall.
 
2013-08-07 01:08:35 PM
And they didn't even get a Thank You Masked Man.
 
2013-08-07 01:09:05 PM

J. Frank Parnell: That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.


The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?
 
2013-08-07 01:10:50 PM

Mrbogey: J. Frank Parnell: That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.

The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?


He didnt say concept, he said franchise.
 
2013-08-07 01:11:43 PM
oopsy
 
2013-08-07 01:12:05 PM

Piizzadude: Mrbogey: J. Frank Parnell: That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.

The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?

He didnt say concept, he said franchise.


The Lone Ranger is a new franchise?
 
2013-08-07 01:13:11 PM
FTFA:  Disney's CEO acknowledged that "high-cost, tent-pole films" were a risk, but that the company still believes "the tent-pole strategy is a good strategy,"


/I got YOUR tent pole right here, buddy
 
2013-08-07 01:17:06 PM

Mrbogey: The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?


To modern audiences. Most middle aged people aren't very familiar with the originals.

They were taking a chance with a franchise that isn't a proven moneymaker these days. If it had done well you'd be seeing a new Lone Ranger churned out every year or two until people get sick of it.
 
2013-08-07 01:17:56 PM
Good. Maybe now, they'll try an original idea.
 
2013-08-07 01:19:37 PM
Just a little friendly advice.  Don't make movies that suck and you won't have this problem.
 
2013-08-07 01:21:08 PM

Piizzadude: Mrbogey: J. Frank Parnell: That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.

The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?

He didnt say concept, he said franchise.


i1.cpcache.com
 
2013-08-07 01:21:12 PM

J. Frank Parnell: Mrbogey: The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?

To modern audiences. Most middle aged people aren't very familiar with the originals.

They were taking a chance with a franchise that isn't a proven moneymaker these days. If it had done well you'd be seeing a new Lone Ranger churned out every year or two until people get sick of it.


Isn't the fact that people are already familiar with the  characters the reason they keep digging up old shows like this to make movies out of them?  If no one really remembers the Lone Ranger just write a new story.
It's a fact.  Hollywood is completely out of new ideas.
 
2013-08-07 01:27:58 PM

for good or for awesome: J. Frank Parnell: Mrbogey: The Lone Ranger is a "new" concept?

To modern audiences. Most middle aged people aren't very familiar with the originals.

They were taking a chance with a franchise that isn't a proven moneymaker these days. If it had done well you'd be seeing a new Lone Ranger churned out every year or two until people get sick of it.

Isn't the fact that people are already familiar with the  characters the reason they keep digging up old shows like this to make movies out of them?  If no one really remembers the Lone Ranger just write a new story.
It's a fact.  Hollywood is completely out of new ideas.


The entertainment industry has been out of idea since before Shakespeare's time.  Even he's accused of being a thieving hack.

//Looking forward to "The Taming of the Shrew Redux #300,000"
 
2013-08-07 01:30:26 PM
Who knew spending $400m to make a movie based on a program no one under the age of 60 ever watched would be a bad business decision?
 
2013-08-07 01:32:20 PM
I saw it, and I think the only thing that really hurt it was Johnny Depp. The script was decent (overlooking that the transcontinental railroad didn't go through Texas), had a solid telling of the Ranger's origin, had a decent amount of complexity in the dealings between the settlers and the Natives (showing that many of the conflicts were caused by robber barons sending thugs dressed as Natives to commit crimes and murder), and had a good, action-packed finale. Armie Hammer (aside from the name), was good in the lead; far better than Klinton Spilsburry's emotionless hack job back in '81. The other Native characters were treated with resect and had much more realism and impact than Tonto. The huge problem was Depp as Tonto; the quirky Depp style just didn't sit right with a character that was already maligned for decades before this film. It added insult to injury. And Michael Horse's performance in the '81 film was really spectacular and gave Tonto a lot of depth and respectability. Johnny Depp was the biggest reason why the movie failed; as soon as he showed up in the trailers and production pics with that bird on his head, people gave up on the film.

And no, I'm not going off memory for the '81 film, I actually watched it again the night before I saw the new Lone Ranger. It's worth it for Jason Robards and Christopher Lloyd.
 
2013-08-07 01:32:26 PM
A previous generation might have cared about the Lone Ranger. Now it's just one more IP that should just be left well enough alone.

While we're at it, can the Superman movies stop now too? The guy's a Mary Sue and can't be made into anything else because people don't buy him as anything else.
 
2013-08-07 01:34:08 PM
The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.
 
2013-08-07 01:36:54 PM
I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.
 
2013-08-07 01:37:46 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age.


This.
 
2013-08-07 01:37:46 PM

Outrageous Muff: Who knew spending $400m to make a movie based on a program no one under the age of 60 ever watched would be a bad business decision?


It's in the bin with "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen", which was also based on characters only the War-babies and early Boomers would remember and a lousy movie with a really stupid plot.
 
2013-08-07 01:38:20 PM

Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.


Really?

www.digitaltrends.com

www.lassothemovies.com

eurweb.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com
 
2013-08-07 01:42:54 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


The Mouse scoffs at such minor inconveniences.  A mere drop in the bucket.

/Mr. Garibaldi's comment about Disney Planet did not fall on deaf Mouse ears...it's a safe bet it's on the drawing board.
 
2013-08-07 01:42:56 PM

for good or for awesome: Isn't the fact that people are already familiar with the characters the reason they keep digging up old shows like this to make movies out of them?


They keep dragging them up because they made money in a different time, hoping they make money again.

Older generations would still be familiar, and maybe they were banking on them influencing younger generations, or something. The cowboys and indians thing isn't a big box office draw anymore, so it had to be something like that.
 
2013-08-07 01:46:52 PM

devilEther: This may mean there won't be another Pirates movie.


You're right. It means there will be TWO more Pirates movies.
 
2013-08-07 01:47:23 PM
Jonah Hex was better. There, I said it.
 
2013-08-07 01:50:35 PM

RoyFokker'sGhost: The huge problem was Depp as Tonto; the quirky Depp style just didn't sit right with a character that was already maligned for decades before this film. It added insult to injury. And Michael Horse's performance in the '81 film was really spectacular and gave Tonto a lot of depth and respectability. Johnny Depp was the biggest reason why the movie failed; as soon as he showed up in the trailers and production pics with that bird on his head, people gave up on the film.


That's what did it for me. I was on the fence initially, but in the previews I didn't see Tonto, I saw Depp playing Tonto. It was a poor casting decision.
 
2013-08-07 01:50:58 PM
I still stand by the fact that this movie failed due to bad promotion and bad casting. If Johnny Depp were the Lone Ranger this movie should have done better, IMO.
 
2013-08-07 01:51:03 PM

Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.


It's not to early to revive Brisco.....
 
2013-08-07 01:53:01 PM

meat0918: Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.

Really?

[www.digitaltrends.com image 379x241]

[www.lassothemovies.com image 414x254]

[eurweb.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com image 500x339]


Not to mention

movieboozer.com
 
2013-08-07 01:54:31 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


Such a shame John Carter didn't do well. It wasn't a faithful adaptation but it was a fun movie nonetheless.
 
2013-08-07 01:55:07 PM

meat0918: Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.

Really?


The problem being those are actually GOOD movies. This was a steaming pile of..well, Disney.
 
2013-08-07 01:56:17 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


I just read a book about what happened with John Carter.  It was horribly horribly marketed, which is kinda strange given they spent $100 million on marketing but had almost no online presence and the commercials just weren't that interesting.  It seems like a decent enough movie, but since the works of Burroughs has since been copied by everyone from Star Wars to Avatar, seeing the original just makes it look like a copy.
 
2013-08-07 01:58:00 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


Avengers, Monsters 2, and Iron Man 3 did rather well.
 
2013-08-07 01:58:30 PM
I betcha Depp's check has already cleared the bank, though.
 
2013-08-07 01:59:20 PM
No biggie for the Mouse, the theme parks saw a 9% increase in attendence for the 1st quarter this year.  And thats with an increase in ticket prices.
 
2013-08-07 01:59:42 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


These aren't accidents. If it does well great, but if it flops they'll write off the losses against every money making movie from here on out.

/Probably will get a better return.
//would love to see a big movie house get audited just once.
 
2013-08-07 02:00:18 PM
Blaming the critics is laughable.  The critics thought "Grown Ups 2" was a steaming turd but that didn't stop it from making $117m to date.  I'd start looking for other reasons why people didn't want to see the studio's Lone Ranger movie and try to do better next time around.
 
2013-08-07 02:02:50 PM

Savage Bacon: meat0918: Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.

Really?

[www.digitaltrends.com image 379x241]

[www.lassothemovies.com image 414x254]

[eurweb.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com image 500x339]

Not to mention

[movieboozer.com image 450x317]


Well, to be fair, that movie was 20 years ago. I don't know what the boundaries was being used for "modern age".  That's a kickass movie, though.

I thought "Maverick" was pretty fun, too.
 
2013-08-07 02:06:14 PM
"The cowboys and indians thing isn't a big box office draw anymore, so it had to be something like that."

You ain't kidding...aliens didn't even help.
upload.wikimedia.org

I was disappointed that John Carter sank, really wanted to see the sequel and more Lynn Collins in skimpy Dejah Thoris costumes would have been just fine as well.
/she would be a good Wonder Woman too.
 
2013-08-07 02:06:41 PM

J. Frank Parnell: That'll teach you to try new franchises. Now get back to casting Batman 14.


yea, brave new originality was the failure here.

/who's cute?  you are!
 
2013-08-07 02:06:54 PM

Savage Bacon: meat0918: Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.

Really?

[www.digitaltrends.com image 379x241]

[www.lassothemovies.com image 414x254]

[eurweb.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com image 500x339]

Not to mention

[movieboozer.com image 450x317]


Also

jaymzbee.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-08-07 02:06:59 PM
That's because they made "The Tonto Show" and called it "The Lone Ranger" all the while, it was really "Pirates of the Southwest"
 
2013-08-07 02:08:44 PM

acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.


Someone in yesterday's thread had the interesting point that the films greenlit by the guy who resigned after the flop of "John Carter" are still coming through the pipeline and will be for several more months.
 
2013-08-07 02:10:13 PM

Car_Ramrod: Savage Bacon: meat0918: Slaves2Darkness: The Lone Ranger is a tired concept that does not play well to audiences. Westerns are just not doing well at theaters in the modern age. Maybe they should have gone with Marshall Bravestarr, Silver Hawk, or Galaxy Rangers.

Really?

[www.digitaltrends.com image 379x241]

[www.lassothemovies.com image 414x254]

[eurweb.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com image 500x339]

Not to mention

[movieboozer.com image 450x317]

Well, to be fair, that movie was 20 years ago. I don't know what the boundaries was being used for "modern age".  That's a kickass movie, though.

I thought "Maverick" was pretty fun, too.


Maverick is a gem. Faithful in spirit to the original, fun wordplay, charming actors.

I was thinking about it while watching Support Your Local Sheriff yesterday.

Query: with the disasters of wild wild west, heaven's gate, lone ranger, etc., why do studios keep giving big time money to westerns? To top everything that has been done before? The old westerns were made because the costumes, props, and desert were cheap and readily available.
 
2013-08-07 02:10:53 PM

ristst: acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.

The Mouse scoffs at such minor inconveniences.  A mere drop in the bucket.

/Mr. Garibaldi's comment about Disney Planet did not fall on deaf Mouse ears...it's a safe bet it's on the drawing board.


THIS. Plus, you don't really believe those numbers are accurate do you?
 
2013-08-07 02:14:58 PM

whither_apophis: acefox1: I'm sure Disney figured that as long as they stayed away from Mars movies they'd avoid another huuuuge financial disaster.

Mars Needs Moms - $140 million dollar loss

John Carter - roughly $150-$200 million dollar loss

The Lone Ranger - another $100 to $200 million dollar loss

That's quite a tradition they have going over there.

These aren't accidents. If it does well great, but if it flops they'll write off the losses against every money making movie from here on out.

/Probably will get a better return.
//would love to see a big movie house get audited just once.


losing $100M to get $5M back on your tax return is still a $95M loss.

/marginal tax brackets don't work that way
//What corporate tax rate does Disney pay anyway? 5%? less than that?
 
2013-08-07 02:16:07 PM

Kurmudgeon: "The cowboys and indians thing isn't a big box office draw anymore, so it had to be something like that."

You ain't kidding...aliens didn't even help.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x326]

I was disappointed that John Carter sank, really wanted to see the sequel and more Lynn Collins in skimpy Dejah Thoris costumes would have been just fine as well.
/she would be a good Wonder Woman too.


...I liked Cowboys vs Aliens :-(
 
2013-08-07 02:23:41 PM

Fano: Query: with the disasters of wild wild west, heaven's gate, lone ranger, etc., why do studios keep giving big time money to westerns? To top everything that has been done before? The old westerns were made because the costumes, props, and desert were cheap and readily available.


Then there's the interesting sidenote that the recent successful westerns like True Grit and Django Unchained were made on modest budgets.
 
Displayed 50 of 122 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report