‘The Lone Ranger’ Review

Published 2 years ago by , Updated November 15th, 2014 at 12:26 am,

The Lone Ranger Tonto John Reid The Lone Ranger Review

A flawed but often entertaining summer blockbuster experience, The Lone Ranger falls short as a sum of its promising individual parts.

Disney’s The Lone Ranger follows the origins of the masked rider, John Reid (Armie Hammer), and the events that lead him to become a symbol of justice in the Old West. After completing a law degree, Reid returns to his hometown, Colby, Texas, to become the city’s government prosecutor and hold criminals accountable under United States law (along with a firm commitment to John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government”). However, when his brother, Dan (James Badge Dale), is murdered in cold blood by ruthless outlaw Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner) Reid realizes that some criminals operate above of the law and he turns to a different form of justice as a masked vigilante.

As a tenuous peace between the Native American tribes and white settlers is threatened, the Lone Ranger must join forces with a heroic, though slightly offbeat, Comanche warrior, Tonto (Johnny Depp), who has spent years hunting Cavendish. Together, Reid and Tonto set out on a mission to investigate the circumstances that led to Dan’s death before more blood is spilled.

The Lone Ranger John Reid Tonto The Lone Ranger Review

John Reid and Tonto in ‘The Lone Ranger’

In an effort to re-imagine the Lone Ranger as a modern blockbuster franchise, Disney turned to the team behind their highly-successful Pirates of the Caribbean series, including producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Gore Verbinski, along with star Johnny Depp. Unfortunately, despite a number of strong individual components, the final Lone Ranger movie experience misses the bar (and longterm promise) established in the first Pirates of the Caribbean installment. For many audience members, Verbinski’s latest will likely succeed in delivering mindless summer entertainment with a number of humorous character moments, a quirky (albeit familiar) performance from Depp, and an elaborate third act set-piece. Yet, for all of the film’s successes, most of the core story arcs and action beats are either derivative or underwhelming – misguided in attempts to piece together a blockbuster experience out of well-known parts.

Considering their have been countless variations to the Lone Ranger character over the years, it’s no surprise that the new film takes plenty of liberties with its origin story setup, especially as it pertains to the relationship between Reid and Tonto. Whereas the plot succeeds as a motor for the larger film progression, providing a believable enough foundation for the main characters (and the enemies they encounter), it under-delivers in attempts to say anything particularly new or interesting about the iconic figures. Worse yet, the movie introduces several compelling ideas (“Nature is out of balance” for example) only to entirely abandon them without worthwhile answers or narrative payoff. As a result, in lieu of delivering the “best” Lone Ranger story in franchise history (via an engaging exploration of fan-favorite characters and the larger Western world), Verbinski’s adventure is relegated to simply being the “biggest” (and most expensive).

The Lone Ranger Trains The Lone Ranger Review

Trains and Texas Rangers in ‘The Lone Ranger’

Armie Hammer (who played the Winklevoss twins in The Social Network) stars in the film as John Reid aka the Lone Ranger, and delivers a competent performance relative to the ambitions of the overarching film. Hammer succeeds in balancing campy one-liners with believable fisticuffs but, thanks to a heavy-handed origin story script, his character spends much of the film whining and bumbling from one dangerous situation to the next. A sequel could allow for a more capable (and exciting) version of the masked rider to shine but Hammer’s first attempt as the Lone Ranger, and alter-ego John Reid, is ultimately a bland variation on similar masked vigilante stories (tales that audiences will have already seen onscreen countless times before).

Equally well known performers provide competent, but not particularly distinctive, additions: including Tom Wilkinson as railroad magnate Latham Cole, Barry Pepper as military officer Captain Jay Fuller, and Ruth Wilson as Dan’s wife, Rebecca Reid. William Fichtner provides an especially creepy performance as the ruthless Butch Cavendish but, despite early indications that the film might do something interesting with the character (likely a holdover from the original supernatural draft of the film), any subtleties turn to disappointing caricature by the end.

The Lone Ranger William Fichtner The Lone Ranger Review

William Fichtner as Butch Cavindish in ‘The Lone Ranger’

As mentioned, Johnny Depp is comfortable in the quirky moccasins of the Comanche sidekick and, for that reason, it’s no surprise that Hammer’s Lone Ranger is sidelined to vanilla everyman duty. It’s a telling sign when scenes between Tonto and the Lone Ranger’s “spirit horse,” are more memorable than any moments between Depp and the titular masked hero. Still, following his penchant for strange family-friendly characters, Depp delivers another enjoyable turn as Tonto; though, the character is tinged by earlier oddball entries in the actor’s resume (Jack Sparrow/the Mad Hatter/Willy Wonka/Sweeney Todd/Barnabas Collins/etc). Like Depp’s other fan-favorite creations, Tonto is unapologetic as a character that will pursue the most cartoonish and ridiculous course of action in order to delight a moviegoing audience – often at the expense of believability.

While over-the-top camp has worked in other Depp movies, it’s noticeably at odds with the tone of the Lone Ranger, which includes brutal scenes of cannibalism and mass genocide, among other challenging story beats. The film is a surprisingly grim piece of storytelling, especially for viewers who aren’t as easily distracted by big explosions and take time to think about what is actually being depicted (or not-so-subtly implied) moment to moment. Playing fast and loose with history is forgivable at the theater but The Lone Ranger relies on shallow caricature while at the same time introducing a lot of complicated and disturbing aspects of Western expansion to further the plot, and neither approach results in impactful character drama or meaningful thematic insight.

The Lone Ranger Armie Hammer Johnny Depp The Lone Ranger Review

Armie Hammer (the Lone Ranger) and Johnny Depp (Tonto)

A flawed but often entertaining summer blockbuster experience, The Lone Ranger falls short as a sum of its promising individual parts. Unfortunately, the mixture of two likable leads and a cast of accomplished character actors, backed by highly-successful producers and a $200 million budget, based on a well-known pair of American heroes, doesn’t necessarily deliver a quality moviegoing experience. No doubt, certain audience members will thoroughly enjoy the bangs and gags in this Lone Ranger story but it’s still style over substance at nearly every turn, and fails to evolve or elevate the series canon in any meaningful (or particularly exciting) way.

If you’re still on the fence about The Lone Ranger, check out the trailer below:


[poll id="638"]


The Lone Ranger runs 149 minutes and is Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense action and violence, and some suggestive material. Now playing in theaters.

Let us know what you thought of the film in the comment section below. If you’ve seen the movie and want to discuss details about the film without worrying about spoiling it for those who haven’t seen it, please head over to our The Lone Ranger Spoilers Discussion.

For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant editors check out our Lone Ranger episode of the SR Underground podcast.

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.

Our Rating:

2 out of 5

Follow Ben Kendrick on Twitter @benkendrick
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. 2 out of 5, LOL. Ouch.

    “It’s sure to please certain audience members with it’s DERP, but over-all what we have here is DERP.”

    • I literally couldn’t stop laughing at this comment for a full minute. This is the perfect summary of this article and you can tell that the writer feels exactly that way but is trying to be nice.

  2. I had so much Faith in Gore Verbinski. I will still check it out though. It could be a fun ride. :)

  3. How does a movie like this happen? Who green lit the heart eating scene, then put those horrible bird hats on sale in the Disney store at the mall–right next to Jake and the Neverland Pirates?

  4. More reason for me NOT to see this….

  5. “…Hammer’s first attempt as the Lone Ranger, and alter-ego John Reid, is ultimately a bland variation on similar masked vigilante stories (tales that audiences will have already seen onscreen countless times before).”

    I have read other reviews that say hammer is terrible in the role. For all of those people who think it will be simple to replace bale in the next iteration of Batman, remember that Warner Brother’s once CAST Hammer as Batman. Not getting bale to reprise his role as the Caped Crusader is looking worse everyday.

    • @ Patrick Bayard
      There is still Jensen Ackles. I think he could play a convincing Bruce Wayne and deliver an excellent Batman, imho. :)

      • Karl Urban.

        • Come on, man. He’s too old.

        • He’s already made Judge Dredd his own, he doesn’t need to touch bats. Although if he hadn’t done “DREDD” and was about 10 years younger he’d be a good rebboot bats.

          • Fassbender.

            • Three things about Fassbender

              1) He is VERY thin
              2) He is already part of a superhero franchise which could compromise his time…not to mention Prometheus if that takes off
              3) He looks nothing like a dark brooding Bruce Wayne (I realize that it is not everything (Keaton did a good job) but when you are going to be compared to previous Bat(men) it is going to hurt the audience acceptance of him.

      • From Smallville?

        All my anticipation for Justice League has gone up in smoke!

        • He was on Smallville for one season. He’s well-known for Supernatural and majority of fans would probably say that he is one of the best parts of the show.

          • definitely he would be a good bruce wayne n batman but if it makes him quit supernatural then NO Thats one of the last good show i have left to watch

        • I do believe he played a bit character on it briefly but he’s best known as the co-lead in the series, “Supernatural” (which he’s great in btw and shows he can be both sides of the Bruce/Bat coin)

          • Just because he is a lead in a TV series, does not mean he could carry a major motion picture. Whoever does become Batman will be guaranteed to be compared to Christian Bale. I cannot think of many people both capable of doing that and having the acting chops to not be upstaged by other (academy award winning/nominated in some cases)actors in his own movie…the very thing that just happened to Armie Hammer!

            • So basically what you’re saying is Bale was the apex and no one can even hope to compare so why even try? Bale is OUT and the DC universe must go on w/o him.

              There is nothing to say Ackles can’t carry a motion picture. Not like Cavill had a ton of acting experience before MoS either and he did fine so I’m not seeing your point.

              • I am not saying that at all. I hope someone gives an even better interpretation as Batman in the future. But here is the situation…all it takes is for the studio to pick the wrong one and it could jeopardize the popularity of the Justice League. You know as well as I the very fact that it is a different Batman WILL make whoever it is a target of criticism and comparisons and it will be a distraction from what may otherwise be good movie…on top of being compared to the Avengers.

                On a side note, if you incorporate the current Batman, then that would mean that the DC universe technically would have started BEFORE the Marvel one – 2005 for DC versus 2008 for Marvel…just an observation!

                • Well I think he does have the acting reach to pull off both sides and you obviously don’t.

                  I guess it’s up to DC/WB to even think about giving him a chance.

      • I think the other Winchester brother would make a better Batman; he’s taller and more muscular.

        • Thing is, Ackles might appear shorter when compared against Padalecki but Ackles is still 6’1″ (which is 1″ taller than Bale)

          I also don’t think Padalecki has the right look for either Bruce or the Bat.

    • Bale can’t play Batman forever…

      • I under stand that…but bale is 39 years old and Robert Downey Jr. 48. If RDJ can play Iron Man for 2 more movies then Bale can play batman for 3 or 4.

        • Except that Bale doesn’t want to be Batman any more. He hinted at the hatred he’d feel if he was typecast as Batman forever (hey!) and prefers to be known as an actual actor with several memorable roles and not just one.

          • Please show me where he said that!

            Right before the release of the Dark Knight Rises (just last year) Bale said…

            “My understanding is that this is the last one. I think it’s appropriate, I think it’s going out at the right time. But…if Chris came to me with a script and said, ‘You know what? There is another story’ then I would love the challenge of making a fourth one work.”

            EMPIRE MAGAZINE – May 29, 2012

            • So you’re admitting that you’re holding onto the idea of Bale returning then?

              Because, OF COURSE he’d say that 2 months before the 3rd movie released.

              Let it go. Nolan and Bale are done with Batman.

              • No I am admitting that I am being CRITICAL of a boneheaded decision. If I had to guess, then I think the role will ultimately be recast…but it has not been cast yet. So maybe the message about what a stupid idea this is will filter up to whoever and they change course. Not likely, but not impossible.

                But if they do recast and Batman turns into the second coming of George Clooney…you KNOW I will be on here and a bunch of other sites saying I told you so!

                • The problem with your supposed dedication is that you are being a hypocrite. If whoever is chosen as the reboot Batman is the second coming of Clooney, you will happily rub our noses in it. IF that actor proves to be a critical and/or popular success, I have no doubt you will become magically silent on the matter, instead of admitting you were utterly wrong.

                  I also disagree with your dislike of Amy Adams as Lois Lane as I found her portrayal to be excellent…but to each, his own.

                  • How am I a hypocrite? Yeah I will be silent on the matter if Warner Brothers proves me wrong…In fact I will go so far as to say I WAS WRONG…I just don’t think I will be and I don’t think there is anything wrong with voicing that opinion.

                    If you liked Amy Adams, as you say to each his own. It did not ruin the movie whatsoever for me I thought it was good. Maybe she will grow on me.

              • What I read is the AUTHOR of that article interpreting that Christian Bale did not want to return as Batman, which Christian Bales quote above disproves.

    • Dude, everything goes back to Batman with you. Though I do agree that WB’s past casting decisions do not inspire much confidence, and I could never see Hammer as Batman, I think MoS was cast very well and hopefully this is the beginning of a trend. I’m sure if people like Goyer and Nolan and Snyder stay close to the decision making process the rest of the Justice League, Batman included, will be well cast.

      • Sometimes WB gets it right and sometimes they get it wrong…even with the Man of Steel where the vast majority were very well cast BUT I think they sorely miscast Lois Lane arguably the second most important casting decision since unlike Zod or the villains, we expect her to continue in the role.

        My frustration goes back to the question that I keep asking and never get an answer to (and I won’t hold my breath)…if you already have a character that 90% of fans identify with and like in the role, how could it possibly be a good decision to recast that role if you don’t have to? Why even take any chances on a failed reboot of the character?

        • Lois was miscast?

          Other than Kevin Costner, Amy Adams was the best thing about that entire movie.

          • No way! I am not saying that reviews are the end all and be all, but a lot of them pointed out the lack of chemistry with her and Cavill and the relative disbelief of her as a feisty reporter like the traditional Lois Lane.

            • so you just agree with what the majority says? you can’t form your own opinion?

          • I didn’t dislike Adams as Lois, but somehow I didn’t quite love it either. I think it comes down to two things: 1) bad writing and 2) a lack of chemistry with Cavill. Both of which aren’t really her fault, though.

            She had this line early on about having writer’s block if she didn’t have a flak jacket on… came off a bit cheesy. I liked the path they took with her character when it came to Supes himself and his identity, but the character itself, IMO, just wasn’t all that well-written.

            Also given that I watched Smallville, I’m unfortunately biased in favour of Erica Durance’s portrayal of Lois. To me Smallville did a lot of things MOS tried to do, just without the big budget – it did the ‘modern, reporter-type Lois’ before MOS did and I think they did it better. But before anyone jumps on me for this I’m obviously not clinging on to the series nor wishing they’ll cast anyone from Smallville in MOS2.

            Oh, and Kevin Costner. The tornado scene was EXCELLENT. I mean, the logic around it is shaky but his performance was fantastic. As for his other scenes, well… great but nothing too new.

    • I’m not ready to think of another man in the cowl other than Bale. It’s just too much. He played Wayne/Batman perfectly.

      • AGREED! I think it is VERY highly unlikely that Bale returns, lthough since batman has not been cast I don’t think it is impossible. People say that Hollywood is a strange place and if this is true, then that would confirm it. Marvel/Disney and Robert Downey Jr. understood that it was in ALL of their best interests as well as the interest of their fans to find an agreement to continue Iron Man ‘s involvement in the Avengers. For Christian Bale to walk away (from a role that would probably pay him the most money) and for Warner Brothers to allow him to leave that easily essentially putting in question the success of their Justice league franchise…without having a discussion with Bale about a role in the Justice League has got to be one of the most stunningly boneheaded decisions I have ever seen. Nobody wins in this scenario. Now I am not privy to the discussions at Warner, but I am trying to imagine who in their right mind decided it was NOT a good idea to bring back Bale. If they do reboot Batman all I can say is congratulations to Marvel!

        • You’re asking why recast if they don’t have to? In my opinion yes they do but more to the point Bale doesn’t want to do it. Who in their right mind decided not to bring him back? HIM!. And Nolan. Bale doesn’t need the giant paycheck. It’s not about money for people like him. Being an A-lister, he can pick and choose his movies. So yeah, they HAVE to recast. I wouldn’t say 90% of the fans liked him but neither of us have any polls to point to so we’ll just drop that. He was the best live action adaptation so far which, as much as I liked the first two, isn’t saying much given what you have to compare it to. There will be other actors that will do just as good of a job and maybe better. And preferably without that weird voice.
          Also, the success of a JL movie does not hinge on Batman. He’s important yes and one of the main 3 and if he were the Adam West version then yes, the movie would fail. But you’re acting like if it’s not Bale it’s gonna be Clooney again or they’re gonna try and squeeze Val Kilmer back into his rubber suit. I’m sure the studio will do many things similarly with the new Batman because Nolan did get a lot of things right but you’re acting like this is complete doom for any JL movie.

          • I will also say that I do not envy who has to pick the new Batman. All the actors I’d go for are already 40 or older except Michael Fassbender. Put another 30 lbs of muscle on him and he’d definitely look the part. But I could see Karl Urban, Andrew Lincoln, Josh Brolin, John Hamm, and Matt Bomer playing Batman. Unfortunately most of them would be pushing 55 by the time the franchise finished up except Matt Bomer. It’s probably gonna be an unknown who they are going to mold into Batman.

  6. Thank you Ben. I have always appreciated your efforts to both give an honest review and still explain why some may enjoy the movie. Keep up the good balance, in the reviews and on the podcasts.

  7. Great review!!!!

    After reading this write up I’m revved up to see MAN OF STEEL yet once again!

    ” I was bred to be a warrior, Kal El. Trained since the moment of my birth to master my senses. Where did YOU train? ON A FARM ??!!!! “

    • Yeah, I’ll be seeing MOS one more time during this extended weekend, but I’ll also see “Despicable Me 2″…and am anticipating “Pacific Rim” (my second most anticipated film after MOS for this year) and “Elysium”. At SOME point, I will probably try to catch “Much Ado About Nothing”…

      It’s a shame about THIS movie…I love the Lone Ranger as a character…

      • I’m with you, bro. I, too, will be looking forward to see “Pacific Rim” – no matter what the critics say. Not that I ever let reviews dictate whether I see a flick or not.

        I’m a fan of the “Jaegers” and the look of the flick looks AMAZING.

        Was never a Lone Ranger fan. My pain in the neck GF and I are still figuring out what else to see this weekend. We usually see 2 or even 3 flicks a weekend. But this weekend looks pretty barren.

        • I too will be seeing Pacific Rim regardless of reviews. My inner kid just can’t pass up seeing huge monsters up against giant mechs.

  8. I think Scott Adkins is the only one I can see taking bales place

  9. This Movie was doomed from the get-go. I believe most of us had an overall bad taste going in to this film. Poor pre-film advertising can doom even a competent film’s chances. With all that said, who the hell wants another over budget grandiose train wreck of a franchise such as Pirates of the Caribbean?

  10. A great autopsy of this fiction of The Lone Ranger.
    The legend of The Lone Ranger seems ever more distant
    while etched on the hearts of every boy who grew up with him.

    The daring and resourceful masked rider of the plains
    will not return to those thrilling days of yesteryear.

    As much as I long to see that fiery horse
    with a speed of light and cloud of dust,
    the sound of a hearty “Hi-Yo,Silver!”
    will only be an echo in my heart.

    • sir, you are quite the wordsmith. do you write everything in your artful patterns?

      • Very kind of you to say, jeffro. Thank you.
        I very much appreciate the compliment.

    • @Robert Palmar
      Beautiful!!! :)

      • And you too, Wanderer. Thank you most kindly.

  11. One of the many problems The Lone Ranger faces is that it doesn’t feel modern. The Wild West that audiences have begun to again embrace with films like True Grit and Django Unchained thrive not because of their niche western setting but because of their steadily unique voice. In a genre where everything has been done before, they divided and conquered simply by doing something audiences haven’t seen before.

    In The Lone Ranger, everything feels retread, tired, and ready to boot. As a winking tribute of sorts, it works to an extent, but tonally it’s stretched like an old rubber band ready to snap. The souring riff on the noble savage, played with tone-deaf readiness by Hollywood’s favorite eccentric, Johnny Depp, is off-putting, head-scratching, mildly offensive and entirely dated. The kitschy elements of the 1930s icon could have been celebrated and preserved, even in light of a modernized overhaul, but instead director Gore Verbinski and go-to cohort Johnny Depp have gone for broke and come up with bags of sand.

    The true shame is that even with so much talent involved and a massive money-belt, the watered down result is hardly minor enjoyment even in light of some padded but fun moments. There are simply too many cooks in the kitchen and any enjoyable escapism is too little, too late. There are just too many instances of the unforgivable, mainly with Johnny Depp’s Tonto and the cringe-worthy narrative egg that encases the story, in which Tonto recounts the tale to a young boy at the fair, to give this one a pass. The Jerry Bruckheimer age of disposable Disney cinema has again balked on its chance for transcendence and has instead delivered derivation at its most sanitary.

  12. I’m surprised at the 2 out of 5 review for this movie; I haven’t seen it yet but will see it this weekend and thought that Gore Verbinski could have another strong movie outing on his hands. I think I’ll still enjoy it but wow, this review was just…wow

    • Why are you so surprised at only 2 stars? I’m actually surprised it got more than 1 to be honest. You do realise Gore Verbinski is the man who directed both Pirate sequels, which are regularly votes as some of the worst movie sequels of all time.

      • *Edit*- voted

      • Really worst sequels ever? Your going way to far, both pirates sequels are fun movies nothing great but pretty solid

        • They’re solid?

          Might be the first time I’ve ever read that being said about the Pirates sequels.

          • HAHAHA @ ” solid! “

        • They really make no actual sense in places, they’re too long and ultimately pointless. They are what many people expected the first Pirates film to be, only it was actually fun and new and great in places.

          From what I’ve seen of LR trailers, Depp is *still* stuck in Jack mode, as he seems to have been pretty much since Curse of the Black Pearl.

          I’d really like him to go back to being an actor and to stop being a blockbuster star.

  13. I’ve read a few other reviews and this film seems like a fluke!

    It sounded like a fluke when it was first announced. Nothing to see here, folks. Nothing to be surprised about.


    Haven’t been this excited about a box office train wreck since AFTER EARTH.

    Loads of fun this 4th of July weekend…

    • Yeah, I think at best it could finish 3rd behind Despicable Me and Monsters U but it could be even worse.
      Even if it does hit the 3rd spot at best it would make @ $30 million and with a $200 million plus budget (over $300 with marketing) there’s no chance for it to be profitable and will join John Carter as another fail by Disney for a 2nd year in a row.
      Sombody’s getting fired.

  14. Disappointing

    • What did you expect??

  15. Why the heck didn’t Depp just play the lone ranger?

  16. I know it’s early so the rating will change but in the 3yrs I’ve been reading here at Screen Rant I’ve never seen a movie poll at 1 & 2 stars. Yikes!

    • I’ve seen a few but few and far between.
      I am surprised 2 is considered “Okay”.

  17. The TV show ended its last syndication in the 80s.
    Already 30 years ago. At least Clayton Moore
    is not alive to what has happened now.

  18. I hope this shall be a good REMAKE. qz I like the original movie. They could folloup tha one and make this a secual

  19. Aye Caramba…They shoyuld’ve kept in the Werecoyotes and made it more fantastical. Would better explain the Silver bullets etc.

  20. Doesn’t sound worse than the 80′s Legend of the Lone Ranger. I am still going to check it out and will probably enjoy it and hope the sequel takes the character to whole other level.

  21. Damn. I knew they would ruin this movie. A complete mockery of the source material. Between this and Man of Steel I’m getting sick of Hollywood screwing up any classic character they can get their hands on.

    • Really? You’re going to lump Man of Steel in with this film? Gotta love it. You know, you just convinced me to go see The Lone Ranger – it must be a pretty damn awesome film that takes some chances with the source material, updates the legend for a modern audience, makes me think about the legend in a deeper way, makes me appreciate where the story is heading, doesn’t lose sight of the heart of the story, makes me tear up, cheer and makes me eager to see the sequel. And oh, the consequences for our hero in the sequel! Hot damn this must be a good film! I’ll get back you if I liked it as much as I did Man of Steel. Or perhaps you’re just exaggerating. Great Rao’s Ghost!

  22. I’m still going to check this out. I’m too much of a fan of the Lone Ranger character not to.

    • Be careful Tony. It might break your heart.

  23. Well, the movie releases here in August but I wasn’t planning on seeing it anyway because it looked terrible in the trailers. The reviews I’ve seen so far just back that up.

  24. It wasn’t that bad. There are a few moments that had me scratch my head and ask why was this particular choice made but in the end, for me anyway, the good outweighed the bad. They didn’t try to reinvent the wheel story wise. The plot was simple and fun. Bottom line, if you enjoyed the recent Zorro films and the Pirates movies you will more than likely enjoy this.

  25. I’m glad Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels aren’t around to see this. Ugh.

  26. Lone Ranger is an absolutely terrible movie, do not waste your time and money to see this rediculous film. I am dissappointed in Disney for accepting this directors film, this is an embarassing attempt to make an action film.

  27. The story is supposed to set in 1869. But everybody was armed with 1873 Colt revolers. And Cavedish was armed with an S&W Schofeild reolver they wern’t made till the 1880′s. But it was A lot of mindless fun and the mantiee was only $6.00.

  28. I’m checking out this movie tomorrow. Bad reviews don’t stray me form going to see a movie.

  29. Called it months ago.