The Lone Ranger

I seem to recall reading a Johnny Depp interview some years ago in which he said he had a great great grandmother or grandfather who was native American Indian (maybe Cherokee?). I don't think his casting as Tonto in what is essentially a comedy is too much of any issue anyway. I suspect his casting came down to two things: his box office appeal and his willingness to take the role.

The history of movies is littered with odd casting choices which are largely attributable to box office considerations. One of my favourite examples from the annals is the casting of Charlton Heston as Mexican Miguel Vargas in the Welles 1958 classic 'Touch of Evil'. Great movie, strange casting choice...
 
Barry_Green said:
Y'know, Gillvane, sometimes I read your posts and find myself agreeing completely. And sometimes, I really don't get where you're coming from or why you're doing it.

Taking an extra thirty seconds to say "okay, we want to cast this character, anybody got any reasons why not to?" and getting feedback that says "well, I think some people might object to Mel Gibson being cast to play Moses"... how is that wrong? Then you can decide whether you want to go forward with Mel Gibson as Moses, knowing it's going to infuriate tens of millions of Jews, or you can say "Hmmm, good point. How about we cast Harrison Ford instead?"

One way is being selfish, and will lead to some controversy and some alienation. The other way will likely result in a comparable film that doesn't cause that same controversy and alienation.

Maybe someone wants that controversy? As in, maybe they're trying to rile up tens of millions of people and use that anguish to sell tickets? If so, well, let me just say that anyone doing that is a rat bastard. Exploiting race hatred or the Holocaust or something like that, to make an additional buck, is evil, pure and simple.

My philosophy is to tread lightly when you can. Break eggs to make omelets, yes, but don't make a bigger mess than you have to, you don't have to trash the entire box of eggs when you only need three to make an omelet. If your attitude is (if I'm reading this right) "To hell with anyone else, I'm going to do what I want, my way, and I don't care who doesn't like it, everyone else can shove their feelings, MY ART is the ONLY thing that matters" well... that's not a philosophy I'm gonna get behind. Because all I said was -- if you're making a choice that has significant consequences, what's so wrong with evaluating whether a slightly different choice would avoid all those consequences? How is that possibly a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Good discussion.

My first thought is, Mel Gibson as Moses? Hell yea! that is a film I'd like to make. That would be a case of doing it just to be provocative and I'm definitely fine with that.

However, we definitely don't see eye to eye on the reason for it. I'd do it because I wanted to express myself and make art and you know, art can be controversial sometimes. Trying to make a buck off the holocaust? The thought just never entered my mind until you brought it up, but isn't that what Schindler's list does? The Holocaust was a horrible tradgedy. No movie is ever going to change that.

I do think there is a line you can cross and I would not cross it. Am I going to make an actual Nazi propaganda film today promoting killing Jews? No. I would find that patently offensive and also find no entertainment value in it.


Personally I thought Passion of the Christ was nothing more than torture porn, but I certainly support Mel Gibson in making his art. That certainly pissed off a lot of people.

Could Mel have said, will this upset people? Should I do something less upsetting? Sure, he definitely could have. Would it have been a billion dollar plus movie? No. Not because of the controversy, because it wouldn't have been Mel making his art, it would have been Mel second guessing himself and making crap to appease the politically correct cry babies. That's not how you make art.

Is there any Native American actor that holds a candle to Johnny Depp? I don't know your thoughts on Depp, but I love his performances. When he's good, he's really good, although he's had his share of dogs. I"ve been a fan since Cry Baby.

If I could get Depp would I even consider a Native American actor? Hell no, unless you can point out one that has the depth of experience and box office draw that Depp has.

All things being equal, would I cast the native American? If he had the same depth of performance and the same box office draw, sure.

Let's say i'm casting a film with completely unknown actors, and the part is a Native American, and some actors are native Americans and some are not.

Woudl I cast a less talented Native American actor because he WAS Native American, or a good actor that was not Native American?

No question. I wouldn't waste a minute on the decision. I'd cast the better actor every time.

All that being said my Art is not the only thing that matters. I do want an audience, what story teller doesn't? You ignore the audience at your own peril. That is not to say you pander to the audience, but you are sensitive to see if your audience can relate to your story, can understand your story, if the pacing works for an audience. I would never say, sure this movie is slow as molasses and the audience is getting bored to tears, but screw them, this is my Art! I'd cut it so it engaged the audience better for sure.
 
You guys realize that the Chinese/Japanese connection (re:Memoirs of a Geisha) is much, much closer than the Celtic/Slavonic one, right? The real aghast'ing should come from an Irishman playing a Czech in Schindler's List.

Or we could, you know. Remember. It's. A. poo poong. Movie.
 
Ramirez never said what his original name was, only that "I'm not Spanish; I'm Egyptian" and "I was born 2,437 years ago." But one assumes no one in the world was named "Juan Sanchez Villalobos Ramirez" in ~900 BC. :)
 
Saw it yesterday. Expecting the worst....well I was surprised I actually enjoyed its escapism.

What I most like was the 'look' of the movie strong art direction, strong scenics , strong cinema photography, beautiful light. Definite homage to "spaghetti westerns' at times. The acting was fine & as a non US viewer I believed it highlighted the tragedy of the west for native Americans. Anyway WTF it was a Disney movie so you're not going to get much more message than that out it. Its like complaining a Big Mac should be more vegan.
 
CallaghanFilms said:
You guys realize that the Chinese/Japanese connection (re:Memoirs of a Geisha) is much, much closer than the Celtic/Slavonic one, right? The real aghast'ing should come from an Irishman playing a Czech in Schindler's List.

Or we could, you know. Remember. It's. A. poo poong. Movie.
Click to expand...

Not to put too fine a point on it... but Oskar Schindler was an 'ethnic German', born in the Sudetenland, which at the time was part of Germany before WWI. The drawing of 'national' lines after WWI was and in fact still is a hotly debated issue, and still gives rise to wars, and border disputes. In the case of the Sudetenland, it was a propaganda point for the NSDAP.
 
Gillvane said:
Native American praises Depps performance

[url]http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/native-actor-commends-johnny-depp-s-portrayal-of-tonto/article_2587a75f-71f2-53f7-9ad3-a0292103cbf7.html


[/URL]
Click to expand...

The article mentions the "Twilight" series... Taylor Lautner, who plays a 'native american werewolf changling'... according to the wiki on him, is of 'German, French, Dutch, and 'distantly native american on his mother's side'... any one whose family tree extends 150 years in the US could probably claim the same... (I don't know how many people I've met who claim 'cherokee' ancestry... for some reason no one seems to mention Yavapai, unless one lives on the reservations... but I digress...)

THe fact that he has a 'look', seems to allow Lautner to 'pass' as an 'native american' unquestioned... at least I've not seen the same amount of yammering about Lautner as Depp...
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
The article mentions the "Twilight" series... Taylor Lautner, who plays a 'native american werewolf changling'... according to the wiki on him, is of 'German, French, Dutch, and 'distantly native american on his mother's side'... any one whose family tree extends 150 years in the US could probably claim the same... (I don't know how many people I've met who claim 'cherokee' ancestry... for some reason no one seems to mention Yavapai, unless one lives on the reservations... but I digress...)

THe fact that he has a 'look', seems to allow Lautner to 'pass' as an 'native american' unquestioned... at least I've not seen the same amount of yammering about Lautner as Depp...
Click to expand...

If you go far enough back, we're all related :thumbsup: .
 
Such a shame, this could have been Lou Diamond Phillips big come back movie, Seriously though, I like Johnny D, just not playing an American Indian, his over zealous attempt at sounding like one made him sound drunk. ridiculous.
 
I enjoyed it. It definitely needed a tighter story and could have been cut down to 2hrs, but it had some great moments. Zimmer's theme when the Rangers first ride into town is absolutely amazing laid over the visuals of these guys on horses. Never having watched the show from the '50s, I still got pretty juiced when the Lone Ranger theme started blaring.
 
This movie was very strange. Parts of it were very entertaining, but there were a lot of "what were they thinking" moments that took me out of the story. It was very serious at times and very goofy at times, resulting in a bizarre tonal shifts over the course of the film.

I also don't see why this movie should have cost them so much money to make. All of the train crashes, etc were mostly superfluous to the story. If a film like True Grit was shot for around $40M, Lone Ranger could have easily been done for $100M or less, which would have considerably reduced the sting at the box office.

I guess maybe the filmmakers were so used to making movies like Pirates of the Caribbean that they didn't know how to make a less expensive movie.
 
Given the responses here i'd say you guys would be casting Johnny Depp in blackface to play obama. My point was, "isn't there any capable native american actor in hollywood these days that can play a character apparently never with makeup off? Could you even tell j.d. Was under themakeup? They might have at least broke even...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top