Pocahontas float stereotypes Indians

Utah school's ‘Pocahontas’ parade float has some calling for cultural education

By Benjamin WoodAdministrators at Copper Hills High School are getting a lesson in cultural sensitivity after a Disney-themed homecoming parade last week resulted in accusations of disrespect for American Indian history.

In addition to little mermaids, Caribbean pirates, and beauties and beasts, Thursday's parade included a "Pocahontas" float complete with a tepee and cheerleaders dressed as American Indians as portrayed in the animated film.

The next night, during the school's homecoming football game, members of the Copper Hills American Indian Student Association collected more than 190 signatures on a petition calling for cultural awareness and tolerance.

"Our culture is not your costume," said Shelby Snyder, a Copper Hills junior and the association's president. "When people dress up as Pocahontas, it just makes it seem like they're mocking our culture and making fun of our culture."Pocahontas float at high school homecoming parade sparks outrage from Native American students

By Tamara VaifanuaMatt Hunsaker was surprised when his daughter told him about the backlash over her costume and float. He says it was all in good fun.

“I don’t believe in any sense that these girls would have intentionally try to hurt anybody,” Hunsaker said.

James Singer, a blogger, and Native American activist wrote an article blasting the school for perpetuating stereotypes.

“Racism today looks like this. This is 21st century racism. It’s different than looking at something like Chip and Dale or Mickey Mouse dressing up as that. It’s not the same as someone’s culture. We’re looking at all the natives throughout all the Americas and saying, ‘look we can boil you down and centralize you to this costume and make you look like a fool,’” Singer said.'Our culture is not your costume!' Native American students slam Utah high school for letting cheerleading squad dress up as Pocahontas for the homecoming parade

Comment:  For more on Pocahontas, see Sorority Performs Pocahontas Dance in Costumes and Miss NC's Pocahontas Photo Shoot.

"In Defense of Pocahontas"

The following posting raised a ruckus on the Internets. The headline says it all:

In Defense of Pocahontas: Disney's Most Radical Heroine

20 years after the movie’s release, its character and premise still feel notably progressive.

By Sophie GilbertPocahontas was something different entirely. The success of Beauty and the Beast spurred studio chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg to push for another romance, and directors Mike Gabriel and Eric Goldberg wanted to pursue a story that had its origins in early American history, while also incorporating the Romeo and Juliet-esque elements of two people from very different backgrounds falling in love. But unlike the naive and uncertain Ariel and Belle, Pocahontas would be far more confident—“a woman instead of a teenager,” as supervising animator Glen Keane put it. As the producer Jim Pentacost says in Disney’s 1995 documentary about the making of the feature, “Pocahontas is the strongest heroine we’ve ever had in a Disney film.”

The main problem with Pocahontas—as expressed by several Native American groups, including the Powhatan Nation, which traces its origins back to Pocahontas herself—is that over time, she’s come to embody the trope of the “Good Indian,” or one who offers her own life to help save a white settler. “Her offer of sacrifice, her curvaceous figure, and her virginal stature have come to symbolize America’s Indian heroine,” wrote Angela Aleiss in an op-ed in The Los Angeles Times. Aleiss goes on to criticize how female Indian characters are defined by their male relationships, are “tossed aside by the white man” for a woman of his own race, and have nothing in their appeal beyond their “on-screen pulchritude.”

But Pocahontas as a character is much more complex than Aleiss allows. She does throw herself on John Smith as he’s about to be executed, emphasizing the value of human life and the destructive nature of war, but her move is reciprocated minutes later, when Smith then positions himself between Pocahontas’s father and the furious head of the English settlers, Governor Ratcliffe, and gets shot in the process. The injured Smith decides to return home, and begs Pocahontas to go with him, but she chooses to stay with her tribe in her homeland. Instead of sacrificing something for love (like Ariel giving up her voice, or Belle her freedom), Pocahontas puts her identity and heritage first. It’s a bold ending, and one that deliberately subverts real history, which saw the real Pocahontas marry a different Englishman, John Rolfe, and travel to London with him, where she was feted as an example of the “civilized savage” before dying at the age of 21 shortly before her husband was due to sail back to Virginia.

Powhatan Nation has a page on its website in which it also criticizes Disney for propagating the “Good Indian/Bad Indian” theme and basing a movie on what is largely believed to be a lie told by John Smith to enhance his own mystique. “Euro-Americans must ask themselves why it has been so important to elevate Smith’s fibbing to status as a national myth worthy of being recycled again by Disney,” the page says. “Disney even improves upon it by changing Pocahontas from a little girl into a young woman.” But an animated feature about the relationship between a 10-year-old (as Pocahontas is believed to have been at the time she met John Smith) and an adult male would presumably have horrified audiences. “We had the choice of being historically accurate or socially responsible,” Glen Keane said.So other than being historically inaccurate, it was a great movie? Okay!

An unrelated posting inadvertently echoes some of Gilbert's arguments:

17 reasons why Pocahontas is the best Disney film

Natives respond

Many Natives didn't like this full-throttled defense of Pocahontas. Debbie Reese posted the first response I saw in her American Indians in Children's Literature blog:

A Native Response to Sophie Gilbert's Article "In Defense of Pocahontas"Gilbert is doing the same thing Disney did. She is promoting this dishonest and self-serving myth at the expense of the Powhatan Nation and all the people who are led astray by the narrative of that film.

By focusing on "female agency" and an "environmentalist message," Gilbert is throwing millions of people under the bus.Reese linked to the Powhatan Nation's statement on the movie but didn't go into it. Her point, if I read it correctly, is that a Native viewpoint should be central to any critique of Pocahontas. You wouldn't critique Birth of a Nation without noting its racism against blacks. This is the same kind of thing.



A roundup of responses included the one below from Kenzie Allen. She goes deeper into the issue of a white frame vs. a Native frame:

Does Disney's Pocahontas Do More Harm Than Good? Your Thoughts

Sophie Gilbert found the film progressive and feminist. Readers feel it whitewashes a horrific past. Perhaps it’s both.

By Chris BodennerI’ve struggled with Disney’s Pocahontas as a source of pain and stereotype. Both Pocahontas and Sacagawea are often held up as heroines in the Western perspective, their stories reduced to kinder details rather than serving the interest of the dominant culture. Yes, there is visibility in telling their stories, but it is a tainted visibility, a false reality rendered through the dominant culture, which seeks to ameliorate, always, the horrific methods by which they came to occupy an entire nation’s worth of landmass.

Nobody wants to feel like a settler. Disney’s Pocahontas gives just enough of a flogging to the “real” bad guys to leave the non-native viewers coming away feeling as though they’ve done the good work of recognizing their own faults, while the pain of forced assimilation and erasure continues for the Powhatan Nation and others.

It is the Western lens that sees a progressive narrative in the way the settlers of Disney’s movie are mocked (but eventually befriended), the way Pocahontas rejects a voyage overseas (but was in reality kidnapped—and in the sequel, even this part of the story is made family-friendly and song-worthy), and the way she chooses family over love (when in reality her “choice” was anything but).

Disney goes so far as to try to turn the narrative around by having the Powhatans call the settlers the “savages,” but it’s only done half-way. Much like coverage of mascot issues often features white voices in the interest of “fair and balanced coverage,” the movie ends with the two groups considered even, with no indication of the devastation yet to come.

If Disney’s choice was between being “accurate” or “socially responsible,” my question would be: socially responsible to whom?Native Barbie doll

These critiques touch upon portraying Pocahontas as an attractive young woman rather than a preteen girl. An old posting discusses how phony Disney's representation of her was:

Representations of PocahontasGertrude Custalow, a Powhatan Indian, remarks, “The real Pocahontas was a child, not a voluptuous woman. And one thing’s for sure—she didn’t own an uplift bra (quoted in Tillotson C8)” (Edwards 154). This stresses the sexualized nature of representations of Pocahontas not only in art but also in children’s movies. This also addresses Disney’s indifference to what Pocahontas actually looked like. Instead, they make her into a “brown-skinned Barbie Doll” (154).

The artist who created Disney’s Pocahontas concerned himself less with recreating what Pocahontas must have looked like in reality and more with creating a generic racial other. He literally combines women of various non-white races to generate a very sexualized representation of Pocahontas. Edwards states, “Pocahontas becomes an historically-impossible multiethnic body—an anachronistic image composed of ‘aesthetically-pleasing’ body parts drawn from American Indian, African American, Asian American, and Caucasian models. Disney animator Glen Keane describes his Pocahontas drawing as ‘an ethnic blend whose convexly curved face is African, whose dark, slanted eyes are Asian and whose body proportions are Caucasian’ (qtd. In Tillotson C8). In addition to historical representations of Pocahontas herself, the visual models of various ethnicities that Keane used for his drawing included Irene Bedard, the American Indian actor who provides Pocahontas’s voice, American Indian consult to the film Shirley ‘Little Dove’ Custalow McGowan, Filipino model Dyna Taylor, black supermodel Naomi Campbell, and white supermodels Kate Moss and Christy Turlington” (151-152).Okay, Disney animator Glen Keane. Thanks for letting us know how fake your version of Pocahontas was!

Rob's reaction

I liked Pocahontas, but I knew her real story. I took the movie as a fantasy largely divorced from reality. Like The Hobbit but with characters who vaguely resembled historical figures.

In fact, I suggested that Disney should've changed the characters' names to show audiences this wasn't history. Make the characters generic Anglos and Indians, or even generic fantasy figures--e.g., dwarves and elves.

Of course, that would've ruined Disney's marketing plans, so no way was it going to happen. But it was the kind of solution I would've liked.

As for the question of how progressive Pocahontas was, I'd say it moved the dial from near zero, in Disney's older movies, to maybe 25. That's only 1/4 of the way to a goal of 100.

So you could say the glass was one-quarter full or three-quarters empty. But ignoring the three quarters for the one quarter isn't exactly responsible writing. It's like saying the Titanic's initial voyage was great except for the iceberg.

For more on the subject, see Pocahontas Bastardizes Real People.

Miss NC's Pocahontas photo shoot

Miss NC's Pocahontas Photo Shoot: No Big Deal, or Teachable Moment?

By Vincent SchillingNearly two weeks ago, Johna Edmonds, Miss North Carolina 2013, posted several photos of herself portraying a glamorized version of Pocahontas. Though she received some appreciative comments on social media, Edmonds also received a considerable amount of backlash from Native communities. Edmonds herself is Lumbee.

"I do not like it when there are sexual overtones to many of the cartoon figures portraying our Native Women," reads one representative comment, from Facebook user Carolyn Martell. "A grave message is sent to the world at large and our children. Our Native Women are to be view, revered with honor, dignity respect and integrity! Not Sex Objects!

"Other commenters were more blunt. "Pocahontas, Disney style? Gross!" was Fran Gillespie's reaction, posted to the Powwows.com Facebook page. "Some jacked up miniskirt & stiletto high heels? On a practical level, she would have froze her ass off & sprained an ankle. Here is this really important historical figure, being made cheap & sleazy!"

On March 18th, Edmonds responded to the slew of comments on her own Facebook page with a statement that later appeared in a post at Powwows.com. Her statement reads, in part:

For the purpose of helping an incredible artistic team who have been unbelievably generous to the Miss North Carolina Scholarship Program, capture the essence of their creative vision for this year’s Disney Princess-themed Miss NC program book ad-page, I portrayed my childhood favorite Disney Princess, “Pocahontas.” And what should have remained a proud moment for me as well as others excited to see the outcome of this photo shoot, quickly devolved.

Within a matter of minutes, I had been unfairly accused of “misappropriating Native American culture” and of perpetuating society’s “hyper-sexualization of Native American women.” … So to those who feel that I have distastefully used my sexuality or femininity–which are mine to use–I do sincerely apologize. However, I’d like to also suggest that if all you see is a “hyper-sexualized” Native American woman when looking at these beautifully captured photographs, I would suggest that problem isn’t me, as I never aimed to convey “hyper-sexiness” at any point during this photo shoot. Instead, I really wanted to epitomize and portray the beauty and regal nature of the “Pocahontas” I fondly remember, and with whom I spent the entirety of my childhood captivated by.The outcome:"We had a board meeting last night and a conference call in which we unanimously agreed to remove the pictures and we discussed information that Lori had shared with us. We had a board meeting today with Johna and I had printed out a lot of that information and took the opportunity to make ourselves more aware regarding the sexualization of the Native American woman and how those images were offensive to so many."Comment:  Several things are wrong with the pageant's and Edmonds' thinking.

For starters, the bone breastplate and choker come from the Plains culture. They're completely wrong for Disney's Pocahontas, the real Pocahontas, or any Native cultures of the eastern seaboard.

Edmonds may claim her poses weren't "hyper-sexual," but the first one, at least, is sexual. Disney's Pocahontas didn't drape herself over a rock like that, preparing herself for ravishing. Whoever arranged this photo turned an "innocent" cartoon character into a sexual object.

Of course, the whole concept of Disney princesses is flawed--especially in regard to Pocahontas. The real Pocahontas wasn't a princess. She wasn't a woman known for her "beauty and regal nature." She was a pre-pubescent girl.

Even Disney's version of Pocahontas wasn't a princess. So any adult women, including Native women, who portray Pocahontas are furthering Native stereotypes. The princess, the temptress, the sex object, the fetching maiden...none of these personas apply to Pocahontas the 12-year-old girl. They're all false and stereotypical and everyone should avoid them.

For more on Pocahontas, see Top Three Native Stereotypes and Pocahontas Poster Shows Movies' Influence.

How Disney promotes the status quo

Dani Miller takes Johnny Depp and Disney to task for hurting or failing to help Indians:

Earth to Johnny Depp

By Danielle MillerSoon after word of Lone Ranger filming, a video was released of Johnny Depp announcing the Gathering of Nations Pow wow. Was this truly an act of good faith, or just a Public Relations stunt meant to assuage his role of perpetuating red face? Many critiqued the video saying the way he acted seemed contrived. Others said his demeanor was an attempt to be cautious and respectful. My deduction of his actions is that Johnny Depp is misguided in his perceptions of Native Americans, like many celebrities and Americans.

Another rumor of a PR Stunt has created buzz online and through the moccasin telegraph; the claim that Johnny Depp is looking to buy Wounded Knee. In Episode 3 of “Rez Round up” Chase Iron Eyes was effective in summing up how many Natives feel about those claims. If this rumor was started as another PR stunt to generate buzz for Lone Ranger, then that is shameful. Of course if the purchase is made it will be appreciated. But it is very frustrating to see claims published with no action.

Chase made the great suggestion to Johnny Depp that he put money towards building an interpretive center to allow tribes to tell their stories. Allowing tribes to tell their own stories is very effective in healing from historical trauma and genocide. It is also effective in decreasing current instances of stereotyping and marginalization. That historical burden of our past is inevitable, but it’s not until we own our own history that we will truly be able to heal and move forward. Historical trauma doesn’t have to keep us feeling victimized or stagnant; it is a reminder to move forward and be empowered for the future we seek. Part of owning our history and identities is also about asserting respect for ourselves and how we are represented. Stereotypes erase culture; they keep natives stagnant and frozen in time. Stereotypes lead to dehumanization which escalates from racism to larger acts of violence. NOW is the time to address these issues to ensure respect, safety and equality for future generations.

In conclusion, some Natives are fans of Johnny Depp, and that’s what made the Lone Ranger so difficult to address. Opinions vary across communities. However, one can still be a fan of Johnny Depp while fighting for respectful representations of their people. True display of respect and honor is showing that you are willing to do what you can to correct situations of injustice. It’s never too late to do the right thing.From Donald Duck to the Wooster group: Di$ney Imperialism Propaganda Hidden in Plain Sight

By Dani MillerThe study “How to Read Donald Duck” analyzed Disney comics to find the effects it had on Chilean children. The results were truly disturbing. What’s even more disturbing is how relevant much of this research still is to Disney cartoons today. Although comics are a different medium many of the individualistic and imperialist attitudes still persist in Disney films. Many critique Disney for their lack of accurate representation of people of color in their films and the absence of parents reflecting the individualistic ideologies they push.

According to NY Times “Mr. Dorfman and Mr. Mattelart concluded the comics taught Chilean children not to rebel against their country’s dependent position in the international capitalist economic system…their conclusion was upheld when the general who overthrew the Government gained support by appealing too many of the values and cultural images imbued in the Disney texts.” It also encompasses the dichotomy of the savage vs. civilization. The book was so controversial that it was banned when it was published.

Could this same concept of propaganda against resistance be occurring in American media? Perhaps this is the reason that Disney continues to push imagery which stereotypes and marginalizes Native Americans. Many Native cultures encourage the best interest of the collective community. Sense of community and kinship systems are a threat to the individualistic “American Dream” that US society and Disney pushes.

Stereotypes are perpetuated by some of the largest corporations prevalent throughout all aspects of the mainstream. Disney, the NFL, and big fashion names such as Chanel and Victoria’s Secret are a few perpetuators. Artist from multiple genres: Kesha, Snoop Dogg, Wiz Kahlifa, Miley Cyrus, and Kanye West all have profited off of stereotypical depictions. The fact that Natives have become more vocal in opposition but these stereotypes still persist shows the extent to which institutional racism towards Native Americans is engrained.Comment:  I'd add Johnny Depp to the lineup of corporate interests who don't have Indian interests at heart. Recall:

As one of the "Lone Ranger's" producers, Depp conceived or pushed the whole project.

He insisted on playing Tonto rather than hiring a Native actor and finding another role for himself.

He invented a fantasy Tonto who bore no resemblance to actual Indians.

His character was "touched in the head," so the Native "hero" was atypical and abnormal.

Tonto's role in the movie was mostly to empower the Lone Ranger to act against a railroad tycoon.

The rest of Tonto's Comanche tribe rode to their deaths against the US Army.

So the movie gives us a slightly mad "lone wolf" fighting a futile rearguard action to stop progress. Followed by the last remaining Indians vanishing into the sunset. Except for Tonto, who lives a few more decades before also vanishing into the sunset.

This is an extremely limited view of Native activism. Remember how Tecumseh rallied dozens of tribes to join a confederation that almost stopped US expansion in its tracks? Tecumseh didn't wander around looking for a white savior, he rallied thousands of Indians to his cause.



If Depp wanted to inspire Indian youth, why didn't he have Tonto do something similar?

Indeed, how is any half-crazed person supposed to be a role model for youngsters? Is Depp advising modern Indians to hit their heads, leave their tribes, and "go crazy" with solo stunts against the military-industrial complex? Uh, thanks but no thanks.

Challenging the status quo

In the modern era, Native activists occupied Alcatraz and Wounded Knee. Marlon Brando supported these Indians, and Depp supposedly admires both them and Brando. So why didn't his Tonto do something equally rebellious?

The 19th-century equivalent of a radical protest might be the Ghost Dance movement. Suppose Tonto found a magical artifact that would let him dance the white man back to Europe. Suppose a villain wanted the artifact to become ruler of America. There's a movie for you. Life-and-death consequences for the entire country--exactly what Hollywood supposedly likes.

Suppose Tonto vanquishes the villain but decides not to go through with the Ghost Dance. Or suppose he does go through with it and the white man disappears. At the end, we learn the entire 20th century was nothing but a present-day Indian's nightmare dream.

There's a movie with a pro-Indian message.

Even acting alone, in a traditional Western, Tonto could've begun a guerrilla campaign against settlers a la Geronimo. He could've gone to Washington and tried to assassinate the president. Or if you prefer a nonviolent approach, he could've gone to Congress and demanded his people's rights.

Fighting a single evildoer is nothing compared to that. It's basically accepting the reality of Euro-American conquest. Which is why critics say most entertainment products--from old Westerns to Karl May's novels to The Lone Ranger--are pro-American and anti-Indian. They don't challenge the fundamental status quo.

That status quo means exploiting the land, water, and other natural resources for profit. Which is the corporate version of the "American Dream." That's what Disney wants and Depp apparently wants. Namely, to lament the past while lining their pockets and doing little or nothing to change the present.

Except for a few scholarships, even helping Indians seems beyond Disney's and Depp's means. For instance, can they find a few million dollars to buy Wounded Knee for the Lakota, as Depp has hinted at? Apparently not.

Cartoon characters don't deserve America

Throughout its history, Disney has portrayed Indians as comical, clown-like buffoons. Most Native stereotypes--from sports mascots to hipsters in headdresses--do something similar.



Even if the portrayals are dignified--as in Disney's Pocahontas--they have two things in common. The Indians are primitive and in the past.

The message of these stereotypes is the same. It's to celebrate the American way...maintain the status quo...protect the power and privilege of the white Christian elite. Civilization won and savagery lost, and the spoils go to the victors.

Just look at Tonto or a prancing mascot or a pop star in a headdress. Should we let these weird, backward barbarians stop the march of progress and keep their land and resources? People who go around half-naked, dance and drink, and wear birds on their heads?

That would be crazy, so no. America belongs to the sober, hard-working Christians who "tamed" it, not to heathens who waste their lives partying in skins and feathers. The Disney/Depp message is that Indians were too "different" to own the country, so they had to go.

For more on the subject, see Onion's Take on Lone Ranger Fiasco and Depp and Bruckheimer Blame Critics.

Ireland Baldwin tweets Indian costume

Ireland Baldwin, the daughter of Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger, got in trouble for a series of tweets. Jezebel.com may have been the first to report on it.

Ireland Baldwin Defends Her Native American Halloween CostumeMom who really doesn't want to be at Disneyland Halloween and was forced to dress up but had one… http://instagram.com/p/gCLTsWEoKU/This is who I was being for Halloween at Disneyland. You all are pathetic.Deleted the picture because it was insulting all the poor little white girls who need a racial cause to be apart of for attention

— ireland (@IrelandBBaldwin) October 29, 2013

Ok everyone. I apologize if my Halloween costume offended you and your culture PERSONALLY. However, I don't apologize to a majority...

... Of you who thought it was necessary to return the favor with a lot of hateful mentions.

A Native American costume was AN OPTION at a Halloween store.

I respect all cultures and I would never mock one. I am Cherokee Indian and I am also well aware of what many tribes encountered in the past

And for some of you pathetic morons to bring my family and other matters into the discussion, you are all sad excuses for human beingsPresumably Baldwin's tweets came in response to other tweets. I don't know exactly what people said, but we can imagine it.

Commenters respond

Some Jezebel commenters responded directly to Baldwin's claims:It couldn't be a racist costume because it was based on a Disney cartoon, also there was the option in a store. If it was racist, that would mean the Disney cartoon and the store are racist, which certainly could never be a possibility.

Seriously, if you are basing the racial appropriateness of stuff off of Disney cartoons, sorry kiddo, but Disney cartoons are racist as fuck and still have a hard time with race.

When she grows out of her teenage sociopathy she will regret that entire tirade. I like that she hit just about every square on the "Racist Apologist Bingo" card. Brava, kid.

Is it me or are we seeing a LOT of privileged, white, pretty, blond girls going absolutely INSANE this Halloween with the black/brown face and getting REAL huffy when called out on it? I'm getting the distinct impression they feel entitled to do whatever they want due to aforementioned blond whiteness. It's giving me rageface because I'm also seeing a shit ton of feminists defending them. Intersectionality, time to embrace that already and not put up with this bs.

You know, there were/are a LOT of different tribes. Isn't it amazing how every single clueless white person always claims to be Cherokee?

Ireland Baldwin, you cannot claim you are part Native American in order to justify your racism, whether you really are or not. I am part African (in my ancestry for real, but am as white as skim milk) but am not using that as an excuse to do racist shit.

She's part Cherokee? Kim Basinger's Wikipedia states that she might be part Cherokee. But how convenient for Ireland Baldwin to bust that "fact" out.

You would be shocked how many people I've encountered outside of the midwest who did not know Native Americans still exist, as if they just perished or something. I get the feeling a lot of people who put on redface do so with the assumption that there are no Natives alive to take offense.

There are many, many more who DO know and just don't care.

For what it's worth, I'm 35, from the East coast, and have met exactly one person who I knew to be primarily Native American. It doesn't excuse Ireland's stupidity, but I think you're right that she probably had no reference point for modern real-life native Americans.Comment:  As I tweeted after reading this:

Claiming to be Cherokee to justify an Indian chief or Pocahottie costume = claiming to be German to justify a Scottish kilt or Greek toga.

There's a glaring contradiction in the above assertions. If Baldwin is Cherokee as she claims, what is she doing in a stereotypical Plains-style costume? If she has no reference point for Natives, why is she claiming to be Cherokee?

If you're an Indian, that doesn't give you a licence to wear whatever you want and claim it's authentic. Just the opposite: It behooves you, more than anyone, to get the costume right. To wear something that's culturally correct, not a stupid stereotype.

More coverage

Other websites reported on the controversy, depicting Baldwin as defiant:

Ireland Baldwin Defends Native American Halloween Costume: “I Am Cherokee Indian” (PHOTOS)

Ireland Baldwin Dons Native American Halloween Costume, Lashes Out at "Pathetic" Critics

Or contrite:

Kim Basinger--Ireland Baldwin Apologises Over Native Indian Halloween Costume

'I made a mistake and I apologize': Ireland Baldwin responds to backlash after Native American Halloween costume causes Twitter uproarThe uproar continued for several days following the incident, with many people seemingly unwilling to let it go.

'People make mistakes, everyone. I made a mistake and I apologize if it offended,' Ireland wrote on October 30, before addressing individual @Buri103, explaining, 'I copied a Disney character and I'm sorry that it offended you.'

On Thursday, the star managed to make light of the situation, tweeting, 'Before I dress as Wednesday Addams and Juno Macguff this weekend, is anyone offended?'Comment:  For more on Pocahottie costumes, see University Bans Offensive Halloween Costumes and Native Regrets "Naughty Native" Costume.

Onion's take on Lone Ranger fiasco

Corpses of 'Lone Ranger' Producers Hung From Hollywood Blvd. Street Lights As Warning To Others



Message: Don't stereotype Indians, people! Or else!!

For more on Johnny Depp and Tonto, see Depp and Bruckheimer Blame Critics and Why The Lone Ranger Flopped.

Depp and Bruckheimer blame critics

Johnny Depp, Bruckheimer Blame Critics for ‘Lone Ranger’ Disaster

Armie Hammer adds: the reviews 'slit the jugular' of Disney feature

By Stuart OldhamJohnny Depp and producer Jerry Bruckheimer have spoken out for the first time since mega-budget Western “The Lone Ranger” crumbled at the global box office, blaming U.S. critics for one of the biggest Hollywood trainwrecks of the year.

“I think the reviews were written seven to eight months before we released the film,” Depp proclaims in a new interview.

Disney’s costly feature, which could lose as much as $190 million, never stood a chance of succeeding because of overtly negative press, according to the Oscar-nominated actor.

“I think the reviews were written when they heard Gore (Verbinski) and Jerry (Bruckheimer) and me were going to do ‘The Lone Ranger’,” Depp said. “They had expectations that it must be a blockbuster. I didn’t have any expectations of that. I never do.”

Bruckheimer, who made millions off the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise with Depp, agreed when it came to the press’ coverage.

“I think they were reviewing the budget, not reviewing the movie,” Bruckheimer told Yahoo U.K.-Ireland. “The audience doesn’t care what the budget is—they pay the same amount if it costs a dollar or 20 million dollars.”These claims are ridiculous, of course. A child could point to big-budget movies that critics loved, and movies that made big profits despite negative reviews.

One writer easily swatted away the claims of Depp and company. His conclusion:

Johnny Depp, Don't Shoot the Messenger for 'Lone Ranger' Flop

By Alonso DuraldeIt’s admittedly very flattering, gentlemen, that you think that the critical establishment is responsible for the catastrophic domestic box-office performance of “The Lone Ranger,” but it’s also hilarious.

If film critics could destroy a movie, Michael Bay and Adam Sandler would be working at Starbucks. If film critics could make a movie a hit, the Dardenne brothers would be courted by every studio in town.

“The Lone Ranger” stunk so much so that audiences got an immediate whiff and stayed away.

End of story.'The Lone Ranger' to Cost Disney $160-$190M in Q4

By Lucas ShawDisney will take a write-down of $160 to $190 million in the next fiscal quarter, the company said during its earnings call on Tuesday.

"The Lone Ranger" has grossed just $175.5 million at the global box office, a pittance for a movie that cost more than $200 million to produce–and millions more to market. Though it opened in theaters in the third quarter, its main hit to the company's bottom line will not be reported until the next quarter given recent changes in reporting standards.

The marketing costs of that film still submarined profits at the company's film studio, which reported a 36 percent decline in profits for the third quarter on Tuesday.In reality, critics have never had less influence over a movie's success. Duralde rightly put the blame where it belongs: on Depp and his stupid filmmaking moves. Including his stereotypical portrayal of Tonto.

For more on Johnny Depp and Tonto, see Skyhawk: Depp Dishonored Indians and Why The Lone Ranger Flopped.

Skyhawk: Depp dishonored Indians

Sonny Skyhawk on 'The Lone Ranger': 'Heads Should Roll at Disney'

By Gale Courey ToensingYou know how they say even bad publicity is good because it creates so much buzz and sells things? Well, this movie had so much bad publicity but it’s still a flop according to the reviews and box office receipts. How do you account for that?

Well, I don’t know that there’s been bad publicity with regard to the Hollywood machine. The Hollywood machine would have you believe that this is a fantastic movie and what’s all the negativity about? That’s the unfortunate part--they don’t have a clue. They didn’t have a clue at the beginning in my talks with Disney...

You talked to them at the beginning?

...I had teleconferences with them when we discussed some of these things. I told them I thought it would go south. I expressed at the time what my feelings were and the fact that having Johnny Depp play Tonto was due for a total crash. And they said, "No, we don’t think so. We have our ducks in a row and we think that Johnny Depp is going to do great.” And I said, "Well, ok! Next point. Why don’t you try and involve the American Indian community if you’re going to shove this down their throat? I would advise that you at least try to get them on your side before you invest in trying to convince them that Johnny Depp is Indian,” and so on. And they said, “No, we have that pretty much in hand also. Johnny Depp is part Indian and we’re going to roll with that” and I said, “Well, you know, the Cherokee Nation, one of the tribes he claims to be from, has vetted his ancestry and none of them are located on their rolls.” And they said, “Well, he thinks he is and so we’re going to roll with that.” I said, “Ok! Good luck!” Those conversations were with a Disney vice president and also a lady by the name of Dawn Jackson, an American Indian who works for Disney in the merchandising department. She’s the go to Indian at Disney when they have a question, like about Pocahontas.

So, they didn’t hear you?

We’re not gloating, but we are doing an I-told-you-so, kind of thing. The problem is that we’ve (American Indians) come this far and we’re still seeing this kind of approach. We had Johnny Depp saying, “I’m going to honor you” and then we end up being dishonored again. The only thing that I can take satisfaction in is that they’re not going to make any money out it. In my experience and in my professional view the $325 million spent on it might make somewhere in the vicinity of copy25 million. So among the powers that be who forwarded this movie, heads should roll at Disney because in my best estimation they’re going to lose close to $200 million on this film.Comment:  For more of Sonny Skyhawk's take on Johnny Depp, see What's Wrong with Del Toro and Depp? and Skyhawk: Depp Is a Charlatan.

My Lone Ranger insight

Now that The Lone Ranger is bombing at the box office, let's take a look back. Let's see who understood the business best: Rob or the thousands of people involved in making this movie.Does Hollywood have to fire all its execs before it can make a sensible decision? How does a Western with one star become a $250 million movie? This should've been a $25 million movie with relative unknowns in the lead roles.Rob, Disney Shuts Down Lone Ranger, Aug. 12, 2011And:There should be a $100 million "Lone Ranger" movie...anything more and you're misjudging the audience.Ignorant fanYou would have said the same thing before the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie, and you would have turned out to be wrong.Screenwriter Terry Rossio to ignorant fan, Lone Ranger Writer Denies Rumors, August 19, 2011Not-so-ignorant fan 1, Rossio 0.

Disney obviously thought Johnny Depp could mint money in any movie he did. In reality, Captain Jack Sparrow can mint money in Pirates movies, and Depp is still a quirky character actor in anything but Pirates movies. As I've been telling people for years.

He's Peter Sellers, John Malkovich, or Steve Buscemi, not Tom Cruise, Will Smith, or Tom Hanks. If he's in a blockbuster, it's an accident. It's not something you want to bet your company on.

For more on Johnny Depp and Tonto, see Why The Lone Ranger Flopped and Ranger too Racist to Reboot.

Below:  Johnny Depp and stereotypical Indians, the early years.

Why The Lone Ranger flopped

Box Office: Why Did 'The Lone Ranger' Earn So Little Silver?

By Gary SusmanWhy was this Western so slow on the draw? After all, despite all the bad reviews from critics and the negative buzz about the bloated budget, the movie earned a solid B+ at CinemaScore, indicating positive word-of-mouth among those who saw it. But that was only if you could get them into the theater first. Here are some possible reasons why they couldn't.

"Despicable Me 2" grabbed all the family audience.

"Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain" grabbed all the guy audience.

People don't care about the character anymore.

People don't care about Westerns anymore.

Who was that masked man? Casting someone charismatic and familiar in the lead role might have made a difference. No slam against the talents or chiseled jaw of Armie Hammer, but he's never carried a mainstream picture, and his star quality remains unproven. Granted, it's been common in superhero movies in recent years to cast handsome, earnest, untested actors in the lead roles (see "Thor" or "Man of Steel"), but that's not always the wisest course.

Not every idea Johnny Depp has is brilliant. Depp's name is still golden overseas, and after the bizarre creative choices he made in creating Capt. Jack Sparrow paid off, Disney was obviously willing to cut him a lot of slack. Still, playing up Tonto at the expense of the Lone Ranger, or costuming Tonto like Kiss guitarist Ace Frehley with an Angry Bird on his head may have seemed too eccentric even for Depp's biggest fans to agree to ride along.

Not everything Jerry Bruckheimer touches turns to gold. Producer Bruckheimer, along with Depp, director Gore Verbinski, and writers Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio, managed to turn a Disney theme park ride into a franchise worth billions, but that doesn't mean everything this group does will work as well as the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies.Let's go through these seven possible reasons.

I doubt other movies could "grab the audience" from a great movie, so I'd discount the first two reasons.

Lack of interest in the Lone Ranger and Westerns is certainly possible.

This posting effectively answers its own assertion about Armie Hammer's drawing power. In addition to Thor and Man of Steel, see the Spider-Man movies, the Lord of the Rings movies, the Harry Potter movies, etc., etc.

I'd say the last two factors--Depp and Bruckheimer--contributed to the problem, at least. They may have been the primary factors in the movie's failure.

Here's what analysts have to say:

The Lone Ranger Represents Everything That’s Wrong With Hollywood Blockbusters

By Gilbert CruzThe Lone Ranger—a.k.a. Pirates of the Caribbean 4.5: Sparrow Goes West—is looking like it might be a huge tentpole movie (it reportedly cost $215-250 million) that goes down this weekend. It also happens to be a perfect example of almost everything that’s wrong with the current Hollywood blockbuster system. In addition to being massively expensive, The Lone Ranger demonstrates the industry’s franchise obsession, origin-story laziness, over-reliance on bloodless violence, and inability to prevent running-time bloat. These are not small problems, and there is no sign that they will be riding off into the sunset anytime soon.These are all potential problems. But I don't think people would object to origin-story laziness, bloodless violence, and running-time bloat in advance. These things might affect word-of-mouth and repeat visits, but they wouldn't affect first-time movie-goers.

Johnny Depp's hard times continue as 'Lone Ranger' bombs

By Arienne ThompsonThe 50-year-old actor's most recent disappointment is The Lone Ranger, which bombed big at the box office last weekend. So big, in fact, that The Hollywood Reporter estimates that it's set to lose $150 million for Disney, the studio behind the critically maligned film, which took a beating against record-setting animated flick Despicable Me 2.

"Outside of Jack Sparrow (from the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise), he's not a huge box-office draw," says Jeff Bock, senior box-office analyst at Exhibitor Relations. "Everybody knows that if you just look at his box-office record. He's probably offered just about every role out there still because his name does carry weight, but he chooses to go that road-less-traveled path."

The very thing that made him may become his undoing, though, says Brian Balthazar, editor of POPgoesTheWeek, a pop-culture blog.

"I do think there may be some audience fatigue in the type of character Johnny Depp plays. He played quirky Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean, and then he was the quirky Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland,and he was quirky Willy Wonka in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. He actually needs to play an ordinary guy. The public has seen him play a quirky, madcap character so many times."

Critics' distaste for Ranger repeatedly noted that Depp's Tonto was not far off from his twitchy, affected Jack Sparrow performance. Ranger, with a $225 million price tag and Depp's name attached, was expected to be a summer blockbuster yet pulled in a paltry $49 million over the July Fourth holiday weekend, making it one of the biggest flops of the year so far.

"It's not a good film. It's tired, it's lazy filmmaking, and he plays his oddball role well, but it's not enough to make up for everything else about it that is been-there-done-that," Bock says.Bingo! I think we have a winner. "Outside of Jack Sparrow, Depp is not a huge box-office draw."

Dark Shadows, Lone Ranger...how many flops before people realize Depp is a great actor, not a great draw? In other words, Pirates was a fluke.

Finding Neverland, Sweeney Todd, and Public Enemies are the norm for a Depp movie, not the Pirates series. People aren't aching to see Depp unless he's Captain Jack Sparrow.

In other surprising developments, don't expect the next Daniel Radcliffe movie to do as well as Harry Potter. Don't expect the next Elijah Wood movie to do as well as Lord of the Rings. The stories and characters made these movies, not the actors.

Depp's lack of drawing power and his bizarre take on Tonto are two major negatives that Disney didn't consider. When you combine them, you have a perfect storm of fatally flawed decision-making. It's an epic fail waiting to happen.

“The Lone Ranger” failed because it wasted money

With "The Lone Ranger," Disney lost big on a bad idea. But in Hollywood, failure's almost as good as success

By Andrew O'HehirHere’s an original observation for you: The economics of Hollywood are massively screwed up. There’s been a good deal of virtual rending of expensive garments in the executive suites of Los Angeles County over the last few days, along with a fair bit of whispered Schadenfreude among onlookers, following the spectacular failure of Jerry Bruckheimer and Gore Verbinski’s “The Lone Ranger.” Even speaking as one of the few critics who didn’t think “The Lone Ranger” was terrible–see also my former Salon colleague Matt Zoller Seitz and Glenn Kenny of MSN–the fact that the movie was a box-office dud came as no shock. “The Lone Ranger” cost a reported $225 million to make, and it’s a western featuring Johnny Depp as the most stereotypical of all “good Indian” characters, speaking broken English with a dead crow on his head. The only mystery here is why anybody thought that sounded like a good idea in the first place.

I almost don’t know whether to give the Walt Disney Co. a medal for bravery or an award for extreme stupidity. You can’t say the Mouse hasn’t been trying, that much is for sure. The debacle of “The Lone Ranger” follows hard on the heels of the now-legendary 2012 bomb “John Carter,” which forced the studio to take a $200 million write-down, and the 2011 summer disaster “Mars Needs Moms,” a less expensive film but an even bigger flop. (“John Carter” also wasn’t awful, but “Mars Needs Moms” was. I believe the NSA has systematically scrubbed that movie from the collective human memory bank.) In all three cases, the writing was on the wall long before the movies reached theaters: “Lone Ranger” and “John Carter” were attempts to revive semi-defunct genres (the western and old-school, sword-and-sandal sci-fi) at immense expense, while “Mars Needs Moms” was a muddled effort to recapture some ‘70s Disney magic by targeting women and family audiences with a science-fiction film.

There’s a clinical term that describes people who keep on making the same mistakes and expecting different results, right? Oh yeah, it’s “crazy.” On one hand, you have analysts like Todd Cunningham of the Wrap urging Disney to stay away from so-called original projects and stick with established superhero or comic-book franchises. (And yes, I do find it amusing that movies based on a long-running radio and TV serial, or on the work of a massively popular science-fiction pioneer, are considered “original” material.) On the other, a different Wrap article by Brent Lang quotes an unnamed movie executive as saying that if Depp showed up at the door with an idea for a $150 million action-thriller in which he played an eccentric character in extreme makeup, not a single studio in town would turn him away. To me this looks like a structural problem, one that isn’t about westerns or science fiction or Disney or Johnny Depp. If, that is, this even is a problem. One could also understand big, stupid, money-losing pictures as a feature of Hollywood’s production system, rather than a bug.

When I say that “The Lone Ranger” was a bad idea, by the way, I don’t mean that making the movie itself, warts and problematic Native American character and all, was indefensible. Sure, a little Johnny Depp goes a long way, these days, but God love the guy–he’s a genuine dose of old-Hollywood weirdness in a stultifying corporate environment, and on the whole I think the culture’s better off if he pursues his pet projects. I even liked “Dark Shadows” (go ahead and mock), and am on the record as believing “The Lone Ranger” is an intriguing and ambitious effort to blend an old-time adventure flick with a post-Peckinpah revisionist western. I do mean, however, that making that movie at that price–a sum that sounds shocking to ordinary people, and that could feed the inhabitants of several African villages for the rest of their natural lives–is irrational and idiotic on more levels than I can count.

If Messrs. Verbinski, Bruckheimer, Depp et al. had managed to “right-size” the picture, at a budget level of somewhere around $80 million or $90 million, let’s say, then all this fascinating postmortem analysis is not happening. The opening weekend gross for “The Lone Ranger,” even after all the dreadful publicity, was almost $50 million. Considered in the abstract, hey, that’s a lot of money! There is absolutely no question in my mind that the right combination of mid-level budget and oddball, niche-oriented marketing campaign could have produced a tidy little summer movie turning a tidy little profit. Everybody goes home happy.

But what fun is that? As anyone who happens to be reading this who works in Hollywood is already muttering, that’s a ridiculous scenario. It’s not that it couldn’t be done, but that Disney and Jerry Bruckheimer would never do it. The movie industry, at least at that level, operates on the same delusional principles as the military budget or Wall Street executive salaries, where bigness, waste and needless expenditure in all directions become markers of significance and ambition. To make “The Lone Ranger” for less money than Bruckheimer and Disney spent on the massively profitable “Pirates of the Caribbean” series might have been prudent. (OK, it definitely would’ve been.) But it also would have been seen, by the devoted priesthood of the industry, as being small-minded and grasping, as a failure to dream or an admission that the moviemakers really didn’t want the alluring devil’s candy of massive success and adulation, theme-park tie-ins and fast-food figurines and copyright-violation Tijuana parody T-shirts and all the rest of it.Unlike Cruz above, O'Hehir doesn't come down hard on movie-making excesses. But O'Hehir like Dark Shadows and The Lone Ranger, which calls his judgement into question. I'd say he shouldn't give up his day job to become a studio executive.

Our last critic agrees with O'Hehir about the right direction for movie-making, even if O'Hehir backed away from his own suggestion.

Disney Epic Fail

By Forrest Rawls“They will think not twice, but maybe five times, before they do another $225-million picture,” said longtime entertainment industry analyst Harold Vogel of Vogel Capital Management. “This is going to make it a lot tougher for any other budding auteur to come in and say, ‘I want to do this $225-million extravaganza.’ It’s not going to happen any time soon at Disney.”

I think it’s time to go back to unknown actors, and writers and start on a small scale (Hello Indie!) before going epic. I would think that those who want to make money would spend less so that the outcome of the paycheck is higher if done well and no red if the movie bombs. Not betting on an actor to carry a film and paying a load of dough to make it. I know some movies may need special effects and car chases, but come on there are decent things on YouTube.One more Lone Ranger point: Depp's bizarre take on Indians, which is bombing at box office, may ruin the market for Native-themed movies.

If that happens, the blame goes mostly to Depp, who conceived his bizarre take on Tonto and used it to convince Disney to greenlight the movie.

For more on Johnny Depp and Tonto, see Ranger too Racist to Reboot and Tonto = Captain Jack Sparrow.

Depp 100% responsible for Tonto

In the debates over The Lone Ranger, we frequently hear that Depp is just an actor, not a writer or costume designer. In other words, that his job was merely to carry out the Tonto role given to him.

This is false in several ways. For one thing, Depp was an executive producer on this movie, listed second after Gore Verbinski. For another, Depp created this version of Tonto long before others were involved:

Depp's Tonto equal partner, not sidekick, of 'The Lone Ranger'Depp’s interest in playing Tonto in “The Lone Ranger” developed early on when it was just germinating as an idea with producer Jerry Bruckheimer. Depp, in typical fashion, figured that the best way to get the ball rolling would be to get into character as Tonto. He enlisted the help of two close friends—makeup artist Joel Harlow and photographer Peter Mountain—and set about creating his distinctive version of how Tonto would look in the hope that it would convince Bruckheimer and the studio, Disney, to give it the green light.

Depp is, of course, a master of disguise and a brilliant character actor as well as one of Hollywood’s best-loved leading men. He based his ‘look’ for Tonto on a painting he’d seen of a Native American warrior and added his own, unique, flourishes.

The result was spectacular and it convinced Bruckheimer—and indeed Disney Studios—that it was time for “The Lone Ranger” and Tonto to ride back onto the screen.

As Bruckheimer relates, “Johnny Depp creates amazing characters, no matter what movie he’s in. His Tonto will be different than any Tonto you’ve ever seen before. He has a whole different look, a whole different feel. We don’t even know until the cameras roll what he’s going to do, but we know it’s going to be entertaining and very interesting.”Comment:  Wow. This article confirms that Depp created the crow-head look before the movie was greenlit, and this radical re-imagining convinced Disney to proceed. Depp is 100% responsible for this stupid Tonto.

Also note what this says about the so-called Comanche advisers. They're told Disney greenlit this movie primarily because of Depp's fabricated Tonto look. Their choice is 1) approve the look and receive fame and glory as Friends of Johnny, or 2) disapprove the look and be labeled the villains who destroyed a $250 million movie.

Wow, tough choice...not. The vast majority of the population would choose 1) regardless of the facts of the situation. So we can pretty much ignore everything the advisers said years after Depp invented his phony Tonto.

For more on Johnny Depp, see Lone Ranger Pitch Meeting, Critics Agree: Lone Ranger Is Bad and New Tonto as Racist as Old Tonto.

Tonto tanks at box office

Before The Lone Ranger opened, here's what analysts were saying about its chances:

Disney Rides Into Box-Office Ambush With ‘The Lone Ranger’

By Christopher Palmeri & Michael WhiteDisney will struggle to turn a profit, after the budget climbed to $225 million and the film earned mostly unfavorable early reviews. The task is more challenging because “The Lone Ranger” opens on a competitive summer weekend, against Universal Pictures’ animated “Despicable Me 2” and holdovers that include “Monsters University,” from Disney’s Pixar, and the zombie thriller “World War Z.”

“It is a huge gamble,” said Doug Creutz, an analyst with Cowen & Co. in San Francisco, who predicts a $100 million write-off for Disney. “You need the film to be really good.”

Critics have been harsh. Of 62 reviews compiled by the website Rottentomatoes.com, 79 percent were labeled negative. That compares with 49 percent “rotten” out of 218 reviews of “John Carter,” Disney’s March 2012 sci-fi fantasy about a Civil War veteran transported to Mars.

“‘The Lone Ranger’ is a drag as an action movie,” wrote Alonso Duralde, critic for the industry website The Wrap.com. “It’s not funny in its attempts at self-parody, and it feels like a Western made by people working off a checklist of tropes.”And:Disney is deploying its typical big-budget marketing for the film. The company lined up sponsorships including Subway Restaurants Inc., Time Warner Cable Inc (TWC). and Kawasaki motorcycles. The consumer-products division has licensed merchandise for release, including $18 Lone Ranger and Tonto action figures, masks for $15 and hats for $17.

The reintroduction of “The Lone Ranger” tells the story more from Tonto’s point of view and introduces comedic elements, such as a stone-faced Depp dodging bad guys on a speeding train. Hammer, 26, is out to avenge his brother’s murder as the masked ranger.

Coveted product placements were difficult in film’s 19th century setting, so in its promotions Time Warner Cable links the speed of its Internet service to the Lone Ranger’s fast white stallion “Silver.”

“What these partners have done is take that idea of riding for justice, take those icons--the mask, the silver bullet, riding the white horse--and made those themes relevant in new ways,” said Asad Ayaz, a Disney marketing executive.

Kawasaki opted for commercials mingling scenes of the ranger racing along on horseback with shots of off-road enthusiasts riding dirt bikes or four-wheelers. A voiceover compares Old West heroes with Kawasaki owners riding their “steeds forged of steel,” according to Chris Brull, the company’s U.S. director of marketing, who declined to put a dollar value on the company’s campaign.Schadenfreude, baby!

Since it opened, things aren't looking good:

‘Lone Ranger’ a Train Wreck While ‘Despicable Me 2′ Shines for Explosive Fourth

By Andrew Stewart“Lone Ranger,” which cost $225 million (not including marketing), sadly looks to be another “John Carter” for Disney, with opening five day projections upwards of $45 million. That’s a paltry sum compared to what Disney needed the film to earn, and even with star Johnny Depp goosing overseas prospects, it’s highly unlikely the international markets will warm to the iconic American Western enough to make up for slagging Stateside box office.Johnny Depp Can't Save 'Lone Ranger' From Being 'John Carter'-Sized Bomb for Disney

Adding in only $29.4 Friday-Sunday, the masked rider and his faithful Indian companion overall brought in nearly $90 million less than “Despicable Me 2”

By Todd CunninghamThe mega-budget "The Lone Ranger" went down in a cloud of a dust in its box-office debut over the July 4 weekend, saddling the studio with a "John Carter”-sized disaster.

Over the five-day holiday weekend, the masked rider will have brought in around $49 million. That’s about $20 million under analysts’ projections and nearly $90 million behind the total of the No. 1 movie, Universal and Illumination Entertainment’s animated family film “Despicable Me 2.”

Worse, the $29.4 million three-day Friday-Sunday total for the $225 million adaptation of the classic radio and TV show, with Armie Hammer as the title character and Johnny Depp as Tonto, was weaker than that of last year's bomb "John Carter."

That $250-million sci-fi adventure opened to $30.1 million, topped out at $73 million at the domestic box office and Disney wound up with a $200 million write down.

It’s hard to imagine Disney executives aren’t questioning the decision they made last summer to restart production on the Western after having shut it down when the budget began spiraling out of control.

“The Lone Ranger" marks the second consecutive major box-office misfire for Depp, who starred in last summer’s “Dark Shadows.” That send-up of a 1960s TV vampire soap cost $150 million to produce and topped out at $80 million. It opened to a mere $29 million--and "The Lone Ranger" did worse than that.

With Depp and the "Pirates of the Caribbean team of producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Gore Verbinski on board, Disney had hoped “The Lone Ranger” could do for Westerns what that $3.7 billion four-film franchise had done for pirate movies.

That’s clearly not in the cards now. And to recoup that huge production budget--and the cost of a major marketing campaign--it would have to overperform abroad. Even with Depp, one of the world’s most bankable box-office stars, that’s an extremely long shot because Westerns don’t normally play strongly overseas.

“The frustrating part for us,” Disney’s head of distribution Dave Hollis told TheWrap Sunday, “is that we had all the ingredients here. You take a classic franchise, team the world’s most successful producer, an award-winning director and the biggest movie star in the world and you think your chances of success are pretty good. But we just didn’t make it work.”

And the belly-flop means it ranks with the biggest Western bombs of all time, such as “Wild, Wild West.” That was the 1999 Will Smith-Kevin Kline horse opera that opened to $27 million despite its $190 million budget, huge for that era.One analyst is still hoping against hope:

Review: 'The Lone Ranger' Is A Fun Summer Ride

By Mark HughesWorld War Z beat back those naysayers with a smart marketing campaign that focused on Brad Pitt as an action hero in a global crisis thriller, while Pitt himself did some serious hands-on public relations for the film by attending lots of screenings and talking to the public to encourage attendance. The Lone Ranger didn’t have the same opportunity to market itself outside of its primary genre, and instead went for a campaign focused on Johnny Depp and The Pirates of the Caribbean series connection. That’s a strategy that makes sense, but I think it needed more attention to the film’s larger concept and story, the gist of which doesn’t really come across in the advertising—we see the basic origin concept in the trailer, and some good humorous bits plus a couple of big action shots, but can you really tell me what the movie is about from that trailer besides “the Lone Ranger becomes the Lone Ranger?” Probably not.

The focus on Depp and the POTC link is good for broad global marketing, where Depp’s star power alone plus the enormous continued popularity of the POTC series are enough to generate strong box office figures, but domestically those things have less weight in a crowded summer race. The film is actually about the early expansion across the western USA, the rise of warfare between the white settlers and the Indian nations, and the way politics and business colluded to create a war with a terrible, inevitable outcome. That’s a narrative that would probably catch a lot of attention from audiences looking for something unique in the field of films vying for attention right now, and I’m surprised Disney didn’t capitalize on all of that for the July 4th opening week.

But as I said, while the North American box office will suffer from the combined overwhelming onslaught of negative press and unclear marketing, it won’t have such trouble overseas, I suspect. The $100+ million domestic total is likely to be overshadowed by a foreign gross that will approach $200-300 million, if Disney aggressively promotes it properly. That means a final box office potential of anywhere between $300 million to $400 million. Surely not what Disney was hoping for a film with this star power and such a great, successful creative team working on a known brand that has mild links to the superhero genre—no doubt they thought $200+ million might be up for grabs domestically, and another $400 million overseas, perhaps. Alas, that doesn’t look possible at this point, although of course it’s not entirely out of the cards that it could pick up lost ground over the weekend and end up closer to $60 million for the first five days and go on to $150 million domestic, then add a stronger $300-400 million in foreign receipts. But that’s a best case scenario now, and not a likely one.Comment:  As Nelson would say on The Simpsons: Haw haw!

Disney took what could've been a good cowboys 'n' Indians movie and turned it into a three-ring circus. I don't want to say Depp's Tonto is a sideshow freak, but as the movie begins, he's literally a sideshow freak.

The lack of Native authenticity probably is a big factor in the public's rejection of the movie. Anyone who remembers the old TV show wants something like that, not Captain Jack Sparrow in a Flying Nun headdress.

For more on Johnny Depp, see Critics Agree: Lone Ranger Is Bad and New Tonto as Racist as Old Tonto.

Lone Ranger pitch meeting

Eric’s Movie Column: The Pitch Meeting for ‘The Lone Ranger’

By Eric D. SniderThey say movies are like sausages: if you like them, you shouldn’t watch how they’re made, because it’s an ugly process that involves a lot of pigs’ anuses. But around here we disregard conventional wisdom and go behind the scenes of your favorite Hollywood productions, and also of “The Lone Ranger” (read our review of the film here). The NSA was kind enough to lend us their recording of the boardroom pitch meeting that led to this big-budget extravaganza, a transcript of which is copied below.Some highlights:DISNEY EXEC. #2: What’s your concept for it? A faithful recreation of the classic character just as people remember him wouldn’t work, obviously.
DISNEY EXEC. #3: That never works.
DISNEY EXEC. #1: Not that we’ve ever tried it.
DISNEY EXEC. #3: Well, it doesn’t take a genius to see that when people go to a movie about a fictional character they’ve loved since childhood, the LAST thing they want is for the character to be portrayed the way they remember him.

DISNEY EXEC. #1: Johnny Depp as Tonto??
DISNEY EXEC. #2: That makes even less sense!
DISNEY EXEC. #3: We love it more!
DISNEY EXEC. #1: That’s $300 million domestic right there. People love Johnny Depp!
DISNEY EXEC. #2: Audiences are in no way tired of his quirky oddball performances!
DISNEY EXEC. #3: A disheartening sense of sameness definitely has not crept into those performances!

JERRY BRUCKHEIMER: Now, Johnny has a few stipulations…
DISNEY EXEC. #2: The movie has to be bloated, overlong, unnecessarily complicated, yet somehow also simple-minded?
JERRY BRUCKHEIMER: For starters. He also feels strongly that the Tonto character should be a dignified representative of Native Americans, and he wants to convey this by wearing a dead bird on his head.Comment:  Brilliant! No need to look any further...I think we've found the Satire of the Year!

For more on Johnny Depp, see Critics Agree: Lone Ranger Is Bad and New Tonto as Racist as Old Tonto.

Marketing of Lone Ranger

The Good, Bad and Ugly of Marketing ‘The Lone Ranger’

By Aura Bogado“The Lone Ranger” debuts in theaters in time for the July 4 holiday, and while Johnny Depp’s decision to play Tonto—a fictional Native sidekick to the white cowboy—has drawn attention and criticism, the film’s release means that all things Native are unusually relevant—and marketable. And that can be a good, bad, and very ugly thing, all at once.

Tonto action figures are already being sold as “Native American warrior spirit” caricatures. The Lego Corporation is pushing its “Comanche Camp” toys. And Subway is hawking plastic soft drink containers with Tonto snapshots that guarantee the image, which is offensive to so many Natives and non-Natives alike, will live on in consumers’ kitchens for years to come. While “The Lone Ranger” film will come and go in theaters, and perhaps to be revived on DVD and in film awards, corporate promo deals will sustain the Tonto image for years to come—and will make millions off of retailing Native stereotypes while doing so.

But it’s not just corporations that stand to make serious profit from the film. Just last week, Jezebel touted a $2,000 Lone Ranger belt created by an “actual Native American designer.” Racked, meanwhile, reported on the same designer, stating that a “Native American chief” made the accessories. A project that features Native artisans would be a great thing (notwithstanding the problematic nature of dissolving all Natives into “chiefs”). Except the artist in question, called Gabriel Good Buffalo, is not a “chief,” as Racked wrote. He’s not “Lakota Sioux,” as Jezebel wrote, either. In fact, Gabriel Good Buffalo is not even Native. Rather, he’s a striking example of how the burgeoning market for Native appropriation and branding operates.

It might be easy to confuse Good Buffalo for a Native. The last name he uses is not uncommon among certain Natives. And his own website features “Cheyenne War Shield Yell” and “Sioux Turtle Clan” designs. In an email, Good Buffalo claimed that Will Leather Goods, the company that originally marketed him as a “Native American chief” did so without his knowledge. He said the company had informed him it would change that on its website (as of publication, it has not, and a phone call to the company store was answered by a clerk who explained that Good Buffalo is a “prestigious Native American craftsman.”).‘Native American’ Lone Ranger Designer Isn't Actually Native American

Comment:  This article ends up focusing on "Good Buffalo" the Indian wannabe. But the main point is in the first two paragraphs. Even if the movie tanks, we'll be seeing LEGO sets and Halloween costumes for years to come.

And unlike the movie, whose fictional aspects may or may not be obvious, there's no context for the ancillary products. Children will assume they're authentic--especially since Depp and company have assured us of their authenticity.

Heck, even adults have swallowed the bilge that because Depp may have Cherokee blood, or was adopted by a Comanche family, Tonto must be okay. How are children supposed to know any better? If you think a child can tell a phony Indian from a real one, you're living in a fantasy world much like The Lone Ranger's.

For more on Johnny Depp, see Critics Agree: Lone Ranger Is Bad and New Tonto as Racist as Old Tonto.

Native media limited at Lone Ranger premiere

Disney courts Indian Country, ignores Native media

NAJA supports inclusion of diverse media in coverage of "The Lone Ranger"The Native American Journalists Association was informed that press junkets associated with the premiere of the movie "The Lone Ranger" have been well attended by journalists but not by Native journalists.

While Disney has attempted to reach out to Native American audiences with the film, they have curiously forgotten to invite media from Indian Country to cover it.

National Native News, a national Native American radio program based in Albuquerque, N.M., made several requests for access to a press event in Santa Fe, N.M., June 19, however, these were not granted. Disney did issue a response to NNN at the conclusion of the event.

A large portion of the film was shot on the Navajo Nation. While some Native media groups were contacted about attending the film's premiere in Oklahoma, the New Mexico premiere has Native media groups that should have also been included in press events. New Mexico is home to 22 tribes, nations and Pueblos, as well as many NAJA members and Native reporters.Native media deserves more than sidekick role

By Sarah GustavusIt has been widely reported that Johnny Depp, in his role as Tonto in the new film “The Lone Ranger,” wants to challenge stereotypes about Native Americans, but Native media was limited to the role of sidekick to other media outlets this week.

The staff of Native America Calling and National Native News, produced by Koahnic Broadcast Corporation (a New Mexico In Depth partner), have reported on the progression of the film in recent years. In the past month, our staff went through the proper channels to request interviews with the cast and crew for our coverage of the official release of “The Lone Ranger.” Our repeated requests were either passed on to other Disney contacts or received no response.

It was a complete surprise to learn on Monday that a major press junket was taking place only an hour from our studios, in Santa Fe. We were not invited, but immediately requested press credentials. Our staff received a response from Disney after the press conference saying we could not be accommodated for the event because it was over.

Our staff also requested access to the film’s premiere in Los Angeles. An exclusive event tied to the premiere will raise funds for the American Indian College Fund, but our requests for media access were not immediately granted.Comment:  Simon Moya-Smith, a columnist for Indian Country Today, was at the premiere. As far as I know, he was the only Native journalist there.

This is for a movie starring a Native character, remember. Do you think Disney would limit the black media at a movie about a black scientist, sports hero, or slave? I doubt it.

For more on Johnny Depp, see Depp Keeps His Ancestry Ambiguous and Skyhawk: Depp Is A Charlatan.

Disney Store sells Tonto costumes

Tonto Costume Collection for Boys$24.95-$44.95

He'll ride to heroic adventures with The Lone Ranger wearing our Tonto Costume Collection for Boys, pairing the spectacular Tonto Headdress with our 2-piece Tonto costume featuring sheer top and faux buckskin britches.

Tonto Costume for Boys--The Lone Ranger
$44.95

Cool kemosabe
He'll honor the brave heart of the west in this bold Tonto costume including sheer tribal top with deluxe detailing and trims, plus faux buckskin britches.Tonto Headdress for Boys--The Lone Ranger
$24.95

Feathered friend
Imagination soars while wearing our deluxe Tonto headdress with wig inspired by the Lone Ranger's trusted companion. Faux suede headband, beaded braids, real feathers, and a crow topper highlight this showstopper.

Comment:  Dress up as an authentic Comanche for Halloween! With a bird on your head! Because Johnny Depp respects Indians! #disneyfail

Did anyone think I was kidding when I posted the Tonto image below? Because I wasn't.

When you're Johnny Depp, I guess every day is Halloween. If you're not one fantasy figure, you're another.

With this move, Disney reveals its true colors. If anyone doubted it, The Lone Ranger is all about making money. Neither Depp nor Disney cares about Indians or they wouldn't allow this travesty.

In other words, all their pro-Indian gestures are phony and hypocritical. They're meant only to placate critics of their gross misrepresentation of Indians.

For more on The Lone Ranger, see Inside Scoop on Lone Ranger and Depp Admires Tonto's Giant Nuts.

P.S. This is the first time I've seen the bird explicitly identified as a crow rather than a raven. Now we know what it's supposed to be.

Plains riders in Paris Disneyland

Natives in Paris: Meet the Bareback Riders Keeping it Real for Disney

By Dominique GodrecheDisney Village, located one hour from Paris, is, by French standards, huge, with its 7 hotels and 27-hole golf course. It contains Disneyland Park, which like other Disney parks contains the familiar "Lands"--including Frontierland, a theme-park version of the Wild West complete with southwest architecture, horse carriages, saloons, and some Native-influenced crafts and decorative items. But the real place where visitors to get the feeling of Native ambiance is the Wild West Show, due to the presence of Native American riders from different tribes, performing among a multi-cultural team of actors, riders, and racers.

"We hire Natives for their riding skills, because we want the show about Buffalo Bill to look authentic, and the public to believe in it," says Philippe Renaud, the casting director. "So we need the roles to be credible: Natives know how to ride bareback, and very few riders do in Europe. Songs and dances have to look true. That is why we go to the United States and Canada, in search of that authenticity”.

Upon entering the wooden theater, built by the architect Frank Gehry, the visitor is offered a cowboy hat. Original posters from Buffalo Bill’s European tours, old flags, tomahawks, Winchester rifles adorn the walls of a saloon where a live band gives a flavor of the Wild West. Spectators are led in groups to the different parts of the arena: Gold Star, Red River, Blue Moon, Green Mountain Ranch. Buffalo Bill makes an impressive entrance, followed by cowboys; this sets the stage for the spectacular arrival of Sitting Bull and the Native riders. The Natives wear traditional outfits, perform dances and songs, and race bareback. The vast arena becomes a dining room, and serves meals in the Tex-Mex tradition. Since its creation in 1992, the Wild West Show has attracted 9 million spectators.

"We hire mostly Blackfeet, Crows from Montana, Lakotas from south Dakota, Crees from Canada, and Navajos from New Mexico," explains Renaud. "We only visit the reservations where we've stayed in touch with Disney’s ex-riders. From 20 candidates, we select three, usually from tribes where horses are part of their culture.”Comment:  At least one of the riders--the Navajo Hogue in a Plains headdress--is grossly stereotypical. I don't know about the other riders and their outfits.

Do they need to be wearing traditional outfits at all? Would it shock audiences to see modern Indians in work shirts, jeans, and cowboy hats--the clothing they undoubtedly wear on the job and in rodeos? I guess so.

The article doesn't say much about what the performers do other than ride horses. But Disney's focus on the horse cultures of the Plains is arguably stereotypical even if the shows are accurate. Wild West shows have presented a one-dimensional view of Indians since the 19th century, and this doesn't sound much different.

For more on Wild West shows, see Movie Ledger on History Detectives and Indians Displayed in "Human Zoos."

Below:  "Colten Buffalo, Shawn Hogue, and Timothy Reevis in costume for Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show at Disneyland Paris." (Dominique Godreche)

Mouseketeer had Snoqualmie roots

Ginny Tyler, Mouseketeer, Dies at 86

By William YardleyGinny Tyler, a Head Mouseketeer in the syndicated version of the “The Mickey Mouse Club” of the 1960s and a voice actor who shifted from Snow White to Cinderella to Bambi on recordings as a Disneyland Storyteller, died on July 13 at a nursing home in Issaquah, Wash. She was 86.

Her death was confirmed by her son, Ty Fenton.

Ms. Tyler, who traced her lineage to the Snoqualmie Tribe of the Puget Sound region, learned to tell stories and simulate animal sounds as a child from listening to her mother, who could play the organ while whistling bird calls. She became a Mouseketeer as an adult. After graduating from the University of Washington, she played Mother Goose on a children’s show on KOMO-TV in Seattle in the early 1950s.

Later in the decade she moved to Hollywood l and quickly found work reading Disney stories for LP recordings as a Disneyland Storyteller and then a Mousketeer.Ginny Tyler dies at 86; voice actress was Disney legend

The former Mouseketeer had a penchant for storytelling and the ability to mimic animal sounds. Her voice was featured in 'The Sword in the Stone' and 'Mary Poppins.'

By Valerie J. NelsonFrom an early age, Tyler "could change my voice at a click of a finger," she told the Issaquah Press in 2010.

In official Disney accounts, her penchant for storytelling and ability to mimic animal sounds was traced to her Native American roots. An ancestor, who was a chief of the Snoqualmie Tribe, traded his two young daughters to a white woman for a piece of property after his wife left him, according to her son. One of the girls was her great-grandmother.

Tyler's talent for animal sounds was probably handed down by her mother, Harriett, a performer who studied bird calls at a school in Los Angeles and incorporated them into her organ-playing and singing, Fenton said.

For the Record

Ginny Tyler: The obituary of voice actress Ginny Tyler in the July 23 LATExtra section said that an ancestor who was a chief of the Snoqualmie tribe traded his two young daughters to a white woman for a piece of property after his wife left him. The girls were the chief's granddaughters. Their mother was the chief's daughter; after she left the girls' father, he handed his daughters over to the white woman, along with a piece of property, to help provide for their care. One of the girls was Tyler's great-grandmother.Comment:  So Tyler traced her ancestry to the Snoqualmie tribe, but she probably wasn't a member of it. Disney traced her storytelling and mimickry talents to the tribe, but Tyler didn't necessarily claim this sources.

The articles also say Tyler's mother was the real source of these abilities. But it's not clear if the mother was in the same line of descent. Tyler could've been Snoqualmie on her father's side.

Also curious is how the Snoqualmie chief went from sounding cold and callous in the original to warm and supportive in the correction. It's a small but telling example of how easy it is to misrepresent another culture. How many millions of times have we labeled Indians "cruel" because they did something we didn't understand?

For more on Indians and Disney, see Artist Reimagines Disney's Pocahontas and Lone Ranger Movie Rides Again.

Artist reimagines Disney's Pocahontas

Artist Reimagines Disney’s Version of Pocahontas as a Warrior for the EarthDisney’s Pocahontas gets a warrior makeover by deviantart user joshwmc, who is reinventing all Disney’s animated damsels in distress as fierce, weapon-wielding women, reported The Huffington Post.

The artist also revised the Disney character Pocahontas’s modern-day back story: she “is an environmental activist” who enters into the Disney fighting tournament “to literally fight for nature,” joshwmc writes in his description.Comment:  The reimagined Pocahontas has feathers, warpaint, a buckskin top, fringe, and tomahawks. The drawing is well-executed but conventional if not stereotypical.

The same applies to her mission: fighting for nature. Wouldn't it be more Native to pray for nature. Fighting for nature with tomahawks, like the axes used to chop down trees, seems counterintuitive.

The article talks about Pocahontas being a role model, an idea this image encourages. But Pocahontas was a little girl, not a princess or a warrior. This drawing is going in the wrong direction, taking a historical figure further and further from reality.

For more on Pocahontas, see Umatilla Model Portrays Pocahontas and "PocaHotAss" Party Canceled.