michaeldouglas1 No need to belabor the excellent points brought up by posters who have already rightly panned this poor excuse of a movie (and disgrace to an American legend). Klinton Spilsbury? Not only an untalented actor who's voice was so bad they had to dub over, but his on-set and off-set antics fairly screamed "unprofessional". According to reliable sources, this was his only motion picture credit, though Wikipedia does say he had a few bit roles in soap operas before making "Lone Ranger". Actually the most interesting (an unintentionally humorous) thing in his Wikipedia article was this: "An article about him in The Los Angeles Times in 1989 revealed that he had spent some time in Europe and was working as a model. He had hopes to revive his career as an actor, but admitted in the article that he was not having much luck..." Hmmmm -- "revive his career"? WHAT career? To paraphrase, "One movie not maketh a career".Of course the thing most people remember about this wretched movie (if they remember it at all) is the injunction against 1950's Lone Ranger actor Clayton Moore from wearing his mask in public. The resulting negative publicity pretty much insured this movie would fail at the box office. In an odd twist, they had the right idea in appealing to Baby Boomers with a Lone Ranger remake, but you don't then jeopardize that same target audience by persecuting the man who WAS the Lone Ranger for a whole generation! A truly GOOD movie might have overcame such a handicap... but this movie simply wasn't good enough to save itself.As the for legal case -- it was a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge named Vernon Foster who was the culprit in "unmasking" Clayton Moore with an injunction. The judge's action was highly questionable from a legal standpoint, as Clayton Moore had freely used the mask and term "Lone Ranger" for 22 years without any objection from the copyright holder of "The Lone Ranger(the Wrather Corp. of Beverly Hills). From 1957 when Moore ended his association with the Ranger, all the way up to 1979 when the injunction was sought, Wrather Co. never attempted to challenge or block Clayton Moore in literally hundreds of public appearances -- because his use actually kept up at least SOME interest in their franchise, including television syndication, and brought them profits. Then suddenly in 1979 -- and only when a "major box-office motion picture" was in the works -- did Wrather find his persona of the Lone Ranger "objectionable". In 1985 a California Court of Appeals finally set aside Judge Foster's injunction as a violation of two basic legal doctrines. The first is of "Laches" which in equity means "a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right." The Appellate court found that 22 years was simply too long for the Wrather Corp. to allow such characterization by Moore without making a legal effort to assert their copyright against him. Moreover, during those years, Moore's defense proved that Wrather Corp had benefited financially from Moore's use of their "copyrighted" name and image (the mask), all while suffering no detriment. The other well-established legal doctrine the appellate court found protected Moore's use was the "Fair Use Doctrine". Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights-holders, in certain circumstances. So finally, after 6 years was "justice served" and Clayton Moore allowed to resume his full persona as The Lone Ranger, upholder of justice in the Old West. Too bad Judge Foster shamed himself by failing to serve justice and throw those Wrather Corp. lawyers out on their butts -- their request for injunction denied.Ironically, by 1985 "The Legend of the Lone Ranger" had long sunk beneath the waves without a trace... a forgotten failure (like Mr. Spilsbury's so-called "career"). Whether Clayton Moore could run around in a mask or not was pretty much "mooted" (as even the losing Wrather Corp lawyers had to admit after the verdict). But the final irony was that, while "Legend" lost for Universal Studios and it's production company ITC (Sir Lew Grade) millions of dollars, it was the Wrather Corp ONLY that actually made money on the film -- they were paid upfront for selling their "Ranger" copyright to ITC!

aljmac I saw this when I was five. I liked it at the time and was too young to have heard about the politics and controversy with Clayton Moore or notice the dubbing of the title character's voice. Even watching it again the other day for the first time in almost thirty years, those things were not issues to the movie itself.It was entertaining. There are things I'd change here or there, but overall it was good. The handling of Tonto still holds up today in our hyper-PC world.It's not without its warts, but they can easily be seen beyond and the movie enjoyed. Definitely check it out.

richardvwhite This movie was wonderful and one of the most memorable of my life. It was much more interesting and exciting than any of the old Clayton Moore stuff. The action sequences were well done, and it was emotionally effective. It gave me some good thrills, like when The Lone Ranger shoots the rope that is about to hang Tonto and then rides up and carries him off with a dazzling display of gunfire, and of course, all to the rousing William Tell overture. This is touching because you remember how Tonto found The Lone Ranger left for dead after the Butch Cavendish attack and nursed him back to health. I can't believe that it was not a hit. No, it wasn't perfect, but it certainly deserved a lot more respect than it got. And Jason Robards performance as Ulysses S. Grant was charming. I just hope I can find a copy somewhere as soon as possible.

va3grp I waited quite awhile till I was able to watch this Lone Ranger movie. I finally got to see it on the Lone Star Channel today and was very disappointed in the whole movie. Clayton Moore and John Hart acted better Lone Rangers and Jay Silverheels as Tonto, than the two stars in this movie. Very poor acting was done by everyone in this movie. Even the plot was bad and far fetching. I believe the horse, portraying Silver was the best actor throughout this movie.I am glad I didn't go out and buy a copy of this movie when it first came out, as I feel it's a waste of good money. I am truly sorry the characters that Clayton Moore, John Hart and Jay Silverheels played, and brought to life on the silver screen, have been tarnished so badly. Unless in the future, they find actors worthy of portraying the characters in the same manner which Clayton, John and Jay did so well in the past, I'll not spend the money to buy the movie. I'll not watch this movie again.Wayne Davies