This is topic The Revenant (2015) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=002181

Posted by Matt Russell (Member # 8989) on 01-10-2016, 11:00 PM:
 
Was saving to review this until the Golden Globes, but now that has happened...

This film did not deserve to win Best Picture. It plays out like a Terrance Malick film, but it really shouldn't. Yes, the cinematography is beautiful, but it's not something that will look as good once it comes out on home video. I read The Revenant novel, and there's a lot of changes between these two stories. For example, Hugh Glass doesn't have a mentioned son in the novel, yet he has one that plays a pretty pivotal role in the film. A lot of the big "gruesome" stuff were also non-existent in the book. For example, there's a scene in the movie where Hugh crawls inside a dead horse for warmth, and you see him taking all the horse guts out of it, but that never happened in the novel. I know the film is loosely based, but why add unnecessary stuff like this if it isn't faithful to the real story? The performances are good, Leo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy do fantastic jobs each, and I can see why DiCaprio may be getting a lot of awards for this role, it is tough. Now, when I said it's like a Terrance Malick movie, it's because there's a lot of unexplained flashbacks and visions that are made for the viewer to interpret. This isn't necessary bad in a movie, but it feels out of place here and when you got a lead character who is mostly silent, it doesn't fit in well. Overall, although some will probably love it, I found The Revenant to be a pretty massive disappointment. The final moments felt out of place, the visions are weird, and the story changes felt unneeded. It's got some bright spot, but the flaws in the movie stood out more so than the positives, at least in my opinion.

Film: 1 and a half out of 4 stars
Presentation: 4 out of 4 stars (the auditorium had a very wide screen, so the picture quality was really good)
 
Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-10-2016, 11:25 PM:
 
The book isn't altogether faithful to the real story as it actually happened either. The author has a couple of pages of historical notes at the end, including the following:

quote:
Readers may wonder about the historical accuracy of the events in this novel. The fur trade era contains a murky mixture of history and legend, and some legend no doubt has invaded the history of Hugh Glass. The Revenant is a work of fiction. That said, I endeavored to stay true to history in the main events of the story.

What is certainly true is that Hugh Glass was attacked by a grizzly bear while scouting for the Rocky Mountain Fur Company in the fall of 1823; that he was horribly mauled; that he was abandoned by his compatriots, including two men left to tend for him; and that he survived to launch an epic quest for revenge. The most comprehensive historical work on Glass was done by John Myers Myers in his entertaining biography The Saga of Hugh Glass. Myers makes a strong case for even some of the most remarkable aspects of Glass’s life, including his imprisonment by the pirate Jean Lafitte and, later, by the Pawnee Indians.

There is some division among historians as to whether Jim Bridger was one of the two men left to care for Glass, though most historians believe that he was. (The historian Cecil Alter, in a 1925 biography of Bridger, makes a passionate contrary case.) There is considerable evidence that Glass confronted and then forgave Bridger at the fort on the Big Horn.

I took literary and historical liberties in a couple of places that I wish to note. There is persuasive evidence that Glass did finally catch up with Fitzgerald at Fort Atkinson, finding his betrayer in the uniform of the U.S. Army. However, accounts of the encounter are cursory. There is no evidence of a formal proceeding such as I portrayed. The character of Major Constable is wholly fictional, as is the incident in which Glass shoots Fitzgerald in the shoulder. There is also evidence that Hugh Glass had separated from the party of Antoine Langevin prior to the Arikara attack on the voyageurs. (Toussaint Charbonneau does appear to have been with Langevin, and to have survived the attack, although the circumstances are not clear.) The characters of Professeur, Dominique Cattoire, and La Vierge Cattoire are wholly fictional.

Fort Talbot and its inhabitants are invented. Otherwise, the geographic reference points are as accurate as I could make them. A spring 1824 attack against Glass and his companions by the Arikara Indians did take place, reportedly at the confluence of the North Platte River and the (later named) Laramie River. Eleven years later, Fort William—the predecessor of Fort Laramie—would be established at that site.

So it is fair to say that a novel that admittedly embellished the facts was further embellished to make the movie.

While I haven't yet seen the movie, I noticed that the trailer shows a number of things that aren't in the book.

On another note, nobody who isn't from around here will care much, but the kid in the movie is the great-grandson of both Gordon Tootoosis annd Fred Sasakamoose, both of whom are revered and respected persons in this area. Gordon Tootoosis is from the Poundmaker Cree Nation near Saskatoon, is a descendant of Yellow Mud Blanket (Chief Poundmaker's older brother), and was a famous movie actor, social activist and band chief. Fred Sasakamoose is from the Ahtahkakoop Indian Reserve in northern Saskatchewan and was the first Canadian aboriginal player in the National Hockey League and later became band chief after retiring from hockey. Isaiah Tootoosis is now seven years old, is from the Poundmaker Cree Nation, and may now have a real future before him in movies. Everyone around here is cheering for him.
 
Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-10-2016, 11:56 PM:
 
sure it had it flaws, but I found it riveting - and technically, the cinematography and sound mix are top notch - in my top three Dolby Atmos mixes of 2015.

4/5 rating.
 
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 01-11-2016, 12:26 AM:
 
I've not seen it yet, but I learned recently a depressing factoid - despite having been shot in part on the Arri Alexa 65, with something like a ~6K sensor, the film was ultimately finished in 2K not 4K. I was told this is because the shoot itself ran over time and over budget, eating into the post production budget, and so it was finished in 2K to save money in post. :/
 
Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-12-2016, 08:55 AM:
 
^ and yet the DCP's are going out encoded at 4K - that makes no sense.
 
Posted by Chris Haller (Member # 9206) on 01-12-2016, 09:48 AM:
 
The Revenant is the most recent cover story in American Cinematographer. According to the magazine multi page article, approximately 13% of the film was shot with the Alexa 65, and the final grade was finished at 4K for DCP, not 2K.
 
Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-13-2016, 06:48 AM:
 
REgal Atlantic Station RPX.
Picture was fairly sharp and good despite the low lighting. The acting was good all around. But nothing great. Your basic survival movie we have seen many times before. I liked the movie, but I wouldn't say it was one of the best.
 
Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-14-2016, 07:57 AM:
 
I gotta say the bear scene in the early part of the movie was one of the highlights of my moviegoing experience this year. Done so well. Too bad the last half hour drags out a bit. Leo deserved his nomination. I am not sure if I care for it as a best picture even if I liked it.
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2