Minimal Speaking. Visuals tell the story. Hardy is just as good as DiCaprio in this.
Add a Review
-
ated-330347 September 2021
-
mrblacktip9 January 2016The Revenant falls into the same category as Aronofsky's "Requiem for a Dream" and Spielberg's "Schindler's List" for me, in the essence of being a terrific movie but not something I think I can sit through a second time. In all these movies there are brutal sequences that cause emotional stress and disgust just watching because it is so REAL and GRIPPING. To think that events in these movies actually happened or that they could very well happen is too much for me to think about. Not to say that I did not enjoy this film thoroughly.
The Revenant is a technical masterpiece that left me wondering "How the hell did they do that?" after many scenes and sequences. With beautiful cinematography and adroit camera movement this film is a visual magnum opus. It is apparent that the great minds that put forth this film are none other than the same ones that brought us Birdman: Lubezki and Inarritu. There are many long shots without cuts that are sprinkled throughout the film that add a sense of sophistication to it with the added bonus of predominantly location based shooting and natural lighting for the film , that can even make a novice film watcher raise an eyebrow at its complexity.
The camera work is not the only noteworthy aspect of the film; The actors did a superb job executing their rolls. Many are raving about DiCaprio's performance but I was more of a fan of Hardy's brutal and gritty character Fitzgerald. Granted, half the words that came out of his mouth were unintelligible but he left no doubt in my mind that he was fully devoted to his role and bringing Fitzgerald alive instead of just Hardy playing a character named Fitzgerald. He was simply amazing.
With all this said, there are still flaws in the film. At some points it was dragging on and moving too slow. It gave the impression that the film itself was cocky and wanted to show off all of its beautiful scenery and camera work too much. Then there was the "he shouldn't be alive" situations. Hugh Glass was a real guy that really did survive a bear mauling but in the film they make this guy practically immortal. There were too many instances where I was thinking "he should be dead three times over right now, for me to enjoy the film as much I should have.
All in all a great film that I only recommend to seasoned and mature film viewers. -
calspers29 October 2021The Revenant (2015), Alejandro G. Iñárritu's sixth film, is one of the most visually stunning statements ever put to film in cinema history.
With a simple plot of chaos ensuing, and a father's quest for revenge, there is not much to the story, albeit I thought it had some emotionally engaging moments. Rather, it is The Revenant's technical merits that makes it truly unique.
Naturally, DiCaprio's performance is in a class of its own, and what the entire crew endured is impressive, shooting the film only in natural lighting and thus extending production considerably. Rather, it is Iñárritu's expert vision for cinematography and ability to translate this vision to his director of photography which is the driving force in making The Revenant a special piece of cinema. The way in which Iñárritu takes the viewer on an intricate journey through America's nature is breathtakingly beautiful and brutal - this is truly a place a survival, chaos and solitude. The film's depiction of this is not for the faint-hearted with its gruesome violence.
Highly recommended for its cinematic value. -
gogoschka-123 December 2015A lot has been said and written about this film, mostly about its troubled production - forget all that: it has no meaning whatsoever for the experience this film provides. A word of advice though: if you go in expecting a testosterone-fueled revenge thriller in the vein of 'Apocalypto', you'll likely end up disappointed. It's simply not that kind of film - but that doesn't mean you won't enjoy it if you watch it with the right expectations.
'The Revenant' opens with images from a dream; we see snippets of memories showing a peaceful life - and soon the loss of that peace, and the loss of life. The images change and we hear the soothing sound of gurgling water as we follow the camera via a long tracking shot over a flooded forest; it's an image that seems to imply peace, evoking nature's beauty with an almost meditative quality - before the barrel of a rifle appears in the frame.
Those first three minutes I just described (which are the only spoilers you will get in this review) set the tone for the film perfectly. It's a film that tells a story of harrowing circumstances through images that are breathtakingly beautiful; a film about survival and death and shocking acts of sudden violence - and yet a film that, despite all its visceral intensity, also has a quiet, immersive quality to it that feels almost hypnotic.
Many critics and reviewers point out the stark contrast between the film's poetic beauty and the ugliness of its violence - implying the director wants to use this contrast to make a certain point regarding mankind's interference with nature. While that would seem pretty obvious (and it probably is at least partly true), I left the film feeling Iñarritu had shown me a vaster, far too complete image of the clash between man and nature to justify such a simplistic interpretation of the events portrayed on screen. Whether intentionally or not, Iñarritu shows the star of his film with a complexity and honesty that we normally don't get to see in these kinds of stories. And I'm not talking about Leonardo DiCaprio here (who gives a no-holds-barred, crazy good performance and I'd love to see him win an Oscar for this film) - the star of this film is not a person: it IS nature, plain and simple.
The revenge plot - which feels almost like an afterthought or a ploy to give the film a certain structure and a proper ending - is not really the film's main theme or strongest aspect, and it certainly isn't the reason that made this film so compelling to watch for me. Such stories have been told often enough - and often better - than in 'The Revenant'. No, what really makes this film stand out for me is that I have NEVER seen a Hollywood film (any film, really - apart from documentaries) that shows nature in such an unflinchingly honest and mesmerizing way as is the case here. And the way I perceive it, Iñarritu sees his human protagonists as being very much a part of nature as a whole - regardless of their destructive behaviour.
It's that refreshingly holistic approach (which some viewers might perceive as nihilism on the director's part) that I find to be the film's biggest accomplishment: it depicts the people in this story as just another species trying to survive in that perilous frontier-world. The emphasis is not really on the moral aspects of the brutal injustice that the main character suffers or how the Native Americans are cruelly exploited; we witness all that - but Iñarritu keeps a certain emotional distance, as if he were shooting a documentary about predatory wildlife. And just like the bear's attack, most of the violence in this film comes as a reaction of defense. Be it self-defense, defending one's offspring or defending territory and valuable resources. Even the character that comes closest to an actual villain is driven by fear - not hate, and his most obvious character defects were caused by a very traumatizing experience. As in nature, there is a simple (if often brutal) logic to why most characters, men or beasts, act the way they do in 'The Revenant' (OK, maybe not the French - but I didn't say the film was perfect). And the bear attack is the most realistic depiction of an animal attack I have ever seen on film.
All in all, this film feels less like a story of revenge and more like an ode to the visceral beauty of nature and the relentless, savage force that is life; it provides an immensely absorbing - and touching - experience to those who have an affinity for the wilderness, but it's also a visual masterpiece and a great piece of old-school filmmaking for lovers of Cinema. It's not perfect (especially during the last third of the film where I felt the pacing was a bit off), but it's a film the likes of which we will only rarely get to see - if at all - in the future. 'The Revenant' is visual poetry of the most primal kind, and it should be seen on the biggest screen possible. 9 stars out of 10 from me.
Favorite films: IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/
Lesser-Known Masterpieces: imdb.com/list/ls070242495/
Favorite Low-Budget and B-Movies: imdb.com/list/ls054808375/ -
lnvicta29 February 2016Since the first trailers of this movie came out I knew it would be an experience. Following the incredible Birdman, director Alejandro G. Iñárritu had the public anxiously awaiting his interpretation of this bleak survival story, and much like Birdman, Iñárritu is also the star of this film. The Revenant has some of the most beautiful cinematography I've ever seen. It's cold, visceral, and almost entirely authentic from the use of natural lighting to the barebones yet powerful storytelling. You can tell Iñárritu poured his heart into this project and it pays off tremendously. This is not to discount the incredible performances of DiCaprio and Hardy (DiCaprio finally getting his well-overdue Oscar), but it's hard to imagine the movie being so impactful had another director been at the helm.
The story is as simple as it gets. In the 1800s, a group of settlers escape an ambush by an indigenous tribe, and during their travels one man gets separated from the group and gets brutally attacked by a wild bear and subsequently left for dead by his team. It's a revenge story more than anything. What it also highlights is human perseverance and the will to live. The things that happen to this man are truly horrific and difficult to watch. I'm not sure what parts of the story were embellished or Hollywoodized, but this film sucks you into this world and puts you right alongside this fatally wounded man desperate to survive. Leonardo DiCaprio gives a heart-wrenching performance as Hugh Glass, expressing a wide range of emotions despite the limited dialogue. Tom Hardy is also phenomenal as one of the most vile, wretched human beings on the planet. This guy is despicable to the core, and you forget you're watching Tom Hardy at times because he's completely absorbed in the role. The supporting cast is great as well despite their small time on screen. As far as performances and cinematography goes, The Revenant is flawless.
What prevents this from getting a perfect 10 is one particular storyline that I didn't think was needed, and it involves the wife of Hugh Glass. She's never developed as a character but she appears intermittently in visions and dreams and it almost sucks you out of the movie for a second because of how intense the main narrative is. But this is a very small gripe. From beginning to end this movie had me on the edge of my seat, my jaw on the floor and my eyes glued to the screen. The Revenant is definitely not for everyone, but it's impossible not to appreciate it for the breathtaking cinematic achievement that it is. -
bkoganbing8 August 2016A favorite era of mine for film stories has always been the mountain man era in the American west. No white people in great numbers, just single shot weapons, they were the ones outnumbered so survival against the Indians was far more an even struggle than in the post Civil War west. The Revenant by dint of its many nominations has laid claim to being the greatest film about that era ever made. It goes up against such items as Across The Wide Missouri, The Big Sky, and Mountain Men, Jeremiah Johnson all pretty good films.
It would have been hard to deny Leonardo DiCaprio a Best Actor Oscar this time around. He's on screen for most of the time and with minimal dialog DiCaprio has to use facial expressions and body language to convey his emotions. He does it well and should share his Oscar with the cameraman who did all those closeups of him.
The plot is best compared to another mountain man picture A Man Called Horse that starred Richard Harris. DiCaprio who was guide to the expedition of fur trappers is badly mauled by a grizzly bear and is after being toted for quite a distance is abandoned by Tom Hardy who claims he died. DiCaprio just wants to settle the score. Unlike Richard Harris he does not find a friendly tribe of Indians to take him in. His survival is his personal story.
The Revenant also won the Cinematography Oscar for the shooting of the rugged winter country these men are in. It's so good the landscape, cold and forbidding, becomes almost a character in the film.
Like The Old Man And The Sea was for Spencer Tracy The Revenant is a personal film for Leonardo DiCaprio. Unlike Tracy who had that magnificent speaking voice for the narration, no narration here. Just anguished expressions convey what DiCaprio is feeling.
Leo got his Oscar and it was a deserved one for The Revenant. It's a great film, but very brutal at times. -
Xstal30 March 2023In a cold and bitter land the pelts are gathered, in these times and in this place it's quite a hazard, as the indigenous attack, many find arrows front and back, as they seek to find a daughter who's been taken. An escape leads to a boat and then a hike, where Hugh Glass becomes the victim of a strike, from a rather angry bear, who pokes, prods, rips, shears and tears, leaves him motionless and looking quite deathlike.
And so begins a tale of revenge and retribution, of persecution and those with an incredible constitution, in conditions as bleak as any opposing restitution. Great performances all round, especially the two adversaries, from a great director who can spin a yarn, through cinematography that really captures your imagination, and leaves you grateful for the home comforts you have today. -
BoxOfficeKid25 January 2016The natural landscape and some of the scenes are overwhelming and spectacular! The camera-work is so immersive, you believe are a part of Hugh Glass' journey through the wilderness and back to civilization. Also with great performances not only by DiCaprio, but also Hardy, as the unsympathetic fellow fur trapper leaving Glass behind.
Story-wise, it is a bit thin for a 156 min picture. Glass' quest for vengeance is sometimes lost as he utters few words about his drive and is being more or less, chased himself. The story arc of the Indians quest for their daughter felt a bit out of place and strange. We also get to see the fur trappers p.o.v. that left Glass behind and the Captain way ahead of them. Which in my opinion takes a little bit of the magic of Glass' total perilous journey.
All my stars goes to the beauty, production value and performances alone! Regardless, this is one of those overlong movies one like, but would not sit out for another viewing! -
'The Revenant' to me is one of 2015's best films and deserved its hype, its critical acclaim justified. It is easy to understand why the audience reaction is more divided, but to me the low ratings are too harsh. The visuals, direction and acting are so brilliant that even if the film didn't impress me it still would have gotten no lower than a 4 or 5.
Its best assets are the visuals and direction. Simply put, 'The Revenant' is one of the best-looking films of the year and a thing of sheer beauty. The settings are rich in atmosphere and the lighting remarkably natural, but it's the cinematography that shines brightest, it's both intimate and immersive. Iñárritu's direction is even better than in his outstanding direction in 'Birdman', some of the best direction of the year.
Acting is marvellous, everybody showing great commitment. Leonardo Di Caprio got his only Oscar for his performance here and it was more than well deserved in one of his best films and performances, a performance of emotional intensity and honesty that is most agonisingly poignant. Tom Hardy excels in bringing brooding menace to his role, and Will Poulter is impressive too.
'The Revenant' has much more to it than those things. The action is brutally tense and the story, while deliberately paced and very simple, immerses the viewer in how gripping it is, being intense and emotional. The characters are strongly realised.
Film fares least in the script which is not bad at all but occasionally a little garbled. This is such a minor criticism however and not enough to bring down my rating.
In conclusion, brilliant film. 10/10 Bethany Cox -
summerloud7 January 2016I recently came across the story of Glass briefly when reading TC Boyles "The Harder They Come", and since this book increased my already big fondness for pioneer or realistic wild west settings, I was looking forward eagerly for a new big budget movie that promised to capture the pioneer era atmosphere in a grim survival story.
The movie starts out awesome enough, kicking off with a powerful Indians vs Pioneers battle scene that features incredibly long, action-packed shots. Unlike in the original story the movie is based on, Glass brings his half-Indian son along, creating some father/son moments and some tension with the other guys on his trek who are not that fond of savages. Shortly after, we are treated to the high point of the movie - the already famous bear scene, which is masterfully done, and painful to watch for its cruel realism.
Unfortunately, from there, it is all downhill.
The whole point of the original story, Fitzgerald and Bridger leaving Glass behind, gets watered down by the state Glass is pictured to be in - the way it is shown in the movie, it would have obviously been the only logical thing to do to leave him behind, with the Indians on the trek's tail and his chances of survival being nil.
Rather than creating a believable dilemma, the movie goes all over- the-top in Hollywood clichés. Instead of just leaving a maimed Glass behind for dead, Fitzgerald kills Glass'es son, turning a survival story into a revenge thriller. We are shown all kinds of bad aspects of Fitzgerald's character to turn him into "the bad guy" so we can root for Glass killing him at the end.
At the same time, the whole Indian side-story that was courageous enough to show Indians as ruthless attackers and not stick to the "noble savage" cliché gets watered down with an unbelievable silly twist when it is revealed that the Indians are just searching for the chieftain's kidnapped daughter, which we later find out was kidnapped by those pesky French, who do all kinds of badguy Indian killing stuff (as opposed to our noble pelt hunters, who are righteous decent human beings with the exception of the traitor Fitzgerald).
The actual survival story then gets completely out of hand, being so over-the-top as to remind me of action movies like Die Hard 2, that do not claim to be realistic and do not take themselves as serious as this movie. Glass, still in a state where he can only crawl, escapes the Indians by jumping into an ice-cold river, gets thrown down waterfalls, gets on a horse, falls down a cliff of around 100ft, etc etc etc. At this point, the survival story failed to grip me, since it was obviously based on comic book physics and -realism.
It gets even more ridiculous, when Glass manages to find the time on his survival ego trip to befriend a lone Indian (who is later killed by the evil, evil French, but not before healing Glass with some Indian sweat lodge magic), and even to rescue the Indian chieftain's daughter who was held prisoner as a rape object by the French, who again thankfully stepped in to fill in for the bad guys.
Despite all of this, the movie manages to stay pretty enjoyable (and never boring) until the ending, which was so horribly predictable that it made me cringe.
First Glass meets up with the rest of the trek, looking extremely healthy for what he's supposedly been through - DiCaprio could have at least lost some weight for this movie, or otherwise they could have used CGI to make him look thinner.
Fitzgerald escapes from the camp, stealing the money from the rest of the crew in the process (that baddie bad guy!). For some reason, even though they still have plenty of other men left, only Glass and the Captain set out as a group of two to hunt Fitzgerald down.
When the Captain then tells Glass some sentimental crap about his wife when they sit down at a fire at night, he might have just as well put on a red Star-Trek shirt, because it couldn't have been made any more obvious that he would be shot in the lead-up to the inevitable showdown between Glass and Fitzgerald.
Predictably enough, thats exactly what happens. To make matters worse, we are not only treated to the good old "both antagonists lose their weapons so it degenerates into a fist fight" cliché, but then, as the predictable fight, that tries to make up in cruelty what it lacks in innovation, inevitably ends with our hero Glass beating Fitzgerald and threatening to cut his throat, Fitzgerald tells him in a typical bad-guy way that killing him won't bring back his son, AND SO GLASS REFUSES TO KILL HIM. Are you kidding me? You just ruined the whole point of turning a survival story into a revenge trip, and lost the last bit of credibility the story had until now.
But of course we cannot let the bad guy get away, and so the actual killing is done by the Indians, who arrive just in time to finish Fitzgerald off and stare silently at Glass in a menacing silent Indian cliché thing. Since Glass saved his daughter's life, the Indian chieftain refrains from killing Glass, and instead rides off silently without acknowledging or helping the wounded Glass lying on the ground who saved his daughter's life. Makes sense.
The movie fades out with a shot of Glass staring into nothing. At least he didn't go after the chieftain's daughter to make some more Indian half-breed babies and live happily forever after.
6/10 -
bob-the-movie-man15 January 2016I went to see "The Revenant" on the day that it was nominated for 12 Oscars, which certainly sets the expectation that it is going to be good – and it is. But I saw it described by DiCaprio as an "epic art-house western" and that's a good description. In the same way that Iñárritu's "Birdman" (this time last year) was unarguably a brilliant but not very mainstream film, so I think the Oscar buzz will attract a big audience to this movie who may find it a struggle to really enjoy. Because it is bleak unremittingly bleak, in terms of the landscape, the weather and the motives of the characters. It is also extremely violent but, unlike "The Hateful Eight" (another film I saw this week that was unremittingly bleak) the violence is much more gritty, realistic and visceral making the drama a lot more compelling.
DiCaprio plays "Hugh Glass", an historical figure who was a legendary fur-trapper in the early 1800's and the central figure in this bear-related yarn. Although the story has been re-embroidered over the years, the 'facts' align with the film's basic story (there's a good "Daily Telegraph" article outlining this - see the link on bob-the-movie-man.com).
Attacked and pursuing by local natives, Glass's party is striking across woodland when he is viciously attacked by a 500lb Grizzly bear. Although appearing mortally wounded, he is a highly respected individual and so is stretchered up by his boss Captain Henry (Domhnall Gleeson). Unable to proceed further, Henry pays for the mercenary John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy) to stay with him, together with his half-Pawnee son Hawk and friend Bridger (Will Poulter), to die in peace. Predictably, Fitzgerald is not to be trusted, and Glass is abandoned in a shallow grave. If this is not enough, for other reasons we won't go into, Glass has even less inclination to keep his fellow trapper on his Christmas card list. Thus is set up a classic revenge movie, with Glass determined to stay alive to enact that revenge despite the enormous odds stacked against him.
This is surely DiCaprio's year for his elusive Oscar as he turns in a cripplingly painful performance. It is clear that the suffering on screen is not all acting – it cannot be, given the inhospitable conditions in which the crew were filming (in Canada and Argentina). As examples he had to eat raw bison liver as well as suffering a much discussed Han "I thought they smelled bad on the outside" Solo moment. Despite having very few lines to deliver, DiCaprio is on screen for 90% of the time, and it is a bravura performance.
Tom Hardy – also Oscar nominated – is also impressive as the villain of the piece, although for most of the time his lines might have well been delivered through his Bain mask for the sense they made. He is an inveterate mumbler.
Domhnall Gleeson's performance is also compelling, adding a degree of goodness and compassion to the film that was so missing from "The Hateful 8". (Gleeson is surely vying this year with Ben Whishaw for the busiest mainstream film appearances after this, "Ex Machina", "Brooklyn" and "Star Wars"). Finally Will Poulter gets a chance to shine in an A-grade mainstream dramatic movie and he well and truly makes that grade.
Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu has to be commended for eschewing the use of green screens, insisting on live performances and in natural light to boot. Stylistically (and indeed story-wise) the film has many parallels with "Gladiator", with its effective and artistically constructed dream sequences. But the film is not without special effects, and these are phenomenal, most incredibly delivered during the relentless and gruelling bear attack scene: a seamless blend of live animal work and effects that make it horrifically believable.
There is also some fantastic camera work (by Emmanuel Lubezki) of the "how the hell did they do that variety". Recalling his work in "Birdman" it's challenging to do single tracking shots of people walking through buildings. To do these same tracking shots during a pitched battle scene is just phenomenal. During one scene in this harrowing sequence at the film's start, the camera is on the ground filming a native galloping towards a victim, then the camera is seamlessly filming the rider as he gallops away. Astonishing.
The only area I really didn't care for was the music, by Carsten Nicolai and Ryuichi Sakamoto. A combination of droning strings and (later) some whiny "Ligeti-style" elements, it was in turns intrusive, gloomy and annoying. Music should largely stay in the background to set the mood. This didn't.
Overall, this is a masterful film, but it is a slog and not a feel-good film to sit through. It also has significant violence which might not suit all viewers, with the final confrontation in particular being one of the most visceral fight scenes I've seen in years.
By the way (I had to look it up) the definition of "revenant" is:
noun
1. a person who returns
2. a person who returns as a spirit after death; ghost.
Now you know too – this public service announcement brought to you by One Mann's Movies! (Please visit the graphical version of this review at http://bob-the-movie-man.com. Thanks.) -
As mentioned 10/10 for the scenic cinematography and direction. But storyline is totally Unrealistic. I mean u will see Leonardo DiCaprio surviving a giant bear attack, surviving a 150ft fall , surviving a swim in a freezing cold river, surviving a group of indians firing in a close range, surviving don't know how many knife stabs.. totally Tollywood/ bollywood style where Lead hero won't die no Matter how much ever ways of killing u try, but villians die just with a one shot !! Not happy with the over unrealistic storyline.
-
mptaylor-5056416 January 2016You are almost immediately plunged into the action, in a similar way to the opening of 'Saving Private Ryan', with a Native American attack on a group of fur trappers. DiCaprio even does that momentarily deaf thing that Tom Hanks does. Lots of bows and arrows and gore and excellent photography that is really immersive. Great opening scene.
There there's the scene where DiCaprio is mauled by a grizzly bear. Again, really believable, exciting and up front and personal - you can almost smell the bear's stinking breath. Brilliant.
And then there's ... well ... not much really. Photography and scenery are by and large excellent but you do get the feeling that better use could have been made of them. Iñárritu often seems to chop scenes around for no particular reason, although you do get the occasional sense of the vast wilderness that comes over well on the big screen.
Dialogue is scarce. Most of it goes to Tom Hardy who tries to put on a Texan accent but succeeds in sounding as if he has a sock in his mouth (does he specialise in being inaudible? remember him as the mumbling Bane in 'The Dark Knight Rises'?).
Then there's the storyline. You know the ending, right? (Just look up the definition of 'revenant'.) Leo is up against it and he suffers a great deal. But you know he is going to survive. So when, to top everything, he falls off a cliff on his horse you realise he's actually become Mr Indestructible. And two and a half hours of crawling, grimacing and wincing does not a very entertaining film make.
There are also several non-credible plot twists. Like when Tom Hardy (a.k.a. The Mumbler) somehow cracks an impressive-looking safe and makes off with the garrison money and just two guys go after him, including the garrison commander. This nicely sets up the final confrontation between Mr Indestructible and The Mumbler .... but really?
We also develop little or no emotional connection with the main character. The silent dream scenes are a clichéd way of trying to do this and they don't work in my opinion - they're just puzzling and boring. Nor do we see much of the relationship between Leo and his son to set up the emotional links between them - just Leo being harsh and dishing out tough love a couple of times.
The pacing is also poor. Once you've passed the opening scene and the grizzly scene, feel free to go and refresh your popcorn - you won't miss much.
Overall, the film is self-consciously bleak and overdetermined and is unevenly paced. A better director might possibly have made this a good film but Iñárritu is clearly not David Lean.
If DiCaprio gets an Oscar for this it will be because the Academy think they owe him one and possibly because of the hype. This is a film that will be forgotten. If you want to see a good silent movie with snow, ice, struggle for survival and even the odd grizzly bear thrown in, watch Chaplin's 'The Gold Rush' - it's far more entertaining. -
0U23 February 2020Finally saw this movie (yes 4 years late) and I understand why Leonardo won the Oscar, along with the many academy awards the movie and director won. It is a cinematic masterpiece. The cinematography is amazing, the whole cast (Tom Hardy is great here) is great. The costumes and weapons used (early 1800s) look so damn good. The story is very simple and not complicated. It is about revenge and surviving in the cold and icy wilderness of 1823. The action scenes are brutal and gritty, like they should be for that time period. Officially in my top 10 movies of all time. If you've never seen this film, do yourself a favor and rent it or buy it. It definitely deserves to be in your collection. Some people might not like all the spiritual stuff or reading subtitles (lots of Native American language here) but it is needed since there a lot of interaction with Native American tribes here. FINAL REVIEW 10/10
-
LiamCullen616 January 2016Go and see this movie. In the cinema. As soon as possible.
Simply put, it is an excellent story of family, revenge, survival, and nature.
The Revenant is one of the most beautifully-shot films I have ever seen. I lost count of how many scenes I sat there in utter amazement, which is undoubtedly due to the brilliant directing and spectacular cinematography: there's no shaky-cam, no quick-cut editing, and a lot of incredibly complex shots which appear to have been completed in a single take. If all films were shot similarly to how the Revenant is, then the movie industry would drastically improve.
The entire cast did a phenomenal job and they all deserve recognition for their performances; however, if Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't win an Oscar for his breathtaking portrayal of Glass then that will be the single biggest injustice of the year.
Do not miss the opportunity to see this masterpiece on the big screen!
UPDATE: I've read an unnerving amount of other user's reviews complaining about the plot. I can understand that the plot may seem a little basic or perhaps lacking at times; however, the plot is not what makes this film so excellent, and I feel as though those who failed to recognise this have seriously missed out. You don't just watch the Revenant: you experience it. Every single element from the music to the cinematography is cleverly concocted to draw you into the film and put you alongside the cast in the brutal wintry conditions. If you've not been drawn in due to being too concerned with the premise of the story, then I fear you've missed a truly enthralling and one-of-a-kind cinematic experience.
UPDATE TWO: Leo won the Oscar! -
"The Revenant" is probably the most beautiful movie I have seen for a long time. This is not only due to the incredible locations, but also to the excellent (and by excellent I mean excellent) camera-work. Frequently I was just blown away by the sheer beauty of the rough terrain of Canada and how it was captured by the crew. However, there are a few drawbacks. Mainly the story (it is a very simple revenge story line) and the dialog (it is basically not existent :D).
When I first left the movie I was still blown away by all the great things I mentioned above (I was thinking about a 10/10 rating), but the longer I was outside the movie the more I recognized that "The Revenant" is a film that is incredible entertaining whilst sitting in the cinema, but also a movie I quickly forgot about when being at home again.
Still, the movie is definitely a must-see. Your money is well invested! -
calebblaney18 November 2021This movie is cinematography beautiful, every shot you get a new feeling, after the beginning sequence that has around 20 minutes with minimal cuts, it breaks to a establishing still shot of scenery, that allows you to reflect on every moment that had just happened, Iñárritu does this constantly within this film. There's a reason this film won many cinematography rewards, and I will stand by every one of them, as I gave the cinematograph in this movie a 10/10 on my scale being the best I had seen in a long time. I have more comments on the acting than anything, first of all, I believe Tom Hardy was the best actor in the entire movie, he built his character super strong, and allowed you to feel empathetic and more connected to him than you did Hugh Glass (Leonardo DiCaprio). In their last fight scene I didn't even know who I wanted to win because I felt the hatred that Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy) had towards the Indigenous peoples was justified, and he did everything he could to survive by all means necessary, which at a point meant making a drastic decision that was terrible, don't get me wrong, to kill Hugh's boy. Tom Hardy should've won an Oscar for his performance here, I would've rather seen him win one over Leo, Leo didn't deserve it for this movie, he was good, he wasn't great, sure, acting in a movie of this caliber would be difficult, but it was a lot of him just grunting and moaning, and when you finally did see him speak, he was good, you understood his full intention to kill Fitzgerald, and you did want to see him fulfill his "Destiny" but you also felt like, how is this guy not dead yet, where did his broken foot go? How did he escape the French? Also the whole plotline of Hugh's wife was understandable but overused. Leo gets a 8/10 for this movie where I gave Hardy a 9.5/10
Really did enjoy the movie, felt at some points it was too long, but was made up for with the cinematography and well composed fight scenes, all and all, worth the Oscar, would watch again. -
sarinkrishna-717361 September 2021One of the best survival movie I have ever seen. Leonardo DiCaprio amazing performance in this movie. In the movie Leonardo DiCaprio fight with bear feel realistic. I shocked when I heard that this movie was based on a true story. Alejandro González Iñárritu thank you for giving such a good movie. The last fight seen was awesome. The background scenery was beautiful.
-
I feel a bit like a party pooper, especially as The Revenant was deemed worthy of three Oscars (Best Actor, Best Director and Best Cinematography), but I was underwhelmed by the film and not even just slightly underwhelmed.
There's no denying that visually it is a feast, and the well-known scene where Leonardo DiCaprio is attacked and mutilated by a grizzly bear is an cinematic accomplishment all of its own. But: where's the story?
As for that bear attack scene, it's hard to believe - although given the CGI expertise filmmakers now have access to, it shouldn't be - that it is entirely and utterly fake: the wood in which it takes place is made up entirely of 'rubber' tree props, the 'bear' is a stuntman in a blue CGI suit and DiCaprio is attached to several harnesses to allow him to seem thrown about by the bear.
That is all fine and dandy and makes for a thrilling experience. But it also leads to questions about Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's reported insistence that before filming, his troupe of actors should all go through a week's boot camp so that they get to know and understand the hardship the characters they play suffered and also look the part when it comes to shooting.
Now, call me an old cynic but that reported week in boot camp is entirely the kind of story the studio press department would like to get out there to drum up a bit of interest - for which read potential profits - before the premiere. 'Look,' the studio PR tells us, 'this is the real deal, this is actors really suffering for their art, this is serious filmmaking!' For all of which the subtext is 'this film is one you really won't want to miss because it is special.' Yes, but is it really?
Although Inarritu nabbed the Best Director Oscar, his cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki deserves a lot of the credit and it grabbed him of the little fellers for his camerawork. And apparently Lubezki wanted to work with only natural lighting and eschew artificial lighting so much that filming lasted at most four hours a day.
Well, for this old cynic it really doesn't quite stack up, and that snippet of news - as well as other stories 'leaking out' that filming was 'so tough' hardened crew simply walked out of the production in protest - most certainly didn't do pre-publicity for the film (and whisper it quietly, the film's Oscar chances) any harm at all.
So what of the film? Well, what of it? What is it about?
Superficially, it is at tale of survival against all odds. Our mutilated hero, DiCaprio, is left for dead by two men charged with taking care of him - though the younger man is far less culpable than the nasty old Texan played by Britain's Tom Hardy - yet despite his wounds, despite being at death's door for quite some time, despite plunging into icy-cold water several times, despite his skin 'dying' (which I suppose is gangrene), despite being chased be Native Americans, despite riding over a cliff and plunging several hundred feet - despite it, all dear reader - let me catch my breath! - our intrepid hero manages to find his way back to civilisation after almost two months - it is never clear just how long it took. Well! If that isn't worth an Oscar - Best Survivor Against Overwhelming Odds? - I don't know what is.
Once back in civilisation, he is not a bit puffed and sets about chasing down nasty old Tom Hardy, and has enough energy to pretty much kill him. (He doesn't actually do the deed - he remembers the wise old words of a Native American who befriends him on the way and leaves the dirty deed that to an troop of Native Americans who also want him dead). And then he dies. Fancy! What a man!
Well, I was pretty underwhelmed. I was underwhelmed by the lack of a story, I was underwhelmed by the vague mysticism which permeated it all but which really made little sense, I was baffled by the intermittent appearance of a gang of French trappers, I was underwhelmed by the gang of Native Americans whose chief is looking for his daughter, and I was underwhelmed by the film's insistence that a man who was barely alive and who could, at first, only crawl everywhere, who ate hardly anything but roots and shoots should still find the energy and resolve to survive hyperthermia finally to get up and walk (and after his supposed exertions) appear to have lost very little weight.
Am I being unfair? Well, only if the whole film had not been pitched as 'this is something entirely different - this is real!' Once that line was put out and we were expected to swallow it, the only conclusion is that the film cheats.
At the end of the day it is in many ways an entirely impressive piece of filmmaking, but in many other ways it cuts to many corners to be taken completely seriously. For style it gets pretty much top marks, but sadly loses almost all of them quite badly on content. -
niklassarocchi11 August 2022Beautiful cinematogrophy and great acting, however not the ideal movie for those who lack patience. A very well-written and truly remarkable story demonstrating how survival and the quest for revenge go hand in hand.
-
niriath11 April 2020Yes the cinematography is stunning, that's very true. But it's also most of what the movie offers. It's a simple, age old story of revenge and 80% of it is just Leo crawling around on the ground, breathing intensly. It did not need to be 2.5 hours long
-
magdalenacquintana7 August 2021The Revenant was an incredible film, from start to finish. The cinematography was breath taking, and the acting outstanding. It's the only film to ever be shot in chronological order, which is not an easy task. Leonardo submerged himself in freezing waters, in 40 below temperatures, for the perfect shot. He ate a real, raw, and bloody buffalo liver, when he's a strict vegetarian. It takes 100% more acting skill to act alone, in the elements, with minimal dialogue, having to convey every emotion, and physical struggle, with your eyes, and facial expression, and body language, then it does to act in any other capacity. That is true acting. Roles like this are to be respected. They show an actors raw ability.
The film was shot in all natural lighting in the Canadian rockies, in the middle of winter, and when the location was effected by a change in climate, production had to be stalled for 5 months while they moved it to the tip of southern Argentina to shoot the last few segments.
The entire project from idea to finish, was 5 years in the making. This film is a work of art, paired with a beautiful score, that convey's every emotion.
I've seen this film 3 times in theaters, and every time it gets better and better. You can't compete with a masterpiece like The Revenant.
I live in Hollywood and work in the entertainment industry. I have been on countless film sets, and have worked with many actors and directors, I know how the industry works, and have witnessed first hand what goes into making a movie. The passion each and every person involved puts into their job, is inspiring. The passion that went into The Revenant, was above and beyond. -
plpregent25 January 2016I haven't seen all of Alejandro González Iñárritu's films. Those I have seen were excellent or at least very good: "Amores Perros", "21 Grams", "Babel" and "Birdman".
When I saw the trailer for "The Revenant", needless to say, I immediately thought it had tremendous potential and got pretty hyped up about it. It showed gorgeous, naturally-lit cinematography, dynamic directing, a historical depiction of the early 19th century savagery, and what seemed to be quite a visceral performance by Leonardo DiCaprio.
I thought that, with Iñárritu's name attached to it, this would be a much deeper film than what I ended up watching, at least in its depictions of history, first nations, and in its ability to exploit classic themes such as revenge and survival.
Without saying that "The Revenant" is an empty shell (although a gorgeous one), Iñárritu's film fails to impress when it comes to depth, thanks to a linear and predictable narrative structure, one dimensional characters, and a revenge plot that never manages to be compelling to the audience.
DiCaprio offers a demanding, physical performance with very little dialogue, but his character, always in survival mode, never reached me emotionally. All the agony grunting and wincing, enhanced by the costumes and make up sure make the character believable, but the script never allows the character to develop or to unfold anything that goes beyond an extremely narrow range of emotions. Very unfortunate.
Tom Hardy is okay as the antagonist, another character that suffers from his development being jilted by the writers. This is an unfortunate mistake to make in a revenge-themed film, where the antagonist is supposed to nourish the quest. In "The Revenant", the antagonist is barely a background character that will leave the audience almost emotionless and neutral.
The directing (Alejandro González Iñárritu) and cinematography (Emmanuel Lubezki) are the highlights here. Visually, "The Revenant" is flawless. The framing of the shots, the camera movements and the snowy, low-saturation imagery are all gorgeous. Some scenes are absolutely incredible to watch.
Editing-wise, Stephen Mirrione could have cut a few corners here and there. And this is coming from a movie enthusiast who sure appreciates a slow-paced film. Watching Hugh Glass walk through the endless forest was great, but you do see at least a dozen very-low angle shots of trees. They're just as beautiful as they're eerie, but slightly redundant at times.
Overall, "The Revenant" is not a bad film. It just isn't a great one either. It does have its moments. Definitely a case of style over substance, "The Revenant" disappoints both as a revenge tale and as a meditation on the savagery of both man and nature. Plot-wise, its flaws keep "The Revenant" in a linear survival tale in which revenge becomes secondary.
Too bad. -
martha-adam115 January 2016What an absolute waste of 2.5 hours.
It didn't look like it was going to be my type of film, but the trailer was very convincing, not to mention the plethora of award nominations it has received, so I decided to give it a go.
Mistake.
It started with a collection of superb actors, delivering solid performances. Despite what I've read, I thought Tom Hardy's accent was spot on - that is what that accent sounds like! Domhnall Gleeson is in everything these days, for good reason, and Will Poulter was certainly endearing. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent, dragging oneself through the snow post-bear mauling should be pretty torturous, and as we know from Wolf of Wall Street's infamous 'Ludes' scene, DiCaprio is a pro at crawling and grunting.
A cast such as this should have delivered an outstanding movie, so I can only assume something went catastrophically wrong with the script. Because my God was it BORING.
There was absolutely zero character development. If you're going to produce something that is on the long side, at least give me something to work with here? The son was killed so early (and following so few lines) I genuinely didn't care, which didn't help to lay a foundation for why I should care about Glass's prolonged revenge mission.
As well as the characters being entirely 2D, they also quickly became parodies of themselves. "The Revenant Presents: Domhnall Gleeson as the Principled Yet Naive Captain (who must die as punishment for his ineptitude); Tom Hardy as the Southern Villain (with no redeeming features, who likewise must die to maintain the idea of a Just World); Will Poulter as the Impressionable Young Soldier-type and Leonardo DiCaprio as the Tortured Hero. Don't forget the Arrogant French Braggarts, and the Wise Yet Ruthless Indigenous People. Oh and Tom Hardy's Random Cockney Friend."
While I still think Hardy's accent was well executed, the choice to use an accent which is often a source of ridicule (I'm not endorsing that view) only served to undermine the tension rather than build it, making him seem like a fool rather than a dangerous adversary. Admittedly, he did a kill a number of people so maybe playing The Fool was his way of lulling everyone into a false sense of security.
DiCaprio was convincing in his role of the Aggrieved Father avenging the death of his son, but his journey of adversity quickly became absurd rather than laudable. The bear attack was BRUTAL, and as his company quickly concluded, it seems unlikely he would have survived his injuries, particularly when being carted around in the depth of winter.
But no, not only does he survive, he also survives Hardy's attempt to smother him, and being dragged into a partial burial, as well as witnessing the murder of his son (which would be enough to render any of us catatonic). OK, this might be plausible, maybe.
Then he wanders around for a bit, spurred on by the prospect of vengeance, before being nearly drowned in a river. Again, the trip down the rapids would have been enough to drown the average man, let alone someone who has just suffered a savage bear attack followed by an attempted smothering. But no, he comes to a gentle stop at the river bank and has a nap - mysteriously without succumbing to hypothermia.
Cue more wandering, some assistance from a kindly fellow wanderer, and yet more wandering.
As if three potential deaths weren't enough (four if you account for the bear effectively attacking him twice), he's then under attack by the very people who's daughter he's just rescued, and not only does he not get shot (despite these people having been shown to be frighteningly accurate), his horse RIDES HIM OFF A CLIFF and surprise, surprise - HE LIVES! In fact, he doesn't just survive it, he guts the dead horse and SLEEPS INSIDE IT. *Beats chest asserting manliness*
By the end I was desperate for one of them to just kill the other so I could go home. Tom Hardy finally met his maker - not before uttering the obligatory moral message that revenge doesn't make us feel better.
The Revenant is a classic case of style over substance. Fantastic actors, slipping effortlessly into a range of clichéd characters, stunning cinematography, and zero emotion. I'm a crier, I will cry at the majority of films and TV shows (and occasionally books), so the fact that I not only didn't cry, but felt absolutely nothing towards any of the characters, says it all.
It's clearly a polarising piece of work, I've seen many other reviews here that echo my sentiments, yet my boyfriend loved it, and the average rating is currently 8.3! Unfortunately, Award Land appears to be siding with my other half. This year's Oscar Best Picture category is a crowded race with several worthy contenders - but the Revenant is not one, and I really hope it doesn't win.
Does DiCaprio deserve the nomination? He was one of the better things in this film, and playing such a role must have pushed him to his physical limits, so maybe he does. Frankly, he's massively overdue one so for God's sake just give the man an Oscar and let's forget this absurd study in masculine pride ever existed. -
CalRhys17 January 2016Take the direction of Alejandro González Iñárritu, combine it with the stunning cinematography of Emmanuel Lubezki and toss in Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy for their acting charms and what do you get? An extraordinary and masterful film.
Fresh off of 'Birdman,' Iñárritu moved straight on to 'The Revenant,' a western-epic inspired by the true-life experiences of frontiersman Hugh Glass in the winter-struck landscape of 1820s America. The film gained some notoriety in mid-2015 for its production problems and has thus been regarded one of the most challenging film shoots in the history of cinema. Rightfully so. The film opens with the soothing sound of running water, thrusting the audience into an almost meditative state, and then it strikes, an action-packed sequence ensues with a near single sweeping take. Now this is a spoiler-free review, so I'll leave the pleasure of viewing that scene to you.
This film heavily evokes reactions from the audience and does so well, whether it's staring at the screen in awe or gasping at the visceral violence, if you face this film with the right attitude and expectations, it will be a thrill ride like no other. Lubezki has proved that he is one of the most fantastic cinematographers of modern cinema, and the extensive use of natural lighting over artificial supports that statement even further, the film is beyond stunning. Supporting this is the score from the relatively unknown composers, believe me, when the sudden orchestral boom strikes your eardrums, it's mesmerising.
The makeup, the direction, the editing, the visual aesthetics, and of course the performances from a hopefully soon-to-be Oscar winning DiCaprio, 'The Revenant' is a visual treat for those who appreciate cinema and for those who wish to just get absorbed by the immense landscapes and poetic justice Iñárritu has given it. This is, for me, a modern masterpiece.