Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

The Revenant - Is This Really The Best That Hollywood Has To Offer These Days?


TomJH
 Share

Recommended Posts

At least, according to those who are betting on the Oscar derby, further saying that it is Di Caprio's time to finally win as best actor.

 

Well, I saw the film, a relentlessly grim and graphic portrayal of survival and revenge in a pitiless wilderness, and I found the film pretty dispiriting.

 

I'm not saying that it isn't generally well done, with some remarkable photography, unique camerawork through the same director that gave us Birdman in 2014 (Birdman, best picture of THAT year? You gotta be kidding - sorry, getting off topic here, but, I guess, it's a reflection of what I feel about the Oscar "winners" these days, at least based on a number of the recently selected best picture awards).

 

The much discussed bear scene in The Revenant is a remarkable piece of CGI effects (quite amazing what they can do these days). It's a graphic, brutal scene which had me squirming and uncomfortable, exactly what the filmmakers undoubtedly wanted. And the film has a few other sequences of note (the main protagonist being caught in a fast moving river and plunging over a waterfall - all very realistic in presentation).

 

Di Caprio is okay in his role. He certainly looks like he went through hell but looking like going through hell isn't the same as great acting, I know he's a good actor, being impressed by him as far back as when I first saw him as a child actor (or, at least a young one) in This Boy's Life. I've missed a lot of his other films but was far more impressed by his acting range when he played Howard Hughes in The Aviator than by anything he does in The Revenant.

 

Tom Hardy, playing his ruthless, self serving nemesis in The Revenant is very, very good and completely convincing. If someone made a case that he gives the most impressive performance in the film, I wouldn't give them an argument.

 

Some apparently feel that the film ends on an ambiguous note. I didn't really feel so, certainly no final scene to compare to the bizarre one that ended Birdman (and had me endlessly scratching my head).

 

One of the key failures of this film for me was the fact that I never liked Di Caprio's character. Certainly I felt sympathy for his situation and fully appreciated the motivation for his cry for revenge. But, having said that, I never really cared about him as a person, therefore my emotional investment in his plight was always limited. I watched the proceedings were a certain emotional detachment, a problem, by the way, that I often have with this particular actor as far as likeability is concerned, no matter how convincing I may find his performances.

 

At the end of the day, having sat through this long film (over two and a half hours) I just felt emotionally deflated. Grim, realistic survival is, of course, not supposed to be a barrel a laughs, not if it's realistically presented, as it is in The Revenant.

 

But I really don't think that this is anything more than a reasonably well executed film (to be remembered for the bear special effects sequence probably more than anything else), but hardly outstanding as entertainment. Yet it has more Oscar nominations than any other 2015 film and may well wind up being the big winner.

 

Which, in turn, should this happen, brings me back to the title of my thread - is this film really the best that Hollywood has to offer these days?

 

I should add that this is the only film I've seen, I believe, made last year, so I'm not offering any alternative titles to The Revenant. I'm merely stating that, by my taste, at least, if this film is one of the year's best, I'm not in any rush to see the other offerings out there.

 

Dargo gave a review of Hail Caesar recently. Maybe that's the one I should have watched instead.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's much too long and I found the fisheye lens distracting and the too many instances of breaking the 180 rule annoying. Still, I preferred it to Tarantino's movie.

 

You might want to check out the earlier version of THE REVENANT titled MAN IN THE WILDERNESS. It's obvious that the makes of the new film did.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's much too long and I found the fisheye lens distracting and the too many instances of breaking the 180 rule annoying. Still, I preferred it to Tarantino's movie.

 

You might want to check out the earlier version of THE REVENANT titled MAN IN THE WILDERNESS. It's obvious that the makes of the new film did.

 

Yeh, you're right about the roving camerawork, clore, but, based upon this film and Birdman, that seems to be the director's style (which, I agree, can be excessive and annoying). His endless camera movement, no edits style in Birdman I found distracted me from what story was there (with all that endless blathering) because I became distracted by the director's technique and started concentrating upon it, rather than what was happening on screen.

 

I must say that I did like The Revenant more than Birdman, but that's hardly great praise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen THE REVENANT yet, but your description, and the thoughts of family members who saw it, sounds like a glossier take on MAN IN THE WILDERNESS. I know they're based on the same true story, but I thought that they may have changed it up some for the new version.

 

I had the same fundamental issue with the earlier film; I didn't really care about the main character. I think the filmmakers hoped the stars would imbue the lead with enough audience sympathy that character depth wouldn't be necessary. It failed with the earlier film, and I like Richard Harris more than I do DiCaprio, who despite his best efforts, remains unappealing to me for some reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting view by someone who also hasn't seen the movie in queston.

 

Just based on what we all see in the TELEVISION AD for it, a friend of mine said he'll pass on it.  His reason?

 

"I already SAW "JEREMIAH JOHNSON "  a ton of times!"  :D

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i haven't seen Man in the Wilderness and, not being much of a fan of Richard Harris (though he was a good actor), haven't been pining over my loss either. If it came on TCM, though, I'd certainly give it a look, if only for the sake of comparison.

 

Di Caprio has always left me cold as a personality, though he's clearly a good actor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, it is because liberals are ultimately STUPID filmmakers.

 

they REFUSE to give the american film-goer want they want...

 

no more war films and no more no-nonsense dirty harry cop films because it is NOW POLITICALLY

INCORRECT

 

Hollywood is now in decline because of it's STUPID devotion to liberal views.

 

Hollywood is choking on it's own politically correct syrup.

 

Good! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, it is because liberals are ultimately STUPID filmmakers.

 

they REFUSE to give the american film-goer want they want...

 

no more war films and no more no-nonsense dirty harry cop films because it is NOW POLITICALLY

INCORRECT

 

Hollywood is now in decline because of it's STUPID devotion to liberal views.

 

Hollywood is choking on it's own politically correct syrup.

 

Good! :lol:

 

Hasn't Hollywood always been liberal, dating back to the Pre-Code era? And aren't you forgetting that the most-talked about movie a year ago was the Clint Eastwood film "American Sniper"? It went on to become the sixth-highest grossing film of 2015.

 

And did you miss hearing about Michael Bay's "13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi"? (I'm sure non-liberals were hoping that it's a stinging indictment of the President and the former U.S. Secretary of State, but it isn't). In a little more than three weeks of release, it's already surpassed its $50 million budget. 

 

As for the no-nonsense cop films, well, times change. John Wayne has been dead almost 37 years and Eastwood is 85 years old. More often than not, today's cop films are about corrupt police officers -- i.e. the upcoming action film "Triple 9, "starring Woody Harrelson, Anthony Mackie and Kate Winslet. And we all know that movies about corrupt cops usually feature heroic ones determined to discard the bad apples ("Serpico," "L.A. Confidential," "Training Day," "The Departed," etc).

 

And let's not forget that Americans love stories about funny cops who can handle themselves when necessary ("Beverly Hills Cop," "Ride Along," etc.).

 

If Hollywood is in decline, you can't tell from last year's domestic and worldwide box-office results. You may not like the trends, but somebody apparently does.

 

As for criticisms of "The Revenant," you have to realize that Alejandro G. Iñárritu and his Mexican-born colleagues -- Alfonso Cuarón and Guillermo del Toro -- are incredibly stylish filmmakers. They could dominate the next decade in movies. They're certainly having a major impact now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hasn't Hollywood always been liberal, dating back to the Pre-Code era? And aren't you forgetting that the most-talked about movie a year ago was the Clint Eastwood film "American Sniper"? It went on to become the sixth-highest grossing film of 2015.

 

And did you miss hearing about Michael Bay's "13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi"? (I'm sure non-liberals were hoping that it's a stinging indictment of the President and the former U.S. Secretary of State, but it isn't). In a little more than three weeks of release, it's already surpassed its $50 million budget. 

 

As for the no-nonsense cop films, well, times change. John Wayne has been dead almost 37 years and Eastwood is 85 years old. More often than not, today's cop films are about corrupt police officers -- i.e. the upcoming action film "Triple 9, "starring Woody Harrelson, Anthony Mackie and Kate Winslet. And we all know that movies about corrupt cops usually feature heroic ones determined to discard the bad apples ("Serpico," "L.A. Confidential," "Training Day," "The Departed," etc).

 

And let's not forget that Americans love stories about funny cops who can handle themselves when necessary ("Beverly Hills Cop," "Ride Along," etc.).

 

If Hollywood is in decline, you can't tell from last year's domestic and worldwide box-office results. You may not like the trends, but somebody apparently does.

 

As for criticisms of "The Revenant," you have to realize that Alejandro G. Iñárritu and his Mexican-born colleagues -- Alfonso Cuarón and Guillermo del Toro -- are incredibly stylish filmmakers. They could dominate the next decade in movies. They're certainly having a major impact now.

war movies were always a staple of hollywood right up to the 1980s when they slacked off thanks to the looming spectre of political correctness which has stifled creativity and replaced old school animation with cgi fare worthy of the sesame street of forty years ago.

 

it's just so darn nice that filthy rich as wall street liberal hollywood celebs can find the time to be socially relevant in between their tennis games and pool relaxations. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May I cheat and paste what I posted in the Films of 2015 thread ...

 

Posted 04 January 2016 - 07:16 AM

I watched two more films from 2015 yesterday.  The first was The Revenant (2015) a man-in-the-wilderness film from recent Oscar winner Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu.  It has fabulous (Canadian) scenery and a great bear mauling scene but that is about as far as it goes for me.  The film is just too one-note and as for DiCaprio's much touted performance, well, if they are handing out Oscars for 90 minutes of painful grimaces he will win hands down.  I'm a DiCaprio fan but this one just doesn't do it.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Which, in turns, should this happen, brings me back to the title of my thread - is this film really the best that Hollywood has to offer these days?

 

 

 

Try Trumbo (2015).  You may like that.  Bryan Cranston is tremendous in it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I know this is off-topic, but every time I see NipkowDisc post, I automatically hear "Cry Me A River" in my mind. The Streisand version, although the Justin Timberlake version still fits the thought. 

 

Poor. self-victimizing attitude that reigns in right-wing America today. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Poor. self-victimizing attitude that reigns in right-wing America today. 

 

Speaking of which, I would also appreciate it if the political cries of America, be it left or right, would leave this thread and return to Off Topics, where they seem to reign supreme these days.

 

Thank you.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the actual topic, I am not interested in the film at all. This might be a modern example where the film might not have a lot of artistic merit and is just a vehicle for long-awaited recognition to finally happen due to collaboration with the "right" filmmaker. With Meryl Streep, it was Harvey Weinstein. With Di Caprio, it's with Alexander Inarritu (sic). 

 

Doesn't really matter about the film itself standing on any artistic grounds, just this person in this vehicle modeling no matter the make of the car. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I  thought the cinematography was great. The film though had some great sequences and some absolutely ridiculous sequences. It's like they tried to stick everything "frontiersman" they could into the story as if the real survival story wasn't enough. 

 

No way the character is going to survive a float no less down an ice cold river, that is stretching it way too much for me. He would lose dexterity in under two minutes. 

 

"Cold water carries heat away from the body 25 times faster than air of the same temperature and as a result, the body core immediately begins to lose heat to the outside environment. At first, the body tries to generate more heat by shivering, but this is not enough to offset the loss of heat to the water. Within 20 to 30 minutes, depending on water temperature, body core temperature drops to below 35° C (95° F) cognitive functioning and judgement become affected" 

 

I read a true account of frontiersman Simon Kenton who during the winter fell in the Ohio or Allegheny, he was barely able to crawl up the bank and get some kindling lit to build a small fire, he stripped naked and used a deer hide to make a small tipi enclosing it around himself and the fire leaving a smoke hole at the top to survive. As soon as he warmed himself up enough he gathered more firewood made the fire bigger and dried his clothes out over night. 

 

But then they sure do a 180 when he guts the horse to use its body for protection from the cold, there they make it seem like it's life or death when in reality the water emersion would have been much worse. 

 

When he escapes from the indians on the pinto sequence he first shoots a warrior approaching him with a flintlock, then after mounting up and galloping away he shoots a brave off a horse with the same flintlock, never reloaded. 

 

When he's catching fish he's got a nice fire going on the bank it takes about a minute or two to cook a fish but he eats it raw. lol. 

 

I also scratched my head when at the beginning they abandoned the protection of the keel boat, it could move downstream to civilization it was solid cover to fire from and it had a swivel gun, which is like a small canon. Then every time they head for civilization they head upstream or up river or head into the mountains ****? 

 

The indians that find the spot where Hugh's son was killed, didn't see the fresh drag marks in the snow where Hugh left tracks. 

 

Cinematography 10/10 story 6/10. Makes me want to see Man In The Wilderness again now too compare. 

 

Also for those interested in reality Here is a cross section of the actual country between the High Plains, North of the Missouri River, into the Missouri Breaks, the Missouri River, then across the divide between the Missouri River and the Yellowstone to the Yellowstone River, most of these shots I took this year at the end of October, daytime temps were in the 50s night to the 30s. This is the typical topography. This is Montana. 

 

You can see it's quite a bit different than what is depicted in the film, there are barely any mountains and you can easily avoid going through them, in South Dakota where the actual story takes place there are even less mountains. The film is not even close to the truth landscape wise. 

 

High Plains:DSCN1281_zpsrgunl5p4.jpg

 

High Plains: 

DSCN1257_zpsbz58blpb.jpg

 

Top of the Missouri Breaks where the High Plains "break" down to the Missouri River 

DSCN1292_zps8vbj2fjd.jpg

 

In the Missouri Breaks: DSCN1304_zpsijln5ho1.jpg

 

The Missouri River: 

DSCN1314_zpsphks5yqw.jpg

 

The Judith Mountains on the high plains South of the Missouri River 

DSCN1359_zps9lvxtmwd.jpg

 

The divide between the Missouri drainage and the Yellowstone drainage and the only snow encountered on the trip DSCN1364_zpswkgb0acb.jpg
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to see Trumbo.  The only films I have seen from 2015 are The Big Short (just saw) and Walk in the Woods.  I'm am considering seeing Spot Light.

 

Did you like "The Big Short"? It's still considered a strong Oscar contender for Best Picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you like "The Big Short"? It's still considered a strong Oscar contender for Best Picture.

Yes, I did.  I knew ahead of time that it was a movie for which I would need to be quite alert so I could understand all the information about the housing market and terms in the financial world for which I don't know.  I went with a group of people. I thought that I would go into the movie with the attitude that it was going to look at the world economy similar to how All the President's Men looked at how the Watergate crisis eventually led to the resignation o President Nixon- in other words, as a mystery/puzzle. I love mysteries and puzzles.  I also love bio-pics.

 

Several times in the movie, whenever certain terms would be introduced that people not in real estate, banking etc. would be used, the movie would eliminate the fourth wall and someone will look straight into the camera and explain these terms with examples of the "everyday" world that the average person would understand.  A chef explaining about repackaging old fish into new food, people gambling on whether or not someone would win at a gambling table who then had people betting on that bet and others, made terms that made me feel clueless at first suddenly I understood.

 

After seeing this film I very happy that I do not actually live in Vancouver, that I do not rent a house and rely upon a landlord who may default on a mortgage, that I own an a apartment that has space, and that I do not have to try to find somewhere to move. 

 

It's a very scary film in that it is looking at a real world situation that is continuing to get worse.  People are becoming homeless everywhere.

 

Steve Carrell is the best actor in this movie and it is too bad he did not get a nomination

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I did.  I knew ahead of time that it was a movie for which I would need to be quite alert so I could understand all the information about the housing market and terms in the financial world for which I don't know.  I went with a group of people. I thought that I would go into the movie with the attitude that it was going to look at the world economy similar to how All the President's Men looked at how the Watergate crisis eventually led to the resignation o President Nixon- in other words, as a mystery/puzzle. I love mysteries and puzzles.  I also love bio-pics.

 

Several times in the movie, whenever certain terms would be introduced that people not in real estate, banking etc. would be used, the movie would eliminate the fourth wall and someone will look straight into the camera and explain these terms with examples of the "everyday" world that the average person would understand.  A chef explaining about repackaging old fish into new food, people gambling on whether or not someone would win at a gambling table who then had people betting on that bet and others, made terms that made me feel clueless at first suddenly I understood.

 

After seeing this film I very happy that I do not actually live in Vancouver, that I do not rent a house and rely upon a landlord who may default on a mortgage, that I own an a apartment that has space, and that I do not have to try to find somewhere to move. 

 

It's a very scary film in that it is looking at a real world situation that is continuing to get worse.  People are becoming homeless everywhere.

 

Steve Carrell is the best actor in this movie and it is too bad he did not get a nomination

That sentence should read : "not in real estate or banking  did not know the terms that were used..."

 

I accidently deleted part o the sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jake, thank you for some wonderful photographs.

 

For those who didn't like THE REVENANT or, like me, have no interest in seeing it, let me recommend five of the other nominated films:

 

BROOKLYN - My favorite of the five, perfectly executed, simple yet great direction by John Crowley. If you like the style of Preminger or Zinnemann, this is for you.

THE BIG SHORT - Very entertaining. Steve Carell is terrific.

SPOTLIGHT - If you can accept the subject and will overlook the first ten or fifteen minutes (awfully flat), builds in power. Tom McCarthy has no business being in the Best Director race (sez me), but the script is good, and so is the ensemble cast.

ROOM - A real downer of a movie, but very well executed.

BRIDGE OF SPIES - Not terribly original, but soundly done, as is usual with Spielberg.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sentence should read : "not in real estate or banking  did not know the terms that were used..."

 

I accidently deleted part o the sentence.

You are correct. Steve Carrell was the best actor in THE BIG SHORT, and he deserved a nomination.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...