DS Forums

 
 

The Revenant getting positive reviews


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18-01-2016, 09:36
Stansfield
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,982
Not exactly Last of the Mohicans, took me a while to realise the other guy was Tom Hardy, Leo on the other hand looked like Leo.

Whereas Clint Eastwood managed to bring out the flavour of his various characters through his rugged movie star looks Leo looks like he's just pulling serious faces. He really should do lighter roles like Wolf on Wall Street, he was great in that.
Me too - as for Leo, crawling and not talking that much - if it gets him an Oscar, there's hope for us all.


Great camera tricks, doesn't make a great film, a solid story does....and there wasn't one here - by the end, I didn't care what happened - they could have taken 40 mins of this, to make it a half decent film, as it is, 5/10.
Stansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 18-01-2016, 12:01
TheAngryGerman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 415
Have to agree, as beautifully shot and as impressive Leos physical performance is - the film itself is so, so very boring.
TheAngryGerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2016, 12:44
sinbad8982
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 928
I thought it was stunning, with all the incessant fantasy crap at the multiplex these days I have little doubt this will be my favourite movie of the year. 10/10 for me and the last film I thought was worthy of a 10 was Apocalypto back in 2006.
sinbad8982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2016, 13:05
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 10,839
I actually quite liked this one. I saw it in the cinema and I think I made the right choice over watching the screener. I thought that the first half of the film was excellent all round; good characters, amazing cinematography, interesting plot. I thought that pace was just about right, I wasn't bored. However I agree that it does somewhat deteriorate into cliche after a while and the end section is pretty ridiculous.

I tend to say this a lot, but I really can't be angry with a film that tries hard to be an original, intelligent piece of art, given the current environment in Hollywood. I just think it's a shame that screenwriters feel the need (or more likely studio pressure) to follow traditional plotlines and wrap up everything in a nice bow at the end.

Doesn't anyone else feel that the ending would have been a lot better if:
Spoiler
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2016, 14:02
TheAngryGerman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 415
I don't know if I would call this ambitiously original, it's different from the Summer Blockbusters sure but then it is your typical Oscar Bait flick - overlong, overly serious and joyless.
TheAngryGerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2016, 15:18
gorgeousgirl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 4,144
Have to agree. Nothing happens in this film. Just Leo crawling around wounded. The entire film is predictable.
Hateful 8, on a similar theme,is more interesting although it's more like a play than a film. It's More interesting as there's more going on in the film.

Can't fault the beautiful visuals though.
Me three. Its the first time in a while that I've been to cinema that a film has felt its length, if not longer. I actually enjoyed the last 20/30 minutes but I think that's only because it felt that something was finally starting to happen. I can't deny that it was a wonderful film to look at but I came out thinking that the whole story could have been told in half the time, had you cut out the constant grunting and crawling.
gorgeousgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2016, 16:59
Lushness
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London
Posts: 24,665
Acting isn't just about dialogue, it's how you can express feelings, emotional trauma and physical pain, triumph, etc. It could be argued that this is tougher to pull off than in normal speech roles. In any case Leo did this very well in my opinion, if he doesn't walk away with the Oscar then I have no words, no pun intended!
Lushness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2016, 06:38
stvn758
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,332
One plus if he does win is we won't have to put up with this tedium every year, starting to get like Tim Henman and Wimbledon.
stvn758 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2016, 09:13
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 22,429
It was alright, not bad in any way, but in no means worthy of all the attention it's getting either.
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2016, 10:21
welwynrose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Posts: 29,544
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
welwynrose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2016, 14:01
danielleh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,250
I saw it last night and was captivated throughout. Beautifully shot and wonderfully acted. It helps that Leonardo diCaprio and Tom Hardy are both insanely talented and infinitely watchable.
danielleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2016, 17:23
Moleskin
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,040
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
Just been hearing that this film is a virtual remake of that one, but unacknowledged.
Moleskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2016, 19:26
Biffo the Bear
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 24,419
Saw this yesterday and was a bit ummy-ahhy about it. I'll reserve judgement until a second viewing - I was thinking it'd be a great film to watch at home with the lights turned off, windows open, no heating on and wrapped in a duvet - extremely atmospheric indeed.
Biffo the Bear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2016, 19:38
Amanda_Raymond
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,796
Maybe if Leo wins he'll go back to making some decent indie films like he used to
Amanda_Raymond is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-01-2016, 19:45
ihatemarmite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,058
Just been hearing that this film is a virtual remake of that one, but unacknowledged.
should've been acknowledged and wasn't.
I didn't like either film. However Richard Harris could convey greater depth and a wider range of emotions than Leo can. Leo brings to mind what the late critic Pauline Kael wrote (about Katherine Hepburn) "he runs the full gamut of emotions from A to B". I wondered if Inarrritu was trying for something deeper from his main character, but if he was, he didn't get it.

Never seen so many Picturehouse cinema goers disappearing in mid movie for another popcorn or a drink.
ihatemarmite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-01-2016, 22:17
Smint
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,964
Despite not being a Leonardo Dicaprio fan, I went to see this this afternoon. Yes, it was a bit long, unremittingly relentless and the cliché count was rather high, but I still enjoyed it

Spoiler
Smint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-01-2016, 11:48
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,707
I enjoyed it, was one of those absorbing films you have to let yourself get sucked in by, the way it was shot makes that easy to do. I can see why a lot of people wouldn't like it, if you are not into the slow burn type thing.
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-01-2016, 00:10
Wizard_of_Ozil
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,529
Despite not being a Leonardo Dicaprio fan, I went to see this this afternoon. Yes, it was a bit long, unremittingly relentless and the cliché count was rather high, but I still enjoyed it

Spoiler
When Leo shot at that bear I thought, oh boy, you shouldn't have done that

I enjoyed it, was one of those absorbing films you have to let yourself get sucked in by, the way it was shot makes that easy to do. I can see why a lot of people wouldn't like it, if you are not into the slow burn type thing.
I like all kinds of films including epics and slow burns but even I found this tough going. Not tough going because it was violent because I loved those gruesome moments but because after a while I didn't think it amounted to much. I'm a big fan of Terrence Malick (sort of a film-making cousin of Iñárritu since they share the same DP) who's notorious for making somewhat 'plodding' films. Theoretically Iñárritu is Malick on steroids and I should've loved this but for some reason I couldn't.
Wizard_of_Ozil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-01-2016, 09:45
Stansfield
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,982
I enjoyed it, was one of those absorbing films you have to let yourself get sucked in by, the way it was shot makes that easy to do. I can see why a lot of people wouldn't like it, if you are not into the slow burn type thing.
Love slow burn - sadly, this one went out, about 40 mins before the end.
Stansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-01-2016, 17:02
Jackapple
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 749
Gorgeous cinematography, but Leo as a grizzled mountain man and father ?? ummm not really..
Jackapple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-01-2016, 23:33
ritch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,707
Love slow burn - sadly, this one went out, about 40 mins before the end.
You didn't like this form of slow burn I guess. I didn't find that after 40 mins at all, I actually felt the film went really quick because I was absorbed in it.
ritch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-01-2016, 13:14
Asarualim
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,572
Saw this on Saturday and really enjoyed it. As other's have said, it's beautifully shot, so a visual feast it's up there with the best. Performance wise I thought Leo Di Caprio was good, believable enough, though he's one of those actors who seems to a certain extent just play versions of himself, I don't have a problem with that. Tom Hardy was brilliant as usual, for the supporting role he had. I ageree it was a litle over-long, i was on the veerge of drifting off in parts so thankfully it picked up again towards the end to engage me again. It's quite a gory movie, nothing is left to the imagination but that gives you a greater sense of what the main character is enduring in order to survive , so for me that is justified and never feels added on for shock value or just for the sake of it. I'm not sure it's the sort of movie I'd watch again, but as a piece of cinema I was very impressed, and it does make a nice change from all the fantasy/action/comic book movies that are so prevelant at the moment. Not that I have a problem with those, but it's good to have something a little different.
Asarualim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-01-2016, 21:13
Joeblob
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 65
should've been acknowledged and wasn't.
I didn't like either film. However Richard Harris could convey greater depth and a wider range of emotions than Leo can. Leo brings to mind what the late critic Pauline Kael wrote (about Katherine Hepburn) "he runs the full gamut of emotions from A to B". I wondered if Inarrritu was trying for something deeper from his main character, but if he was, he didn't get it.

Never seen so many Picturehouse cinema goers disappearing in mid movie for another popcorn or a drink.
probably going for a pee. it was on for ages and ages.
Joeblob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2016, 11:23
ArtfulDodger81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 847
Thought the film was OK, Don't think it Leo's performance (I think hes an awesome actor) deserved an oscar nomination.

Great visuals on the films though.
ArtfulDodger81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2016, 19:36
Dirty Rooster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 652
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
I just watched both today, The Reveneant for the second time, minus the last twenty minutes.
Man in the Wilderness had a believable plot and a believable lead actor, but the giant boat stuff was silly. Excellent acting all round.
The Revenant has much much better filmography but is comic book silly in parts and the plot has gaping holes and a crappy ending best left out like something from those channel 5 daytime crime dramas.
Best supporting actor, yes. Best actor? : deskbound pudding-face makes grunting noises : Oscar! kthxbye.
Dirty Rooster is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:43.