|
||||||||
The Revenant getting positive reviews |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,982
|
Quote:
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. 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. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 4,144
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
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!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Posts: 29,544
|
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,040
|
Quote:
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,058
|
Quote:
Just been hearing that this film is a virtual remake of that one, but unacknowledged.
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,529
|
Quote:
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
![]() Quote:
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,982
|
Quote:
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 749
|
Gorgeous cinematography, but Leo as a grizzled mountain man and father ?? ummm not really..
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,707
|
Quote:
Love slow burn - sadly, this one went out, about 40 mins before the end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 65
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 652
|
Quote:
Good film but not a patch on Man in the Wilderness
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. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:04.






