Isn’t that movie a remake of Man In The Wilderness?
Yep, based on the same true story. Mysteries at the Museum/Monument/Park/Chippie/Hair Salon also did the story, which was the first time I heard it.
On my way to see it now… will let y’all know.
I’m back!
Very good film that, I thought, had a number of problems in the pacing and editing department. It could have used 10 minutes cut from it, and it must have been difficult (if not impossible) to have even levels of snow from scene to scene, but you’d think they’d at least try. Also, the terrain never really matched. Sometimes a group is going over wide mountain vistas, then the people following never, ever get to those mountains… stuff like that. But there were two scenes where I laughed out loud a bit at the clunky editing…
[spoiler]So Leo gets attacked by a bear and left for dead. His legs do not work, so therefore he has to move by pulling himself forward by his arms. Discounting the fact that it appears he was able to go miles by doing this, after a while he hears this roaring sound. Pulling himself by his arms to the edge of a cliff, at least 100 feet high, Leo looks straight down into a river.
cut
Next shot has the legless guy at the bottom of the cliff, drinking his first real drink of water in a damned long time. I can only assume he hand-climbed down the cliff.
Then there’s the “Run, Forrest, run!” scene where Leo, still without the use of his legs, gets surprised by a bunch of native Americans, crawls out into the river, and as he’s doing this, his legs all of a sudden seem to want to work again, allowing him to swim to safety… so by the time he finally washes up at the side of the river, he is now able to walk again. 
[/spoiler]
All in all, I’d give it an 8 out of 10. I have no problem believing the actors suffered quite a bit for their roles and Leo was excellent, but the editing and pacing issues kept it from being as great as it could be.
What is a “revenant”? Seems strange to have a movie title that, I bet, 99% of English speakers don’t know what it means.
Probably a similar percentage who knew what a Ronin was, or who Prometheus was, or had read Beowulf.
Someone never played D&D. 
There was another film titled, “The Revenant” released in 2009:
It was about zombies and it was a terrible movie. I expected this year’s edition to be a remake due to the title. But it was nothing like the previous film.
I tried to watch this year’s film but just didn’t have the patience and gave up on it after watching about 30 minutes. I would have rated it significantly lower than 8.0 but it wouldn’t be fair since I didn’t watch more than the first 30 minutes.
Revenant: A person who returns.
You walked out of a movie after 30 minutes? I hope it was a matinee; movie tickets aren’t cheap these days.
While it means “One who returns” in French it was also used as in zombie, visible ghost or, the idea I think of when I saw the title; a vampire’s victim that rises from the dead but does not get fed vampire blood. It attacks like a vampire but is mindless and only creates more revenants. Slot Online, Daftar Situs Slot Online, Judi Slot Pulsa, Slot Deposit Pulsa
So seeing a remake of Grizzly Adams or Daniel Boone or whichever frontiersman it is about just isn’t my cup of tea.
I have a friend who works for a movie distributor. His uncle has access to all kinds of movie screenings. Past, present and future movies.
I feel very lucky because I can get to see so many movies and no one minds if I walk out early. Many of the other people there do the same thing. AAMOF, three people walked out before I did.
How is it this got best picture, comedy or musical, in the GGs?
…it didn’t. It won Best Drama.
:smack: Right. The Martian got the other one. Anyone know how that was a comedy or musical?
Because Fox and Ridley Scott asked that it be considered such. I can’t speak to Scott’s motivations, other than to have easier competition, but Fox’s was likely ‘we don’t want to compete with ourselves in the Drama category- if we put The Martian in comedy, we can potentially win both awards!’ The Foreign Press approved the request, so I guess we could take it up with them. 
Birdman and The Artist did the exact same thing, by the way.
Saw it today. I thought it was pretty riveting from start to finish and had a very visceral impact. All the scenes of people lying in the snow or swimming in icy water had me shivering in the theater.
I’m not big on revenge movies and some of his feats of survival stretched credibility, but the film was absolutely gorgeous - really, the landscape was a bigger presence than Leo or the bear. I wouldn’t have given it a Golden Globe, I don’t think (my choice was Spotlight) but it was an excellent film.
Saw it recently. The filmography was excellent. Many long takes within an action scene.
The movie is only marginally based on the novel. The novel is much longer and didn’t include the character Hawk, which was invented for the movie. There wasn’t even a Hawk in reality. The novel supposedly follows the actual events more closely. The characters of Glass, Fitzgerald, Bridger and Capt. Henry are all based on real people.
Legless? I turned off the video (which luckily I got for one free night) after about 30 minutes on the fact that he would have been dead by infection alone! More Hollywood BULLSHIT.
Although the cinematography and special effects WERE brilliant. I considered watching the rest of it with the sound down , but I didn’t want to be further insulted.
By the way, here is a brilliant review and I agree 100%
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/12/28/i-dont-care-how-hard-it-was-to-make-the-revenant
And, once again, except for the closeup of Leo boy (in the attached review) everybody, again, seemed to have perfect white teeth.
He wasn’t “legless” on account of they were missing, but in the sense that they weren’t working.
I understand that. I just couldn’t believe that they expected US to believe that he could be sutured up in a filthy (medically speaking) environment and survive. I have read about grizzly attacks where the victims who DID survive had about 400 sutures and almost didn’t survive the loss of blood.
Yet old Leo somehow survives out in the middle of nowhere? I mean how unrealistic does a film have to be before people get upset? I have a very low threshold myself.
Again, I agree with this brilliant review
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/12/09/the-revenant-review-brutal-beautiful-banal