Filed under: Movies, Oscars, Posted by TA, Review | Tags: Alejandro Iñarritu, Leonardo di Caprio, The Revenant, Tom Hardy
Overall, I didn’t quite like it despite its many pluses. They are: Iñarritu’s vision was quite original and his amazing camera work followed along from Birdman. Cinematography and production are some of the best I’ve seen in a while. Tom Hardy’s back to shape. That was by far his best work ever (remember when I gave him a timeout after 3 terrible back to back flicks?). If it costs you only $5.38 to watch (that’s how much I paid), watch it in the theatre. Otherwise, wait.
My peeve with the Revenant was is about the flow and intention. 2 hours and 37 minutes of cold and gory film was too much. The story got broken several times when unnecessary takes were added. There’s too much symbolism and crazy philosophical chit chat. I find it hard to believe that was the way Midwest pioneers used to behave. And let’s be honest, Indians are also stereotypically depicted. Historical inaccuracies also stand out in this movie, and I have a big problem with that. The Revenant is “Inspired by True Events”. That’s one of the lowest in the historical movie accuracy categories.
The intention of The Revenant is also not clear. Did Iñarritu try to make a western, a thriller, a morally pleasing testament to First Nations / Pioneer relations in the 19th century? The beginning suggests a story of rage and revenge that turns into an emotional tale of survival. Those two themes don’t usually sync well together. It gets confusing.
One has to recognize Leonardo di Caprio’s acting improvements. He’s good in the movie. Grunting for an entire hour in the snow requires skills. In my acting ratings, he now sits along with Dakota Fanning.
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
Angel and Tiggs 