|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Well, the idea there is more that she's some beautiful model-type. Yeah I doubt Malick and the casting director gave much of a poo poo about racialized casting narratives (I certainly don't) but something about the close yet far oddity of it amuses me.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
This is the first time I've ever heard the phrase tree-friend of the family. Is that a real thing people said?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
Gorgeous, stunning visuals, many great performances, fantastic use of the score and absolutely cowardly handling of the narrative. If you want to make a movie about a triple hard metal as gently caress mad bastard, make it, don't punk out on the more insane parts and throw in cliched, hackneyed bullshit I've seen in so many other movies. Also, loved Domhnall Gleeson going toe to toe with Hardy, acting-wise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
rejutka posted:absolutely cowardly handling of the narrative. If you want to make a movie about a triple hard metal as gently caress mad bastard, make it, don't punk out on the more insane parts and throw in cliched, hackneyed bullshit I've seen in so many other movies. This is funny because in the real story Glass made it back and didn't even attempt to kill Fitzgerald, he had stopped caring at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
rejutka posted:don't punk out on the more insane parts and throw in cliched, hackneyed bullshit Can you expand on this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
RCarr posted:This is the first time I've ever heard the phrase tree-friend of the family. Is that a real thing people said? I dunno how widespread it was but yeah, it was definitely a term that got used. Turns out racists aren't all that creative - see also Arabs and the Irish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
The Onion on point as usual. http://www.theonion.com/article/leonardo-dicaprio-hopes-he-screamed-and-cried-good-52170
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:This is funny because in the real story Glass made it back and didn't even attempt to kill Fitzgerald, he had stopped caring at that point. This was mainly due to Fitzgerald enlisting in US army after he abandoned Glass and completed his trek back the nearest fort. The real life Glass left Bridger live on account of his youth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
i thought it was beautiful except for all the parts that looked like a goddamned music video
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
good electric posted:i thought it was beautiful except for all the parts that looked like a goddamned music video Are you talking about the vision sequences?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 08:08
|
|
|
Those visions were largely unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
They were definitely indulgent, but I didn't care because they were shot so perfectly and looked amazing. That's kind of my thoughts on the movie as a whole, the cinematography is so good I can look past any other flaws. I really liked it overall, maybe my favorite of the year, and a lot of that is due to the eye candy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Yes, the vision scenes were unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Agreed that this movie is effective at many things but largely feels empty. Cinematography is absolutely amazing, though. Has a DOP ever won Best Cinematography even two years in a row, let alone three? Because that's definitely going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
For that matter, has anyone in any category won 3 in a row before? He definitely deserves it 100%.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Just saw this. The bear was amazing and scary as gently caress. You people saying it was some fakey-looking garbage... I don't know about you guys. When he looks back over his shoulder and sees mama bear and how close she is I got a chill, you could have a machine gun in that situation and you're still completely hosed. The way the bear was just casually flinging him around and ripping the gently caress out of him was gut-wrenching. The bear stepping on his head was such a great "This thing doesn't give a gently caress about you at all," moment, and him pulling out his knife and stabbing it while it was mauling was just amazing. I really liked the movie. I don't expect to watch it again but I won't forget it. I'd still give the Oscar to Mad Max.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
I can't stop listening to this soundtrack. It perfectly captures the feeling of being alone in the cold north. It makes me remember growing up here in Canada and just running around in the fields and outside the city in the dead of winter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Escobarbarian posted:Agreed that this movie is effective at many things but largely feels empty. Cinematography is absolutely amazing, though. Has a DOP ever won Best Cinematography even two years in a row, let alone three? Because that's definitely going to happen. He'll be GOAT at that point, not just 'chivo'...but also GOAT. JonathonSpectre posted:Just saw this. The bear was amazing and scary as gently caress. You people saying it was some fakey-looking garbage... I don't know about you guys. This post is correct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
I think Mad Max gets best picture, Inarritu gets director, Hardy gets supporting, and hopefully Leo gets lead. Lubezki will clean house again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Funny to think that both Lubezki and Alfonso Cuaron started their career on the same quaint film, Sólo con tu pareja, which pretty much single-handedly brought the Mexican film industry back from the dead 25 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I'm surprised that it took till page 4 for someone to bring it up but yeah. Not the biggest Malick fan but I loved it and has so much more going on than the visuals which are just as gorgeous despite not being near the mountains. Not to distract from the film itself, but it did feel like a stew made up of The New World, The Grey, and Aguirre with a dash of The Holy Mountain. Although most of all I'd compare it to Deliverance. I've got to agree with whoever said that it needs to lose about 30 minutes in the middle. Definitely felt like it was harking on the same point again and again. Leo crawling and groaning can only be compelling for so long. It either needed to cut, or it needed to add more with what was there - the Pawnee traveler he befriends for one. But I'm very glad I saw it in theaters, immensely gorgeous with a lot to unpack. I'll have more thoughts later, still breaking it all down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
After discussing it last night with some friends I think one of the things that makes that bear scene stand out to me is honestly Leo's acting in between the attacks when he first crawls to get the gun and then gets his knife out. Both times he has this look of just incredibly intense total concentration. No fear, no "OH MY GOD," just this look of "I have to get to my gun, I have to get out my knife." Anyway I think last night I sold about a dozen tickets to the Revenant based on my description of it so there you go Alejandro and Leo. The movie also reinforced my understanding of the woods, which has always been, "Enter only if heavily armed." People want to go and be one with nature, but almost all of nature's creatures want to make us one with their bellies. The opening scene is also an incredible meditation on the nature of the cycle of violence, where everyone who kills is immediately then killed in turn moments later. It's a weird contrast with the whole story of the movie, where Glass's quest to go kill Fitzgerald is treated as a sort of noble endeavor, which immediately devolves back into horrifying, brutal killing as soon as they are alone together. I love a fight where the first thing that happens is a dude gets half his hand chopped off, it lets you know this ain't going to be pretty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
bullet3 posted:In this, those asides feel like something that's been tacked on to a much more conventional, ultra-intense action movie. The mystical journey isn't an aside, it's almost the entire runtime. There are a couple action scenes that make up a fraction of the film which serve as the beginning and culmination of that journey, and none of them are handled in a way that is conventional. Judakel posted:Those visions were largely unnecessary. They're pretty central to the entire point?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:They're pretty central to the entire point? Did you forget that Leo really loved his family and that they were his light in this dark, unforgiving world? Mystical elements feel dishonest in this film; unlike in Malick's, for whom they are central. Malick also employs them in a more complex fashion. The Revenant flirts with muddled mysticism, but does not have the intelligence to make more of it because it is a revenge flick with loftier aspirations. Judakel fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
I disagree that Malick uses them better or that these were entirely pointless. A little long and overdone but they were certainly central to the story and his journey.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
I don't understand why Fitzgerald scalped Andrews instead of just killing him. Up to that point he seemed like an evil guy afraid for his life, but not a full on psycho.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
It was to make Glass think the natives did it not him
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Ohh that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Escobarbarian posted:Agreed that this movie is effective at many things but largely feels empty. Cinematography is absolutely amazing, though. Has a DOP ever won Best Cinematography even two years in a row, let alone three? Because that's definitely going to happen. echoing this, the movie was a technical marvel - that cinematography & the accompanying score are incredible - but as a story it just wasn't that interesting. I didn't connect with Glass, and had a very hard time understanding Fitzgerald's accent (although, I wasn't at the best cinema, I admit). I feel like this movie would be much better with the commentary track on. There's a few youtube clips of Innaritu narrating scenes, explaining choices etc and it's fascinating. I'd like the bear to get a nod for best supporting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 09:20
|
|
|
The side plots didn't make much sense to me: - The natives raided Glass's crew because they were looking for the kidnapped girl. - They took their pelts and traded with the French guys for more horses and weapons. - It turns out the French guys are the ones who took the girl in the first place. Do I have the progression right? Seems like one weird-rear end coincidence, if true. I feel like if this film was 45 minutes shorter and tried to be a straight-up thriller instead of a profound meditation on the metaphysical nature of vengeance, it would have been a lot better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
Yeah seeing as how Glass took a route specific to him encompassing over 200 miles of open frontier, the fact that he kept running into the same two factions over and over seemed a bit implausible (especially knowing beforehand that it was an invention of the film) It felt pretty unrelated to the main narrative aside from manufacturing drama and suspense for Glass' pilgrimage. speshl guy fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
speshl guy posted:Yeah seeing as how Glass took a route specific to him encompassing over 200 miles of open frontier, the fact that he kept running into the two same factions over and over seemed a bit implausible (especially knowing beforehand that it was an invention of the film) It's a big problem with film adaptations of true stories. You already had a really interesting true story, but there's the need to frame it in the context of a cliched Hollywood plot. It's pretty obvious that in real life Fitzgerald didn't really kill his son, and that they didn't ever have a one on one battle to the death by the banks of a river. It didn't seem made up to make a point, or to have any impact on the film other than to be sure that there's one clear Good Guy, and one clear Bad Guy, and they have to punch each other at the end until one of them dies. Technically the film was incredible, but it was such a standard revenge plot with stock characters that the attempts at a deeper meaning through dream sequences and flashbacks just felt misguided.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
This movie was a pie with amazing crust and a poo poo filling. I'm upset with how many short cuts the plot took, and how little characterization there was. I don't understand the hype, it wasn't a good movie.mr. unhsib posted:The side plots didn't make much sense to me: Why the gently caress did they start hanging natives when their businesses is trading with natives? It's almost like they just wanted to kill wandering native for *~plot reason~*
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Veskit posted:Why the gently caress did they start hanging natives when their businesses is trading with natives? It's almost like they just wanted to kill wandering native for *~plot reason~* Just prior they had a bad trading experience where they were forced to make a trade they didn't want. Also it's really not that unrealistic for people to be racist pieces of poo poo but to deal with "inferiors" out of necessity or benefit or fear. A lone traveler has no value to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
I really liked him too. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
I didn't dislike the movie, but I don't know if I would say that I liked it either. It was very nice to look at, and the action of the first 20 minutes or so was incredible, but that was where the movie peaked for me. I was more interested in what Tom Hardy was up to after that point. I found the Fitzgerald/Bridger story to be more interesting than Leo crawling around in the dirt for another two hours.RCarr posted:This is the first time I've ever heard the phrase tree-friend of the family. Is that a real thing people said? I was at the discovery channel store at a mall in the south one time and I heard an old man look at some Native American doodad and mutter "buncha spear-chucking timber niggers" so, uhh, yes. Probably. Jamwad Hilder fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Jan 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Veskit posted:This movie was a pie with amazing crust and a poo poo filling. I'm upset with how many short cuts the plot took, and how little characterization there was. I don't understand the hype, it wasn't a good movie. Agreed completely. Looked amazing and Hardy was amazing, but otherwise, found it mostly boring and kind of unintentionally funny (what can go wrong next?!). Seems like the real star of the movie was the making of the movie, which is cool I guess? Leo did a fine job but his character was not really a character, just an embodiment of drive. Honestly the snowflake scene was probably the best because it at least makes him seem somewhat human. Really don't understand the amount of praise this movie is getting. Then again, I thought Mad Max was kind of garbage so take my opinion with a grain of salt (just kidding my opinion is probbaly much better than yours)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Did you forget that Leo really loved his family and that they were his light in this dark, unforgiving world? Mystical elements feel dishonest in this film; unlike in Malick's, for whom they are central. Malick also employs them in a more complex fashion. The Revenant flirts with muddled mysticism, but does not have the intelligence to make more of it because it is a revenge flick with loftier aspirations. I meant they are the point in that they establish both the theme and the symbols that the film will use. The film uses a makes a much more structured use of such things, and without those sequences you wouldn't have any indications of what, say, a raven represents in this specific film's context. It's a completely different approach to symbolism and thematic storytelling than Malick uses, and the comparisons don't make much sense to me. I don't think they'd come up if it wasn't for the combined aesthetic of Lubezski and Fisk. Malick is my favorite director, but this is doing something different.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
I'll be the billionth person to echo the sentiment that it was an absolutely stunning achievement in film making. With a pretty lack luster plot. Although, as good as the cinematography was, the Captains "Golly, I sure hope I get to see my wife again" speech, the scene before he died was almost as cliche and terrible as the cinematography was good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
Sharks Eat Bear posted:unintentionally funny (what can go wrong next?!) After the helpful native outcome I thought "wow this is the most intense adaptation of fortunately, unfortunately ever." It really did seem like that's how they wrote the script.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 07:37
|
|