criterionforum.org

My goodness that looks amazing.

According to this interview, the film was shot using only natural light. This is based on the same story that informed the Richard Harris film Man in the Wilderness

Lubezki used the new large format Arri too. First time, I think. Digital 65mm equivalent.

I don't care how much actor fellating nonsense this guy feels like he has to write, if this movie is half as good as it looks, all is forgiven.

solaris72 wrote:Said to be $35 million over budget

Wonder how much DiCaprio is making.

FrauBlucher wrote:

solaris72 wrote:Said to be $35 million over budget

Wonder how much DiCaprio is making.

Mostly back end I imagine, and his salary/participation would have been figured into the original $60 million budget. According to the article, the massive overage comes mostly from bad scheduling and mismanagement.

Revenge stories are a hard sell for me, but Lubezki as always appears to be in top form, and the reveal in the credit block that Ryuichi Sakamoto is scoring the film has me really excited!

Other than the dictionary definition, I like this a lot. It's got that patented Neil Kellerhouse magic.

No need to worry, there is no bear rape in the film

I saw the film last week. In terms of style this is like the love child of Malick and Herzog, which is no bad thing, but it is no more than a simple adventure story with not much else to it. As such it works even if it feels slightly overextended. I've never been a fan of Iñárritu as I've found his "rubbing your face in it" approach and his self aggrandising "the world is a cesspool" preaching seriously irritating but here he is making a survival/revenge western and only lapses into preachiness a couple of times. As a feast for the eyes and the ears (great score!) The Revenant more than works and the action scenes truly pack a punch with the bear being an impressive creation with not a detectable pixel in sight. DiCaprio is fine in a role which puts his character through the wringer. Apart from that the film is beautifully made and mostly involving, there is nothing more I can think of saying about it, because there is nothing more to it.

How anybody could put it out there that the film features a "bear rape" can only be a prank whose purpose is beyond me.

The influence of Malick is very strong in the trailer, especially the super-wide lenses and natural light (which Malick takes to extremes in KNIGHT, using a 6mm Nikon fisheye in some scenes, where the lens is literally touching Bale's face). You can also see something of BIRDMAN's fluid, unending style. Lost Highway, did the film feature very long takes? I am curious how much of that long-take style he carried over from BIRDMAN? I wonder how much of that carries over from Cuarón's CHILDREN OF MEN and GRAVITY, for example, through Lubezki?

Trees wrote:Lost Highway, did the film feature very long takes? I am curious how much of that long-take style he carried over from BIRDMAN? I wonder how much of that carries over from Cuarón's CHILDREN OF MEN and GRAVITY, for example, though Lubezki?

Does a bear shit in the woods ?

You bet!

Lost Highway wrote:

Trees wrote:Lost Highway, did the film feature very long takes? I am curious how much of that long-take style he carried over from BIRDMAN? I wonder how much of that carries over from Cuarón's CHILDREN OF MEN and GRAVITY, for example, though Lubezki?

Does a bear shit in the woods ?

You bet!

Like how long?

(by the way, why don't why have the smilie of the guy eating popcorn here?!)

Trees wrote:

Lost Highway wrote:

Trees wrote:Lost Highway, did the film feature very long takes? I am curious how much of that long-take style he carried over from BIRDMAN? I wonder how much of that carries over from Cuarón's CHILDREN OF MEN and GRAVITY, for example, though Lubezki?

Does a bear shit in the woods ?

You bet!

Like how long?

(by the way, why don't why have the smilie of the guy eating popcorn here?!)

I'll just say that you will be very happy with the extended take which opens the film and I was chewing my nails too hard to check my watch.

Just as a reminder, this guy has two last names (González from his father, Iñárritu from his mother).

swo17 wrote:Just as a reminder, this guy has two last names (González from his father, Iñárritu from his mother).

This is true, of course, but he is billed/credited as "Alejandro G. Iñárritu" for this film, and I believe this was true of Birdman as well.

By the way, I notice today that Drudge is still continuing to troll Iñárritu and DiCaprio with this whole "Leo raped by bear" hoax. Pretty hilarious.

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/201 ... enant-bear" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-21/l ... 30/7046524" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... rd-bear-r/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I saw this one today and am wholly disappointed by it. The movie works beautifully for 2/3 of its running time. For most of the film you forget it's a simple revenge story. The long takes are more impressive here than in Birdman, the scenery is gorgeous, the camera hangs on the background and the landscapes just long enough to evoke Malick but without any of his overindulgence. It's pretty much a perfect film.

But then the final act is so poorly done. The long takes are traded for close-ups and typical hard cuts.

Spoiler

Tom Hardy's character final line is something along the lines of "You came all this way for your revenge. Well, enjoy it." And just as Leo's character realizes he's let Hardy dictate so much of his actions, I, too felt duped at the same time. Duped in the sense that what seemed like an amazing tale of survival was actually a run of the mill revenge plot. Which wouldn't be so bad if the final confrontation sequence wasn't the weakest part of the film.

Leo is decent here but he's been better. I think his Oscar is only guaranteed because of his reputation and not having a strong field this year. Tom Hardy is the better performer. He's a 19th century frontiersman but also that guy you know who's always trying to get you to go hunting with him.

The notorious bear scene is some of the best use of CG this year - maybe ever. It's a gripping, powerful sequence. Most of the movie works incredibly well but it falters in the end. It doesn't make the cut in my top 10.