Conversation
Notices
-
So I watched The Revenant. I feel like the best word I can think of to describe it is "oppressive". It's heavily atmospheric, but it works in that regard thanks to some absolutely stunning cinematography and effective sound design. It's really well shot and performed, though its uncompromising nature may be its greatest Achilles Heel. It's by all means brutal, but that brutality has me wondering if and when viscera in film overtakes narrative. It's a classic survival story driven by revenge, though I feel the most interesting "character" of the film is the environment itself. It's indifferent, starkly beautiful but also unwilling to nurture its inhabitants. The camerawork juxtaposes claustrophobic character shots with lush scenic wide takes, which further emphasizes its man vs nature thematic undertone. I don't think "enjoyed" is the right word for it, but I was certainly captivated by the film. In spite of its narrative shortcomings, if nothing else it demonstrates stellar film craft.
-
@northernnarwhal I feel like it ran maybe 20 minutes too long, if only because it let me catch on to some of their focus-shift light-and-sound dramatic moment Gandalf moves, but I do agree it had amazing cinematography and some hard-core acting talent in it. And, as a bonus, another incomprehensibly mush-mouthed Tom Hardy character!
Monday, 25-Jan-16 01:55:21 UTC from web-
@bigpoke For better or worse the film left me really exhausted. In a lot of ways it was "Manly Guys Doing Manly Men Things" but it was just so well composed. I feel like in terms of its atmosphere its length is justified but in terms of its narrative lots of fat could've been trimmed as far as runtime is concerned. Tom Hardy was Tom Hardy in this film, but I guess in this sense it kind of works in that all of the human characters in The Revenant are gritty and unintelligible.
Monday, 25-Jan-16 02:15:23 UTC from web
-
-
