I enjoy a lot of Disney movies but will never set foot in a park again, no offense Hugh. He probably is good but he is one of those people that just makes my skin crawl when I see him. Axel Rose is the other. If I had a heavy bag handy it would probably be good exercise for me as I could take it out on the bag while I watched a movie.

I am probably missing out, but I don't watch that much TV or movies anyway.

I am right there with you on axel rose!

I have a lifetime pass to the theme parks and I don't go either.

OK... So my son and I saw it tonight.

Certainly well worth the wait. It never lets up and it's absolutely brutal at times. A truly unique movie.
Some of the scenery took my breath away. The guys that did this for real must have been very tough.

An epic masterpiece!

Most of that scenery is only about 1 hour from Calgary.
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I read the book in two days. Very enjoyable book.

Funny, it took me a month to read a little book called "The Mersault Investigation". It was fabulous for inducing sleep!

I think I am going to read the book first and then see the movie....that is the Revenant one:)

I will be in a minority but I didn't like it very much. I enjoyed it, but I thought it was 45 minutes too long and pretty much every surprise scene in the movie has been done somewhere else in a movie well known enough that I could name it as I saw the scene. The bear scene was the exception and that was incredible. The scenery was fantastic but taking so long to pan the horizon every time the camera changed position got a little old for me and added time to the movie without moving the story forward. I also didn't like the ending. I think it will be like The Road to Perdition was for Tom Hanks - a lot of early buzz and breathless reviews but it didn't stand up over time and is now mostly forgotten.

I am certain my opinion will be a minority of one, so no one should avoid seeing the movie based on my experience. I did enjoy the movie but I wouldn't see it again and Everything that I didn't like about it were exactly the things that made my two (college Age) sons love it.

I will say this. The movie was so intense and had such an impact that the entire theater filed out silently. It was as though we were leaving church after a funeral.

Romans 12:19 “Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord”

Sorry, just saw this. Yes, she is Native American. I haven't seen the film but have heard that she only appears in dream sequences or as a vision or (?)

Possibly not a speaking role but still a big break for a young NA actress who doesn't live anywhere near the big city.

That's something Drudge Report was pushing. The character was attacked by a mother bear protecting her cubs. The 'rape' story is more internet idiocy.

The movie is quite different than the book. The time covered in the movie is a matter of several weeks over the course of fall and winter of the same year. The events that happened to Glass before the movie are explained either in dialog or dream sequences.

The firearms appeared correct from Jeff's description. There's a nice scene of Glass reloading in the heat of battle by measuring poweder and spitting shot down the barrel of his gun on the run. I commented to my boys that he must have been able to shoot both shot and ball with the same gun. My sons wondered if the barrel would be rifled even though it could be used with shot. I thought so but don't know.

As I noted in an earlier post, I watched the movie for the way they portrayed the rifles that were used and from what I saw they were pretty close to the way things work in real life. The biggest thing to get is that the Indians can shoot arrows much faster than a white man can shoot a flint lock! I am not so sure about the power their bows had but I did notice they took their arrows from the dead men after the fighting stopped since it was hard to make them. As for the rifles, most all were smooth bores and they can shoot a single round ball or shot depending on what you want to kill. If you watch closely in some scenes there are people that keep the frizzen covered with some cloth to prevent the snow from wetting the priming powder. We do that if we are shooting a muzzle loading match and there is any mist or rain as we don't want misfires either. You'll also note that in many cases the shooters seemed to just dump powder down the barrel but in reality the hole in the powder horn was set so if the shooter counted to 3 he would have 70 or 80 grains of black powder which was a good hunting load. The calibers were probably either 69 caliber for the military muskets or 50 caliber for the Hawken rifles which were just being started back then. The final thing to note is the black powder they used then was much cleaner burning than what we have today mainly due to the hardwood used as the base to make it.

I bought the DVD earlier this year but never watched it. Lo and behold, it came on TV yesterday afternoon (FX) so I watched it for the first time. I really enjoyed it and look forward to seeing it again.

The only negative is I could hardly understand anything Tom Hardy's character said. It was like he mumbled instead of actually talking.

DiCaprio has done some decent work in the last decade. I think so far "The Departed" is my favourite of his with this one in second place.

I thought they did a really good job of showing the type of relationship he had with his son.

He was honest and up front and his son had to accept life the way it was.

I wanted my 2 hours and 36 minutes back.
When I see a movie I like I'll watch it again later on. There are many films that I find entertaining and have seen many times over the years.
But I have no desire to watch the revenant again. None whatsoever.
just the opposite.

It wasn't that the movie was all bad, just disturbing with little redeeming value and zero entertainment.
The lighting, contrast and dreary twilight effect got old quickly.
The point was made after 10 minutes, life was horribly difficult and dangerous back then in the frontier and even worse for this guy. The movie didn't have to be repeat that point constantly.
The lead character was immortal and could survive gunshots, knife wounds, bear attacks, starvation, infection, and hypothermia. He suffered from all those things but nothing could kill him. Any mortal man would have died in that movie a dozen times, but not our hero. There really were no good guys in the film, one almost developed but he got killed easily.
It just got really old.
The revenant was beating a dead horse, literally.

The way the movie was shot reminded me of "a man on fire" or "the book of eli" where a potentially good movie was ruined by the directors' attempt to prove how creative he is.
Instead they just proved they were the self-indulgent artsy-fartsy type.
At least in those denzel movies the acting and action made up for much of the bad effects.

Don't get me wrong, the revenant director wasn't tarantino horrible. Taranino is so bad he has his own cult following.

This guy just made a film worse than it should have been.
this movie had most of what was necessary to be great, it just missed.

IOW I didn't care for it.

Thanks for clearing that up at the end, sammy.

I'd put Gangs of NY ahead of Revenant.

I could have deleted everything above that last line, but I figure no one is going to bother reading it anyway .......... :D

I know it is based on a true story/event but I found it rather far fetched with his ability to with stands the effects of cold/hypothermia and couldn't take it seriously. I don't think you could survive what they portrayed in those scenes in modern winter/foul weather gear more than a day or two but, this guy lasted a week or more wearing little more than oiled canvas and animal hide.

I did like the Indian attack scene however.

IMHO....us humans used to be tougher than "we" are now.

We've gotten SOFT! :rolleyes: