[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Anyone else think this is one of the best...
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /tv/ - Television & Film

Thread replies: 133
Thread images: 7
File: 279258.jpg (163 KB, 1800x1012) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
279258.jpg
163 KB, 1800x1012
Anyone else think this is one of the best films they ever seen?
>>
>>65080199
No but it was one of the better ones that have come out in theaters the past few years.
>>
Yes.
>>
>>65080199
If you think that you haven't seen many films.

It's very good but not amazing.
>>
>>65080199
it's poor man's malick.

leo shit as always.

tom hardy was a cartoon villain.
>>
>>65080578
kill yourself
>>
>>65080578
Malick is incapable of making good films anymore.
>>
>>65080199
Yes.
by the way Ive been in captivity for 20 years and this is the first film Ive ever seen
>>
>>65080578
This + forced and overdone metaphors.
>>
>>65080199
No

Pretty solid film though

>>65080578
Hardy was a little one dimensional but he had room to not be. Clearly he was looking out for himself, fine, but I wish they would have fleshed him out a bit more.
>>
>>65080199
Best ever? No. One of the best lately yes.
>>
>>65080687
>>65080283
it had the potential to be reddit for sure, but ended up being more Aguirre

>>65080578
Nah it is superior to Malick cause it gets rid of all the nonsense
>>
The Revenant is simply the representation of the artistic bankruptcy plaguing the contemporary film industry.

Like Birdman, Iñárritu's last endeavor in hackery, this latest attempt is to convince the masses that what they are viewing is something deep or meaningful, when all it has done is push forward shallow technicality and exaggeration to make the frame pulsate with vulgar loudness. Characters are mere veneers, the cinematography is pretty but so conspicuous as to be rendered aggravating and the thesis is about as overdone as DiCaprio's acting. The camera feels like it has been waiting all day for a climactic shot and the film's deliberately difficult production history is laid bare in the indulgent cinematography.

Thematic complexity and philosophical subtext take a back seat to what amounts to as basically an action movie with action stars wrapped up in the veil of arthouse. And much like Salome, what lies beneath is ultimately puerile, obscene and holding fascination only for adolescents.

Iñárritu is guilty of something far greater than simply making a bad movie. He is guilty for the crime of gestating his pretense and self-importance, forcing many others to labor over it in a misguided attempt to create art and daring to call the afterbirth a film. Perhaps instead of taking his cast and crew to the ends of the Earth in search of a better shot, the Mexican counterfeit filmmaker should have taken his juvenile and crass sensibilities to the seedy San Fernando valley. There he could have at least made a profit of filming all the money shots he wanted.
>>
File: 1452573313720.png (753 KB, 629x754) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1452573313720.png
753 KB, 629x754
>still no based YIFY torrent
>>
>>65080199
Hardy was the best actor of the film and his character was the most interesting.
Leo was utter shit, and his character was boring to follow.
Stupid ass dream-sequences? Original concept. I'd rather see Leo grunting and shouting desu.
>>
>>65080199
the technical aspects are great but the story and characters are too blunt
>>
>>65080841
Imagine being this asshole
>>
>>65080841
What's wrong with any of that?
>>
>>65080740
>Hardy was a little one dimensional but he had room to not be. Clearly he was looking out for himself, fine, but I wish they would have fleshed him out a bit more.

Could you type any more words to say as little as you just did?
>>
Solid film, complaints were that Hardy was one dimensional, there was an audio sync problem when Leo met the Indian, and Gleeson went to hunt down Hardy without any fucking backup.
>>
>>65080963
Imagine being this asshole in that post and having to be all like "damn, The Revenant, you fuckin' fine..."
>>
I didn't really understand the message of the movie and I'm not sure if it's because it was too subtle for me or if it was unfocused. What exactly was the point? Revenge is meaningless? That's kind of what I got from the title and the motif of the endlessly flowing river, but I feel like there's more to it than that.

>>65081001
Brevity is for jerk

I just meant I wish they had developed his character more. He had the potential to be more than just the selfish racist.
>>
What was meant by the final shot, where Leo turns to the camera and looks at it for like 15 seconds before it fades to black?

Why couldn't they just have a shot of him either dying or returning to camp or something to finish the story? Or even just fade to black without having Leo stare at the camera?
>>
>>65080199
I haven't watched a bunch of "the greats" but The Revenant will be tossed in the good but forgettable category
>>
>>65081155
Shitty unsatisfying ending like Birdman tbqh.
>>
Read something like Blood Meridian or Butcher's Crossing if you want a real taste of the West. This movie tries its hardest to offer the same imagery of a well-written novel.
>>
>>65081155
Maybe they meant it to be ambiguous. Does he give up and die, or does he continue to survive even though he no longer has anything to live for? Also it ends with his heavy breathing over black just like how it started, which brings me back to the theme of cyclical suffering. But seriously that seems like to weak of a theme to build a whole movie on
>>
>White liberal literally avenges the killing of an Indian at the hands of a bible-quoting n-bomb dropping psychopath

It was a liberal feel-good flick that plebs parade as amazing art. Innataru lacks the subtlety required to be a truly great filmmaker.
>>
>>65081298
Avenged the killing of his son, not some Indian.
>>
>>65081155
Leo is trying to make a connection with the most dangerous enemy, the audience.
>>
>>65081068
>He had the potential to be more than just the selfish racist.

Exactly. Absolutely worthless arbitrary shit argument to make.
>Transformers sucked because Megan Fox's character wasnt fleshed out, it had the potential to be more than just tits and ass.

Shut the fuck up and enjoy the movie, nigger.
>>
>>65081352
>Don't point out flaws just like things

So do people still talk about movies here or is it all just interracial porn and telling people to go back to the boogeyman of the month?
>>
>>65080199
I think it could have been the best movie I ever saw, but it fell down whenever anyone said anything.

Minimalistic and beautiful movies like this cause the viewer to subconsciously come up with interpretations of the characters themselves.

When Hardy's character turned out to be "macho idiot man", I was pissed off. I thought I understood who he was.
>>
>>65080948
>Leo was utter shit

stopped reading right there
>>
>>65081425
True. Innaritu always has really good ideas for his movies, but they always seem to fall a little short in execution. Babel, Birdman and The Revenant are all good movies but they all have this problem that take them from a 10/10 to an 8
>>
File: faggot.jpg (11 KB, 202x249) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
faggot.jpg
11 KB, 202x249
>>65080578
>>65080699
>>65080948
>>
>>65080675
>implying

Tree of Life is the best film of the decade so far and To the Wonder is a worthy entry in his filmography, Lord Scrubicus
>>
>>65081538
>Tfw you will never make something as remotely beautiful as Tree of Life

Why even live
>>
>>65080199
only a treenigger would disagree
>>
>>65080841
Armond white's whole point is providing a dissenting voice to the critical circlejerk surrounding movies while also showing how preposterous some of the negative "hit piece criticism" you see is. A multi-paragraph deluge of insults directed at an Adam Sandler movie is just as annoying as someone having an orgasm to twelve years a slave.
>>
>>65081242

my impression of the film was just that it's Blood Meridian meets Bear Grylls.
>>
>>65081343
Right, and why would the film maker decide to make his son Indian? Just for fun? It doesn't take a genius to see what is being shown. Leo's character is a liberal fantasy, literally avenging the sins of his racist ancestors. The structure of the story actually isn't that much different from capeshit, an unlikely origin story leads to a hero seeking revenge against a villain who represents some simplified version of American ills.
>>
>>65080841
you sound like one of those bullshitting assholes who down voted toy story 3 on rotten tomatoes.
>>
>>65080199
I thought it was pretty damn good -- definitely one of the strongest films of the year, and I enjoyed it much more than Birdman. But not one of the best I've ever seen.

I thought the violence was superbly handled. Even if the shit Leo has to endure stretches my suspension of disbelief at times, it's all handled so well that I didn't really care while watching it.
>>
>>65081425
>I was pissed off. I thought I understood who he was.
I think you did understand who he was, to be honest. Hardy's character feels like he was rewritten at the last minute to appease SJWs. He's a guy who is extremely cautious because of past mistakes getting him scalped. You don't need to make him excessively racist or macho, that screams of studio meddling.
>>
I thought it was alright.
But that CG bear looked awful. And it should have ripped Leo's face off tbqhwy.
>>
I thought it was a good film but honestly it left me a little disappointed

While I was watching it, I was lapping that shit up, and was thoroughly engrossed for long periods.

BUT

it's a large butt

Considering how gorgeous the visuals of the film were, and how well constructed the film felt, there was something lacking; the religious and philosophical subtext felt half baked- what actually was the point? There are no truly stunning moments emotionally in this film, just a series of grim, well paced lows. Something this close to brilliance should have been much more, but honestly I felt like it really was a poor Malick imitation.

8/10
>>
>>65081594
I haven't read the book or looked up irl Hugh Glass, but I doubt that the film came up with his son being an Indian. That was probably included in the book, which was made into a movie for reasons that aren't pushing a paranoid agenda. Also I was worried that the interracial angle would be forced but it wasn't. There was the one racist character, nobody else really seemed to care. The French took advantage of the Indians because they were there and they were easy, and Hardy was the only one to make racist comments
>>
>>65081608
>Doesn't understand the source
>Down vote

Good god I don't say this ever but go the fuck back to reddit
>>
>>65080949
it was based on a true story.
>>
>>65081692
This this this this this
>>
>>65081756
That doesn't mean they can't write them as good characters
>>
>>65081570
That's not an Armond White review, you idiot.
>>
>>65081155
if you listened carefully, his breathing carries into the credits and stops.

he dead
>>
>>65081855
Did it stop because he died and then the credits rolled, or is his breathing the end and then the credits roll, that's the question
>>
Grizzly Man was better
>>
>>65081565
It fucking hurts, bro
>>
>>65081855
>>65081900
the breathing really should have carried on after the movie ended.
we should still hear it even now.
>>
>>65081756
The real story was way more poignant than the pseudo-philosophical treenigger garbage we got. The real Hugh Glass spared Fitzgerald as atonement for killing an officer of the US army; the writers could've easily played by that angle instead of the only god can take revenge crap
>>
>>65081976
Wait really? That's way better, I'm now pissed off at Alejandro
>>
>>65081976
>The real Hugh Glass spared Fitzgerald as atonement for killing an officer of the US army
That could have been more powerful.
At the very least I thought the audience deserved to see Fitzgerald get scalped. Why bother to make that choice of an ending and not show it properly.
>>
>>65081976
How did you not get that facet of his decision to spare Fitzgerald? His previous crime of killing an army officer carried into his hesitation and ultimate abandonment of Fitzgerald. Glass realized that he will never be able to perpetuate this cycle of vengeance, and left it up to God thereby proving his existence.
>>
>>65082089
Yeah wtf it's incredibly brutal all throughout the movie, even during their fights, and they don't show it. They got Leo to look like a bear ripped a chunk of flesh out of his back but they couldn't make it look like Hardy got scalped? Seriously why would they not show it?
>>
>>65082123
>His previous crime of killing an army officer carried into his hesitation and ultimate abandonment of Fitzgerald
That wasn't the reason implied in the film, he hesitated because he knew killing Fitzgerald wouldn't bring his dead wife and son back
>>
>>65082123
Do you think that's the ultimate point of the film? Because that's kind of the point I got from it, Revenge is and endless cycle of suffering and only god can truly exact it, but then again most of the movie isn't about revenge, it's about Glass surviving. Revenge is his ultimate goal for doing so, but I'm wondering if it wasn't also trying to say something about the human spirit.

Overall I think the point of the whole thing was a little unclear.
>>
>>65082154
Because scalping is the stuff of nightmares.
It would make people sick and make it the 'talking point' of the entire film.
>Did you guys SEE that scalping?
>>
>>65082456
That's the only reason I can think of, but they already have that in the bear attack scene, that shit was unforgiving.

The shot was on Leo's face when he was being scalped though, suggesting that the important part of the scene is how Glass feels about that. Unfortunately if I'm remembering right Leo just had a blank expression on his face.
>>
>>65080199
Just because it stood out in a shit year it may seem like that but no

>yfw Tom Hardy was in the two best movies of 2015
>>
>>65081155
means
>gib oscar pls are u not entertained what more u want of i and i
>>
>>65082648
Those fuckin jews better give it to him. I heard he actually spent the night in an animal carcass during production.

I know that doesn't mean acting, but come on, just give it to him he deserves it.
>>
taking away his voice because dialogue is hard to write
>>
>>65082697
Leo is a fucking hack, keeping the Oscar away from him is the only good decision the academy's ever made
>>
>>65082592
weird innit

to be totally honest I haven't enjoyed 2 "big" films in a year like this since 2007 had There Will Be Blood and No Country For Old Men
>>
>>65080199
No, but bear scene is one of the best special effect scenes I've seen and the whole cinematography aspect and the directorial input is both obvious in attempt to create a living breathing indifferent world and successful. Apart from two leads, most of the acting is stiff, what little of plot there is is poorly written but movie is almost a masterpiece
>>
>>65082768
I haven't seen all of his nominations, but I think he's pretty good. He's charming and has a great on screen presence. I don't think he's great for emotionally complex roles though, keep him in things like Wolf of Wall Street. I mean he brings a good energy to his characters, but he can't really sell more subtle emotions like the ones in this movie. As far as delivery and stuff like that though he's always pretty spot on.

He's good, but he's not one of the greats.
>>
>hitting anyone with accuracy with a smooth bore musket

Those things had a three foot pattern at 30 yards.
>>
>>65082859
>acting was stiff

by who? I felt like none of the supporting cast let the film down; Domnhall Gleeson and Downs Syndrome Damon were both very good. leo's son was kinda shit but I guess there aren't any good indian actors
>>
>>65082934
Whoever played the guy commanding the expedition fucking sucked, everyone else was good. I actually didn't think his son was that bad.
>>
>>65080199

Great cinematography, good to great acting.

But the story just doesn't grab or move you in any way.

None of the characters are relatable and even Leo's character wasn't that likable.

All that indian, spiritual crap came off completely empty.

Nobody gave a shit about the indian woman, and half the people cheered when the little screaming bitch Hawk gets killed.

Overall... the STORY is just not that compelling... and kind of emotionless
>>
>>65082913

not being a douche...

how do you know it wasn't a rifled musket?
>>
>>65083007
I wish they would have spent more time on Glass living with the Indians. They never gave a full picture of what actually happened when his village was burned, just unsatisfying snippets. The story would have been a lot more compelling if they had expanded his character more and not had any scenes with the other group, just Leo and his memories until they get back to camp.
>>
>>65082934
commander of the expedition is a shit actor, indians are just generic faces, french are fucking le horrible and perpetually kid looking man shouldn't be cast anywhere outside YA shitfests.
>>
imagine if Gladiator couldn't speak the whole movie. would be pretty shit revenge story eh?
>>
>>65082913
What year was the film set? I'm not too familiar with the history of firearms, but I thought that smooth bore muskets started getting phased out by rifled muskets at some point which were far more accurate.
>>
>>65080199
of kors
>>
know what's funny

like for most fresh movies threads will be less and less frequent, and then peak again after a while and that's how I know the blurray release is out/ripped

see you then
>>
only liked the scenery and the bear attack desu
>>
File: 1374757067731.jpg (21 KB, 286x344) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1374757067731.jpg
21 KB, 286x344
>>65080199
The Indian attack on the camp at the beginning was one of the best combat scenes I've ever seen in any movie.

Tell me someone has a webm
>>
cinematography-wise, I thought it was good but the constant use of upwards shots of the sky and trees with excessive smoke made it feel a bit gimmicky and samey.
>>
>>65083162
1820s
>>
>>65081695
Actually glass never even had a son, not the guy you're arguing with because I'm not retarded and don't have a problem with it.
>>
>>65083255
>One fucking take
Fucking brilliant sequence, really glad I saw it at the kino house, that shit was awe-inspiring
>>
>>65083255
probably the best scene in the movie tbqh.
>>
>>65083297
Huh. Maybe the Indian kid was in the novel?

If not, still not really a big deal. Just kind of an overused story device.
>>
>>65083322
The best thing about it was how most of people just died painfully, quickly and weren't good at fighting or shooting at all.
They just got fucking killed, in a disorganized mess. Exactly how it would be IRL
>>
>>65083047

It takes place a few years before they are invented.
>>
>>65083007

This.

Innuratu seemed to have put all of his directing energy on the lighting and cinematography that he forgot the most important part: to tell a good story.

Agreed none of the characters were particularly likable or relatable. You feel no empathy at all for the characters.

And you're right. Most people were probably glad to see annoying ass hawk get killed.
>>
>>65083388
Yeah I thought it was great like that, it seemed like it would actually happen
>>
>>65080675
>anymore
>>
>>65083118
I think they tried to go the Malick route with the flashbacks. There's something qualitatively different about how Malick handles these, though -- something I can't quite explain. Like he's touching some subconscious part of the mind, and I can't say I've seen anyone replicate it perfectly.

I almost would have preferred if the flashbacks were cut out entirely, tbqph. They felt repetitive and didn't reveal any new information or breathe any new feeling with each successive flashback. These kinds of flashbacks, I think, are difficult to pull off because they need to be vivid enough to leave and convey some sort of impression, but they also need to be vague enough to be just that -- an impression. Something ethereal, immaterial even. Like a scent or a dream half-remembered. The film is at its strongest when it's raw, immediate, gritty, and real, and it's at its weakest when it tries to force the subconscious or spiritual angle. And like I've said, Malick is one of the few directors working today who can handle both the gritty and the ethereal -- The Thin Red Line is the best example of this.
>>
>>65081594
>liberal fantasy

Did you miss the part where the roaming band of Indians are depicted as violent mass murderers lead by a paranoid lunatic?

Or do you just choose to ignore that so everything can fit your /pol/ narrative and you can feel red-pilled despite the fact that you're just regurgitating someone else's delusions like the average John Oliver watching leftist fucktard?
>>
>>65083427
Innaritu needs a partner to keep his ideas grounded and centred around a theme.
>Alejandro stop shooting pictures of woods and help me with the script
>Hey! Hey get Emmanuels dick out of your mouth!

Speaking of which, that shot soon after they leave Glass and are crossing the river, how low they are in the shot and how crushing the scenery is, and then they start infighting. Fucking great.
>>
Dances with wolves Story >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Revenant story

Revenant cinematography >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dances with wolves cinematography.

How many of you remember the ending scene where Kevin Costner was leaving the camp and one of the braves keeps yelling "Can you see you will always be our friend?"

I remember chills from that scene.

Dances with Wolves was emotionally moving.

I couldn't relate to or feel for anyone in the Revenant.
>>
>>65083484
It's because Malick makes films like Hemingway wrote books. He makes movies about things and feelings that he knows very well and a full and we'll rounded view of, therefore the minimal narrative still shines through as a rich and full story because the images he's chosen to use perfectly emulate the emotions he's trying to portray.
>>
File: Untitled-1.jpg (58 KB, 424x562) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Untitled-1.jpg
58 KB, 424x562
Yes. Not a single dull moment

>>65083427
Glass was likable, while tough, he cared about his family, his group.
>>
>>65083686
But the film kind of hovered between wanting you to relate to glass and root for him, and being a detached narrative more focused on an overall theme than a character or a narrative. It felt like they could have done one or the other in a really spectacular manner, but they both a little half assedly
>>
>>65083747
Shit I used narrative twice and now it looks contradictory
>>
Bumparoo Bonzai
>>
>>65082015
>>65081976
The real Fitzgerald never murdered Glass' son(he never had a son irl anyway). So it would be a lot easier for him to forgive him.
>>
>>65083624
Eat a dick, faggot
>>
>>65085142
B R A V O
R
A
V
O
>>
>>65085192
No seriously fuck off Malickfag
>>
>>65085227
>STOP LIKING THINGS I DON'T LIKE
>>
>>65085266
>liking meme directors with meme cinemetography
>>
its a great FILM not movie or flick.
but since its "mainstream", "patricians" feel less special, after all, they are taking from them their last thing.
>>
>>65085310
>meme as an argument

That's literally just nonsense, fuck off
>>
>>65085441
just like malick films
>>
Is it like valhalle rising?
>>
>>65085335
As a film it's average, but it is above average cinema
>>
>>65085475
Not at all
>>
File: bradybb.jpg (33 KB, 640x480) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
bradybb.jpg
33 KB, 640x480
I don't go to films, I go to film school.
>>
>>65080578
He only became a cartoon villain at the very end.
>>
>>65081234
birdman was a perfect ending pleb
>>
>>65085597
Birdman was the first movie that actually deserved to win best picture in a long time, that made me happy.
>>
>>65081726

Pretty sure he's smarter than you.
>>
>>65085597
>muh symbolism
>>
>>65085813
Probably, half the time I give up my half assedly arguments and just start spouting memes
>>
>>65085862
Trivializing things by putting "muh" in front of them isn't a real argument. If you have an actual opinion, voice it, otherwise you just look like a retard
>>
>>65081155
Because anyone with even a limited knowledge knows in real life Glass survives.
>>
any decent rips out
>>
>>65085908
>symbolism
>>
>>65085970
Watch it at the theatre if you can, it's worth it
>>
>>65080841

Why are you copy pasting things?
Thread replies: 133
Thread images: 7
Thread DB ID: 450145



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.