The Revenant

[Captainkirk]

OK, no Colts in this 'un....A goodly number of rocklocks, though.
Here's my impressions:

OK...just saw "The Revenant" on the Big Screen tonight...opening night around here.
Well, they get a "A" for effort. They made the wilderness seem like a badass place to be even on a good day as a fur trapper (which it was) and made you realize how fragile life could be out there (which it was).
My biggest bitch? I think they did a huge disservice to Hugh Glass.
First, I don't think they ever mentioned "Hugh" through the entire movie...just "Glass". Glass who, you might wonder if you didn't know, because nowhere did I see or hear any mention of a reference to the real Hugh Glass, or even "based on a true story". Totally mum on the whole subject that it might actually be based on truth and/or historical fact. And it certainly was. One of my boyhood hero stories.
And of course, Hollywood had to twist the plot and add stuff that wasn't there.
My worries about DiCaprio being able to carry the role didn't come to fruition...he didn't shine as Redford did in "Jeremiah Johnson", but he didn't bomb, either. What disappointed me the most was Hollywood's concentrating on Glass's need for revenge, more than a need to survive. And there was little in the way of explanation of the plot, either...which I won't go into detail as many of you probably want to see it without any "spoiler" discussions. Those will have to wait...for now.
However, if you do intend to see this film...please, please, do a little research on Hugh Glass so you will know about the real man and why it was so important to tell his story (which, truth be told, they DIDN'T. They told A story).

[Holeinhide]

Capt. the moment you stop expecting Hollywood to get any thing right even a little bit movies get much better.  After master and commander which is not even close to the story line of the far side of the world, I just went with was it entertaining yes or no. So without applying any actual facts or real story lines I did find the movie entertaining.  With out giving any thing away I found some of the fight scene's very cool and the blatant bad decisions were almost along the lines of puns.  That's just me I go in expecting a movie to just waste my time and some times I walk away feeling like it was not a total waste. This movie falls into that category.

[sltm1]

I don't remember the name of the original movie,( A Man In The Wilderness?????), with John Huston and the guy who starred in "A man called Horse" (again, CRS). Did you see that version and if so, how did it compare?

[sltm1]

It only took two and a half hours to come up with the actor's name, Richard Harris....see, CRS is not invincible!!!

[Captainkirk]

I don't remember the name of the original movie,( A Man In The Wilderness?????), with John Huston and the guy who starred in "A man called Horse" (again, CRS). Did you see that version and if so, how did it compare?

Richard Harris, yes, and yes, I saw it. A long time ago, so hard to compare, but I think it was a little less Hollyweird. Don't get me wrong; "Revenant" was pretty darn good. But I know enough about the real story that parts of it irritated me.