Don't you have to have a certain skill level to become a movie reviewer. Isn't there any type of test? All I can say is that the movie was very entertaining, Joseph Fiennes played his role of the fictional character Clavius very well, the supporting cast was good and there were even a few comedic elements woven into the story. Go watch it. You'll enjoy it.
Uh oh, sounds like someone was offended that his hero Rush was lambasted. And shouldn't you have been at church Sunday morning instead of playing on the Internet?
I don't know how you manage to include references to Rush Limbaugh in a review about a movie that illustrates something that happened two thousand years ago but . . . oh wait . . . OF COURSE I do.
Next time, try to REVIEW THE MOVIE instead of upchucking your empty political opinion during a time when you're supposed to be "doing your job" as a "Professional Movie Watcher" . . . which is ludicrous at best.
Thirty minutes of story (less than most single episodes of '60's and 70's TV westerns), an hour of DiCaprio grunting and groaning, all wrapped around an insult to both whites and Native Americans in history. The whites are portrayed mostly as cruel and greedy and the Indians as mostly insensible and murdering; barbarians all. Ah, but attention to detail as DiCaprio had to carefully remove all his cloths after gutting his horse and then laying inside the belly. Little concern for the physical impossibilty of so many of the situations, the bear mauling but no antibiotics or treatment, the swimming in icy waters, no fire in winter. Reminiscent of the mindlessness of Apocalypto.
I couldn't disagree more; Tom Hardy's performance as Fitzgerald was spectacular and he's fully deserving of the nomination. One of the best actors in the business.
Brilliantly shot - makes the viewer feel You're there. Going to see it again with a crew. Movie is liong but still Resonates. In fact, Not sure, if some reviewers a tually watched Revenant given the utter repellant tone.
Personally, I couldn't agree more with this review. Regardless of the fact that this was a beautifully shot, and exceptionally well made film, it was also painfully too long, and frankly pretty boring. I equate this to "all sizzle, no steak." But of course, this is just my opinion, and is in no way intended to provoke or enrage any of the tough guys in the comments section.
Thanks for writing, everyone -- even Jessey with his unsettling fascination with flatulence. Wow, looks like that Golden Globe win emboldened heretofore meek fanboys to come out in full force!
What a crappy little review.
Haven't seen it yet, but I want to. It looks really good. Also I happen to like Mel Gibson's so-called snuff films THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST and APOCALYPTO. Those were viscerally powerful films. Oh yeah it won the Golden Globe Award for Best Picture (Drama) by the way.
I gave the "The Revenant"4 Stars and consider it a masterpiece. Leo is an amazing actor and I truly believe when it's all said and done he will go down as the greatest of all time. When you watch his performances it's as if you're witnessing history and live events as they are actually being played out. Leo transforms into the character like no other. He's due for about five Oscars by now; this year it's going to impossible for voters to ignore him.
Pretentious nonsense from a critic trying too hard ; Matt Brunson is a desperate writer looking for attention in all the wrong ways. In his attempt to sound more refined and knowledgeable, he loses all credibility as a writer and a critic. One can only assume that his audience consists of haughty losers who look down their nose while smelling their own flatulence.
Silly review the writer lost me when he wrote "Like Wolf, both are stylistic studies in overkill, and both serve as masturbatory material for a segment of American males who clutch them like crucifixes in an attempt to ward off the encroaching new world order that they feel downgrades machismo and manliness."
Sounds like writer is threatened by the American male. that comment has very little to do with the movie and more to do with his own projections.
Love this review! So many witty burns to savor on the tongue: "stylistic studies in overkill...clutch them like crucifixes in an attempt to ward off the encroaching new world order...Mel Gibson's garish snuff films...like those cute pets in The Incredible Journey,...injecting elements of mysticism (apparently a requirement for any director making a movie...he's committed to his grunts, groans and growls, but then again, so was Charles Bronson." Anyone who can work both the madness of Mel Gibson and the cuteness of Incredible Journey into one review is my hero.
Loved it. Unlike those who are threatened by it and feel lesser for it. Find a safe space and grab a coloring book instead.
Uh, "...stylistic studies in overkill, and both serve as masturbatory material for a segment of American males who clutch them like crucifixes in an attempt to ward off the encroaching new world order that they feel downgrades machismo and manliness..." Say what? Dude, that schtick was cutting edge, like, eight years ago.
What happened to Overrated Underrated?
I enjoyed it. Nowhere near as good as the originals. But far better than the prequels. Although I did enjoy Episode III, it still didn't have that Star Wars feel to it that Abrams has managed to recapture. And I give him major credit for using real set pieces and special effects. Not all this CGI crap the prequels had.
The movie is a joke. It's a crappy clone of a new hope and is the worst of the bunch. Would rather watch the prequels than this garbage.
I read your review. Great to know you also enjoyed the movie as much as i did.
Womack Newspapers, Inc.
Powered by Foundation