THE REVENANT
**1/2 (out of four)
DIRECTED BY Alejandro González Iñárritu
STARS Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy
Between Babel and now The Revenant, it’s tempting to drag out that hoary expression of the emperor having no clothes to describe director Alejandro González Iñárritu and the fervor surrounding his movies. But then one recalls such efforts as Amores Perros, 21 Grams and especially Birdman (the best picture of 2014, according to Oscar and me), and it’s clear that he’s equally capable of being decked out in sartorial splendor. Fueled by his passion and his intellect, his films always register as Art with a capital A but are occasionally hampered by presenting entertainment with a lower-case e.
The Revenant shares some DNA with Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street, and it goes beyond the fact that both showcase Leonardo DiCaprio in Oscar-swooping mode. 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. In these respects, the film has less in common with such accomplished frontier flicks as 1972’s Jeremiah Johnson and 1992’s The Last of the Mohicans and instead brings to mind Mel Gibson’s garish snuff films The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto, chest-thumping works of endurance rather than enjoyment.
Set in 1823 and loosely based on a true story, the film casts DiCaprio as Hugh Glass, an accomplished frontiersman and guide traveling with a military outfit led by Captain Andrew Henry (the ubiquitous Domhnall Gleeson, also presently seen in Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Brooklyn). An attack by Arikara Indians leaves most of the party dead, and Glass himself is later critically injured after a close encounter with a grizzly bear (and, no, he is not raped by the bear; that was a sophomoric rumor started by right-wing imbecile Matt Drudge and spread by both his sycophants and by impressionable Internet dwellers). A redneck soldier named John Fitzgerald (British actor Tom Hardy, laboring mightily to convince us he’s a Southern boy), who hates Glass just because, agrees to look after the wounded man for a large payment; instead, he eventually commits a great atrocity against him before leaving him for dead. But Glass will have his revenge, and like those cute pets in The Incredible Journey, he attempts to travel many miles to reach his desired destination.
Yes, it’s the familiar revenge motif — the one employed in hundreds of movies from Rolling Thunder to Machete to the Kill Bill twofer — but here such a simple scenario buckles under the weight of Iñárritu’s approach. The picture is a bruising beauty in terms of its visuals — no surprise, since the cinematographer is Emmanuel Lubezki, coming off back-to-back Oscars for Gravity and Birdman — and there are a number of powerful scenes spread throughout (that sequence with the bear is astounding). But Iñárritu’s artfulness too often feels at odds with the threadbare story, and his attempts at injecting elements of mysticism (apparently a requirement for any director making a movie involving Native Americans, Michael Mann and Kevin Costner admirably excepted) prove to be heavy-handed. And then there are the paper-thin protagonists Glass and Fitzgerald, neither of whom are particularly interesting as screen characters. If DiCaprio finally wins his Oscar, it’s yet another example of the Academy rewarding the right performer for the wrong picture — he’s committed to his grunts, groans and growls (largely the extent of his dialogue), but then again, so was Charles Bronson in Death Wish.
And while I’m not about to spoil the ending, let’s just say that the manner in which it sidesteps the piece’s primary thrust is both insincere and hypocritical (on the part of Glass and Iñárritu). It’s basically an example of having your cake — or, in this instance, caked-on blood and mud — and eating it, too.
This article appears in Jan 6-12, 2016.
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.
Loved it. Unlike those who are threatened by it and feel lesser for it. Find a safe space and grab a coloring book instead.
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.
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.
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.
1/10
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.
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.
What a crappy little review.
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!
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.
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.
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.