...and how did you feel about the whole thing?

I dunno if you watched the Directors' Circle Jerk that was on posted on here or not, but one of the big things QT and Inarrritu and the rest emphasized was the very real natural conditions that they put up with and their cast did, like having to film for months to get the snowfall just right or having young Magneto from X-Men memorize 200 pages of dialogue for the keynote speeches and such. So it's weird seeing a bear that I've seen done better in video games show up here. Not that I want Leo to get mauled and raped by a bear, but just sayin'.. not exactly natural.

That being said I just saw Todd Haynes' Carol, which was really really good. Not as good as Mad Max or Sicario, but definitely worth seeing.

Also the steam on the lens effect was really bad, like "let's add this in so they think it's a real bear". It worked for Children of Men and a few other movies, but here it's just stupid, especially for a period piece before they had cameras.

I was thinking the same thing! Doom Sounds!

Needs a Doom Sounds tag.

Grizzly man joke and or putting your actor through hell joke simpleton

The Perfect Storm is influenced by Fitzcarraldo, there's a boat in both films.

I was DOIN A BIT

If you just watch the first 30 seconds it has more of a Jurassic Park, "Clever girl" ring to it.

CGI Bear died on the way back to his home planet. I miss that bear already.

Yes, the cinematographer is the same guy who did Gravity and Children of Men, hence the visual similarities. I saw it last night, it is indeed a bit slow moving at times and some pseudo-existentialist elements in it don't really work that well, still it's beautifully shot and has a couple of great action sequences.

The low res youtube encode is doing that bear a lot of favors. I watched an HD screener the other day, and it looks kind of cheap and chincy in a res you might actually watch the whole movie in.

I feel like the whole cinema verite thing is going to hurt in the end: yeah Leo did go through hell compared to a lot of actors, but wait he wasn't mauled by a bear? I think Bill Hicks got it right when he said that terminally ill people should be in movie so Chuck Norris could just kick their heads off for real.

Richard Harris ate raw bison meat in that one but the bison was STILL ALIVE

cutest joke of the yar

As Mr. Nu'man says above, this was the cinematographer for Children of Men, and that's sort of his lens, metaphorically and literally. In case you haven't seen it (rent it steal it etc) I won't spoil anything but it works to great effect in CoM. But the thing about that scene is it's a very long take so basically that thing on the lens was a fluke but they decided to use that take. Here, I think that's CGI steam and that's become the cinematographer's thing now. It'd be like if I messed up at work but accidentally stumbled on something that saved the company, and then I kept trying to recreate it.

Unless it's supposed to be a "found footage" type of movie, any little tricks that involve something happening to the camera take me out of the moment. If you were seeing this happen in front of you, your eyeballs wouldn't get steamed up.

And yes, I did see "Children of Men" and it was bloody brilliant, but again I was very aware of the camera, which sort of fucked up that glorious long take, but not enough to diminish my enjoyment of it.

I was very aware of the camera in Gravity as well, but it still worked. Goddamn, that kicked ass in IMAX 3D.

In the Heart of the Sea did this a lot, ripping off the fishing documentary Leviathan. It was an all-around terrible movie.

I might as well confess this; I went into Gravity when they were showing it at the museum in the IMAX where you watch it looking straight up thinking they actually filmed it in space. Hell, they're filming a porno in space as I write this, so you'd think that would've happened by now. So the lens stuff really worked for me. But in space or not, it was still a modern film, so if you were as high as I was in the theatre it wasn't totally inconceivable that they were filming a documentary up there.

aw shit the space porno's still in the process of being crowdfunded.

No one appreciates a Walt Kelly Pogo dialogue joke.

(except that they were pretentious)

I remember Babel all too well, because it kept me at work until past bar time given its 3-whatever run time. Amores Perros was good if I recall, but I was kinda boners for youngish Gabriel Garcia Bernal so that movie could've been about anything. 21 Grams sucked. Gravity I was really high but it was pretty, Birdman was OK IMO but would've been better without the play-within-play V-effect bullshit, like Inarritu invented it, and now we have CGI bears that look better in Norm of the North.

Lurchi, you hate Inarritu but think THIS movie is really good??

My God.

My......


......God.........

I have more or less the same opinion.
Revenant is neither realistic nor mythic. It's just a feat of logistical filmmaking and cinematography. Instead of plot, it's bad Malick.

It's funny how Inarritu followed Birdman (about not putting your egotistical head up your ass) with a movie where he puts his egotistical head up his ass.