The Revenant

Release Date: December 25th, 2015
Running Time: 156 minutes
Directed by: Alejandro G. Iñárritu
Written by: Mark L. Smith & Alejandro G. Iñárritu (based on the 2002 book of the same name by Michael Punke)
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Domhnall Gleeson, Will Poulter, Forrest Goodluck, Arthur Redcloud, Melaw Nakehk'o, Duane Howard 

Beautifully filmed in stark, wintery landscapes, The Revenant is part survival story, part revenge story, and part historical legend. Skillful writing, directing, and acting make the film, for the most part, a successful if largely predictable entry into all of the aforementioned cinematic genres. It's a graphically violent, rugged adventure.

As a survival film it's intense and visceral, with themes of man versus nature and man versus animal prevalent throughout. The well-paced action, ebbing and flowing between extreme intensity and quiet eloquence, is effective in giving the audience time to breathe and process each incredible scene they've just witnessed before thrusting the protagonist into another immense challenge. That protagonist, Hugh Glass—based on the real life 19th-century fur trapper—is played with melodramatic earnestness by Leonardo DiCaprio. What we get from DiCaprio here is what I think we usually get from him: an ambitious actor unafraid to take on challenging roles, with usually satisfying results—but he never makes me forget that he's Leonardo DiCaprio acting in a movie. I don't mean to slam Leo, but I do think he's a bit overrated. He seems like a nice guy, and I applaud his activism and the ways he uses his wealth and celebrity to support progressive political agendas. He appears sincere in the worthy causes he promotes. He’s a good actor but rarely if ever a great one, in that the greatest actors in their greatest performances do make me forget that they're actors and instead just make me believe that they're the character. It's a hard role, no doubt, and Leo does deliver overall, but at times treads too close to overacting as I think he does all too often.

As a revenge flick, the genre's common theme of man versus man is of course prevalent throughout as well. Tom Hardy plays the antagonist John Fitzgerald—also based on the real person—a colleague-turned-enemy of Glass. In contrast to DiCaprio, Hardy has deservingly come to be regarded as one of the top-caliber actors of his generation, and does possess that chameleonlike quality that makes me forget that he's an actor and instead just see him as the character. Here he speaks in a mumbling southern drawl and embodies a violent, racist, anti-First Nations bigot, and a self-serving capitalist. His performance is on point. Viewing he and DiCaprio together, I found myself imagining what the film would've been like had their roles been reversed, had Hardy played the hero and DiCaprio the villain. I think it might've worked better, as DiCaprio's tendency to overact lends itself better to cartoonish villain characterizations (as in Django Unchained) and Hardy's restraint could've served the heroic qualities of Glass.

The Revenant also succeeds as a historical legend, as the incredible story of Hugh Glass's survival has become enmeshed in American folklore and elevated him to almost superhuman status. At times it made me think of Mel Gibson's Braveheart (1995); while obviously set in a different time and place, that film likewise told the story of a character who achieved extraordinary, against-all-odds feats of accomplishment and as such was aggrandized over time to being regarded as a hero of mythic proportions. The backdrop here is early 19th-century American colonialism, the mass murder and subsequent assimilation of Indigenous people, the fur trade, and the wild frontier, in the Industrial Revolution age of capitalism. In this regard the movie might be thought of as an American Western, although an untraditional one as most in the genre are set post-American Civil War and in desert environments rather than mountainous snowy ones.

While a white man is the protagonist, the Indigenous characters here are portrayed sympathetically in key supporting roles whose involvement are crucial to the story. Glass was married to an Indigenous woman with whom he had a half-Indigenous son, so his role here is, symbolically and actually, a kind of bridge between the European and Indigenous worlds. He knows the ways of the land and is tuned in to the ways of the Indigenous people far more than most of his white compatriots. This seems to be the main reason for Fitzgerald's hostility towards Glass, resenting him as a sellout of the racist colonialist ideals that he upholds while Glass has shown comradeship with the Indigenous folk and indeed made them his family. There are echoes, in this respect, of Kevin Costner's Dances with Wolves (1990).

SPOILER ALERT—DO NOT READ AHEAD IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM AND DO NOT WANT TO KNOW ABOUT SOME KEY DETAILS  

Despite the overall general soundness of the script, there are a few plot details that don't add up. In the scene in which Fitzgerald attempts to kill Glass as he lies post-bear mauling on a stretcher, he's interrupted by Hawk, Glass's son, and subsequently Fitzgerald kills Hawk. Glass lies watching it happen, spitting and sputtering in anguish, apparently incapable of moving due to his severe injuries. Fitzgerald then drags Glass into a pit and lightly covers him up with dirt—effectively burying him alive—and returns to the fort. A short time later, Glass summons the strength to crawl over to his son's dead body. So, my question is why did he only now suddenly gain the power to get up? Where was that energy when Fitzgerald was fighting with Hawk? If Glass had gotten up when Fitzgerald was fighting with Hawk, he likely wouldn't have been able to prevent Hawk's death anyway and probably would've also been killed then and there—and then there would be no movie, no chance for Glass to chase down Fitzgerald and get his revenge. So the scene feels contrived, which could've been easily remedied by allowing more time to pass before Glass is able to get up, like overnight at least, rather than some twenty minutes later. And then a little after that it's shown that Glass is miraculously able to walk. In the course of a couple of hours Glass goes from near-death, lying still on his back and barely able to move, to walking. I don’t really buy it. Although maybe I'm interpreting these actions a bit too literally, as if they're supposed to be regarded as having occurred precisely as depicted, and perhaps this is a moment when I should instead let the story's mythic undertones take precedence over its generally realistic tone.

Another slightly problematic detail is near the end of the film, when Captain Henry (Domhnall Gleeson) agrees to go out with Glass, just the two of them, to find Fitzgerald. Why wouldn't they bring a larger party? There's something about honour, I guess, when Glass speaks of wanting to go after Fitzgerald alone. Still, in an earlier scene Henry brought dozens of men out to find Glass, so why not bring dozens out again to find Fitzgerald? Because then we wouldn't get to witness the final showdown between Glass and Fitzgerald, protagonist and antagonist—an intrinsic element of revenge flicks.

Following the first half hour or so, after the initial incidents that set the story in motion, not much happens that's unpredictable. We expect that Glass will survive, that he'll find Fitzgerald, and that he'll kill him in a violent showdown. When Glass saves the Indigenous woman Powaqa (Melaw Nakehk'o) from the French hunters, we assume that this action will cause her and/or the other Indigenous people to help him later, and this also happens when she and her father Chief Elk Dog (Duane Howard) let Fitzgerald die but let Glass live at the end. So we imagine these things will happen, and they do. It's still entertaining to see just how it all unfolds, but it's all rather predictable and leaves one with little to contemplate. It's the difference between this film being a good one and a great one.

In addition to the solid performances by DiCaprio and Hardy, as well as the supporting players, the real stars of the film are director Alejandro G. Iñárritu and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki. The two worked together on 2014's Birdman, a very different movie, which among other things was appropriately applauded for having been edited to appear as if the entire film was a single, continuous shot. Here Lubezki should be given great credit for the visual poetry he captures in the snowy environments that, while set in Montana and North Dakota, were actually filmed in a dozen different locations throughout Argentina, the U.S., and western Canada (B.C. and Alberta). Much has been made about how difficult the shoot was, no doubt because of the harsh climate of the natural settings. Furthermore, a few of Iñárritu's production choices drove the film's budget from its initial $60 million to an eventual $135 million, such as shooting the entire film with natural light and chronologically. But these choices have no doubt had immeasurable positive effect on the final product. And besides, the film has proven to be a huge hit, profiting nearly $500 million as of April 2016, and winning Academy Awards for DiCaprio, Lubezki, and Iñárritu. Following the success of Birdman, and now The Revenant, Iñárritu is on a creative and professional high, so it'll be interesting to see what he does next.
Rating (out of 5): ★★★½
• Nik Dobrinsky / Boy Drinks Ink
April 6th, 2016