•
Rating: Based on a true story...
I believe there's a limit to everything, and these five words, twenty-one letters in total, are starting to bug me because too often they take on the appearance of a free pass to unleash a wave of hyperbole more doped than Armstrong at the Tour de France! I like sugar in sweets, but if you add a kilo more than necessary... In the same way, if you make the film's hero: get stabbed, mauled for 10 minutes, swim in freezing water, raft on a log among rocks, jump from a height as tall as a couple of houses, endure a snowstorm, etc... Well, in that case, the risk is achieving the opposite effect than intended. If you find a jerk like me in the audience, you might end up laughing. And indeed, there were several comments like that in the theater, even during the screening. DiCaprio, the character he plays I mean, should have died at least fifteen times in just the first half, and I believe a hypothetical IronSuperBatHulk would have had trouble making it home. In certain scenes, as I mentioned, I found myself smiling given the distance from any semblance of reality. The fact is, I thought it was a film of a certain caliber and not a simple fun flick.
Taking it for what it is, a mere spectacular high-budget blockbuster, it is undeniable that it is a marketable product. The action scenes are rendered impeccably: the sound and hyper-realistic makeup in particular, combined with excellent shots, ensure that the impact on viewers is at the highest level, and there's nothing to say against that.
I remain deeply perplexed because it's a work that leaves you with nothing apart from the action of three scenes, as the characters are as empty as the pack of Nachos I devoured in the first half: greasy, unhealthy, and just salty enough. Predictable plot, characters as stereotyped as a USA vs. USSR movie from the '80s, (the very good good guy versus the very bad bad guy). What's left? The visual satisfaction of a wise and well-crafted photography with valuable shots: in certain cases, especially the zooms of the wild nature, it seemed like a revisit to Malick in "The Thin Red Line", "The Tree of Life", and "Badlands".
Two and a half hours in total that are definitely felt because the pace is far too slow and reflective, abusing the use of ponderous flashbacks, disrupted by the sudden acceleration in the most violent scenes. I remain convinced it is a commercial flick (pure entertainment that requires a disengaged brain) and among the films I've seen this year, I much prefer "The Big Short" and "Perfect Day" over this mishmash of American action movie clichés.
About DiCaprio: he may never win an Oscar for the rubbish of the late '90s, but he is objectively a good actor, and I didn't discover that from this film. I remember him in the exceptional performance of "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" and I remain convinced that was his peak, at least for now, without forgetting many valuable performances since "Catch Me If You Can". In this "Revenant", he finally loses his eternal boyish face. Filthy and bleeding from beginning to end, more than acting, he is forced to grunt, crawl, and scream with very few dialogues, zero monologues. He widens and blinks his eyes, grinds his teeth, uses his body to express a character that is angry, vengeful, not at all complex. He convinced me, but again, it's not a surprise, and above all, the problem with the film is the lack of substance in the film itself, which conveys little beyond aesthetics and blood, rich and abundant, in several spectacular scenes.
Meh! 2 and a half stars.
Loading comments slowly
