The Revenant | Dec 25 Limited, Jan 8 2016 wide | Opening in select IMAX theaters Jan 14th.

[Infernus]

If that thing seems weird to guys in the US then I'll explain. In India, in most 2nd tier cities we still have mostly single screen theaters and only a few multiplexes. Here, in Agra, we have around 7 single screen theaters and 3 multiplexes. All single screens only always show Indian movies (and we have lots and lots of them) except for movies like AoU and JW and FF7, as not many people watch hollywood movies and even those that do are mostly youth who only go to the heavily marketed and worldwide-known blockbusters and franchise releases. The multiplexes show mostly no more than 4 movies at a time (most people here try to save money wherever possible and so go mostly to single screen theatres and therefore most multiplexes don't really get enough income to be bigger). Now that includes an average of two new hindi movies released every weekend plus the holdovers plus other Indian non-bollywood/hindi-dubbed films. These are accompanied by one other big hollywood movie at max. That mostly includes only franchise-parts or some other big-budget, CGI-filled, heavily marketed action movie. Animated movies (neither minions nor IO nor TGD was shown in any theatre here) and smaller scale movies (on a commercial level, that is) like Bridge of Spies (man, I was really waiting for that movie) never get shown here because people simply do not watch them and because we have limited screens and because we have too many movies of our own already and because the multiplexes don't have enough income to be able to afford showing films few would attend. Plus, movies are highly censored here (they even cut out a kiss scene from Spectre!), so R rated movies have even less chances to get released and even if they do, a lot of scenes are cut out. Still, if it does get released here is shown here, I am definitely gonna go see it. But yes, I am gonna download the leak and watch it if it isn't. I know all this doesn't make that right at all but as I said... sometimes you simply do not have an option 

 

Edit: Oh this was my 1000th post here!!  

Edited December 22, 2015 by Infernus

[Dementeleus]

^^ Thanks for the explanation, and congrats on 1000 posts, btw!

[marveldcfox]

1 minute ago, Infernus said:

If that thing seems weird to guys in the US then I'll explain. In India, in most 2nd tier cities we still have mostly single screen theaters and only a few multiplexes. Here, in Agra, we have around 7 single screen theaters and 3 multiplexes. All single screens only always show Indian movies (and we have lots and lots of them) except for movies like AoU and JW and FF7, as not many people watch hollywood movies and even those that do are mostly youth who only go to the heavily marketed and worldwide-known blockbusters and franchise releases. The multiplexes show mostly no more than 4 movies at a time (most people here try to save money wherever possible and so go mostly to single screen theatres and therefore most multiplexes don't really get enough income to be bigger). Now that includes an average of two new hindi movies released every weekend plus the holdovers plus other Indian non-bollywood/hindi-dubbed films. These are accompanied by one other big hollywood movie at max. That mostly includes only franchise-parts or some other big-budget, CGI-filled, heavily marketed action movies. Animated movies (neither minions nor IO nor TGD was released in any theatre) and smaller scale movies (on a commercial level, that is) like Bridge of Spies (man, I was really waiting for that movie) never get released here because people simply do not watch them and because we have limited screens and because we have too many movies of our own already and because the multiplexes don't have enough income to be able to afford showing films few would attend. Plus, movies are highly censored here (they even cut out a kiss scene from Spectre!), so R rated movies have even less chances to get released and even if they do, a lot of scenes are cut out. Still, if it does get released here, I am definitely gonna go see it. But yes, I am gonna download the leak and watch it if it doesn't. I know all this doesn't make that right at all but as I said... sometimes you simply do not have an option 

This post is excellent. Thank God I live in Delhi.

[marveldcfox]

2 hours ago, Infernus said:

So anyone here watched the leak yet? What did you think about the movie? And how good was the leak (just in case it doesn't even get released here in my city (which it most likely wouldn't, even Inside out wasn't released here...only major live-action tentpoles mostly do)) ?

I just downloaded it and watched first part. It is a brutal movie man. Really good so far. Screener is excellent quality.

But ya I don't see this releasing on single screens and most multiplexes in India. Only the multiplexes in tier 1 cities will show it and that too 3-4 showings MAX for a week. 

[stuart360]

Its one of the best looking films you will EVER see, the cinematogrophy is awesome and every single scene looks great.

The film itself is good but its very slow and actually a very simple story at heart, although done in a more arthouse style.

It has the usual ambigous ending you get in these kind of arty films.

Very good film overall but i'm surprised they spent 135mil on this, its hardly mass market.

[TStechnij]

Who here has seen this? I'm hoping there is at least one person who hates it as much as me. I don't even like the cinematography; it is too distant and serves no real purpose. 

 

Poutler is the MVP of the cast. Gleeson is good. Leo is okay and Hardy... Yikes. The worst performance of the year for me. 

Edited December 22, 2015 by TStechnij

[Dementeleus]

Just now, TStechnij said:

Who here has seen this? I'm hoping there is at least one person who hates it as much as me. I don't even like the cinematography; it is to distant and serves no real purpose. 

 

Poutler is the MVP of the cast. Gleeson is good. Leo is okay and Hardy... Yikes. The worst performance of the year for me. 

 

I've seen it. Really enjoyed Hardy in it, I thought he was better than Leo. (Although I love Hardy when he gets all mumbly and grumbly). Thought the movie was technically amazing, but I never really emotionally connected with it. I thought Inarritu fumbled the ending badly. Overall I still enjoyed it, though I'm a sucker for survival movies.

[stuart360]

2 minutes ago, TStechnij said:

Who here has seen this? I'm hoping there is at least one person who hates it as much as me. I don't even like the cinematography; it is too distant and serves no real purpose. 

 

Poutler is the MVP of the cast. Gleeson is good. Leo is okay and Hardy... Yikes. The worst performance of the year for me. 

 

Oh come on, the cinematogrophy is great. Some of those vistas and one take sweeping shots are amazing.

[Joel M]

The dvdscreener quality is not good enough to watch for the first time a movie you really anticipating and have high hopes for. If you can't see it on the big screen at least wait for a HD release legal or not (I'm not gonna judge).

 

I think with awards season movies it's harder to wait because you want to be in the conservation and have an opinion before Oscar night. I live in a small town so I know there's no chance in hell we get to see movies like Carol, Room or Brooklyn on the big screen but i think Revenant, Hateful Eight and maybe Joy will eventually get released here. So I'm gonna wait for them. But for the others like Carol (one of my most anticipated) I'll have to wait 6 months before I can see it in a proper quality, but it's really worth it. I downloaded the screener just to check it out and it really sucks. Maybe it was okay for home video 10 years ago but we're past that. I don't see how someone could enjoy a movie at that quality in 2015.

[stuart360]

1 minute ago, Joel M said:

The dvdscreener quality is not good enough to watch for the first time a movie you really anticipating and have high hopes for. If you can't see it on the big screen at least wait for a HD release legal or not (I'm not gonna judge).

 

I think with awards season movies it's harder to wait because you want to be in the conservation and have an opinion before Oscar night. I live in a small town so I know there's no chance in hell we get to see movies like Carol, Room or Brooklyn on the big screen but i think Revenant, Hateful Eight and maybe Joy will eventually get released here. So I'm gonna wait for them. But for the others like Carol (one of my most anticipated) I'll have to wait 6 months before I can see it in a proper quality, but it's really worth it. I downloaded the screener just to check it out and it really sucks. Maybe it was okay for home video 10 years ago but we're past that. I don't see how someone could enjoy a movie at that quality in 2015.

 

Have you got a 100inch tv or something?, the image quality was great and DVD quality. You did download the 3gb version right?.

[Dementeleus]

2 minutes ago, stuart360 said:

 

Have you got a 100inch tv or something?, the image quality was great and DVD quality. You did download the 3gb version right?.

 

These two statements are not equal.

[stuart360]

1 minute ago, Obi-Wan Telemachos said:

 

These two statements are not equal.

 

lol thankfully i haven't got to the stage where i need everything to be 1080p or its 'unwatchable'.

One thing i will say though, i had no intention of going to see this film (which is why i downloaded it) but i'm seriously considering paying to see it on the big screen now, the film looks that good.

Piracy eh?

[TStechnij]

PS I saw this at a guild screening two weeks ago, haven't touched the leaks. 

 

Some of the visuals are gorgeous, yes. But it isn't anything new for Lubezki and it his worst work of the 10s. It is distant filmmaking simply for showboating. I can't even give a fuck about the gorgeous shots because they are so inconsequential and needless. I saw Joy the same day as this and it's cinematog is much more striking as it is inventive, employing a huge variety of techniques that are all intentional and shape the narrative and characters. 

 

And, do I need to talk about AGI's direction? Pure torture porn, and adds nothing new to his directorial ouevre. And the faux Malick bullshit is done so poorly  I liked Birdman but after this I'm starting to see him as a total hack. 

 

Also, you can feel the lack of feminine touch and it hurts. The whole film is tasteless in that regard. 

 

The costumes were great though. 

 

I really really hate The Danish Girl, but this takes the cake for the worst prestige picture of the year. Maybe the decade. 

 

@Obi-Wan Telemachos I don't really ever like Hardy and to me they asked him to indulge in his worst tendencies here. I'm kind of surprised he is so divisive, but it is going to land him one of my least favorite Oscar nominations. 

The end is pretty bad, more faux Malick that doesn't resonate. I don't think it is that open ended though. 

Edited December 22, 2015 by TStechnij

[stuart360]

3 minutes ago, TStechnij said:

PS I saw this at a guild screening two weeks ago, haven't touched the leaks. 

 

Some of the visuals are gorgeous, yes. But it isn't anything new for Lubezki and it his worst work of the 10s. It is distant filmmaking simply for showboating. I can't even give a fuck about the gorgeous shots because they are so inconsequential and needless. I saw Joy the same day as this and it's cinematog is much more striking as it is inventive, employing a huge variety of techniques that are all intentional and shape the narrative and characters. 

 

And, do I need to talk about AGI's direction? Pure torture porn, and adds nothing new to his directorial ouevre. And the faux Malick bullshit is done so poorly  I liked Birdman but after this I'm starting to see him as a total hack. 

 

The costumes were great though. 

 

To be fair, one of the first things i thought was that its just like a Terence Malick film, thats not a bad thing though.

I don't know, i thought it looked amazing and those sweeping camera shots in the battle scenes were awesomely shot and directed.

[Dementeleus]

Just now, stuart360 said:

 

To be fair, one of the first things i thought was that its just like a Terence Malick film, thats not a bad thing though.

I don't know, i thought it looked amazing and those sweeping camera shots in the battle scenes were awesomely shot and directed.

 

No overt spoilers, but I'm tagging anyway just to be safe:

It's Malick-lite (at least for some aspects). I thought the cinematography was excellent; there was a clear effort to make it immersive by using long takes and shooting with only a couple wide-angle lenses (I think Inarritu said they shot it all with 14mm and 16mm lenses, but I might not be remembering correctly). Like I said, the technical aspect of putting you right there in the midst of frozen frontier wilderness, in the middle of all the occasional chaos, was really impressive and very successful. The other aspects, where Inarritu is reaching for something more, didn't work for me. I found I enjoyed it more when I disregarded any philosophical effort that Inarritu made and just treated it as a straight-up revenge genre piece).

[Dementeleus]

10 minutes ago, TStechnij said:

It is distant filmmaking simply for showboating. I can't even give a fuck about the gorgeous shots because they are so inconsequential and needless.

 

I don't agree with this at all.

[Avatree]

18 minutes ago, Obi-Wan Telemachos said:

 

These two statements are not equal.

Didn't you know that DVD quality resolution is improved if you have a 100 inch TV?!

[stuart360]

1 minute ago, Obi-Wan Telemachos said:

 

I don't agree with this at all.

Have you seen it Tele?

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, stuart360 said:

Have you seen it Tele?

Yes, I saw it at a guild screening a couple of months ago.

[stuart360]

Just now, Obi-Wan Telemachos said:

Yes, I saw it at a guild screening a couple of months ago.

 

You faux pirate!.