0454 | The Revenant

A revenant is a person who supposedly returns from the dead, and the word can be applied to several characters in the new film by Alejandro G. Iñárritu (he has dropped the ‘onzález’ for the time being). Most obviously it’s Leonardo DiCaprio’s frontiersman Hugh Glass, who is mauled by a bear and left spluttering in a shallow grave by the film’s main antagonist, fellow fur trader Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy). It also applies to Glass’s two immediate family members: his Native American wife (Grace Dove), killed during an earlier sacking of a village by white soldiers, appears in flashbacks and in Glass’s visions, which may well be the result of delirium as he crawls across the landscape in search of food (or possibly a sign of something else); Glass’s son Hawk (Forrest Goodluck), who is murdered by Fitzgerald, thereby setting off a quest for revenge, also appears in a similar fashion. Less obviously Iñárritu and co-screenwriter Mark L. Smith (adapting Michael Punke’s novel of the same name) play with the theme during the film’s finale; a visual trick employed by Glass briefly brings another character ‘back to life’, while it is revealed that the head of an Arikara (Ree) Native American raiding party has found the daughter he has been searching for throughout the story, who – like Glass – had been given up for dead.

The Revenant promises much in terms of its exploration of the problematic history between white settlers and Native Americans, though it is more successful as a straightforward revenge or survival tale. It begins with a breathless and violent opening sequence in which the Arikara kill a substantial number of the hunting and fur trading party that Glass, Hawk and Fitzgerald belong to. These warriors are a threat to the white characters throughout, and are usually unseen, tracking the traders through the spectacular but inhospitable frozen landscape of modern-day Montana. We also see them doing business with another party of French traders, which takes on greater significance as the film progresses. By occasionally deviating away from the Glass/Fitzgerald story the writers clearly attempt to engage with the politics of the era, and the film manages to show how these disparate groups relied upon one another, even if there was mistrust and misunderstanding on both sides. The script touches on the issue of land theft as well as the sacking of Arikara and Pawnee settlements by soldiers, but ultimately Iñárritu keeps his flirtations with the concerns of the raiding party brief.

At one point Fitzgerald flippantly comments that ‘God giveth, God taketh away’, and his words could apply to possessions as much as they apply to life or land; ownership of pelts, horses and other objects is shown as transitory and uncertain, but nearly everything is important enough to shed blood over. Fitzgerald later grumbles that all the Arikara do is steal – the irony lost on this avaricious, self-centred character. It’s clear that Fitzgerald hates the Native Americans, yet there’s a carefully-constructed (convenient?) balance to the story, which depicts compatibility and harmony in equal measure alongside all the mistrust and misunderstanding: there’s a short but positive connection between DiCaprio’s injured, barely surviving hunter and lone traveller Hikuc (Arthur RedCloud), and then there’s Glass’s loving relationships with his Pawnee and half-Pawnee family members, a back story for the main character that is completely fictional. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with such a fabrication, of course, and it serves a dramatic purpose, but a cynic might argue that such scenes, and the relevant Native American characters, are only in The Revenant to imbue the main character (and therefore the film) with a faux-spiritual, quasi-mystical sheen. The movie is the latest in a long list of westerns that attempt to show the Native American experience of the time through the eyes of a single white man, and in that respect it follows in the wake of films like Jeremiah Johnson, Dances With Wolves and Last Of The Mohicans, all of which featured white settlers living with Native Americans. It seems Hollywood is unwilling to show the Native American experience in the old west using only Native American characters, though I guess you could argue that racial issues are so central to that experience a mix of Native American and immigrant characters will always be necessary to explore them. Still, by Hollywood’s historical standards The Revenant is actually quite progressive, given that it employs actual Native American actors in Native American roles.


Tom Hardy as the ruthless and self-centred trader Fitzgerald

First and foremost, though, this is a tale about white men on the frontier (t’was ever thus). The story of revenge and survival at the heart of The Revenant is involving, and though it’s simple it would be churlish to deny that it isn’t enhanced by the film’s many strengths. These have been pointed out ad nauseam elsewhere, but I feel like I ought to cover certain factors that I enjoyed. It’s all obvious: the photography by Emmanuel Lubezki captures both the bleakness and the spectacular beauty of several different locations, and is superb even by his high standards, while the constant intensity of the performances by stars DiCaprio and Hardy is designed to impress, and impress me it did. Dutifully I should mention the action sequences, which I found gripping largely because the (apparent) single takes make you feel like you’re caught up in the middle of the mayhem, whether it’s that initial bloody raid, a desperate chase on horseback to a cliff edge or the infamous bear fight, during which Glass takes a thorough pounding.

Because the moments in-between these sudden exhilarating bursts of violence are fairly long, and sometimes quite slow, there are times when watching the film feels like an ordeal. (And look, when I say it’s an ordeal, obviously watching it is nothing compared to the Glass’s real-life struggle, or even the notoriously tough shoot, though you could say that The Revenant is light fayre when compared with a film that’s really lengthy and caked in filth, such as last year’s Hard To Be A God.) It’s chilly, and not just because it is set in the middle of an icy winter, while there’s a relentless grimness in its depiction of a relentlessly grim time and place. As such its good-looking stars, including Domhnall Gleeson as the Captain leading the party, spend most of the time with masses of saliva, blood and dirt residing in their proto-hipster beards. They’re all good-looking fellas, though, and particularly with regard to DiCaprio that’s something the director and his make-up department can’t hide even when they cover the cold, wet star in shit.

The length of a film doesn’t usually bother me, but particularly not when I’m watching a film by Iñárritu, who I think is a fine establisher of mood and a director who is skilled at employing a tonal consistency. It’s problematic for some that his films are so serious and relentlessly downbeat, but not for me, and I like this almost as much as I like earlier works such as Amores Perros and Biutiful. For a number of reasons watching DiCaprio slowly make his way across the terrain is quite engrossing, and thanks to Lubezki’s photography – sorry, but it bears repeating, there are some truly magnificent shots here – it remains visually stimulating throughout. I’m less enamoured by the film’s mystical bells and whistles, but that does at least raise some intriguing questions about the physical state of the main character, particularly at the end.

Directed by: Alejandro G. Iñárritu.
Written by: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Mark L. Smith. Based on The Revenant by Michael Punke.
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Domhnall Gleeson, Will Poulter, Forrest Goodluck, Arthur Redcloud, Grace Dove, Duane Howard.
Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki.
Editing: Stephen Mirrione.
 Ryuchi Sakamoto, Alva Noto.
Certificate: 15
Running Time:
156 minutes.

Comments 14

  1. ckckred January 25, 2016

    Nice review Stu. You know my thoughts on Iñárritu and because of that I’m in no rush to see The Revenant. I know a lot of people love Iñárritu’s work but find his style emphasizes a “holier-than-thou” feel.

    • Stu January 26, 2016

      Thanks! And yeah, I guess he’s one of those directors that just polarises opinion! I don’t get the same negative feeling when I watch his films and I’ve enjoyed all of them so far.

    • Stu January 26, 2016

      Cheers! The comments I’m getting seem to confirm what I already thought, in that the guy’s like Marmite. I liked this one and I expect it’ll do well at the Oscars.

  2. Keith January 26, 2016

    Big fan of this one. I’ve seen it twice now and found myself even more engrossed by what AGI was doing both narratively and visually. I have had problems with AGI in the past, but I truly loved this flick.

    • Stu January 26, 2016

      That’s good to hear. I liked it a lot and I just couldn’t get my review right; wrote one, scrapped most of it, started again, still not happy but posted anyway as I decided to move on! I had a few problems with it but the pros far outweigh the cons; clearly there’s great work on show by many people.

  3. Tom January 26, 2016

    Such a great review dude. The Revenant is potent stuff, a visceral, in-your-face emotional epic. As such it’s difficult to find the flaws. This is a well-balanced take on it. I think there’s something to be said for Iñárritu’s shying away from politicizing the relation between white settlers and the violence set upon them by the native tribes. Conflict arises out of necessity, one group isn’t painted as pure evil while the other is made out to be saintly. I was impressed all around by this very naturalistic production. Truly something to behold

    • Stu January 26, 2016

      Thanks Tom – as I said to Keith in the comment above I went back and forth writing this one and I’m still not happy with it but it’s time to move on. I think there is a balance between the two groups here that’s interesting, and Glass is kind of caught in the middle on his own for much of it. I was impressed by the production too – acting, cinematography, score (which I forgot to mention in the review), the whole package.

    • Stu January 26, 2016

      Same for me, Dan. I found it fascinating, though as I said in the review I could have done without the visions, even if they did raise some interesting questions about Glass’s true state.

  4. Mark Walker January 27, 2016

    Nice one mate. It seems we sing the same song again. I’ve written my review but need to get around to tidying it up a bit.
    I liked this very much and even though the mystical elements weren’t hugely explored, I still viewed the film on a metaphorical level and outwith its basic revenge story. It’s works on both accounts and should appeal to audiences across the board whether they like to read into the narrative or not.
    The biggest deal for me, though, was Lubezki. His work here is just astounding.

    • Stu January 27, 2016

      We park our cars in the same garage! I admired a lot about this too, and agree that Lubezki’s work is impressive here. It’s not just a case of pointing the camera at stunning landscapes, either – everything from the lighting to the muted colour to the framing works for me. I couldn’t quite go for the mystical stuff but I can see there’s some effort made to engage with all of that and I liked the underlying subtext about Glass’s true state. I look forward to reading your take on it. I have to admit I struggled to write this review, for some reason. I think it’s one of those where it has been written about so much I didn’t have much inclination to write another review, but had to anyway!

Leave a Reply to Mark Walker Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s