A week ago, I made the trailer for The Revenant the lead afternoon link. I did that because I really didn’t want to talk about it too much because – just my opinion – this film has not been made for me. And that’s fine. I’m not the target demographic. I dismissed it as a “dude-movie” in every sense – what little dialogue there seems to be, it seems that only the men get to speak (a quick IMDB search reveals that there are no major female characters). This is just a film about dudes. And it seems like this is a film FOR dudes, with a lot of mud, guns, rage, assaults, pain and boy dramz. And historical accuracy, for sure. Here’s the trailer again:
If you enjoy Leo, you’ll probably believe that this is finally the film that will get him the Oscar. If you enjoy Tom Hardy, you’ll wonder how he ended up in this film and why he couldn’t have done the lead in another film that wouldn’t have him camped out in the Canadian wildness with Leo for a year. If you enjoy director Alejandro Inarritu, then maybe you’ll believe that this is a worthy follow-up to his Oscar-winning work in Birdman. But if you believe that, maybe you should also believe that Inarritu is a massive douche.
The Hollywood Reporter did a write-up about the excessively long shoot, the ballooning budget, the near-death experiences and Inarritu gave an interview to THR in an attempt to explain it all away. The resulting article ends up concerning me more than all of the rumors that have plagued this shoot. You can read the full piece here. Some assorted highlights from an article that leads with “this film has been a living hell.”
This is some World War Z shiz: Revenant went into production in September and was supposed to wrap in March. But cameras still will be rolling into August as the budget has climbed well past $95 million, with insiders predicting it will reach or exceed $135 million. Crewmembers say they have seen huge turnover, including many who were fired and others who quit. They say the behind-the-scenes drama led Inarritu to bar producer Jim Skotchdopole, who worked with him on Birdman, from the set.
Filming in sequence: Everything had to be filmed in sequence, even when the weather didn’t agree, which is why a shoot that was supposed to be finished months ago is heading for reshoots in Argentina, where there’s snow.
Inarritu on the problems plaguing production: “I have nothing to hide. There were problems, but none of them made me ashamed.” Yes, some left the crew, he says, “but as a director, if I identify a violin that is out of tune, I have to take that from the orchestra.” And while acknowledging that the film has gone over schedule and over budget, he says he is “obsessed” with making movies at a price: “I’m absolutely, even stupidly conscious about it.”
It’s all this other guy’s fault: There’s a lengthy narrative about Inarritu’s relationship with producer Jim Skotchdopole, who sounds like the guy who let the lunatics take over the asylum. Inarritu denies banning Skotchdopole from the set but Skitchdopole “has moved on” from the production.
Lost light. Inarritu & his cinematographer insist on only using natural light, which is costing a fortune and there are endless delays as the production continuously “loses the light.”
Everything was rehearsed, but Inarritu is indecisive: Crewmembers say: “We’d never shoot what we blocked… Everything was indecisive, whether it was this particular actor for this particular role, this costume, this makeup.”
Inarritu decided at the last minute that a “naked character should be dragged along the ground”: The director remembers being concerned about the actor’s genitals and laying down plastic sheeting to protect him. “I asked him several times, ‘Are you fine?’ ” says Inarritu. Each time he asked, he says the actor replied that he was prepared to try another take. “I was super considerate because he was a nice, 22-year-old guy,” says Inarritu. While crewmembers say the actor was in pain, Inarritu dismisses that as “a lie.”
Why not CGI? “That’s exactly what I didn’t want,” counters Inarritu. “If we ended up in greenscreen with coffee and everybody having a good time, everybody will be happy, but most likely the film would be a piece of sh-t.” Revenant is about survival, he says, and the actors and crew benefited from having to make it in nature. “When you see the film, you will see the scale of it,” promises Inarritu. “And you will say, ‘Wow.’ “
Wow. I’ll say “wow” right now at the audacity of Alejandro Inarritu. How much time, money, goodwill and respect is he determined to lose and all for what, exactly? Why would it have been such a big deal to shoot this out of sequence, depending on the weather at the time? Why would it have been such a big deal to enhance the natural light? Because that wouldn’t have been authentic to the time period? Guess what? Neither is your movie camera.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Hmm, The all natural lighting and casting intrigues me. Is he a douche or an insane perfectionist? Time will tell.
Why is that an or? He’s obviously both.
Well, some can skew one way or the other, but they are not mutually exclusive.
Thank goodness not ALL films are dubious sequels and nostalgia remakes made with the complete approval of moneymen and social media mavens.
No way, Inarritu is far from a douche. I’ve read many interviews with him, he has a very intelligent, nuanced, compassionate mind. He’s also incredibly gifted as a filmmaker. I might even go as far as to say he is a great artist. My opinion.
Full disclosure: I have a crush on him, so I’m hoping this proves false.
I agree with JFresh. Inarritus is a great filmmaker. Whether he’s a jerk or not seems irrelevant.
I agree that these things aren’t mutually exclusive. He can be thoughtful and articulate while discussing his work, and still be an a-hole. As for it being germane to the point: if the movie went massively over budget because of Inarritu’s personality quirks, it’s reasonable that we discuss it.
Yes. Time will tell. I wasn’t too interested in the movie before but now I kind of want to see it. The cinematography looks excellent at least.
Both a douche and an insane perfectionist (or “demanding visionary” and “exacting genius”), these are not mutually exclusive…
Ever heard of a movie called Heaven’s Gate? It’s very likely that you have, but much less likely that anyone here has actually seen it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven%27s_Gate_(film) Director Michael Cimino’s ego was out of control, and the production was an overblown disaster, pretty much heralding the end of the 70s Golden Age of film.
Although it’s regarded more highly now, with editing and hindsight, the name is still notorious for being a mistake no Hollywood studio wants to make again.
His “out of tune violins” (multiple) were part of an elite crew, working in extreme conditions, facing multiple issues on this shoot.
He’s both. There have been multiple accounts where he lined the crew up and basically humiliated them and told them give me a reason why you should stay. honestly the guy may be acclaimed but it doesn’t give you the right to treat your crewmembers as garbage.
He sounds more like a total douche to me. But I would be interested in seeing this movie because I read the book it was based on like 20 years ago and the trailer looks beautiful.
Looks awesome to me.
Me too.
Agree. And I find it odd that it’s described as a movie for dudes just because it features male characters. Seems a very myopic view to take. Should I not watch movies exclusively featuring people of (another) color from myself? Or geriatric characters? Etc.
Of course you can watch a film with all geriatric characters, if that floats your boat. But how many films are out there featuring such characters?
It’s just that these gritty films oozing testosterone, with oh so tough and righteous frontiersmen fighting and bleeding and seeking revenge are getting old. Haven’t these western dude stories already been told a thousand times in different versions?
I’m quoting what Damn wrote below: “Hollywood will never tire of all male movies and proving how tough they are.” THIS.
The question is, are these other types of films being marketed as totally mainstream and about the basic, universal human experience?
Or are they presented as ‘niche’ films that people who want to expand their horizons and knowledge base tend to go see?
Sounds like another Michael Cimino and Heaven’s Gate disaster. Hope the final product validates Inarritu’s vision. Too bad it didn’t work out for Cimino.
Funny, I just wrote a longer post about it above…before I scanned down and read yours, I guess we think alike!
Heaven’s Gate occurred to me as well. This director might want to be careful – Cimino’s career never recovered from that flop.
Also, banning the film’s producer from the set seems like an incredibly insecure thing to do.
The posts on The Revenant’s filming on Reddit were epic.The filming seems totally insane and it’s not finished.They must film some scenes in another aera soon ( next week?) ( it’s why Dicaprio still has his beard)
Wait it’s not done film? So why bother putting out a trailer now if they have more to film?
Could this be a publicity stunt?
The same things where written about Brad Pitts movie. Now they’re working on a sequel.
I have no idea what to believe when it comes to Hollywood.
WWZ’S problems weren’t a publicity stunt. The movie made a sufficient amount of money to essentially try again, but it’s widely believed that the studio fudged how much the movie cost and they didn’t actually make any money.
Well, either it didin’t make any money or it was worth making a sequel of? Since a sequel is being made, it’s hard to believe that the studio was so thorough in it’s PR spin that it would get in the hole for another 190 million?
@ Original G
Studios go in on sequels to unsuccessful films all the time. Warner Bros lost money on Man of Steel, which they also buried costs on, like Paramount did for WWZ, but they’re still going ahead with Batman v Superman, etc. Movies are investments, and what Paramount sees in WWZ is the ability to try again and make more. Look at the box office as a measure of interest, and WWZ scored “interesting enough” to greenlight a sequel. And you can bet they’ll be a lot more careful with the sequel, both creatively (actually using the great source material), and financially, with a much stricter budget and hiring a director who doesn’t have a reputation for creating money problems (Marc Forster did the same thing to Quantum of Solace).
@Original G: the studio isn’t going to sink the same kind of budget this time, and the huge problem with the first one was how out of control the budget got. It actually had a respectable showing, but the movie was SO expensive that they were happy to break even or just have a mild loss. But if they can shoot a sequel for less money (which wouldn’t be hard, because Z was a man-made disaster, shot by folks that had never made a movie of that scope or that type of action) they can potentially make a nice amount of money since it’s a known property and people really enjoyed the source material.
Or, in fewer words: let’s try again, but this time not spend so much on making the movie.
“An epic, bloated disaster” … kind of like Leo. Should work well for him
Snazzy…YESSSSSS!!!!!!!
Ha ha ha! Tailor made!
you just made my day! 🙂
lol – the photos from that ‘gala’ of his in St. Tropez were atrocious.
AI needs this to be a hit. Tom Hardy needs this to be a hit. Why? Because no matter the talent, money needs to be made. This type of bahavior will only be tolerated for so long.
Leo, for all the crap about his personal life, has a solid professional reputation and a strong box office record. So if it does flop, he will be alright.
I hope and think the upcoming movie ‘Legend’ will be a hit for Tom Hardy. The trailer looks awesome; great dual-perfomance!
Can’t wait to see how this turns out. I am now 99% sure Tom Hardy clocked this director onset.
And I am now 99% sure the director probably deserved to be clocked.
The industry is full of people that have reputations as difficult and films that are god-awful to make, so for it to get bad enough that an actor (who has seen his fair share of difficult people and projects) would haul off and slug a director tells me this guy has taken it to a whole new level.
I don’t see the big deal about the natural lighting. Lots of directors do that. I believe Malick did it for The New World. I just feel like if you’re going to make a movie that won’t be a big box office draw, as some Oscar movies are, then you need to work on your budget. He probably didn’t need to pay to have these two actors in it. As always, any role Leo takes on, someone else can do it just as well. He’s not a standout actor, he’s just decent and he picks very good roles for himself. Any other actor could be this role.
Leo is a good actor, in spite of who he might be as a person.
$135 million to make the movie, and then double that if they do a big marketing campaign. There definitely is a place for interesting artistic endeavors, but not something of this budget. The movie needs to be a pretty big hit in order to make that money back, and considering the subject matter I’m a little skeptical.
Tom Hardy punched Inarritu in the face and knocked him out, correct? I believe that was a Lainey blind.
Tom Hardy is always getting into it with someone on a movie. Others will be fired for less and that crap he pulls is annoying and a turnoff from seeing his films.
Hardy seems like a difficult person to work with.
I recently watched a presentation John Seale, the cinematographer on Mad Max, did on his work in the movie and he makes an obvious reference to Hardy being hours late every day, so the crew had to stand around in Namibian desert heat/sun waiting for him & how it prevented Seale from being able to shoot under the lighting conditions he wanted.
I find this sort of thing more damning than his history of laying hands on his directors – it’s just so disrespectful & rude to inconvenience so many people.
There’s that video of him being interviewed with Cumberbatch a decade or so ago, and even then he comes off as an arrogant douchenozzle. He’s an interesting mix of endearing, brawny and brainy onscreen (I liked his Redfordesque turn in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy), but I can’t say he’s a draw.
I have to agree with you, Kaiser, this movie has 0 appeal for me (Leo, ugh). Oh wait, I stand corrected: Domhnall Gleeson is in it. I still won’t see it, though. Speaking of Redford, this reminds me a bit of Jeremiah Johnson.
I generally don’t believe Lainey’s blind items but wouldn’t be shocked if this was true. Hardy seems pretty volatile.
Inarritu is an a-hole as well. He just acknowledged dragging a naked man genitals first across the ground and brushed off that the crew said he was in pain. I could absolutely picture Hardy and Inarritu getting into it, especially if the director was terrorizing the less powerful folks on set (a la David O Russell)
No, not Inarritu. He’s a very talented , intelligent and sweet direcctor. Intelligent people can’t be d-ck heads.
Isn’t this the same director that slammed Comic book movies and people came to his defense when RDJ made that comment about his ability to speak English? Even I as a RDJ fan was disappointed that he said that. Still that doesn’t give Inarritu the right to think his films are so Superior. Maybe people in Hollywood knows more than we do about the real AI.
@V4REal
I was shocked at the comments above….like no one’s going to discuss that he dragged a man naked through the mud, no worries about his private bits…and then discusses the fact that the man was in pain was a lie? Like wtf? Even if the guy REALLY was okay with it…….that doesn’t mean that it won’t still hurt. Especially if you’re doing it over and over again–I would at least acknowledge the hardship the actor was going through for shit pay. Like wtf?
He comes off as a real a-hole. And I’m shocked that’s not the biggest thing said in this thread. I mean, imagine if this was a female director…good Lord.
Big fan of Hardy’s work and the impression I get from him is that he is a very hands on actor. He is very concerned about the films he’s being in being something he thinks is good. That’s me trying to be charitable haha. Like, and I do love him, but he seems very needy and also involved…and when he works with a director who doesn’t let him in on the process like Miller or Inarritu, he gets very agitated. I read an interview where he was describing working with Inarritu and it sounded like he was struggling with it because Inarritu was very distant and springing things on him very chaotically without any empathy for what he was asking for. If you listen to the directors who have done more collaborative work with him, they all talk really positively about him. I will give him props for apologizing to Goerge Miller after Mad Max but I do hope he apologized to the crew too, because if that story about an actor showing up late was about him and it wasn’t an isolated incident, that’s completely unprofessional and unacceptable. I don’t really fault Tom for having ego clashes with big people like Inarritu or Shia, especially when he seems to realize how ridiculous it is and makes an effort to repair those relationships, but no crew deserves that. No matter how good he is or how cool he seems otherwise, that’s definitely lowered my opinion of him.
Not true people…saw a picture of them both fooling around on set; just for fun! Inarritu speaks about Tom with the greatest respect!
Looks like my kind of movie. I will see this for three reasons: Tom Hardy, the storyline, and the director. I’m Swiss on Leo. It would be nice to see him win a best actor Oscar if he lives up to it.
I can’t figure out what the hell is going on in that trailer! What is the story about? Why is everybody mumbling their lines? I enjoyed Birdman, but this looks pretty bad!
It’s Hugo Glass’ story, frontiersman, trapper, and army guide. It’s terrifying and really harsh. It’s a dude story inasmuch as the frontier used to be mostly a dude’s affair.
ETA: Sorry, it seems that I’m repeating information from below.
I really don’t care about this movie but I would pay mad money for a behind the scenes, “making of” documentary/book. Full story, all the dirt.
Off the top of my head I also want the same on:
– the Katie Holmes departure from Batman
– the full saga of the Cracken (one Ms. Lohan)
– Affleck. The real story.
They made a movie like this: Hearts of Darkness (subtitle: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse), about the disastrous shoot of Apocalypse Now.
From Martin Sheen being hammered during filming (even during the mirror scene, supposedly), Marlon Brando showing up the size of a water buffalo (that’s why they mostly filmed his head) and the rented military helicopters flying off in the middle of scenes to fire at actual guerrillas in the jungle, as I recall.
The trailer looks amazing and I love Leo as an actor, I’d watch him in anything. If the movie is good and enjoyable to its demographic it’ll be a success. I can’t wait for it.
+1 !!!! Leo has throroughly earned my respect, if not my actual fandom, by this point.
Epic trailer and Tom Hardy’s a f#cking great actor to watch! He’s intense to work with but honest and funny too. Don’t judge too quickly…
The Revenant = White Man Frontier Fantasy. I see nothing here to interest me, but I’m sure all the white man critics will be salivating over the beards, the grittiness and the over-emoting come release.
+1.
You have a problem with white people?
No.
what?
My only interest in this movie is related to Domhnall Gleeson. I read he spend 7 months in the wilderness with them, which sounded like his role must be significant, but after reading these excerpts – I’m not so sure anymore. I wouldn’t be surprised if Innaritu made him prepare like crazy and work every day for 7 months just to include him in two scenes in the final cut.
I’m only giong to watch for Gleeson. So that would suck. That guy is clearly the best actor in this mess.
You forgot Tom Hardy; he’s brilliant…in anything!
Holy cow thats Daniel DL dedication.
Love the movie Frank for how much A-grade Domhnall Gleeson it served up! Also, impressed by how expressive Fassbender is… without his face… with just his body. (There’s no way not to make that sound weird or dirty; just watch the movie!) Scoot McNairy, too. Get that casting director an award.
Hollywood will never tire of all male movies and proving how tough they are. So much testosterone!
Testosterone poisoning.
Yep. The trailer looks awful, bordering on ridiculous. Is there really a big audience for these kind of movies out there?
So you wanted them to artificially create a female character in a setting where there were no women just to appease PC people?
Yes.
A she-bear would (did?) solve the dude dilemma. 😛
I think “sills” and “Pablo” are the same person.
@anon33 I think so too
This movie was made before–Man in the Wilderness with Richard Harris.
Thanks for pointing that out. 🙂
Didn’t know that, adding another movie too watch on my list.
I mentioned above: also Jeremiah Johnson.
AGI has a reputation for treating his crew and his actors like shit. Word is that he’s worse than DOR.
Can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs
Who’s DOR?
David O. Russell. He directed SLP and American Hustle.
Oh yes I did hear that he was a jerk. Different breed of jerk though than someone like AGI (if AGI even merits that label at all). DOR strikes me as a much more of a coke-addicted-spoiled-brat type than a creative-visionary-going-bust-trying-to-realize-his-crazy-dream type. But who knows.
Anyway I saw American Hustle and thought it was ATROCIOUS. Haven’t seen SLP but no matter how good it is I doubt he’s on the same level as AGI, at least not in my book. Maybe someday tho
Or maybe DO’R!
“Oh no, he yelled at another actress. DO’R!”
Really? I know someone who worked on the production of Amores Perros, and said Alejandro was super nice (also said that Gael was a total smug back then).
Granted, it was his first movie and maybe fame went to his head, but even now he seems normal to me
I thought the trailer was great. Leo is a movie star who can really act. Alejandro is an artist. Tom Hardy is a jem on screen. I’m a girl and I’m in. I’m not one to follow what a “boy” movie is or isn’t. I’m sick of Marvel/superhero films and cartoons. This looks like a movie for adults. And all those people wondering why Leo still sports that beard got their answer – the movie is still in production.
For the ones not knowing: the movie is based on the book TheRevenant which is based on the life of trapper legend Hugh Glass. Leo plays Glass who is mauled by a bear while hunting. Instead of helping him his a-hole companions rob him and leave him to die. Glass, heavily injured, survived his odyssey in the wilderness and later hunted his ex-companions down for revenge. It’s an old trapper/ adventurer legend.
Glass inspired almost all grizzly man/ trapper stories…
It sounds interesting. I’ve never heard of Hugh Glass.
When I saw the trailer I wanted to watch the movie but then I read ¨and later hunted his ex-companions down for revenge.¨and now I’m dying to watch this film.
Anything that says based on a true story or insprired by true events like this trailer excites me! Even more so because ive never heard of it and its fun to learn something new. I think Leos a great actor who definitely is lucky to have a great track record. As we say every year it seems, maybe this is his year
Iñárritu is very gifted, so I could believe him being VERY particular on a set. Too many ideas at the same time- therefore the indecisiveness. Malick, or Heaven’s Gate & The Deer Hunter come to mind. I like Leo as an actor, but I’m not sure about the movie subject itself. I seem to remember something along those lines with R.Harris from the 70s. But I’ll watch anything Iñárritu, it’s always challenging to try to follow his creative mind.
Iñarritu is an extremely gifted director, that doesn’t mean that after the Oscars and the praise all that could end up to his head and making him think his farts are gold. That’s a really dangerous and thin line, and artists often ended up screwing their own careers because they thought too much of themselves. I hope this is not the case, but I have to say it might be, not because of Iñarritu’s problems with the film, but because what comes out of the trailer isn’t really that interesting, the cinematography and the technical aspects might be great, but Leo playing Leo again and the fact that is just looks like another dudes movies is not helping.
yeah I liked his films before but this one is just screaming OSCAR BAIT from the mountaintops.
and it does sound like the fame and praise went to his head and inflated his ego even worse. This kind of dictatorial behaviour on a production is not good.
I am obsessed with Alejandro and his films. I cannot wait for this epic MASTERPIECE and for him, Chivo and Leo to win Oscars for it.
So maybe Sean Penn wasn’t so wrong…
Penn made a sarcastic joke, only most people didn’t get it as such. They are friends.
For a site that treats being friends with Chelsea Handler with being the 8th deadly sin, I’m shocked that no one has commented on Inarritu’s friendship with Penn.
@Bridget
Didn’t know much of (anything) about Inarritus, but I can see why he’s friends with Penn. They’re both talented a-holes. He’s not on the same level as Penn (that I know of), but damn.
um, he sounds like the absolute worst to work for. I loved his movies but I can’t support the work of someone who makes people’s lives such hell as a boss.
This is based on a true story, not some invented story from Hollywood. There are dudes because its about a dude surviving the wildness (after a real life bear attack) while he tries to hunt down the other dudes that left him there to die. There are no main character women involved because yes, no women were involved in the main actual small moment true story. Its about this particular moment in this guys life, its not a saga with lots of characters. Will definitely see this, couldn’t care less about a directors bloated personality, will watch a good original movie without even a thought about someones work method. At least ts not another generated sequel or super hero unoriginal movie.
I’m torn on this. I want it to be epic because even though it is an all male cast, those kind of wilderness survival revenge epics are my thing entirely, plus I love Tom and Dohmhall and CHIVO, greatest cinematographer working today, with him and Inarittu, it’s definitely going to be beautiful. I also imagine there’s no way to shoot a movie like this without it being difficult and frustrating.
However, Inarritu’s comments and various anecdotes about the shoot irritate me. I don’t think its worth it to make people’s lives hell and toast gloatingly about the pain you’ll cause them (apparently what he did when shooting started), go through crew like they’re Kleenex, and be so invested in artistic vision that providing respect for your coworkers goes out the window. I mean its fine if Leo wants to put himself through hell for that Oscar glory, but not cool to extend that kind of “f you, my art” to lower level crew. It’s a movie, you know? You can make a beautiful picture without being a dick. I just hate the idea that people need to suffer and be in conflict for entertainment to work. Whiplash had two of the most intense and dynamic performances of last year and in between takes JK and Miles were joking around, not throwing drums at each other for art. That’s way more impressive to me, to be honest.
Who cares if it has an all male cast? Women weren’t around in this time or situation. Enjoy it for what it is. If people want to watch a female who more than holds her own with the men in this genre of film, watch Robyn Wygert as Calamity Jane in Deadwood.
TAWY.. why stick a woman in a film when it would be just a gimmick. And I loved Deadwood.. Wygert is as you say.. amazing.
I would love to see such a film or such that focuses on women during that time. I love moves set in this time period.
I wouldn’t say its a “dudes” movie. I think it appeals to movie buffs in general. Because there is already talks of how this might actually get Leo an oscar, that will probably get some men and women going out to see it.
From the looks of the trailer I think it will be a film with amazing performances but would otherwise be kind of boring. Who knows, maybe I’ll be wrong. I hope I’m wrong.
And yeah Alejandro sounds like he would be a pain to work with, but again maybe all of it will be worth it for an amazing movie.
Looks like the sort of film that should be seen on the big screen. I’m there.
Maybe the shoot was a mess, but that doesn’t mean the film is. It looks so good. Can’t wait to see it.
I don’t know if I’m interested in seeing it.. but I hate when a film is being trashed and called terrible before it has even been seen. You are correct.. Problems on the set or during production doesn’t equal a bad film.
Sad because the internet is now used as a tool to destroy films; especially if you have some issues with the actor. and that is a shame because all films suffer because of this in the long run.
Oddly, this thread (and hearing about the insistence on natural light–because I am a total sucker for that in film when done right) has me thinking I need to see this in a theatre. No small feat, considering the trek I’ll have to make. Though sounds like the males in my life will all be up for escorting me!
These kinds of stories make me wonder if Leo is even just a little tempted to get a hot new girlfriend a few months ahead of his films releasing, just to boost the PR a bit more. No actor is 100% confident of their box office appeal, even someone with Leo’s track record. And furthermore, maybe he has more pressure to do something like that precisely because of that track record.
His girlfriends are interchangeable and he never talks about them nor makes them seem important in the least, just a few photos of him off vacationing with them. How does that have anything to do with boosting the PR?
But he knows he’ll be photographed with anyone new and a new relationship will generate 1 billion new headlines and many more times that in terms of clicks. I think it’s unlikely that he does fully think that way, but I’m just wondering if it does have even a little impact. They all live in the goldfish bowl. And Leo’s look more ragged and less glamorous these days. He used to be sooo cute though not my type.
We just watched Schindler’s List last night. I was blown away with the direction by Spielberg and what he accomplished because of the magnitude and scope of that movie project. He shot it in Krakow. It was a grueling, grim shoot because of the subject matter, the weather, the surroundings. The movie is a masterpiece.
He filmed it in 72 days
One of the big deals about this movie is it’s the first production to shoot on the brand new Arri Alexa 65mm digital cinema camera, so it can easily handle the natural light and give the movie a huge epic feel. I’m going to see the movie just for that reason alone. If you can play the trailer on a large TV screen, you’ll see what I mean.
Who are we to question how an artist wants to work?
Artists shouldn’t get to do what they want to other people just because of a ‘vision.’ It’s a huge overstatement of the importance of art to think that the above (if it’s true) should be permitted in pursuing it. This is a film about a dude shooting other dudes, not the second coming.
I find the article a bit too negative towards a movie that hasn’t even come out yet. I miss balance.
I am in no way a movie buff but I wonder if there might be advantages to shooting in natural light. The pics look great and the landscape might look rather gloriously impressive and unbelieveably beautiful on a huge cinema screen.
It could very well be that not-shooting-in-sequences but rather in-one-piece shots might add a special aesthetic effect. I want to see that. (I have no idea how to call these technical things properly so forgive my lousy vocabulary #colloquialterms.)
I don’t mind dude movies either and I have no idea why this seems to be presented as a negative point. There are chick movies and romantic movies and action movies swtf?
As for many crew members leaving: it is a very cold climate and therefore very uncomfortable and difficult (does a camera work at minus 15 something degrees celsius?) so I would expect more problems than usual.
I agree you on the dude films and the lighting points. This films looks amazing to me, me as a female who detests chick flicks.
The movie set was enormous. I was there several times. No expense spared on this one. I think it will be a great film.