One Who Comes Back

Rating: 8/10 (27 January 2016)

Late 2015 has given us two fine epics of survival, "The Revenant" and "In the Heart of the Sea", both dealing with men who somehow manage to survive against the odds after a disaster which leaves them isolated in a hostile environment. The word "revenant" literally means "one who comes back", and is often used to refer to a ghost which "comes back" to haunt the living. "The Revenant", however, is not a tale of the supernatural. It is a Western based upon the true story of Hugh Glass, an early 19th century frontiersman. In 1823 Glass was part of a fur trapping party when he was attacked and severely injured by a grizzly bear. Glass's companions left him to die in what was then unexplored wilderness, but he somehow survived and came seeking revenge on those who had abandoned him. In particular he wanted vengeance against one John Fitzgerald who had not only tried to persuade the others to kill Glass outright but had also murdered Glass's son Hawk, who had been trying to protect his father. In this sense Glass is a living "revenant", one who comes back to haunt his enemies during his lifetime.
The date at which the film is set is an unusual one; most Westerns are set during the period 1865-1890, the quarter-century immediately following the Civil War, and it is unusual to find one set as early as the 1820s. The story, however, is not particularly original; revenge has long been a standard theme of Westerns. Indeed, Glass's story has already been told in an earlier film, "Man in the Wilderness", made in 1971 and starring Richard Harris.
I have never seen "Man in the Wilderness" so cannot say how it compares to "The Revenant". Alejandro G. Iñárritu's film, however, is very different from most revenge Westerns, not in its storyline but in its style of storytelling. The traditional revenge western is fast-paced, moving quickly to the climactic final shoot-out between hero and villain. (Another 1971 film, "Hannie Caulder", is a good example, except that there the person seeking revenge is a woman rather than a man). "The Revenant" is different. It is a large-scale epic of the West, slower and more deliberate in its pacing. It starts not with the bear attack, as many directors would have done, but with a battle between the trappers and a band of Native Americans. For most of the film the emphasis is not on vengeance but on Glass's struggle to survive not only the bear but also cold, hunger, hostile Indians and an equally hostile group of rival French (presumably French Canadian) trappers.
Leonardo DiCaprio has not only given a number of fine performances in recent years, he has done so while playing roles generally very different from one another. The rugged backwoodsman Glass has little in common with urbane millionaires like Jay Gatsby or Howard Hughes in "The Aviator", or with J. Edgar Hoover or the youthful con-man Frank Abagnale in "Catch Me If You Can". This is perhaps DiCaprio's most physical (as opposed to verbal) performance; for most of the film Glass has nobody to talk to, and even when he has he is not the most talkative of individuals. His thoughts and emotions are mostly conveyed through expressions, gestures, movements and a general sense of mood. It was also a physically demanding role; DiCaprio had to undergo in person many of the hardships which Glass endures, such as jumping into icy rivers or sleeping in a buffalo carcass. His "Best Actor" Oscar nomination is well deserved. Unfortunately, not all the acting is as good. In particular Tom Hardy as the main villain Fitzgerald failed to speak clearly and was often difficult to understand. He should have stuck to writing "Tess of the d'Urbervilles". Iñárritu's original choice for the role was Sean Penn, who may well have been better.
A notable feature is cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki's photography. This is one of those films where every shot looks like a painting; I was particularly reminded of the work of great American masters such as Albert Bierstadt, Thomas Cole and Frederic Church. Most of the film was shot in Canada, although because shooting overran into May the final scenes actually had to be shot in the Andes of southern Argentina, one of the few parts of the world where snow was to be found. This is not simply photography of beautiful scenery for its own sake; indeed as most of the action takes place in late autumn and winter the look of the film is for the most part not conventionally beautiful. It is, however, generally awe-inspiring; Lubezki and Iñárritu seem to have wanted to create a sense of majestic grandeur in order to emphasise man's insignificance in the face of nature and of nature's indifference towards man, a sense which makes Glass's achievement in surviving all the more impressive. I hope that the Academy will remember this film at the Oscar ceremony. 8/10