Saw it yesterday. Crikey, it was grim. Beautiful, compelling and absorbing, but grim.
Does anyone know why he put moss/lichen in his dead son's mouth?
Does anyone know why he put moss/lichen in his dead son's mouth?
Revenant Ultimate bush craft movie
- Thread starter Kiwi Tim
- Start date
Not 100% sure here but I thought he was trying to see if he was still breathing.
I believe it has something to do with the believe that the last breath breathed by a person was supposed to become noxious at the time of death and moss was supposed to purify it as it leaves the body.
I don't know the particular Indian cultural reasons for it; hopefully one of our Indian members can fill us in on it. But a lot of cultures place things in various orifices. Partly it stems from the body breaking down and gases building up and escaping. Sometimes it can also be seen as a " last bite" to sustain the body on its final journey; a lot of northern European hunters, myself included will place a final piece of browse/food into say a deers mouth after it has been killed as a sign of respect for giving its life to sustain us. Sadly it seems to be a practice in decline with many modern cultures.
If you read up on various peoples death rights various charms and coins are placed to aid on the afterlife.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
If you read up on various peoples death rights various charms and coins are placed to aid on the afterlife.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
From a bushcraft standpoint, I liked that they showed a realistic way for how he could have made fire. I remember watching Ray Mears talking about Hugh Glass on one of his shows, and explaining how he used his razor, a piece of flint, and the magic of bushcraft to start a fire. I remember wondering how that was possible without him having prepared tinder. The answer given by the movie was...gunpowder, which makes a lot of sense.
In the movie he had what looked like a little steel fork to strike with, it looked quite nice I'd like one of those.
Thats not quite true. The other one joined the military, Hugh couldn't kill him for fear of a hanging...(real life version) so Hugh told him never to leave the military or he would kill him. Never got the chance as Hugh was killed in an Indian attack 10 years or so later.
Leo's acting was a bit... well, i dunno. Not what its hyped up to be. Spent most of it not actually talking.... just groaning. If he gets an oscar, its cos they found him a good role where he didn't need to say much...lol
Leo's acting was a bit... well, i dunno. Not what its hyped up to be. Spent most of it not actually talking.... just groaning. If he gets an oscar, its cos they found him a good role where he didn't need to say much...lol
Last edited:
I'm rather glad I went to see it with no agenda or interest in its historical accuracy. Enabled me to view it for what it is: Entertainment that happens to take place in the environment I love most.
That said I did let out an audible squeal when what I'm sure was a single shot blackpowder pistol-wielding Good Guy got off two (2) shots without reloading!
K
That said I did let out an audible squeal when what I'm sure was a single shot blackpowder pistol-wielding Good Guy got off two (2) shots without reloading!
K
Just got back from watching it ... first visit to the Kinema for over a decade - enjoyed it.
Yeah it annoyed me that he had a free shot from his pistol ... but I otherwise quite enjoyed the film, though I thought the landscape was the real star
Yeah it annoyed me that he had a free shot from his pistol ... but I otherwise quite enjoyed the film, though I thought the landscape was the real star
I went to see the Revenant on Saturday Night, I enjoyed the film and the survival techniques was pretty good! the scenery was amazing! with what he went through his middle name must have been called 'Lucky' to survive the bear attack is one thing let alone the cold!
But I agree with John Fenna that also annoyed me to having at least 2 shots from his pistol, but that said I would give it 5 Stars.
But I agree with John Fenna that also annoyed me to having at least 2 shots from his pistol, but that said I would give it 5 Stars.
I too saw the film and enjoyed it as entertainment. With regard to the pistol incident I assumed he'd pulled a second pistol from under his coat as a black powder/flint lock reload at full gallop was a bit unlikely...Let's face it, wearing that big hairy coat he could have had a belt fed Vickers under it let alone a second pistol....
True enough I guess.... it still looked like 1 pistol only to me...never saw him drop one and pull another...
Plus if you follow the action he only captures one pistol. Multiple shots and more so the foley artists rubbing in weapons cocking/racking overtime someone brandishes them, and the shing & ring of blades every time they're drawn (when was the last time your knife rang when drawn?) annoyes the pants off me. Maybe if the film becomes more popular in the future it'll gain a similar rope to Star Wars "Han shot first!" but instead "Glass shot once!"
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
But..but..you're ignoring the formula of Movie camera+gunfight = 24x5 second bursts with 30 round magazines from 600RPM weapons ( any Diehard) or hits at 200 metres with a Colt 44/40...from the hip ( Clint Eastwood in Two mules for Sister Sarah)
Applying that formula, two shots from a single barrel Flintlock pistol is more than feasible...
I enjoyed the film anyway...had to keep me coat on though..felt chilly just watching it..
Applying that formula, two shots from a single barrel Flintlock pistol is more than feasible...
I enjoyed the film anyway...had to keep me coat on though..felt chilly just watching it..
Two shots from a single shot ain't too bad. Most 6 shooters are 16 shooters and some never run out.
More reason why I don't go to the movies. I just buy the dvd when it comes out.
Similar threads
