The Mercenary with a mouth is back with the eagerly awaited arrival of “Deadpool 2”. The films sees the generally well-meaning but highly dysfunctional Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds), back to taking out bad guys as a contract player but also managing his relationship with Vanessa (Morena Baccarin). When an unexpected event sends his life into a freefall, Deadpool tries to find a new purpose with the help of his X-Men associates from the last film who attempt to recruit him into their organization.
His first mission is to defuse an angry and destructive young mutant named Russell (Julian Dennison), which takes an unexpected turn and lands them both in serious trouble.
One would think that would be enough to cause some major life changes for Deadpool but thanks to the arrival of Cable (Josh Brolin), a cyborg soldier from the future; things are about to get much more complicated and intense.
Undaunted, Deadpool opts to form his own league of heroes and aside from Domino (Zazie Beetz); they seem to be as unlucky or dysfunctional as their leader which makes for some very hysterical consequences.
What follows is an action and laugh-laden adventure which brings even more of what made the first film such a success to the audience as the film takes the bawdy action of the first and ups the ante thanks in large part to an expanded budget and cast.
My biggest concern for the film was that with an expanded budget there would be too many characters and an attempt to do far too much with the film. That did play out at times in the beginning as for me, the first film worked so well as they had to let the characters rather than the action and effects carry it and the rapid-fire arrival of so many jokes and creative profanity made repeat viewing of the film necessary to catch everything.
This time out we get elaborate action and chase sequences as well as a much larger cast. At times it seemed as if this would possibly overshadow the characters and story but Reynolds and Director David Leith never let it cross that line.
They also go back to the core elements in the final third of the film which really allows the film to fully connect with the tone of the original film and brings the film home to a satisfying conclusion. What really sold the film for me was the brilliant and very inspired extended scene during the credits which allows Deadpool to “fix” various issues which perfectly captures the irreverent character and the best aspects of the series where the cast is willing to make fun of themselves as well as the larger universe in which their characters exist.
I cannot wait to see what comes next as “DeadPool 2” is another fun outing for the character and something very different from most comic based movies.
4 stars out of 5

If you want to see Batman the way he SHOULD be portrayed on screen then this is the movie for you. It's great to see a 'comic' adaptation tackling darker emotions and greyer morals in its heroes. Batman is a bulked-up savage brute, which I applaud, and Superman is prepared to murder to save his mother. This is the only DC movie worth umpteen rewatches.

One of the best superhero movies I've seen in quite sometime now. Action packed, along with good actors and actresses. Just an overall great movie!

I actually thought that Ben Affleck did a decent job in the role. He did that Michael Keaton thing where he understood the link between Batman and Bruce Wayne and was able to pull off a good Bruce, and that is really where Batman is, figuring out which one is the mask and playing both accordingly.
However, it starts... abruptly. It starts with the assumption that you have seen the Superman movies, and for viewers that hadn't it comes across as more than a little jarring. You were expected to understand what was happening from the start and, unfortunately, that's not the best way to start a film that doesn't have the number "2" after it.
It doesn't have that slow build that explains the story, it just kind of starts and moves along as if the audience is already sucked in... and this with a new star as Batman, and a new universe to host him in.
Had it taken the time to let you get to know the characters first, it would have made for a more compelling and interesting film. Instead it moved along as if no introductions were necessary for either the characters or the world they inhabited and that made a lot of people lose interest fast.

**Watch the Ultimate Edition!**
The first of several DC movies to suffer from WB forcing a mediocre cut of a great film. Before the Snyder Cut there was the Ultimate Edition, Snyder's vision is better presented here in a longer, darker, and more sensible cut of this film.

**Zack Snyder creates an entire DC universe in one film filled with gritty new takes on familiar characters and brutal action.**
I know this is a polarizing thing to say, but I loved this movie! I think Zack Snyder crushed it with the incredible production design, off-the-charts casting, and gritty take on a lost and weary Batman. The casting for this movie is a master stroke of brilliance. Ben Affleck’s Batman is jaded and bitter, taking his rage and loss out on the criminal element of Gotham. His hulking physique emphasizes Batman’s imposing strength over his gadgets when in combat. Zack Snyder also gave us Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, which we all know is one of the best choices in the comic book cinema world. The fight sequences are the best part of BvS; pitting godlike power against a man motivated by grief somehow seems possible and brutal because of Snyder’s writing and directing. Finally, the world-building and teases bring so much intrigue and excitement for future films. It isn’t a perfect film, but as a DC and Batman fan, it is one of my favorite comic book movies and stands out as refreshingly separate from all the bright-colored goofy Marvel movies of the time.

I don't understand the hate people had with this film. I thought it was brilliant.
Sure, I had my doubts of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, but halfway through the end those doubts were put to rest.
And Ben Affleck was amazing as the latest incarnation of Batman. It was a long time since the actor did a superhero movie (Daredevil).
My only critique was Jesse Eisenberg's portrayal as Lex Luthor - really cringing for me. Didn't do justice for the character (no pun intended)! Michael Fassbender would've been a more suitable role.
Anyway, this film...it was a Zack Snyder masterpiece.

Very short synopsis : Batman has been hit hard by the events of Man of Steel : a "god" descends on earth, is confronted by another god, and they fight, killing thousands of humans. He learns about a rock coming from his birth planet that can weaken or kill him. It's the property of Lex Luthor, who could target Superman too, but with evil purpose.
So I won't go deeper in the story. This movie, unlike most other superhero movie, is targeting adults. I don't mean 18 or 21 year old, I mean mature beings that have endured bad things in life, and have taken the time to see the goods and bads of humanity. Yes, not the Marvel (Guardians of the galaxy, Ant man) target audience. Batman makes it clear (rejoined by the senator) : if a being is so powerful he can't be killed and can kill thousands, even if for now he does good, what happens if he becomes a villain? What laws or weapons can stop him?
Now going back to the movie and how it presents its argument. We have Batman's introduction to the new DC movie universe (death of parents, tortured psyche ...) done during the opening credits. That is both efficient and powerful. Then we see Bruce Wayne at the time of the Superman / Zod battle. We also see humans being scared and killed. So, yeah it's superhero movie making not showing merry world with superheroes saving humans. And doing funny quotes. It's people (or super people) facing tragedy and growing up to see how the future has to be settled. And then a new villain appears. Or rather, he appears as a careless billionnaire showing off - how could he be perceived as dangerous? He has the chance of having Batman wanting to take down Superman, when he wants the same thing, so he can go for his secondary plan to use Krypton technology to change the world.
So the last part of the movie is the fight of 3 super heroes against a creature created by the "god"'s technology and humanity's madness/evilness. Yes, it's not a villain that is there because you need one to fight the bad guys, it's yet another consequence of Kryptonians coming to earth.
So the films rolls out and I'm so stunned by the content I feel I was treated as a human being, not as a popcorn eating teenager or a comics fan. Just as someone that could appreciate great movie making.

As I write this review I have just had a thoroughly disappointing movie experience and it so just happens that I have some strong feelings about the source material for this movie so be prepared for a bit of ranting and a few more “adult” words than usual.
I have to say that I bought this movie only because I felt I wanted it in my collection just for it to be complete. I was really expecting to be, shall we say, not impressed. A movie about Batman and Superman, heroes that I grew up with, fighting is not my kind of movie.
In the end I realized that my expectations of crappines was not enough. I really disliked this movie. In short succession this movie turns several of my childhood heroes to bad guys and the greatest superman bad guy into a unstable hippie-like jerk that goes through the movie behaving like he is a drug addict. So basically this movie went drown the drains for me straight away and then I have not even gotten started about the plot. Actually I felt so annoyed over this crap that I actually spent time taking notes while I was watching.
Let me see what I noted. Lex Luther is a fucking joke. Alfred, the same. Jimmy Olsen a fucking CIA agent? You got to be fucking kidding me! And not only does he screw Lois Lane but gets himself shot after a few seconds of screen time.
Same stupid nonsense about XXX being too powerful, is a threat and needs to be government controlled that has been used in hundreds. if not thousands, of crappy low and high budget action movies. I hate that crap. It is stupid, stupid, stupid.
Weird and totally uninteresting dream scenes, what the f... did the writer smoke? If they wanted to pad the movie it a) was a crappy way of doing it and b) why? With over three hours (Ultimate Edition) it is way to long for such a crappy movie anyway.
Oh, here is a (somewhat) positive note at least. It was indeed rather funny that they had chosen CNN to spew out the nonsense conspiracy theories about Superman being responsible for the bomb in the wheelchair. Fake news anyone?
I had a little bit of enjoyment of the movie during the last part of the movie when it finally turned into a bit of action. Batman’s car and plane was cool. The action, once Batman getting knocked on his head enough to get to his senses again, was a nice chunk of CGI goodness. That I have to admit.
Okay, after three, mostly painful, hours the movie finally comes to an end. And what an end. Meh!!! Not only was it a crappy ending but they managed to drag it out forever with excruciatingly boring scenes.
I am sure a lot of the above can be said to be subjective. For instance my dislike of the way my childhood characters where treated. I am not a professional reviewer though so this is my personal take of the movie. If you don’t like it, fine with me and good for you but do not feel obliged to tell me about it.

I still have faith in the DCU but this movie had problems. Watch my full review here.
http://www.hweird1reviews.com/allreviews/bvsreview

> Know your enemy's weakness before challenging to a fight!
It is known that critics have no brain. It is the best Superman film as Henry Cavill in the red and blue suit. Yep, I know it is always DC versus Marvel, so it is then DC's reply to the 'Avengers'. I don't care their rivalries, as a film fanatic, I enjoy good films and I found it was so good. But I was a bit worried after the Superman was shown in a dark shade in the trailer, especially after Batwan was overly stylised by Nolan, I thought the black suit would take over. After watching the film I was relieved and happy that Batman was exposed.
Batman fans might have been disappointed, but for the superhero and DC fans, this film is a great treat. You can't compare it with 'Avengers', it had its own style. It follows the 'Man of Steel' and directed by the same director. Excellent cast. I have never been the Ben Affleck hater, so I had no objection to his role in this. He did good along with Cavill and others. He would do better in his solo Batman films if Zack Snyder is retained to script and direct them.
I'm not a comic book reader, so I did not know the story before the watch. I was surprised for the Wonder Woman's part in the film. The visuals were awesome, the story was unpredictable, well developed characters, cleverly composed scenes, wonderful stunt sequences and the film's overall tone was kind of dark and gloomy, a very satisfying superhero film. The content balance was perfect, but the characters did not do the same as we know Superman is a father of all superheroes.
I already watched it twice and I can't wait for its sequel. Especially looking forward for Jesse Eisenberg, because he was kind of stayed low in this and I hope his character Lex becomes much stronger. It is a PG13, and there's nothing botherable stuffs in it for the underage audience, but I felt it is targeted for adults because of the matured flavour. Don't think about that I said, just watch it, it will definitely entertain you well if not blow you away. Surely recommended to all.
8/10

A bit slow but overall good. There are many sub plots in the movie that could've been made into independent movies of their own.

One would think that the ultimate showdown between two of the most iconic super-heroes would make for some downright compelling action-oriented exploits against a landscape of angst and destruction. Plus, it certainly did not hurt that exhilarating filmmaker Zack Snyder (‘300’) was at the helm in bringing together the colorfully and concocted confrontation between The Caped Crusader and The Man of Steel. Also, it should have been an effortless task to bring together **Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice** leading men Ben Affleck and Henry Cahill since they had prior experiences donning heroic attire as mighty super-heroes on call to save the day. So why then does Snyder’s big-budgeted connect-the-dots comic book caper feel so incoherently stiff and aimless?
The dour randomness of **Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice** is quite disappointing because this moping actioner wants to grab more than it can chew in its crowded mouth. Snyder and screenwriters David S. Goyer and Chris Terrio aspire to plug in such contemplative issues pertaining to moral ambivalence, political platitudes and religious themes but none of these factors energize or sustain this action-packed narrative that seems to slouch all at the expense of a sluggish approach to the mechanical hedonism that labors.
There is no doubt that **Dawn of Justice** has its share of visual opulence as this is obviously expected in an expansive superhero saga where the proven selling point are two mythical comic book titans spearheading the pumped-up proceedings. Again an overreaching script that plods along, a couple of super-powered sourpusses going the moody motions and the lack of carefree robust action undermine the potential explosiveness that **Dawn of Justice** could have capitalized on with dynamic aplomb.
Sure, there is a noted curiosity and interesting element about the topic of “heroism fatigue” and hidden demons that could have certainly contributed to the psychological strain for our Caped Courageous Ones. Still, **Dawn of Justice** never quite turns this premise into a sparkling case of burn-out conviction, Instead, knuckle-dragging duo of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Affleck) and Clark Kent/Superman (Cavell) make the common sleeping pill look like an excitable bag of M&M candy treats. Thankfully, another fan favorite superhero in the form of Wonder Woman (Gal Godot) is thrown into the mix to break up the monotony of the boorish Boys Club. Unfortunately, the appearance of the wily Wonder Woman during the tail end of the second half is too little and too late for her welcomed presence to rescue the film’s clunky pacing.
Gotham’s Bruce Wayne and Metropolis’s Clark Kent are experiencing setbacks that could be perceived as reaching the depressive crossroads. For starters, a maturing Wayne’s/Batman’s crime-fighting prospects have been tailing off drastically. As for Kent/Superman his existence at the Daily Planet newspaper seems mundane especially when his boss in editor Perry White (Laurence Fishburne) declares that the public has moved away from print given the major impact of social media and other online resources. So yes…Wayne and Kent are in a critical funk in their professional lives both in and out of their familiar costumes. However, can the slumping cities afford two down-and-out superheroes when one can probably carry the load in rough, unsure times?
When the film establishes the dilemma that there can be only one muscle-bound ego to handle the affairs of the region’s unprotected this is where the **Batman v Superman** portion of **Dawn of Justice** looks as if the frenetic fantasy will percolate. Inexplicably, the hype involving the sparring twosome is put on hold as the exposition takes its tedious time building up the conflict to satisfy the clashing insecurities of the capable caped crime-stoppers. For those that witnessed Cavell’s mediocre **Man of Steel** a few years ago will probably understand the current bad blood that exists between the two super studs. Whatever the case both Batman and Superman have pegged each other as brawny bad news ambassadors…something that does not sit well with either struggling superhero as their revered reputations are on the line.
Naturally, there are other outside forces to consider as the acrimonious overtones continue to flow between the brooding mega-powers. The famed instigator in Superman foe Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) is realized as the high-tech billionaire nuisance that has an underlying scheme to eradicate both bickering super powers once and for all but not before Luthor pronounces his take on philosophical tirades. In the meantime, Lois Lane (Amy Adams) is on board to profess her undying love and support for her desired dreamboat Superman. Luthor loathing Superman while Lane fantasizing about her strong flashy fly boy. In other words it is business as usual. While Superman is trying to figure out his place in the sun Snyder piles on the bothersome dreamy anxieties that plague the aging Wayne.
**Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice** is a jumbled mess. Snyder undertakes a convoluted production and tries to sell it as a sophisticated meeting of the misplaced minds between two embattled entities embroiled in uncertainty and super-sized cynicism. Still, Snyder’s vision is mishandled as he seems to have forgotten one crucial point–simply making an action movie that registers with genuine thrills. One cannot help but stumble upon the pretentiousness and piousness that ruins this boneless blockbuster. The film finally decides to stack on the combinations of boisterous match-ups involving everyone but the kitchen sink but all comes off as frivolously forced. Cavell was never really an enticing Superman ever since he donned the big “S” on his chest back in 2013’s** Man of Steel**. Affleck’s Batman is a little more palatable but the constant scowl (both on his face and on the mask) is too much to digest. One would not mind yelling at the screen for Affleck’s alter ego to lighten up a bit.
The supporting players are virtually wasted in this exhausting CGI popcorn pleaser. Eisenberg, normally a trustworthy performer with considerable scope, merely irritates as the punkish techno-magnate Luthor. The always radiant Adams is a wash as the gushing Lois Lane. Oscar-winner Jeremy Irons’s Alfred the butler won’t make anyone forget Micheal Caine’s take on Wayne’s trusty man servant anytime soon. Even the reliably adventurous Oscar-nominated actor Michael Shannon cannot exuberantly bring to life the menacing presence of Zod.
Humorless and hackneyed, **Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice** will probably satisfy indiscriminate devoted fans that will buy into the proposed heralded rivalry. As for others, they will wonder what lies ahead in terms of other League of Justice movies that hopefully can muster up more entertaining stimulation than this over-indulgent doomsday dud. Is anyone up for **Wonder Woman vs. Redwing** with an empowering feminine twist?
**Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice** (2016)
Warner Bros. Pictures
2 hrs. 30 mins.
Starring: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jesse Eisenberg, Laurence Fishburne, Jeremy Irons, Diane Lane, Gal Gadot, Holly Hunter, Michael Shannon, Ray Fisher
Directed by: Zack Snyder
MPAA Rating: PG-13
Genre: Science Fiction/Fantasy/Action and Adventure/Superhero Saga
Critic’s rating: ** stars (out of 4 stars)
(c) Frank Ochieng

Awesome moview. Best Action sequence.
**Slow in the first half**

There is something gloriously brutal about this film - not in an especially violent, nor gory manner - but just in the combination of the best and worst of human traits (resilience, determination, betrayal, desertion, lust etc.) coupled with a truly magnificent depiction of the harshness of a wild Missouri winter. Leonardo DiCaprio is "Glass", who when out hunting with his team is savagely attacked by a bear. He is then for dead by his colleagues. To stay alive, he must use his innate skills to survive the environment and the hostile natives to get back to civilisation - all fuelled by his overwhelming desire for revenge on those who abandoned him to the elements. Iñárritu directs this adventure with considerable skill; you are immersed into the struggle "Glass" has for his very life and then into his vengeful hunt for Tom Hardy "Fitzgerald" whom he blames for his predicament. It may be that the director is trying to draw parallels between man's treatment of each other and of their treatment of nature - and of how there is little difference in the consideration afforded to either; but that's tangential in my view. This is an hugely enjoyable, character-driven, gritty film that builds slowly and relentlessly to a fitting denouement and left me looking for a cardigan.

Utterly riveting.
It's no surprise this one got/gets rave reviews - it's outstanding! 'The Revenant' isn't necessarily edge-of-your-seat viewing, though it's still a massively impactful watch as you feel every hit of Hugh Glass' journey. It's rather gruesome and bloody, while it also has a few top notch action sequences.
Leonardo DiCaprio is easily one of my favourite actors of all-time, the man is simply a sensational actor - I'm yet to see an anything less than tremendous film involving him. I wouldn't even say this is his greatest performance, and that's saying something as DiCaprio is absolutely superb here.
Away from the main man, Tom Hardy is also part of this film. He is great, as I always expect from him. He and DiCaprio are fantastic actors. Hardy portrays John Fitzgerald, brilliantly. However, his character isn't written perfectly - not poorly by any stretch, he's just a bit flip-floppy at the beginning. The way the story creates itself involving Fitzgerald being where he is isn't as amazing as it could've been - very minor criticism, mind.
Another small complaint is the ending, there's nothing truly wrong with it at all but I, personally, would've concluded things about 10-15 minutes prior - there's a quality, almost Quentin Tarantino-esque, scene involving horses that would've made for a more thrilling end shot.
To finish, everything's beautifully crafted together visually, from a filmmaker's viewpoint, too. A marvellous film no doubt, certainly a must-watch!

"My heart bleeds. But revenge is in the creator's hands".
The Revenant is set in the 1820s, in the uncharted wilderness of America, Hugh Glass set out with a hunting party on an expedition. Glass was mauled by a bear and left for dead but through sheer will and to get back to his family, Glass survived - but that wasn't the only thing on his mind as he set out to payback the men who left him behind.
I remember last year around January time when I saw the two images for The Revenant, with Leo holding a Kentucky Flintlock Rifle looking like he's not playing around. Those two images straight away caught my interest. I then found out it was directed by the magnificent Alejandro González Iñárritu who did the Oscar wining "Birdman" (a movie that I personally loved). The Revenant quickly became my most anticipated movie of 2015, as I was looking forward to this movie more than Star Wars, and yes I said it. And after finally seeing the movie myself, I can safely say that I was not disappointed. The Revenant is one of the most stunning, brutal, intense, grizzly movie experience I've ever had. The movie isn't for everyone, but I loved it.
Alejandro González Iñárritu is starting to become my 3rd favorite director working today, because he's such an old school director when it comes to storytelling by the use of art. There's been a lot of drama happening behind the scenes of this movie, with the weather stopping the production or if someone made a mistake while filming, the crew must stop for the day and wait until tomorrow, because one mistake could lose a lot of day light for a scene (It was shot in natural lighting). One of the studios suggested that the movie should be shot using computer generated to make things much easier, but luckily Iñárritu said no to the idea by stating, "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 shit." And after seeing the movie I gotta say that it was the perfect decision, because it's very rare for a director today to take that risk and avoid what the studio says. Yes there are some CGI scenes, but the way that the animated effect's blended together with the practical effect's is handled incredibly well. This is one of the best directed movies I've seen in 2015 and I know Iñárritu already won an Oscar already, but I hope he wins another one for this, because never before have I seen a revenge tale presented so unique and utterly magnificent.
I respect Leonardo DiCaprio as an actor, but in this movie, he sleeps inside of a dead horse naked and eats raw food from animals, now if this doesn't get him an Oscar, nothing will. He's performance in this movie is what a call 'a silent performance', because Leo barley has that much lines in the movie and the only time he dose get to talk is in a different language (which Leo has said it was tricky to learn the language). DiCaprio has proven time and time again that he's more than a pretty face, but in this movie I only saw Hugh Glass, not DiCaprio. That's my biggest praise I have to give to Leo, as he had to deliver all the emotions, the pain and the tortured soul that Hugh Glass. All of that was all through his face and eyes and trust me when I say this, but it's not easy as you think. We are so use to seeing Leo as the angry, pretty boy billionaire in every movie he's in, but in this movie I thought he was fantastic. He played the man who lost everything. With very little lines he had, he still manages to make a powerful performance that's so far his best. I really hope Leo gets an Oscar for this.
Tom Hardy also gave an Oscar worthy performance in this movie. I've heard that some people had trouble understanding him in this movie (or just in everything that he's in really). Sometimes I didn't understand what he said but for the most part I did. But all that a side, I still think he was fantastic in the movie. He really added a lot to his character, because sometimes you understand the things that he dose in movie and yes the things he dose in the movie are wrong, but in a rough environment that these people are in, you would likely do the same. I'm not sure if he would get in for best supporting actor, but I hope he dose.
I'm running out of things to say about Emmanuel Lubezki breathtaking cinematography. The camera work and how he makes the camera feel like a character of it's own is seriously impressive. Lubezki captures nature on film, that shows it's beauty and it's unpredictable surprises. The people running the Oscars should just give Lubezki his third Oscar right now, because he's going to take that third trophy home.
For flaws I had with the film it that some of the character logic towards the end of the movie didn't make that much senses to me. And that's it.
Overall rating: "The Revenant" is one of most intense and stunning movies I've seen in 2015. The score is haunting, the editing was top notch and that bear attack scene was just terrifying. I mean how the hell did they do that? I don't know about you, but I honestly can't stop thinking about this movie. It's one of those movies that sticks with you after it's over and it isn't going away anytime soon.

**The following is a long form review that I originally wrote in 2015.**
From a technical point of view, _The Revenant_ is one of the most masterful pieces of cinema I've ever seen. This made its one technical failure all the more jarring. The ADR. I don't know how or why this was allowed to happen, but the dubbing of the Native Americans is some 70's style shit, it's awful, and it's awful every single time. In your average film this would be only a minor annoyance, but in _The Revenant_ which A) pretty much nails everything else in the AV department, and B) Takes itself so goddamn seriously, this issue is painfully distracting.
I also found myself continuously rooting for the antagonists (first the bear, and later Hardy) subconsciously, and scolding myself for it. The good aspect of this is that it was rooted in the fact that all the characters are humanised (even the bear) and fallible, which I like, but the flip-side to that is I was less sympathetic to Leo's character, which takes up the majority of the screen time, and thusly I did not feel fully engaged for a large portion of the movie.
In fact the whole second and third acts underwhelmed me in that exact way. That's not to say that they were bad, but they were invariably weaker than the first act. After its end the rest of the film did feel like it was stretched a mite thin.
That all said, I knew within about 90 seconds that I was going to give _The Revenant_ a favourable review. Visually, it has this ethereal effect. It feels **too** real. So real that it must be a trick, the world of _The Revenant_ is alien in its realness. A bizarre contradictory nature that struck a chord with me immediately. For the average cinema-goer, I would say _The Revenant_ is worth your time, but for a movie aficionado or film student, I would say _The Revenant_ isn't anything short of a must.
75%
-_Gimly_

This is the best film I have seen all year (since 'Birdman', in fact, the previous film by Innaritu). It was expertly directed. The use of natural light really adds to the danger of the environment that surrounds Hugh Glass (Leonardo DiCaprio). Innaritu loves the camera to pan around objects and people to create a sense of awe and spectacle.
Leonardo DiCaprio really did deserve all the awards that he got for this role. I thought it was his best film by far. The realism and intensity of his performance really comes through.
The story was gripping throughout the whole film and I found the twists and turns very interesting.
★★★★½

There's nothing really to complain about the acting but their praise and this movie is overrated. Read my full review here.
http://www.hweird1reviews.com/allreviews//therevenant

> The one who came back from the dead to avenge.
The movie was inspired by the real event that sets in the year 1823, United States. When one of the crew members of the hunters left behind after he was severely hurt from a bear attack, he desperately looks for a way to get back to the camp alive, especially to avenge for the death of his close one. The whole film was about survival in the wilderness and to avoid the native Americans. But the introduction in the opening was very brief and in the final act, it was another brief man hunt. Overall, it was an enjoyable movie for adults with some gruesome scenes.
The movie was made on a grand scale. Well written screenplay, good direction, the cast, music and the locations, but it would have been even awesome if it was true to the original occurrence. I felt it was cinematically overdosed, especially for the commercial purpose. The fans of Leonardo Dicaprio's overwhelming celebration created a huge buzz. In fact, it looks like the entire Hollywood is his fan and the Oscars given to him out of sympathy, because I have seen his best performances better than this in the past.
The length of the movie was a big concern, should have been at least 15 minutes shorter. But the visuals were fantastic, the CGI bear was almost flawless. There are plenty of reasons why this should not be missed, at a time the narration lacks the realism. Otherwise, it would have made a wonderful semi-documentary film. So don't have high hope on this, especially if you're no ones fans, but just love watching movies like me. A little bit overrated everywhere, but still this movie is good, just good, that's it, not a masterpiece.
7/10

Good performances by DiCaprio and, even more, Hardy.
Good directing, specially the initial attack, photography, landscapes and soundtrack but the story is, at some points, unnecessarily violent and the action scenes are, sometimes, somehow stupid; people letting others to kill them, or ignoring foes close by ...
A good movie all in all, but not one of the greatests.

I thought this was a great movie. Seemed like it was a very physically demanding role for Leo.

The Revenant, a ravishingly violent Western survival yarn from Alejandro González Iñárritu, has a healthy few, scattered like acorns across its two-and-a-half-hour canvas..... no matter how extended, the film’s tense story is under the director’s complete control...DiCaprio’s performance is an astonishing testament to his commitment to a role. cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki done a great job..as a supporting actor tom hardy is brilliant..must watch...

Loved it! It's a different kind of movie from your usual run of the mill kind. The twists and turns in the storyline keep you engaged. Recommended!

Parasite is fantastic.
It's clever. It's funny. It's disturbing. And yes, there is a powerful underlying theme of the divide between rich and poor. But the latter is so deftly weaved into the fabric of the story, you really don't think about it much until a fateful scene before the last act.
It fully deserved the Oscar for Best Picture and Director. If only for the peach fuzz fight scene.

Despite hearing about this from day dot, I thankfully managed to avoid knowing anything about this other than it's title, director and subsequent success. Boy am I glad, because it's quite the ride!
No doubt about it, 'Parasite' is a high quality film. It wasn't at all what I had assumed it would be like, it has a much more comedic side to it than I was expecting - and that's a positive. Yet, it's still pretty dark. It's a great mix. The plot is one that is very entertaining to see play out - the ending is particularly nuts.
The cast do a fantastic job, especially the main quartet. Song Kang-ho would be my personal standout, I enjoyed watching him throughout. Choi Woo-shik is very good too, as are Park So-dam and Jang Hye-jin. All of the onscreen talent do terrific though, from Cho Yeo-jeong to Lee Jung-eun.
I don't have any negatives for this, it's a brilliant film. From the cinematography, to the dialogue, to the locations, to the humour. You name it, this produces it on an impressive level.
Not that I need to say this, given I'm seemingly one of the last few who hadn't, but you must watch this!

One of the funniest and most disturbing films I've ever seen. Probably some of the best cinematography ever. 10/10

What starts as a seemingly simple premise quickly unfolds into much more. I didn't expect an enhanced perspective into my own life, but that's just what happened. Parasite is a timely analysis of the ever-increasing divide between rich and poor, all while being witty enough to make for an exhilarating ride.

"We all live in the same country... called capitalism."
_Final rating:★★★★ - Very strong appeal. A personal favourite._