I saw _Ravenous_ at a 12:30 matinee with a handful of people in the audience. Perhaps it should not have been marketed as a mainstream film. This quirky little film is essentially serious, but has a tone that wobbles into comedy as effortlessly as real life. The comedy does not make the film any less powerful or disturbing. I would not be surprised if Antonia Bird is a vegetarian, because the film begins with an absolutely sickening dinner of something like prime rib that the wild editing style makes appear absolutely disgusting. I went to Old Country Buffet that night and found myself still repulsed by red meat, particularly ribs, after seeing this film, even though the comment about them is spoken by Ives.
This film is nowhere near as graphic as I expected it to be, and it moves as swiftly across its running time as _Singin' In the Rain_, ably abetted by a very different form of music, a powerful score by two very different composers (Michael Nyman, one of my favorites, a contemporary classical (minimalist) composer, and Damon Albarn of the rock group Blur, who had previously collaborated on a track for a Noël Coward compilation) which really gets at angles different from what could be presented without it, particularly when Boyd has to choose whether or not to eat to survive.
However, the film suffers because of its obligatory death count. Many of the characters, particularly Chaplain Toffler, are quite interesting, but as they start to develop, they are killed. It almost seems like a statement on how horror films cheat their audiences out of characters that ought to be interesting, but usually aren't. The fact that so many are killed so early on does not help either.
While Pearce manages to be almost an everyman as Boyd, Carlyle delivers a performance that makes Francis Begbie look halfway sane. Particularly good is how different Colquhoun appears to be from Ives, despite being the same person. Jeffrey Jones as Hart is even stranger.
This film also heralds the return to significance of the title design, although it's a far cry from what Saul Bass was doing. The visuals of 1870s California (actually shot in Slovakia) are quite beautiful and mark a sharp contrast to the scenes shot in Mexico. The cinematography and editing are quite brilliant.
It deals with ironies of war and survival, but never seems to make a heavyhanded display at any particular point it tries to make. Instead, it lays things out for the viewer to chew on (pun intended), and does not try to draw attention to the scene that leaves it open for a sequel through its matter-of-fact presentation and no return to the scene at the very end once its shown and instead focuses on its rather poignant final shots. There is an effort, although not entirely successful, to not play the Indians stereotypically, but it is much better handled with Martha than with her brother, George.
This may not have the most profound script, but it is worth a look, particularly during the February-March doldrums of bad theatrical releases. It probably won't win any awards, but its score certainly deserves to, if only there were more effort to promote the album. It often reminded my of Kubrick's _The Shining_ and Dante's _The Howling_, and is destined to become a classic of the genre.
This film is nowhere near as graphic as I expected it to be, and it moves as swiftly across its running time as _Singin' In the Rain_, ably abetted by a very different form of music, a powerful score by two very different composers (Michael Nyman, one of my favorites, a contemporary classical (minimalist) composer, and Damon Albarn of the rock group Blur, who had previously collaborated on a track for a Noël Coward compilation) which really gets at angles different from what could be presented without it, particularly when Boyd has to choose whether or not to eat to survive.
However, the film suffers because of its obligatory death count. Many of the characters, particularly Chaplain Toffler, are quite interesting, but as they start to develop, they are killed. It almost seems like a statement on how horror films cheat their audiences out of characters that ought to be interesting, but usually aren't. The fact that so many are killed so early on does not help either.
While Pearce manages to be almost an everyman as Boyd, Carlyle delivers a performance that makes Francis Begbie look halfway sane. Particularly good is how different Colquhoun appears to be from Ives, despite being the same person. Jeffrey Jones as Hart is even stranger.
This film also heralds the return to significance of the title design, although it's a far cry from what Saul Bass was doing. The visuals of 1870s California (actually shot in Slovakia) are quite beautiful and mark a sharp contrast to the scenes shot in Mexico. The cinematography and editing are quite brilliant.
It deals with ironies of war and survival, but never seems to make a heavyhanded display at any particular point it tries to make. Instead, it lays things out for the viewer to chew on (pun intended), and does not try to draw attention to the scene that leaves it open for a sequel through its matter-of-fact presentation and no return to the scene at the very end once its shown and instead focuses on its rather poignant final shots. There is an effort, although not entirely successful, to not play the Indians stereotypically, but it is much better handled with Martha than with her brother, George.
This may not have the most profound script, but it is worth a look, particularly during the February-March doldrums of bad theatrical releases. It probably won't win any awards, but its score certainly deserves to, if only there were more effort to promote the album. It often reminded my of Kubrick's _The Shining_ and Dante's _The Howling_, and is destined to become a classic of the genre.