Recutting the Revenant: How a Long Take Can Fail

it adds tension tho?

I completely agree. In this segment it does not give the audience the perspective the director is looking trying to achieve.

I think that you're absolutely right.

He said in the intro that he likes long takes because they help to emphasize the environment and the nature that surrounds the character. Panning over the rocks and the river shows exactly what kind of situation he's in and what he's up against and what separated him from his enemies. He made good points but it was hypocritical and EXTREMELY nitpicky. It wasn't unnatural, blinking is not the same as cutting. Cutting takes you from one perspective to another, while blinking describes waaay less time. You don't look at the lamp, close your eyes, and open them when you are looking at the person, you blink in between for a microsecond and continue on panning.

I would have cut the son, and the final fight. Glass's pure will to survive was by far the most powerful thing in the movie, and the revenge stuff just felt like a distraction.

I disagree but for a completely different reason, I feel like the pans are too slow, they drag for a little too long

Was that a cut at 2:36 ?

I think the solution is even simpler than that. Just pan faster in scenes like this. That way you keep the tension that a long cut can provide while also staying in the character's pov.

dude it was fine, shut the fuck up

Great video. Lot takes are definitely used for style over substance sometimes and i think this video highlighted that point well. As others have mentioned your cuts didn't flow as well as they should though but that would only because it became very noticeable after watching the no cut scene and also if they were filming this scene with the intention of cutting it would become much more easier to edit and make it flow better.

i disagree.
I dont particularly care about being immersed as the character, but i do care that i am immersed in the environment. As offputting as it might be for some, i felt the slow 360 pan of the environment really increased the tension and immersion of the scene. It shows the audience exactly what is around them and the context and perspective of it all.
I much prefer that to just seeing leos face, then the subject, then leo, then the subject all cut together with no context of the environment he is surrounded by.
The only issue i had with the scene upon closer inspection is when the camera slowly pans right, it wobbles as if the cameraman mis stepped

This scene really bothered me too and I'm glad someone else felt it's awkwardness. I really loved the continuous shot of looking at the two hunters above then sliding down the rocks to find the one native really close, that felt like natural eye movement. But the pan across the river felt so unnatural, as if you were sitting next to Hugh and then spun around in place for no reason.

I can understand both sides. The idea of cutting it is good, I can imagine it working, yours worked ok, but the cuts were very sudden sometimes, but that's because the scene was made to be uncut. The idea is good, and I'd still like the scene with the cuts.
But there's something about the uncut that actually dazzles me. To me it felt more like I was there with him, not that I WAS him. And about noticing the camera movement instead of the action, that happens to me all the time with almost everything. I'm like "OMG IT'S NOT CUTTING" and I can keep myself in the moment, but I guess that's just me.
Pretty good video, brought up an interesting subject.

Original holds the tension way better, exactly how the long take should be used. In this scene we are made aware there is danger, but like the character are unaware of its exact presence. Slow pans hold us in that space and increase the level of discomfort. Cutting the scene feels more jarring to my mind, and would be inconsistent with the established style of the film as a whole.

i also had a problem with this scene, i couldn't put my finger on what at the time but i think you are dead on the money

"Feel what he's feeling, see what he's seeing." I haven't seen this movie but purely from a directing standpoint, long shots aren't the only way to build tension. Just take a look at Christopher Nolan's constant use of Shepard Tones in movies like The Dark Knight and Dunkirk. It's cheap but effective. And the opening scene of Inglorious Bastards. This shot from the Revenant, just feels like the new mentioned trend of long shots for the sake of long shots.

i agree

I agree that the slow pan by the rocks really brought attention to the shot selection itself and the movement of the camera. I don't necessarily agree that a continuous long take is the wrong selection here, though. If the pan was reworked, maybe have the camera pull back behind Glass so we see his character on the edge of the shot as it pans past the rocks toward the Native Americans on the beach, then we get what Innaratu wanted. You didn't have raw footage to work with, so you did your cuts as well as you could considering, but they definitely removed a lot of the tension from the scene. The cuts eliminate most of the tension-filled seconds of waiting. We see Glass watching the Natives, then bam, there are the Natives. It eliminates all of the tension we felt from waiting to see them move into our field of vision.

i feel the problem isnt thats its a long take but more on camera placement it would have been better if it starts off with leos face and then pans around to show the native americans but stays at his back, it then slowly moves back when he turns around and starts swimming

The original take is flashy, and clever but distracting. It's a great example of a director going for style over substance and not putting his story first. I much prefer your quickie version, which is telling considering the director could obviously have done even better with the material.

Love your video !

…the continuing shot makes the audience fell to be right next to him, and you get a feeling of the distances and positions of the characters. It also provides a realtime experience. The cut version has a faster paste and is more traditional. I prefer the long shot, even if it is not the best shot of the movie…

I think it was supposed to be perceived as a POV because it was the anxiety of waiting that stretches out time. When you're in hiding on high alert time has a tendency to slow down, especially when what you're hiding from is so close. The 'blinking' or cutting is more effective when there is action going on.

Nah. Not buying it. I'll agree with the first cut if you would have let the person see Leo. That tells me it is a reaction. With the cut that you made, we are assuming what Leo saw to make him start moving back in to the cold water. I will say this. The pan from Leo to the native should have been quicker because the situation is getting tense and it demands his quick reaction. So, if we were to feel as if we were there, we would be looking at the native and back in quicker movements. Mind you, I say this only for the time when there is that loooong rock shot. But that is my thought on this.

Frankly….No… I disagree entirely. The city you made made the scene feel less tense to my mind. As other have pointed out, you just removed some of the geography from the scene and the flow of the shots was disturbed. This isn't just about POV, it's also about being there next to the character.

Excuse me but I disagree. This was so well executed that you don't feel that long take at all, you just become part of the tension and it builds up. It was not forced or edgy, it was just an extremely good scene in my opinion.

I disagree because it builds more tension with out the cuts due to how slow the camera pans are. We feel as if time is way to slow for how fast we know the character needs to get away from those people. I think by not making it realistic to what he sees, actually manipulates the tension for the better

While I agree with your argument, I do not think it's bolstered by your editing of this scene. However, I will say that since the scene was already filmed/you were working with something that already existed, I don't know how you could have supported your argument with your own editing. In other words, your theory is more appropriate for this plot point, but I don't think your editing can live up to it.

the single take felt much more claustrophobic and involving. you can get the sense of how close he's actually getting caught. you're right that one might become more aware of the camera, but i'm willing to trade it for the feeling of being there