Looks good to me!

http://youtu.be/XuDImXbulVA

I just might have to shell out a few dollars to go see that. I was always in awe of Hugh Glass's story, and how he survived against astronomical odds.

Debut is Christmas 2015. Pretty sure I'll see this one in the theatre.

Someone on the fire might have worked security on parts filmed in Libby MT . (not me)

Sweet! Looks like this may be his movie he needs for a Oscar.

He should have killed Jim Bridger.

I'll go watch it.

It looks good.

Hope they keep it real. The true story is amazing and doesn't need amped up by Hollywood.

I'm a bit confused by the emphasis on Winter,....he made his legendary "Crawl" during fly season.

Sure agree that no embellishment / Hollywierdization is needed.

GTC

I'll never pay a dime for anything that watermelon dipstick DeCrappio works on. Forget it.

Crew defections, brutal cold, a global search for snow and even a naked actor dragged on the ground — 'Birdman' director Alejandro G. Inarritu responds to critics of his ambitious methods: "When you see the film, you will see the scale of it. And you will say, 'Wow.'"

A version of this story first appeared in the July 31 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine. To receive the magazine, click here to subscribe.

Veteran crewmembers who have toiled on director Alejandro G. Inarritu's The Revenant say the director's follow-up to Birdman could turn out to be epic and Oscar-worthy. Some also say that making the film has been by far the worst experience of their careers — "a living hell," as one bluntly puts it.

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio as early 19th century explorer Hugh Glass, Revenant went into production in September and was supposed to wrap in March. But cameras still will be rolling into August as the budget has climbed well past $95 million, with insiders predicting it will reach or exceed $135 million. Crewmembers say they have seen huge turnover, including many who were fired and others who quit. They say the behind-the-scenes drama led Inarritu to bar producer Jim Skotchdopole, who worked with him on Birdman, from the set.

Inspired by real events, Revenant follows DiCaprio's character through deep snow and ordeals including battles with Native Americans and a near-fatal mauling by a bear. Inarritu, 51, made the unusual choice to shoot the film in sequence, using only natural light. While the plan was to film DiCaprio's trek entirely in Canada, the weather did not cooperate, so the filmmakers now are headed to a location at the tip of Argentina in quest of snow.

"We had weather challenges," admits Brad Weston, president and CEO of backer New Regency. "This was a tough movie. We always knew it was a tough movie. And the movie's great." New Regency — extended financially between Revenant and the costly upcoming Assassin's Creed — backed the past two best picture Oscar winners, 12 Years a Slave and Birdman. Brett Ratner's RatPac is contributing about a quarter of Revenant's original budget and is sharing some overages; Empyre, a fund based in Abu Dhabi and Brazil, and Chinese company Alpha Pictures also have small pieces. 20th Century Fox will distribute.

Read More 'Birdman' Cinematographer to Push the Envelope on 'The Revenant'

Crewmembers often complain on difficult shoots, but on some films the noise reaches an unusual pitch. Seated in production offices in Santa Monica, Inarritu says he normally would not give an interview with his film still months from its Dec. 25 release. But the Oscar-winning Mexican auteur says he wants to set the record straight about what widely is rumored to be a troubled production. "I have nothing to hide," he says. "There were problems, but none of them made me ashamed."

Yes, some left the crew, he says, "but as a director, if I identify a violin that is out of tune, I have to take that from the orchestra." And while acknowledging that the film has gone over schedule and over budget, he says he is "obsessed" with making movies at a price: "I'm absolutely, even stupidly conscious about it."

While some insiders say Inarritu is needlessly difficult, their harshest criticism is aimed at Skotchdopole, who is blamed for planning poorly and failing to communicate problems to Inarritu, who would then take out his frustrations on the crew. "You've got to let the director know: 'We can't do that. We have no money or time in the schedule,'" says one. Crewmembers recall a seemingly deal-breaking clash between Inarritu and Skotchdopole in April after they took a helicopter ride to a forest location that turned out to have the wrong light.

Inarritu remembers venting frustration over a wasted morning but says Skotchdopole was not barred from the set but rather redeployed to a trailer to wind down the production in Canada. Still, Inarritu acknowledges that problems had become so evident that a planned two-week hiatus in December was extended into a six-week break, prompting issues with actor schedules. In January, Tom Hardy was forced to drop out of Warner Bros.' Suicide Squad to accommodate the protracted shoot. During the break, the director asked veteran producer Mary Parent to help get the project on track. Ultimately, she took over on-set duties; Skotchdopole, who did not respond to requests for comment, has moved on.

While weather undeniably was a huge obstacle, several crewmembers say a threshold issue was a failure to understand, as one puts it, "what a period film outdoors on this scale was really going to cost." Given cinematographer Emmanuel "Chivo" Lubezki's decision only to use natural light, there was a short window each day when the production could film. Inarritu is making extensive use of the tracking-shot technique that he deployed to dazzling effect in Birdman, so changes in weather could mean trouble. "It's 4 o'clock, and you've got an hour and a half of daylight, and it's not the light he wants to shoot in," says a crewmember. "If you want to seamlessly stitch [the footage] together, it's not going to match."

Read More Leonardo DiCaprio Makes How Much Per Movie? Hollywood's A-List Salaries Revealed

To take advantage of the window of light, the produc­tion built in a great deal of rehearsal time with a full crew and cast (except the principal actors) in place. But insiders say Inarritu often changed his mind. "We'd never shoot what we blocked," says a crewmember. Echoes another: "Everything was indecisive, whether it was this particular actor for this particular role, this costume, this makeup." Inarritu acknowledges shifts but says, "That's part of the process. … It's about incredible precision. … It's not easy. You have to be sculpting, sculpting, sculpting until you have it."

As fate would have it, when the production was counting on snow, it was so warm near Calgary that even attempts to manufacture it or truck it in failed. Later, temperatures dipped to 25 degrees below zero, or minus 40 degrees with the windchill factor. But since the action at that point was set in the autumn, actors were asked to go without hats and gloves. "Everybody was frozen, the equipment was breaking; to get the camera from one place to another was a nightmare," says Inarritu.

Multiple sources say the film started to spin out of control early on, as a major battle scene was shot over two weeks. Originally it was going to involve about 30 trappers and about as many Native Americans, but it expanded to 200 players. Leaving little time for the crew to prepare, Inarritu decided that a naked character should be dragged along the ground. The director remembers being concerned about the actor's genitals and laying down plastic sheeting to protect him. "I asked him several times, 'Are you fine?' " says Inarritu. Each time he asked, he says the actor replied that he was prepared to try another take. "I was super considerate because he was a nice, 22-year-old guy," says Inarritu. While crewmembers say the actor was in pain, Inarritu dismisses that as "a lie."

The director says safety always was a priority and no serious injuries occurred on set. An actor who was immersed in freezing water had a broken dry suit, volunteers Inarritu, "but he was taken care of 10 minutes after he was done." A crewmember says some necks of the dry suits were cut off so they wouldn't show on film, but first assistant director Scott Robertson denies that and says just one actor's dry suit had the neck cut, and it was only to aid him after he reacted adversely to the cold water. Overall, Robertson says, there was a great deal of rehearsal and planning to protect the cast and crew. "We had a safety meeting every day of the movie, sometimes multiple times," he says. "No one got hurt on the film with all the crazy [bleep] we did."

Read More 'The Revenant' Trailer: Leonardo DiCaprio Fights to Survive a Deadly Attack and Harsh Winter

Weston says he and New Regency owner Arnon Milchan attribute the challenges during the shoot to the ambition involved in the filmmaking. "We were in uncharted territory," Weston says. "Everyone who came aboard this project, cast and crew alike, understood this going in, and we all support Alejandro and his vision. The performances are extraordinary and the film is great. Arnon and I would be honored and lucky if Alejandro made his next film and the one after that with us.”

Still, some crewmembers believe a lot of misery could have been avoided — and money saved — if at least some parts of the movie had been conceived with computer-generated effects. "That's exactly what I didn't want," counters Inarritu. "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 [bleep]." Revenant is about survival, he says, and the actors and crew benefited from having to make it in nature.

"When you see the film, you will see the scale of it," promises Inarritu. "And you will say, 'Wow.' "

I have been to the Fork of the Grand River where he was attached by the bear. To think that he journeyed to if I remember correctly is where Chamberlain, SD is one realizes what a journey that had to be.

I watched Man in the Wilderness which was also the story of Hugh Glass, when I was a kid. It has Richard Harris and came out very near his success with A Man Called Horse. Both those movies are well worth seeing.

Man in the Wilderness is an awesome movie. If this new one follows the same general story line it should be well worth a watch.

I believe they changed his name to Sam Bass instead of Hugh Glass in the old movie.

I just watched Revenant. If you want to be bored out of your gourd, go see it.

Other than in the mountain man/fur trader days there was a trapper named Hugh Glass, who was nearly mauled to death by a griz, and two men of the trapping company who were supposed to stay with him until he died, and didn't -- Fitzgerald and Bridger -- and Glass, although horribly injured, managed to survive and went looking for Fitzgerald and Bridger in order to kill them for leaving him, Revenant is about as discombobulated as an "historical" flick can be. Nothing else in the movie that's shown from the very first scene, actually happened in the real life travails of the mountain man, Hugh Glass.

In my opinion, much of the flick doesn't make a lick of sense.

If you go see it, make sure you have relieved yourself before going into the theater as it is 2½ hours long. In my opinion it is slow, draggy, and the director easily could have cut out an hour and it wouldn't have made much difference.

As an aside, regarding DeCapprio as Glass, he's a good actor, but there is a scene in which his entire torso is seen and he has absolutely no muscle definition. I think the real Hugh Glass would have had to be made out of rawhide and piano wire to have done what he did. Of course, it is just a movie and actors are actors.

I'd save my money if I were you boys and girls.

Just a suggestion.

Merry Christmas to all.

L.W.

Thanks. I'll wait until it comes out on Rental.

As I recall the main character was named Zach Bass.

kwg

I want to see that one too...wish they did more movies about our early pioneers there were some real bad azzs..