Drystan & CineFreak
Hey, I’ve been watching some old survival flicks—think “The Last of the Mohicans” and modern ones like “The Revenant”—and I can’t help but wonder how realistic those wilderness scenes are. What do you think?
Oh man, the wilderness in those movies? Like, the camera’s always got that sweeping, almost postcard‑like view, but the actual survival? Not so much. In “The Last of the Mohicans” they show the rangers sprinting through the forest, and you’d think it’s just a romanticized trek, but in real life, you’d have to deal with mud, actual bears, and—get this—getting lost in a snowstorm would mean you’d be cold, hungry, and maybe half‑dead before you get any “heroic” moments. The Revenant, on the other hand, nails the brutal cold, the bone‑shattering pain of losing limbs, but they cut out the part where the guy has to catch a fish or find a shelter without an obvious guide. So, yeah, some of those scenes are pretty far from real life, but they do keep the adrenaline pumping. And honestly, I love how they make you feel the “out there” vibe—just wish the realism was a bit deeper, like actually struggling with the wind and the taste of raw berries instead of a perfectly lit shot.
Sounds about right—those films love the camera, not the creaking logs and the gnawing hunger that makes a trek real. If you ever find yourself out there, remember: a good fire is worth more than a fancy shot, and a berry is worth a story about finding it when the wind’s howling. Keep your feet steady and your mind on the next step, not the next highlight reel.