Hugh Glass--Those guys had some hard Bark on em'

chud333

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,896
Reaction score
22,520
Location
Indiana
Just watched the movie "The Revenant"
Wife and i rented a copy from Redbox.
I must say i was riveted. Well acted !!
I got to rate it right up there with "Jeremiah Johnson",
one of my all time favorites.

Those fellas were cut from a different bolt of cloth.

Simply amazing to see what life was for a Mountain Man
back around the early 1800's

And to go through what Hugh Glass endured boggles
the mind of someone who has been an outdoorsman
for 40 plus years.
Yep, Those guys had some hard bark on em' :eek::eek:


Chuck
 
Register to hide this ad
Yep those old mountain men were a different breed for sure. Also thought it was a good movie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The younger people that watched that movie think "it's just a movie". They have no idea what life was like back then.
 
That movie was SO far from the truth that I almost left the theater. If you knew nothing about Hugh, I would think it an interesting movie. A few movie discrepancies. The mauling happened in the early fall, not winter. Hugh was on the plains with not a tree in sight, not the mountains. Hugh crawled through 200 miles of cactus not over mountains. The Indians helped him the last 50 miles by putting him in a canoe and floating him to the fort. The Indians that rescued him sewed a buffalo skin onto his back to help the healing.The French trappers he stole the girl from was actually his future employer and he did not encounter them on the way to the fort. By the way, the French trapper in real life was with the Corp of Discovery and was Sacagawea's husband whos name was Charbonneau. He did not have a son. He did not kill or even fight with Fitzpatrick. He made a epic journey in the bitter winter that would have killed 10 men trying to find Fitzpatrick.The mauling was just a chapter in the life of an extraordinary life. He was believed to has been forced into servitude in a navy. After escaping he was captured by the Pawnee and weaseled his way out of being burned alive. He was shot by the Arikaree in the battle depicted and still was able to push his beloved rifle "Bull Thrower" into his pants and swim to the keel boat. After returning to the fort he went out with Charbonneau and was ambushed by Rees again and when almost run down and killed, Sioux Indians rescued him, saving his life. As short time later he was with a party of trappers when they were attacked and left for dead. He then walked 400 miles back to a fort with nothing but his knife and possible bag. He was then killed a few years later by the Arikarees while hunting. An extraordinary life and man not properly honored by history or the movies. Barring the fact the movie was almost totally false, it did bring back Hugh's name to many who never knew of him.
 
Lord Grizzly by Frederick Manfred is a bit closer to the real story of Hugh Glass. I have poked around some in that Grand River country where the events took place and it is magnificent country, but not at all like the mountains portrayed in the movie.

I have been tempted to see the movie, but seeing the trailer put me off because the setting is so far off. I guess I will have to watch it sometime, though.
 
That movie was SO far from the truth that I almost left the theater. I By the way, the French trapper in real life was with the Corp of Discovery and was Sacagawea's husband whos name was Charbonneau. He did not have a son. .

I believe "Pomp" Sacajawea's son, was properly named Jean Babtiste Charboneau.
 
Some of you have said it's a good movie though not at all accurate. If I knew the history I'd agree but a movie is a movie and, quite often, they don't depict the events as history has shown us. They tend to stretch truth and try to make it more dramatic, suspenseful and entertaining at the expense of accurate portrayal of events.

I didn't see the movie after my sister said it was terrible. She commented that DeCaprio just grunted during the entire movie. I guess now I'll wait until I can get it on Netflix or Amazon and see for myself. I don't think I should listen to her opinions any more.
 
Some of you have said it's a good movie though not at all accurate. If I knew the history I'd agree but a movie is a movie and, quite often, they don't depict the events as history has shown us. They tend to stretch truth and try to make it more dramatic, suspenseful and entertaining at the expense of accurate portrayal of events.

I didn't see the movie after my sister said it was terrible. She commented that DeCaprio just grunted during the entire movie. I guess now I'll wait until I can get it on Netflix or Amazon and see for myself. I don't think I should listen to her opinions any more.

This ^^^
We All know it's a Movie right ???

And what was she wanting from DeCaprio as a mountain man in 1829 ? Shakespeare ??

Well acted and gave a pretty good account of what Hugh
had to endure. This was late 1820's if i'm not mistaken
so there's probably more than one version floating around
about the "actual" events, and little if any of this "documented".
I appreciate seeing the period clothing, customs, language,
guns, and the hard life these Mtn. Men had.
Regardless, i enjoyed it as i went in with an open mind
and had not read the book as yet.

Rent it Krell as i think you might enjoy it.


Chuck
 
Last edited:
From our perspective today their way of life was tough, but it was the life they chose and they loved it. They were free and enjoyed a total freedom we will never know.
 
I have been wanting to watch this one for a while, not as a factual documentary as such but as an interesting mountain man movie. I'm sure some of my favorite westerns missed a fact or two, I still enjoyed them.
 
I believe "Pomp" Sacajawea's son, was properly named Jean Babtiste Charboneau.

After I typed my response, I proof read it for the first time. It does appear I was commenting on Charboneau not having a son. I was referring to Hugh not having a son. The fictional murder of Hugh's son was just that, fiction. I will endeavor to be more clear in future posts.
 
This ^^^
We All know it's a Movie right ???

And what was she wanting from DeCaprio as a mountain man in 1829 ? Shakespeare ??

Well acted and gave a pretty good account of what Hugh
had to endure. This was late 1820's if i'm not mistaken
so there's probably more than one version floating around
about the "actual" events, and little if any of this "documented".
I appreciate seeing the period clothing, customs, language,
guns, and the hard life these Mtn. Men had.
Regardless, i enjoyed it as i went in with an open mind
and had not read the book as yet.

Rent it Krell as i think you might enjoy it.


Chuck

I commented that I wouldn't listen to my sister any more. Truth be told, I rarely listen to her anyway. I have two sisters I basically ignore, both were "feeling the Bern". Now I think they're just depressed.
 
I commented that I wouldn't listen to my sister any more. Truth be told, I rarely listen to her anyway. I have two sisters I basically ignore, both were "feeling the Bern". Now I think they're just depressed.

Now that gave me a good belly chuckle. :D:D

I also have some family members who are "challenged"
mentally. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Nuff said. :p:p

Chuck
 
After I typed my response, I proof read it for the first time. It does appear I was commenting on Charboneau not having a son. I was referring to Hugh not having a son. The fictional murder of Hugh's son was just that, fiction. I will endeavor to be more clear in future posts.

No apology necessary. I understood what you meant. Glass has always been an icon of mountain men, but since so little is known about him, his life lends itself to interpretation and a lot of Hollywood hype. Anyone who reads "The Revenant" will understand how much liberty the film writers and director took in putting the story on the big screen.
 
Back
Top