This is definitely subjective and I understand your angle. We are just coming at it from different directions.
I think if we are trying to get people to suspend their disbelieve it's more efficient to indulge on associations. Specially with the distant enough but not so distant past, people are used to looking at the past through old photographs. Not by time traveling and actually being there. This is why I think most would think of yesteryear more easily if shown something which looks more in line with what they grew up looking at as representing the past. It's just psychology really.
Getting people to suspend their disbelieve is increasingly harder. Audiences are more critical with every decade. I don't see a reason to make it even harder. This is the reason for the overuse of black and white and sepia for flashbacks and whole movies set on the past. It has become cliche for a reason. It's effective.
The hyper-real look is something I associate with reality TV. Not period epics. I wouldn't go as far as shooting black and white or getting a sepia grade. But a more "organic" look, for lack of a better term, would have better served The Revenant in my opinion. It was just too sharp, too digital, too unnatural for my linking. I think there are ways of projecting realism without resorting to that. I think this doesn't make for more real. It makes for more modern, which is exactly what you or at least I would want to avoid when making a period movie. Going against cliche is one thing. Going against nature is another.
But this is definitely a divisive topic. I have seen people standing on both sides of the fence in basically equal numbers, both online and in person. Maybe with time it will sort itself out like the Hobbit 48fps debacle. But yes, all very subjective.
Having said all that, it doesn't detract from the whole movie experience enough and I still enjoyed it. It's a great movie.
