[DISCUSSION] [SPOILERS] - KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON - Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro, Lily Gladstone
[DISCUSSION] [SPOILERS] - KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON - Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro, Lily Gladstone
| RELEASE DATE | RUNTIME | IMDB | ROTTENTOMATOES | METACRITIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 20, 2023 | 3hr 26m | 8.5 | 94% | 90 |
Premise:
Members of the Osage tribe in the United States are murdered under mysterious circumstances in the 1920s, sparking a major F.B.I. investigation involving J. Edgar Hoover.
Director(s):
Martin Scorsese
Writer(s):
Eric Roth, Martin Scorsese, David Grann
| CAST | ||
|---|---|---|
| Leonardo DiCaprio | ... | Ernest Burkhart |
| Robert De Niro | ... | William Hale |
| Lily Gladstone | ... | Mollie Burkhart |
| Jesse Plemons | ... | Tom White |
| Tantoo Cardinal | ... | Lizzie Q |
| John Lithgow | ... | Prosecutor Peter Leaward |
| Brendan Fraser | ... | W.S. Hamilton |
For all the talk of Scorsese honoring the Osage in the production, I felt like Molly and the rest of the tribe were pushed into the background for a good 2/3rds of the movie in order to tell the story of the emotionally tortured white guy who keeps helping murder his in-laws. It felt like Molly's only real moment of agency was when she went to DC to beg for an investigation.
Also, I for one (and my girlfriend and our friend for two and three) felt that this 3.5 hour movie felt like a 3.5 hour movie. It would have been better served as a miniseries à la Chernobyl, not least because I understand a lot of content from the book didn't make it to screen. I feel like Scorsese is too much of a purist to have entertained that route though. There are enough big plot beats that you could break on big plot beats and it wouldn't feel like... well, a 3.5 hour movie.
I felt like Molly and the rest of the tribe were pushed into the background
Having read the book, that was kind of the point. They didn't have agency, because it was literally robbed from them at every moment. And during the part of the story where Ernest is under scrutiny and forced to own up to his sins, his wife is as passive as it can get, because she's on death's door and bed-ridden. It would be artificial to give her a big presence there, because in reality she was in the process of literally disappearing from the world. Molly actually gets more of an emotional presence onscreen, in part because the book is a more journalistic account and first hand sources of who she was are limited. I would like to have seen some scenes of her moving on with her life afterwards at the end in place of that weird epilogue.
Watched it earlier today. I will say first that I believe it could be a little tighter in the editing but it was so well paced and did not feel like 3.5 hours at all. As far as the rest, I enjoyed it immensely. Knowing nothing about the book or the tragic events beforehand, I was really expecting more violence and basically a war breaking out but it wasn't that at all. The whole movie was a showcase in suspense with every moment never knowing who was safe. The score with it's just constant drum and bass beats amplified the suspense so much. I wouldn't say it was tense a la the border scene in Sicario, but there was this sense of dread the whole time.
The movie is beautiful. Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography is fantastic here and it shows why Scorcese uses him so much. The whole film has this look of a colorized black and white photo. This subtle pastel look really made it have this kind of documentary feel to me. Like it was actual footage from the 1920s. Funny that Prieto also did Barbie as well. He's having a hell of a year.
The story is very well told and the trauma Molly had to go through constantly is just so depressing. Lily Gladstone was so good especially because most of her scenes were her barely holding in all the emotions. Leo is great as always and this should be a record for the most frowning in one film. He was just constant stinkface. De Niro has one of his best performances ever in his long career. At 80, he doesn't miss a beat.
I do love how there's this kind of moral ambiguity about most of the characters actions. Or maybe more accurate to say theres a similarity to the concepts of ingorance and evil. I feel like Earnest is torn across this stupidity and complicity. He's trying to do mostly right by his family but also seems very naive to the consequences of his actions. But ultimately it ends up in the same place.
I also loved the dichotomy between Whites and Indians, especially in the opening scene when Earnest gets off the train tells so much with no dialogue at all. So strange seeing the White men falling over themselves to help the Indians however they can to get a chance at their money.
Final thought, as a person with depression, I want to start calling it the "melancholy". Sounds much more interesting to say I'm "melancholic".
Damn, De Niro is 80? I don't think the world will be ready when he's gone. I hope he can live a long life, as long as he's not living miserably ofc.
Seems promising, even longer than Oppenheimer somehow, just like the Irishmen. Might watch it in cinema.
It was very well paced. I do think it could have been a little tighter but it didn't feel like 3.5 hours at all.
Wow I didn’t know it was that long. I’ll have to set aside some proper watch time for this.
Any movie produced by a streaming company that isn’t streaming on day one can suck a dick, Scorsese or not.
Pretty much every movie would have to be streaming on day one then, since almost every movie is produced by a company that also has a streaming service. The movie theater industry would just collapse. What a weird hill to die on.
Meh I like being able to see these cinematic movies in the cinema, and if it were on streaming I'd probably watch it there in a moment of weakness.
You say that like it's an insult. You do know that a sizeable portion of the population don't have a problem fellating. Many actually like performing oral sex. Scorsese or not.