206 min
7.5
2023
USA
When oil is discovered in 1920s Oklahoma under Osage Nation land, the Osage people are murdered one by one—until the FBI steps in to unravel the mystery.
Overview
Reviews
Lachlan Thiele wrote:INT. GANGSTERS IN OKLAHOMA - DAY
Film students, film lovers, cinema-goers, and reviewers rejoice! Martin Scorsese's latest film is excellent! The Irishman might have been his last 'gangster' film. Still, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, Killers of the Flower Moon might not be a gangster film, but there are many 'mob' elements within it.
The biggest fear people had going into this film was the runtime. Weeks before the release, speculations came out about the length of this film. I saw an article stating it would be 4 hours long! Alas, it's only 206 minutes long, not even coming close to the longest film here at Cannes. I can confirm that the film never drags its feet for too long; there are times when it slows down, but this is only during the film's opening hour. Thankfully it quickly picks up the pace and goes by fast once the whole ensemble is introduced. Jesse Plemons is a late bloomer in the film, only being introduced 2 hours in; as I said, this is where the film starts moving.
The story is simple: During the 1920s, oil was discovered on Osage Nation Land. Turning them into the richest people per capita in the world! Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) returns to work for his uncle, William Hale (Robert De Niro). Ernest meets Mollie (Lily Gladstone), and they marry. However, slowly many of Mollie's friends and family are murdered, with those who married into the family taking ownership of the land—eventually, the FBI steps in to investigate.
Lily and Leo have excellent on-screen chemistry, with Lily performing phenomenally. I hear talks about the Oscars for her, which is entirely valid. De Niro steals many of the scenes he's in, often providing the most laughs. He is ultimately the most 'mob-like character within the film, never pulling the trigger but commanding the troops. Jesse Plemons is the final major character within the story as Tom White. Unfortunately, Plemon's isn't that interesting; I wonder if Plemons wasn't given much direction or if he decided to make the character this way. Still, White moves from scene to scene without much interest. He's just there, leading the FBI but never being an individual; I didn't remember his name after the film; I just referred to him as 'FBI guy.'
Technically, Killers of the Flower Moon is a marvel (Not that Scorsese would like me saying the word 'Marvel'), but just like all of his films, everything is great. Nothing stands out as 'excellent'; the score, editing and cinematography are at the level you'd expect from the mind of Scorsese.
This leads me to my final thoughts on the film; recently, Martin has been talking about his age and his ability to make films like he used to. Scorsese is 80 years old and doesn't believe he has the same drive as Ridley Scott. Suppose this is to be his final film. In that case, I'd be happy knowing it's not a significant departure from what made him the famed director but a story worth telling from a creator who will continue to be studied and praised for the next many decades.
FADE OUT.
Manuel São Bento wrote:FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://fandomwire.com/killers-of-the-flower-moon-review-a-work-of-art/
"Killers of the Flower Moon is a remarkable cinematic feat by the master Martin Scorsese, with exceptional contributions from Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro, as well as a striking, breakthrough performance by Lily Gladstone.
It unveils a harrowing narrative that prompts deep, poignant reflection on the past and present. Technically, all departments shine, but Thelma Schoonmaker’s editing is simply flawless. The commitment to authenticity and the use of the Osage language are commendable additional traits.
The final sequence is one of the most powerful conclusions in recent years, a memorable, thought-provoking commentary on the desensitization of modern entertainment. A must-watch!"
Rating: A-
CinemaSerf wrote:First things first. There is absolutely no need for this to be 3½ hours long. It follows the story of the ambitious "Ernest" (Leonardo DiCaprio) who arrives at the Osage home of his venal uncle "King" (Robert De Niro) who encourages him to ingratiate himself with the wealthy, indigenous, population. He ends up meeting and driving the independent, no-nonsense, "Mollie" (Lily Gladstone) and after a while she starts to fall for his charismatic charms, they fall in love and marry. Though he does love his wife, "Ernest" proves to be a rather fickle and violent man who loves money more - and at the behest of his outwardly benign relative starts to implement schemes that will ensure the rights to the oil well heads move swiftly - and frequently brutally - to more "suitable" owners. This sudden spate of "accidents" and killings and the prudent action of the fearful local council alert the authorities in Washington who despatch a team of FBI agents led by the tenacious "White" (Jesse Plemons) to get to the bottom of things. Perhaps the "King" house of cards might now be becoming just a but precarious? DiCaprio is very effective here. He plays well a man who juggles internal demons and conflicts as he is cleverly manipulated by an on-form, slightly menacing, De Niro. It's Gladstone who steals the show for me, though. She plays the role of the decent and loving - but shrewd and savvy - "Mollie" strongly. As she starts to become a victim of her husband's avarice she exudes a sense of desperation that is both pleading and dignified and her struggle is potently illustrative of just how far the "white" man was prepared to go to get to - and keep - the money. The film is beautifully shot with a plausible look that helps generate for the audience a true sense of just how this outwardly genteel and civilised society was really anything but and the writing clearly interweaves the clandestine aspects of the the plot with the more noble ones. Perhaps sacrilegious to say, though, but at times it does really drag. I felt it could easily have lost an hour, condensed the story and immersed us more quickly in the characterisations and not really suffered. It's a good film, but it's not a great film and unlike Scorsese's far better "Irishman" (2019), I'm not at all sure I will rush to watch it again.
tyler wrote:I have issues with the decisions both Roth and Scorsese made when adapting the source material, but I’m still so happy this exists. Martin Scorsese has made sure that this American tragedy will never be forgotten.
Raphaelsais wrote:While beautifully mounted, scored and acted, Martin Scorsese’s latest feature, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro, suffers by failing to provide motivations for its characters.
For full review, visit: https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/movies/killers-of-the-flower-moon-movie-review-martin-scorseses-slow-burn-look-at-the-troubling-birth-of-enterprise-is-frustratingly-opaque/article67465885.ece
gogo1974 wrote:razocaran mnogu !!leonardo e glumec sto vo ovoj film izgleda kako namerno da go rusi svojot stil,a skorseze napravil film za deca so specijalni potrebi-nesto kako TELETABISI :(
biancarockr wrote:Hats off to Martin Scorsese, once and once again. This right here shows us the real power of cinema.
Brent Marchant wrote:The importance of addressing (and attempting to correct) gross injustices can’t be overemphasized, and that’s the key objective behind writer-director Martin Scorsese’s latest release. This fact-based saga chronicles attempts by unscrupulous, two-faced White swindlers clandestinely (and sometimes quite brazenly) seeking to steal the considerable assets of wealthy Osage Indians in Oklahoma in the 1920s after oil is discovered on their land. This tragic tale explores the depths that these immoral criminals would go to (including murder) in the name of unabashed greed, efforts ironically spearheaded by the local, smiling, allegedly well-meaning sheriff (Robert DeNiro) with the help of his dimwitted nephew (Leonardo DiCaprio), especially in their scheme to shamelessly pilfer the wealth of the accomplice’s own wife (Lily Gladstone). The sweeping scope of this offering is indeed impressive, effectively brought to life by the fine performances of the three principals and an excellent ensemble of supporting players. And the stellar cast is backed by proficiently executed work in an array of technical areas, including production design, writing, cinematography and the original background score, making for a gorgeous picture to look at, all of which have earned “Flower Moon” a boatload of awards season nominations, with more undoubtedly to follow. However, the runtime of 3:26:00 – with no intermission – is a challenge to manage, even for the most patient and tolerant moviegoer. I streamed it, watching it in two parts, almost as if it were more of a TV miniseries than a standalone film, the only way I could effectively see myself getting through it. This handling of the story, in my opinion, represents something of a significant miscalculation by the filmmaker and the film editing staff – either cut the picture (which could have been done without losing much) or add a much-needed break partway through (which could have been accomplished without inhibiting the story’s continuity). In my view, I believe that the second half was far better and more compelling than the first and that some of the narrative’s more incidental detail could have easily been dispensed with without affecting the overall quality of the release. Still, that aside, it’s obvious that this project was a labor of love for the director, one with a clear vision of what it wanted to say in relating an important and little-known story of injustice in a nation that professes to be a staunch champion of truth and virtue, and, for that, we should be thankful for the enlightenment provided here. This unconventional take on the Western may not feature the traditional cinematic interpretation of cowboys and Indians, but it nevertheless sets the record straight about who the real villains are, at least in this story, a lesson from which we can all learn.
Chandler Danier wrote:It's a hollywood oscar film. It's well put together etc. I don't really care for these films. They're fine. This one was good. I liked it. Leo is such a hate-able loser.
rsanek wrote:Way too long. Worse than the book. Leo has a distracting facial expression the whole time. Some writing also pretty bad.
Peter McGinn wrote:This movie was well-made, though its structure seemed familiar. It is a Scorsese film so perhaps it was the mob-like plot: a wealthy big shot tries to appear as a benign community leader, while he buys local political and law enforcement protection, has others do the dirty work, and throws any of them under the bus if the corruption is exposed. Just substitute the native Osage lands for the inner city neighborhood. In this case, rather than bootlegging, gambling or prostitution, the bad guy (William Hale) traffics mainly in murder. The goal is to have the sale rights of the Osage people’s oil land transferred from the murder victims to a white spouse in bad guy Bill Hale’s pocket, or through other machinations, to him directly.
The screen time is mostly taken up by Hale, his nephew Ernest Burkhart and Burkhart’s Osage wife Mollie. Ernest loves her but he is weak and kowtows to Hale’s wishes, even to the point of endangering his wife. Finally he — but I won’t give anything further away in the plot.
The only criticism I will make is that a lot of people are murdered in this story, especially from Mollie’s own family, and we see very little about the other victims except for a little insight into Mollie’s wild sister Annie. If you are going to use 3 1/2 hours to tell a story, I think a tad more character development on some of the victims would not go amiss.
However, the movie is well-made, as I said earlier, but I don’t see that I will feel driven to watch it again down the road.
BornKnight wrote:Another must watch movie from 2023 and another hit from Martin Scorsese. Currently it holds 10 nominations to the 96th Academy Awards (Best Picture, Director, Best Actress, Supporting Actor, Cinematography, Editing, Production Design, Costume Design, Original Score, Best Original Song).
It is based on the 2017 nonfiction book "Killers of the Flower Moon"
by David Grann, that basically investigate the Osage Indian Nation that occurred between 1920 and 1930. Just as an outline oil was discovered on Osage lands in the end of 1800, but with the boom of automobile industry it value boomed, making the Osage people one of the most rich on Earth at that time, even if the jurisdictions of the legal rights were done by white man. Based on legal attributions and heritage marriage occurring on that time a wide spread of sordid murders and interracial marriages between Indian woman and white men occurred putting a whole af the money in white mens blood dirty hands.
Of course being a 3 and a half hour project (after all not all stories can be condensed on 2 hours, and the rhythm is right), the second of Scorsese after 2019's "The Irishman" - the movie (which had the rights buyed in 2015 by 5M) was to start production in 2019, but obviously it halted because of COVID what gave Scorsese time to get the money for a USD 200M production (by Apple and Paramount) and started the works in 2021.
I will not enter in details of the characters here, but all is historically researched, and many details were affected by Osage contributions. On the Acting part, Leonardo DiCaprio, as Ernest Burkhart, Robert De Niro as William King Hale, Ernest's uncle and Lily Gladstone as Mollie Burkhart, Ernest's wife are just perfect.
The nominations of Cinematography (Rodrigo Prieto - Argo, The Irishman, Brokeback Mountain among other sublime works), editing (Thelma Schoonmaker), Production Design (Jack Fisk and Adam Willis), Costume Design (Jacqueline West), Best Original Score (using musics from Indians and from that time, in a discrete, but at the same time prominent in the last work of Robbie Robertson) are all spot one.
Maybe the best achievement of the movie is bringing to the spotlights another history side of the evil side of USA, as Tulsa was in the same age.
I expect a lot of Awards for this ones, even with some strong competition - and give this one a 9,2 out of 10,0 / A score. Do yourself a favor and see it, if you like Scorsese epics.
TheRealMina wrote:Needlessly long, boring and utterly useless Oscar bait. It relies on clichéd tropes, wooden performances, and an extremely dull script. The movie wastes the talents of its star-studded cast, especially DiCaprio and De Niro, who seem bored and uninterested in their roles. The movie also suffers from a lack of tension, suspense, and emotion, making it a tedious and forgettable watch.
badelf wrote:This is as slick a production as Scorsese ever made. Story aside, this film just feels like pure, unadulterated Oscar bait. In the end, isn't it just a bunch rich, Hollywood, white men exploiting the Native Americans again? I'm not denigrating Lily Gladstone here, who was fabulous.Even she said "So many films are made on Native land, why did it take so long for an Indigenous actor to be nominated for an Oscar?" yeah, why? Well, the 5/10 stars I gave it are only for her and David Grann. If not for those two, I would just be kicking myself for even trying to watch a Hollywood movie when I know damn well they always disappoint me.
