KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON - Movie Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- Website: www.deepfocusl...
Support me on Patreon: www.patreon.co...
Follow me on instagram: / deepfocuslens
Follow me on twitter: / deepfocuslens
Like my Facebook page: / deepfocuslens
Email me: deepfocuslens@gmail.com
I just wanna add my thoughts on the ending.
It gave me the feeling of being robbed and abused. None of the major characters fates are seen on screen. Translated thru a radio program much like their fates being transmitted thru a film. It robs us of the actual gravity of these murders. Basically saying no film can communicate the experience these people went thru. You're robbed of even seeing their fates because that would give the audience more satisfaction. When stories like this their is no satisfactory ending or answer. I loved the ending, it basically for a moment makes you feel like those people. To you its just a story passed along for entertainment, when it was their entire life. One of the most gut punch endings I witnessed recently. And as soon as that segment ends we transition to our reality with an alive and well modern osage tribe despite the horrors of history.
I watched an interview with Scorsese. That was actually the point.
The idea was, with the birth of the FBI later came the romanization of the FBI. “Good ole boys taking in bank robbers and crime bosses.” It does become theater at some point. And in the beginning, came literal radio theatre that told heroic stories of the FBI. And the story BECOMES the FBI, not the murders.
He’s showing how this horrific history was lost in the first place.
Right, yeah, the fact that he cameos to deliver the final line is him saying to us that even a carefully, thoughtfully made film like this one is still just as paltry a representation of these real people's real lives as the crappy radio drama. When compared to actual history of the pain of real people, even a film as masterful as a Scorsese film falls as flat at telling the truth, as the rinky-dink sound effects and voice acting as we saw on that stage. He's imploring us, the audience, to feel the reality of these events, and what they mean for us as Americans living in this country today. It's a stunning ending.
It was a commentary on how we consume true crime but like it was a bit out of place. Don't agree with it being disrespectful.
It really had weight that he broke the 4th wall to actually tell us, was just a bit messy @@papayacatproductions
Yeah I can see that. I feel like several of the transitions throughout were a bit messy. The very first scene, and then the sudden oil discovery and then the transition to Leo's story. I think Scorsese's style is kind of... scrapbooky or something.@@disliked1390
great review as always, you should really consider trying to get your reviews written down / in print! they’re far more incisive and well articulated than almost any other movie reviewer i’ve seen for real
You need to read more.
Without spoiling anything, I actually thought the final shot was one of the most beautiful and effective I have seen in a long time - a cinematic way of making the themes of the film resonate powerfully.
I'm an uber driver in la, and last night, I gave a ride to a man who actually went to college with the female lead! Saw cool pictures if them from college when she was much younger! Can't wait to see the film
Spoilers: i just saw it and that last dialogue between mollie and ernest was PERFECT.. when mollie asked ernest "what was in the shots" i think that was her final shot at trying to forgive him, as it was an implicit way of saying "will you ever lie to me again?" And would have forgave him if he said it was poison. Sidenote i love how decaprio switches his body language instantly when he said "just insolin" where YOU CAN TELL he's lying
Like you, when I came out of the theater there was a lot I was wrestling with in terms of buying certain relationships, but one area I felt very certain that I loved was that last scene. Complicity in genocide receives the most tepid of punishments before being sold to the public as a success story for a wonderful new investigation bureau taking down corrupt officials, therefore relegating it to a footnote of history. I think the way it ties into the rest of the film is Scorsese wrestling with his own legacy of these Hollywood morality tales that blend romanticism with cynicism, and concluding that the reality is a lot more mundane. And therefore it might be time to give the power of storytelling back to the people who experienced the event.
Martin Scorsese + Jack Fisk 😍 felt like Days of Heaven meets There Will Be Blood
Yup! And there were so many other films that it reminded me of (if even slightly) like Once Upon a Time in America, Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Miller’s Crossing, Out of Africa, Heaven’s Gate, but it was its own unique movie in the end. One of his best films in many years.
@@djstarsignThere Will Be Blood AND Heaven's Gate - if it holds up next to these masterpieces, it will be glorious.
It's always a joy to see legends working together.
Hello, I found your channel looking for Killer's reviews, and after watching this videos and a couple more I decided to subscribe.
You talk about classic movies, wich is something that not a lot of reviewers do (most of them give me the feeling the oldest movie they know is Star Wars). And another thing that drew me in about you is how you articulate your thoughts, a pet peeve I have with a lot of critics is that every new movie has to have a score or a phrase like "is the best..", "is my favorite...", but you don't do that, you just talk about the movie, and that's something I really appreciate.
Anyways, new supporter here, you're great. The biggest compliment I can give you is that your love and passion for cinema was clear as day for me after a couple of videos, keep the great work!
This is the only review not fawning over this film. Thank you
Have you seen it yet?
@@kurtrivero368 Well, I wasn't asked, but will answer: it was ok, but nothing more. No need to freak out about it. Sorry, no masterpiece. A movie. Ok, good. No masterpiece.
@@cielant Nobody’s freaking out, lug nut.
@@cielantagree to disagree, but i respect your subjective opinion.
@@billcipher3946 Disagreeing can be a good thing. Btw: opinions are per definitionem subjective, so: yeah: this is mine.
As always, a very thoughtful and articulate review. I can’t wait to go see it.
As always, I can understand why someone with a face like that was put a camera in front of it
Great review as always! As someone who has only delved deeply into film this year, discovering your channel has been amazing for me. I love how critical and nuanced your perspective is. Easily the best on UA-cam.
I don't know if you take review recommendations, but if you do I'd love to see you review...
La Haine (1995)
Goodbye, Dragon Inn (2003)
Fallen Angels (1995)
I haven't seen the movie yet but I've read the book. In the book, the FBI agent is the hero, similar to Kevin Costner's Elliot Ness in The Untouchables. If Scorsese manipulated the plot to put the focus on the villains, it's going to be a complex transition. It's not a story about the mob. It's a story about an essentially racist government that requires native Americans who possess property with oil to have a "white guardian" to manage their money (which essentially means putting them in the hands of scam artists and predators) and one good individual, the FBI agent, who rights one small wrong but is helpless against the overall tide of American history. Essentially this sounds like The Untouchables with the main focus on Capone.
More like Al Capone’s not so smart nephew. The first 2/3rds is all about the corruption and scheming. Then the FBI shows up and they start handing out comeuppances. Really satisfying to see it unravel.
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the book. I will try to keep that in mind while watching the film.
De Niro's performance was phenomenal.
His part is even more difficult seriously being cold like that even in the mourning scenes
No it wasn't. Comic book stuff.
@@RandFanOne You Trump fans are a disgrace.
@@RandFanOne
Jack Nicholson in the shining was comic book stuff
That doesn’t mean its bad
Just saw it. It was pretty amazing. Fully engaged the entire time. And every single scene has something in it that is uniquely inventive and specific to that scene and just moves forward so perfectly from scene to scene.
I've never been bothered by long films and most great films are long. I felt other people's discomfort with it. So I wished I was in that theater alone. I'll never understood people's beef with long movies in a strong, fully engaging movie.
Molly's instant and complete understanding of who he was and what he was and still marrying him anyways is a nuanced real life relationship that I feel is always missing from movies.
I'm glad he didn't write all these extra scenes to get us there. This seemed the more intelligent and nuanced move. Which she pulled off brilliantly with her eyes.
In this way Scorcrse is stil the bold young filmmaker of the 70s. So instead of it showing up in big ideas it shows up in small, bold decisions.
Also this is 2 movies in a row he departs from the story and goes full meta at the end. A big middle finger to us and Hollywood.
That young bold filmmaker is still in there.
Thanks for the review! I loved loved the film. My own issue is that it could have been trimmed down more. But it’s an AMAZING film! 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
“Marinate in his world for a while” , good one.
I'm surprised by your opinion of Leo. I had the opposite experience. I had a bad opinion of him around the time Titanic came out and then later I saw him in Woody Allen's celebrity and was surprised by his acting ability. I thought he was amazing in Revolutionary Road, Django Unchained, The Revenant.
I thought he was excellent in Revolutionary Road.
@@collindysart6472 Yes!! Amazing movie all around.
It is based on an excellent novel. @@christopherpaul7588
I think she just trying to be different
I notice that as a trend of hers
Lily Gladstone was the standout of the movie. She was great. Your review deepfocuslens was spot on. Watching docs of the Osage murders were very horrific and sad. I look forward to your next review.
Agreed 😊
@@only257 She is an amazing woman and actress.
The nuance of women choosing marriage a hundred years ago is authentic. Its still happening today en mass it's just not talked about in the mainstream.
100% agree on di caprio, some solid child acting performances but as an adult he has no idea how to go internally for a scene and let it breath it's all external but even that's not up their with similar actors that push for more external, and I've said same about tarantino say what want about the guy he knows actors pros n cons and who fits which characters. I'm kind of their a bit as youve said before with Scorsese but it's hard stay mad at a guy that brings it to this level at his age, I think he found a middle ground between what he wanted to do and what studios and mainstream audiences want.
When you look at how many of his generation of filmmakers stopped making films at that level it's hard to not to be impressed by what he does, we don't expect a Coppola film or de palma or say even lynch now, I enjoyed twin peaks the return and glad seems he's still got it but I'm not expecting anything else soon.
Enjoy the man while he's still here he's one of a kind.
best way to get recommendations- from a passing mention inside a review like this-- I wanna check out Giant (1956) now!
Two hours into this movie, I walked out. I never do that. Because I can sit through a long movie, a violent movie, or even a boring movie. But after 2 hours of this film, all I felt was intense dread and irritation.And I couldn't figure out why. The elements of greatness were all there- a great story, great actors, great cinematography.But I just couldn't get inside this movie. I never not saw DiCaprio and DeNiro acting onscreen. And because Lily Gladstone feels so completely authentic as Molly,, their performances didn't mesh for me. Had those roles been played by less identifiable actors, I think the performances would have felt more balanced. I think it was a mistake to tell the story from DiCaprio's pov, because his character is literally the antagonist of the story that brings the conflict.. It should have been Molly's story, and the husband a supporting character in it.
Just saw it. I wasn't phased by the length, it progressed very well and really kept me on the edge of my seat where things were going and then wraps up perfectly if not hauntingly.
Dicaprio, DeNiro and Lily Gladstone are phenomenal. Can't put it among Scorsese's 10 greatest but its a great acheivment for him. Throughly enjoyed it.
I watched the film and enjoyed it. I do think they were boxed into making Ernest look stupid (because of the age of Leo) , instead of young and easily manipulated. Ernest was 19 when he came to work for his uncle and Hale was 41 (not 81--De Niro) . The age gaps changed the story. Still, a good film.
I can put the 10 best
Terrific definition of Leonardo Di Caprio's acting strengths!
Totally. Her analysis of Di Caprio's strengths and weaknesses as an actor is dazzlingly lucid.
I'm a longtime admirer of Scorsese. A die hard fan, let it be known. I also have no quibbles whatsoever watching a long movie. Paris, Texas is a long movie, and it's arguably my favourite film of all time. However, this felt needlessly long. Whilst I admired its nuance, I think it lacked tension and, despite its subject, it didn't feel as compelling or sure-footed as most of Scorsese's best films. Casino was a relatively long film, but it was rivetting. The heart was there, no doubt, but the focus seemed mired by its production and a foggy, opaque screenplay. Having said that, anything made by Scorsese is a cinematic blessing.
agreed
it does lack tension, but may be that is the point
@@juandanielvidelamontilla3403 To be honest, I agree with your assessment. It's very possible, and I don't think for a moment that Scorsese was lost or directionless in terms of what he wanted. I thought the silent, slower sequences, the visual patter, were beautiful. My issue was more around the pacing of where the suspense was meant to be, such as in the courts, or during the investigation, where the editing appeared slack. I will, of course, revisit this movie again. Scorsese is a sublime jewel in the crown of cinema, so I will buy tickets and view every movie he makes, regardless.
In the case of this film, it didn't feel epic-long, like Casino, or like Paris, Texas, by Wim Wenders, or Days of Heaven. Scorsese's "Silence" was, in my opinion, a stunning work. To be honest, perhaps the screenplay and the order of its proceedings had me feeling like it's slow burn did not ignite as much as I thought- or expected- it would. I'll watch it again.
the key theme of the movie is about the banality of evil, and the ending is showing how these people's lives were turned into a throw away entertainment radio show. Its trying to get us to change our ways.
I believe they could have executed your correct sentiment in a non mundane way.
I agree.
I understand that interpretation in theory but the execution of that doesn't really hit for me
Really agree about Leonardo di Caprio - to me he stopped being convincing when he started doing serious, leading man, heavyweight characters as he has always maintained that man-child aura - he is much better suited to character roles and is hampered by being such a big star, imv. I liked him as a bumbling professor in Don't Look Up, for example, as he is so much better when he isn't playing into his playboy image.
I have a ticket to go see it Sunday night! I’m waiting to watch this review and read comments afterwards so that I can go in almost completely blind and unbiased. But I can’t wait to hear yours and everyone else’s thoughts! Have almost no idea what to expect! Wish me luck! Lol
The Osage felt like a huge plot device. We don’t really get to know any of them personally anytime they have screen time it’s just them getting whacked off.
They get whacked off? Is this a rated X film?
Let's all come together and realize that Deepfocuslense is awesome and thank you for what you do. A. Because she doesn't depend on showing clips. She keeps me engaged just from her thoughts without beating me over the head with specific scenes which is kinda brave because everyone else does that. I can't stand the gross body horror stuff she likes but she rocks any-ol-way. I'm glad I stumbled across her channel. It must be hot where she lives or I hope she doesn't feel she needs sex appeal because she rocks anyway. 😎 Really enjoy your content Deepfocuslense
You are a genuine film armoire and the only one on the net who's review I actually take seriously. Thank you.
The ending reminded me specifically of the ending of the Assassination of Jesse James. It is meant to portray the trivialization of tragedy. By dramatizing the events in the film, the audience (in the play not the movie) is getting shortchanged by not fully comprehending the implications of said tragedy. Scorsese is basically saying "we've shown you devastating evil for 31/2 hrs. Now let's show you how it has been fed to people for the past 100 years". Like you said Scorsese is a very cerebral and meta director so it's easy to miss what he's trying to convey.
I personally loved the picture, though I think 20 to 25 mins of fat could have been trimmed off to make it more airtight (and to spare my bladder). I'll definitely be seeing it again soon.
Just glad as hell Marty didn't quit after 10 flicks, like Tarantino plans on doing. The Coens have quit. We need ya, Marty. Super Hero flicks just don't cut the mustard.
Have the Coen's really quit making films?
@@Revolver1981 They've quit as a team. That's my understanding. Individually, they're gonna keeo going. One of em made a doc on Jerry Lewis, for example.
I just like Robbie Robertson score was sharp it reminded me of Peter Gabriel music in Last Temptation of Christ a little bit and glad that it told a story of the past that U.S.need to talk about.
Looking forward to some Indian spiritual chants. I heard some Native American chants on this TV show with Daisy Fuentes and enjoyed it a lot.
excited to see this though I admit I was sceptical and kind of annoyed when I saw that Leo got the lead role. just as scorsese miscast him in Gangs of New York, I hope this wont be as bad.. having said that he is a very watchable performer but indeed needs the right apparatus around him to excel, case in point being his role in Django unchained which was truly outstanding and the highlight of the whole film for me.
I deeply love listening to this channel in order to improve my English skills. Also a very good way to think about movies
I found myself falling in love with the Osage aesthetic of the first half of the film - like yeah I can live here for 3-1/2 hours - whereas the second half felt like it got much closer to a "typical" Scorcese film albeit set in 1920s Oklahoma. Still engaging and rightfully continued expanding its themes, but it made me wish that Osage heart had remained more prominent...
But interestingly, one could argue that that plot/production design structure was a deliberate metaphor for [the attempt at] the Osage being whitewashed out of existence.
It’s interesting this will make a fifth of Oppenheimer’s domestic take.
Great score from Robbie Robertson.
Score by Robbie Robertson?
Looking forward to it!
The most amazing thing is that MS is 80yrs old and still making movies..🎬🎥
I think I saw the ending as exactly what you said, how time and society as a whole manipulates and also “softens” history. And then you have Scorsese himself as the director giving almost a tribute to Lily’s character and giving her that dignity that is so often lost with time and with the portrayal of these events
9:32 OH SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP
feel like this film didnt need the all star cast selection. Lily was good, De Niro & Leo needed more subtlety in their performances.
woulda' like to seen somebody like Gene Jones as William Hale
I love your reviews. They feel genuine.
seeing Killers in the afternoon. i eagerly anticipate your review after that. i want to go in fresh.
There's a lot of things to admire about the film. The score is excellent, the opening is one of the best I've seen in a long time, and the performances are all strong. But it has huge flaws. It had no business being three-and-a-half hours long, the romance between Molly and Ernest makes no sense, and it might have been stronger if it had been told from the Osage perspective. Overall, it will be seen as a minor work in the Scorsese canon.
That dam Lily Gladstone man she’s a force.
Gladstone is the runaway performance of the film. I'm glad Kelly Reichardt gave her the spotlight with Certain Women & what it has done for her as an actor. I agree with Scorsese's use of DiCaprio over the past two decades. I felt Leo was miscast throughout all of Scorsese's 2000s efforts, with Gangs of New York being the biggest offender. Since Wolf of Wall Street, Scorsese knows when to use him & when not to. DeNiro was solid, but I would've preferred someone less obvious. Tracy Letts would've been fantastic in the role.
I ended up agreeing a lot with that one Osage consultants take. Ernest’s character has far too many incongruities to feel truly rooted to the tragedy. He’s smart enough to pull off his Uncle’s wishes and duping Mollie but stupid enough to not see his own manipulation.
The way the movie tries to portray love feels insufficient in a way that makes me wonder if it should have been a thematic focus at all.
the so-called incongruities make it a very difficult role to play
I agree completely about Deniro, I reviewed this film on my channel yesterday ❤ Awesome upload
That paddle scene reminded me a lot of the billiards scene from Eyes Wide Shut. Just the creepiness of watching a character get the vail yanked back and realizing he's powerless to the people running the show
Great review. I agree with a lot of your points. I'm glad Scorsese chose to tell this particular story, but I think there were some problems with the way he chose to tell it. It was well done on a technical level, and I didn't have a problem with the meta ending. I thought it was powerful. But I didn't feel an emotional connection to the love story because I didn't understand the DiCaprio character at all. If he loved his wife so much, then why did he do what he did?
The movie kept me engaged for its long length but I ultimately left the theatre feeling flat. It was perhaps that the characters except for Molly didn't resonate through the screen. I thought DeNiro wasn't given much to do and could have been a scene stealer. It was difficult to feel anything for DiCaprio's character. Plemons just seemed to be shoved in and underused when his character was central to the book.I would have preferred the earlier version of the script with DiCaprio as the agent up against DeNiro's Hale in a similar vein of Cape Fear.
I thought this film was too slow and too dull. Important subject matter but the Osage murders are better suited to a documentary.
That's a good point. Mollie knows she can do better than Ernest. So ...... why?
Of course she does at the beginning and she says that he is dumb. But she also finds him attractive and he does make an effort to win her over.
I wish we had more from the Osage perspective. My guess is having a white husband was a status symbol, plus it probably helped procure funds when needed as most were deemed incompetent. Maybe she even thought he could protect her from the white power structure at the time.
As it stands, I do think Scorsese did a good job making sure DiCaprio's character didn't steal the spotlight. The Osage collectively have the biggest arc from start to finish; most scenes are about either rooting for their members' survival or drumming up anger when they don't.
I think Marty really dropped the sensationalism for a more in depth understanding of the motives of De Niros character and many men like him at the time how cunning and evil they were I hate how they made us try have empathy towards Leo's characters as if he wasn't a morally inept piece of wood himself but this movie really put us in the space of these cruel men who used diplomacy to commit heinous crimes against humanity and they did so with no remorse and it left you with no solace purposefully to further drive the fact that this is a true story make of it what you want its the sad world that we live in .The main perpetrator lived a full life ,it hits home especially for people of colour
from all the film critics on youtube your opinion always deviates the most, and that's why I watch you
Remember that Sidney Lumet also directed great movies into his 80's.
Lily Gladstone, Montana Native!
Having read the book first I came out of the theater being pleased.
I thought the ending was one of the best endings of his career. It was very surprisingly moving and tasteful (ironically by presenting something as intentionally tasteless).
I didn't like Scorsese film mainly due to how the Osage were being portrayed. They should have been in the foreground not in the background and I think it would have been more interesting if Scorsese completely told this story from Mollie's POV jmo. The film is very slow and boring
Idk, also felt like Scorsese deep down in his gut had no real empathy for Native Indians even though he makes a cameo appearance. The film cared more for Burkhart, Burkhart's brothers/ colleagues and King
So much respect for the wife who knew, by the end, that her entire family was killed off, or helped killed off by her husband. I mean, that's right isn't it? She was still willing to be with him when he was arrested and facing court.. and only stepped away when it was her own neck. I don't get it. This is the strong, powerful heroine?
It's probably like oppenheimer. Everyone loved it and hyped it and I felt like I was the only person who hated it. Probably the same thing that will happen to me again..
great review, always good to hear your opinion on new films, i can always trust you'll be honest and open with your review. If nothing else, this new Scorsese feature is a great representation of how film could truly be great again, Killers of the flower moon moreso represents something than truly achieving greatness, it represents that if filmmakers are given the trust and the space to create their vision, then films can be just as powerful, and expressive as they once were, here's hoping those times return soon xx
Watched it yesterday here in the UK. Really enjoyed the film. Only problem was the Taylor Swift concert movie was playing on the neighboring screen and the noise from the soundtrack was extremely loud, which kept taking you out of the film. So it made the experience annoying. In fairness the manager gave us all refunds for the inconvenience.
to me listening to your review having not seen the film yet it reminds me of the experience i had with The Irishman. It was acclaimed as a masterpiece and i really struggled with it. It is a super long film that meanders alot and in parts looks frankly awful to the point of hilarity. I did go back to it and appreciated it more but it felt like a slog and chore something which Scorsese's other work and even something like Silence never did. I think he truly wishes to do something different sometimes but relies on the old tropes and actors to deliver for him and that can be hit and miss.
I thought the Irishman was good but not great. I don’t know if the problem was the length though.
Marty hasn't made a great movie in over 30 years.
@@EddieHenderson92 Imo wolf of wallstreet was amazing. Also Departed.
@@MrDeone365 No and No.
@@EddieHenderson92 At this point your just trying to be different.
Thank you for this review! Every review I see says this movie is a masterpiece, but honestly I feel like people are scared to really critque this movie due to the fact that it is telling a true tragic story of the Native American people. And critquing this movie may come accross as not being sympathetic with the Native American plight and the historical injustuces they have faced throughout American history. However, you can think the movie is good for the Native American voice that it brings to mainstream audiences, but still critque the movie as a movie. I honestly feel this movie is a boring tradgey that had no real tension, despite having all the pieces to make a great tradgey/documentary-esque drama. But just because something is tragic does not mean it is interesting on its own. That is where the movie itself brings that to the audience, and unfortunately, I never got that. After i finished the movie, i was wondering if I just "didnt get it" or maybe it was too complex for me to really connect with it. However, after thinking about it more and more, i have determined that it was a boring movie that did not earn its run time and is being praised for it has done to help Native American voices, but it seems this should have been a documentary or a part series - not a movie.
I kinda was expecting police procedural western epic, but I trust Scory, so I will watch it.
I just got back from seeing it, it is definitely not a police procedural. If anything there is no involvement with police until the last hour or so.
@@RYNO2511 yeah, I know. Scorsese changed his mind while shooting and redirected the focus of the story on the family with Dicaprio.
I think it is a masterpiece. It really warrants a second look. Incredible acting. I think that this is one of DeNero’s best roles. Scorsese explores our humanness in all of its shades. I wish the radio program was eliminated.
Great review, thank you.
I haven’t seen it yet, and I’m not that pushed either… it I do want to see Lilly Gladstone’s performance….from the trailers alone I get a sense we’re being introduced to a special talent.
I appreciate you’re just off the back of a fresh viewing where you’d prefer a little more reflection before committing to a public opinion, but for what it’s worth I think you nailed it….sometimes the Emperor is a bit naked.
The Emperors New Clothes of Scorsese movies. Tropes, White Saviour overtones, baggy construction, flat compositions, and a truly bizarre ending.Less then the sum of its supporting parts. Dances with Wolf of Wall Street.
I think that the fact that the manipulative relationship between uncle and nephew isn't so well defined is deliberate. Di Caprio's character is a bit stupid, we know, and he's in a way a victim of his uncle's power; but I think the intention was to focus on how in spite of that he's not completely stupid (he repeats once and once again how much he likes money, so he knows exactly what and why he's doing it), and therefore he's responsible for the terrible choices he makes even if he's conflicted. De Niro's character is a strong presence and influence, but I guess it's Ernest's arc we're supposed to be interested in. After all, his bond with the osage nation is also more personal than his uncle's.
Spot on review! I totally agree. Saw it last night.
At least we are getting an actual film! Been a minute
I liked the movie as well. I was the same way with the end. It seemed so left field. 😂 Whatever symbol or metaphor was there, I missed it.
My main problems with this movie were Leo and Robert’s casting. I honestly think that they’re miscast for this kind of film.
great presentation, utmost well said, love hearing you. me too, must see it again, too much transpiring within and intertwined throughout the multilayers even for 3 1/2hrs. .
do, however, believe d'nero slamdunked the uncle hale portrayal, relating me the perfect proverbial snake hiding within the garden's flowers, the wolf in sheep's clothing among the flock.
thank you...waiting on you see again and fully review again.
DiCaprio was good in Catch Me if You Can and Wolf of Wall Street. In both movies he played a scam artist who may or may not have been a good actor but got credit (and money) for being better than he really was. He was OK in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (even though Brad Pitt stole the movie out from under him) where he played a mediocre actor trying to get his mojo back. He was also good in the dinner party scene in Titanic where they dressed him up in suit and he almost (but not quite) passed as a gentleman.
I don't always agree with you but I always enjoy your take.
I'm with you on the majority of this review. DeNiro is a phenomenal actor, but his performance in this role didn't work. The ending was a bit self-indulgent, and the resolution was lost in translation. It feels like it would've been better served playing out as a mini-series. However, this does make me want to read the book now, as I've heard it's perfect.
Unlike other reviewers i watched, you didn't mention the runtime..... interesting...
Your deliberate way of talking through everything, all your feelings about Scorsese... It's a good preface to then say "hey there's something kind of up with De Niro's performance", even if it is quite good by most reasonable measures.
For me, I know he's a little off with that accent. He's never been good at consistently maintaining accents. The strength of his performance kind of "lies somewhere else". You can tell he did a lot of work for this role, and I like it a lot. But the flaws are definitely there
I idolized Martin Scorsese for many years but after seeing some of his later works, that idolatry turned into indifference. I think he has failed in his later works because he has become more of a fan of filmmaking than a filmmaker.
With no disrespect to Robert DeNiro, if there could be an alternative casting for the uncle role, whom would you pick?
Daniel Day Lewis maybe or Willem Dafoe.
Dicaprio was best in the revenant. Not necessarily a weak man, but definitely not outwardly emotional ( like he is in Scorsese flicks.) I like him, but your criticisms seem fair/ accurate.
I interpreted the end as a form of satirizing modern true crime endings.
I'm not sure if it was properly explained but it was hard for the Osage to handle their own finances because they had such great wealth from the oil. Might explain why Mollie was so ready to be married to a white man especially one as "handsome" as Leo. Their "overseer" would be one she could trust and love. The movie also presents her as someone who is older in her years and that Ernest was the nephew of the most respected white man in their community.
According to my search engine, this film at nearly 3-1/2 hours has no intermission. Don't drink a beer if you're not wearing a diaper before seeing this one - unless you're OK with missing part of it. Even with an empty bladder this bodes to be a grueling marathon no matter how excellent. Intermissions once a common feature of epic movies seem to be a thing of the past. Sorry, I'll be waiting for it on a streaming service. Most movies today I can wait to see.
HI M! I believe the ending is good, the problem is that the rest of film is not meta enough! Olivier pulls it off better in Henry IV or Hamlet. (Actually, Shakespeare himself in Hamlet). I wish Scorsese had emphasized the surrealist elements early on in the film, leading to the (I'd say great) finale. De Niro role is great, only it gets a bit tiring at the end, but Hale is a great movie villain. The Burckhardt/Di Caprio role is a lot more difficult. He handles it well (except perhaps at the beginning). He is not a great actor, I agree. I bet Lily Gladstone and De Niro get nominated, or they deserve to. Again, I miss a better "meta" transition from film to radio, like Olivier achieved in his films. Also, there is more Welles than Ford or Stevens in this film.
I liked the movie but it could have been much better and surprised Scorsese didn’t go the route I’m about to explain.
The film should have been in two parts: From Mollie Burkharts perspective. Then from Tom Whites perspective(FBI agent)
It shouldn’t have been clear who were all behind the crimes and just allowed the audience to watch this tsunami come and crash through every aspect of the family and community.
Then allowed Tom White to come in and go through a rigorous investigation and show how difficult it was to crack the case slowly revealing the people behind it.
I don’t want to be long winded but that would have made for a more entertaining film then watching Leo in the lead role.
"Can you find the wolves in this picture?"
I swear Leo was doing his best Jack Nicholson
Just finished watching this movie about an hour ago and it blew me away. I absolutely loved it. I think it’s absolutely ridiculous to even suggest that Oppenheimer would be better then this. This movie was absurdly raw and didn’t hold back, and I love that it didn’t victimize decaprio unlike Oppenheimer which made him seem like a poor wittle man who didn’t know bomb would go boom boom😢🙄
Oppenheimer was very good actually. I haven't seen this yet but I could easily prefer one or the other. And your idea that Oppenheimer was victimised is a bit ridiculous. It showed him feeling conflicted, guilty, and remorseful. How does that make him look like a victim? It really should be stressed that the circumstances in which the project began didn't apply when the project ended, which is significant.
You simple fool, that bomb did win the war but that doesn't mean that it wasn't a tough decision.
what an uninteresting take
Fr, if you are in the bomb-business, you are Willing to kill people. In his case he was willing to kill innocents, over a rather pointless war (A peace treaty with Japan was not the objective of the american Government, and that was clear even back than). Today historians are certain, that the bomb was unnecesarry from an Strategic standpoint, and only fired to test it out and Scare the Soviets.
That is obvious by the chosen locations, the fact they did it twice, and their rejection of peace with japan).
Also the entry of the russians in the war with Japan was just as Big of an factor than the bombs, and Japan already being on their last Straw.
Sadly its recognizeable Nolan grew up with the american Version of history.
@@miz4535 how is my idea that Oppenheimer being victimized is ridiculous? ALL he does in the movie is feel bad and look guilty you literally proved my point. It makes it look like he’s being ganged up on by all the other government officials and like he’s the true “victim” of the story. We murdered 200,000 plus with that bomb and not a SINGLE Japanese perspective was shown in 3 whole hours, even thought they show the ability to have another perspective in the story through Strauss. Could you imagine if killers of the flower moon did that and jus showed DiCaprio killing the Osage but never showed a single indigenous person on screen? I legit watched Oppenheimer with my friend and at the end scene she cried cuz “he didn’t deserve to go through that” REALLY?!? If people are coming out of your movie crying about Oppenheimer and how he “felt bad and was trying to do the right thing” and NOT crying about the 200,000+ people we melted with an atomic bomb then there’s something wrong with you and the movie lol I have no idea how in anyway that idea is ridiculous🤷♂️
Interesting story, but the length was way too self-indulgent and ultimately did not service the film.
I feel like the days of a handful of directors (Tarantino, Scorsese, Spielberg etc.) dominating the film scene is obsolete. And the same actors like DiCaprio, Hanks, Pitt, getting paid millions to keep churning out films every year is utterly ridiculous. We need more diverse stories and voices. Young voices!! - not the same old tired faces and stories.
It was a great movie I got some heaven gate’s vibe from killer of the flower moon and some old western vibe I like it
please review The Departed/ Infernal Affairs at some point. I find it very interesting about Scorsese's later works that there is always something missing and just doesn't click.
I didn't like the radio bit at the end even if the lucky strike news was prevalent at that time and in the book..It was jarring, manipulative and completely unnecessary...Should have kept it solely on the osage for a more powerful ending like keeping the focus on molly by cutting to her years after leaving ernest and melding her into that joyous pow wow ending..That said, this was a big step forward in scorcese's sensitivity and growth and is in my top five marty films including silence, the departed, wolf of wall street, and gangs of new york..Not a big fan of casino, raging bull or good fellas
Just saw this film. Tremendous. Depressing. A masterpiece. I don't love every Marty film, but this one … may be his best. Certainly a top three or four. Additionally, this is an _important_ film, which adds a lot of weight.
I can't find your review for the exorcist believer. did you do one?