Killers Of The Flower Moon - Beautiful, Poignant, LONG
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 жов 2024
- Killers of the Flower Moon, Martin Scorcese's latest historical epic, seems to have been tailor made for the awards season. But is it as good as it's made out to be, or a long and self indulgent movie by a director who doesn't know when to wrap it up? Let's find out.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @thecriticaldrinker
THIS is what Hollywood should be spending $200 million on. Not Thor Love and Thunder or Quantumania
Love and thunder actually made a profit so you are wrong
@@leecameron9226 but it still sucked
@@leecameron9226ok simp
@@theunknowncommenter725💯💯💯💯
This is just the same as those movies. Boring trifling shit disguised as cinema
The movie is based on the book "Killers of the Flower Moon" which is also a long book, but it is illistrating the birth of the FBI
And the movie is following the book which is non-fiction so it is not meant to be a satisfying ending, but follows the story of what actually happened.
"We're still here .... We are not going anywhere." ~ Native Americans 😔
For God's honest truth, pls read the informative and insightful multi-page comment by 'Lonely Alaskan' at, "Complete History Of Indigenous America Before Colonialism"... It's on UA-cam.
"We're still here .... We are not going anywhere." ~ Native Americans 😔
I like how we pretend the FBI's purpose is any different now than it was at it's creation.
The hardcover is 352 pages long. YMMV
The Dates And Dead Guys Channel did a really good video on the story this is based on.
@@MaximusGermanicus-df8jsseriously
They really should not have given everything away in the beginning. We as the audience should have gone through the same paranoia and betrayal Molly has to go through
Yeah it felt like an hour 10 min in you have a pretty full picture, I wish they hid some things longer
That was the initial plan, but after talking with the osage people they said that it'd be better to show more of the relantionships between Ernst and Mollie. It was a council that Scorcese chose to follow
Probably not very important to an epic. In fact in all Chinese classical novels, the tradition is to tell the ending of a story at the very beginning--even in the title (usually a two-sentence short poem). Does not reduce their charm a single bit.
why don’t you go let martin scorsese know that
To be fair, it becomes extremely obvious extremely fast. You keep wondering how Earnest and Molly can be so dumb. Earnest for trusting his uncle, and Molly for trusting Earnest.
It’s pretty incredible how Scorsese is turning 81 in about a month, and he’s still making great movies that have so much artistic vision and value in them. Whether he’s one of your favorites or not, it’d be very difficult to make the argument that he’s not one of the greatest directors of any generation.
That and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee.
@@iamperplexed4695 A buck? SatanBucks and DutchHoes have entered the chat.....
I'm more concerned about upcoming directors to match his caliber in the studio system after he passes :(
Well, Clint Eastwood was 91 in the last movie he made.
EXCELLENT CRITICAL DRINKER.
Scorsese is the living proof, there's no more beautiful and fruitful a thing than to do what you're good at.
You can thank your luck that you are naive enough to believe that
@@quatore-5886 you're apparently sad, so i Will cut you some Slack. But each of us has vocation, which manifests itself in our work. We can like It ir not; despise our vocation or be fond of It. But, in the end, each of us do something in a special and particular way.
" THREE AND A HALF HOURS! " What is it trying out run Oppenheimer????? o.o
@@Joao-jx1lo tell your mom to bring home an extra box of Kleenex
@@quatore-5886 I should asks yours, when she stops by here. Guessing you ain't seeing her in a loooong time, huh buddy?
I think the unsatisfying ending is entirely intentional. The Osage didn't really get a satisfactory ending either, as detailed in the radio show outro sequence. You're meant to feel like shit about it. As an Inupiaq, another tribe that has oil rights, who has been exploited for my shares in a native corporation, this hit extremely close to home, and I'm glad Scorsese emphasized the lack of justice and attention the case got in the end.
Bingo.
And the book ends it the same way. We feel the way they feel (obviously on a much smaller scale). Unsatisfied. Betrayed.
I completely agree, and I don't think much of the Critical Drinker's review of this brilliant movie.
The film was fantastic. I was totally invested in the characters. By the end, I was a wee bit melancholy. I felt emotionally moved at the end. The recreation of the radio show was a perfect coda.
I have a hard time believing a director would intentionally make a film that climaxes at the 2 hour mark then proceeds to drag on for an extra hour, leaving the audience feeling empty and unsatisfied. I understand you're saying he was trying to evoke a feeling of discomfort snd unease in the viewer, but being boring isnt something a legendary director would do on purpose to achieve that. You can arouse those feelings while still being entertaining.
As a member of the Osage tribe who's great grandmother was mentioned in the KOTFM book and whose uncle was in the film, I'm honored that he made this film. Sure it was long and may not be as remembered as Taxi Driver or Raging Bull, but my people needed their story told.
What do you feel about white people after watching this movie ? Also, does your tribe collect welfare ?
I like the use of the Osage language (shared with the Kansa nation, I hear). It seems Osage-Kansa, like Cornish, almost died out recently but both nations are bringing it back. But in the 1920s it was a living language.
Is your uncle Larry? Osage here also.
@173Eli173Eli lol no my uncle Damon
@@ogggggggggggggggggg1 lol a long shot. I know Larry Sellers was in it which I thought was pretty cool, I'm an Osage too, my parents live in Pawhuska and my nephew was in the movie as well(for 3 seconds). I agree with you, it was so awesome to see our past told on the big screen, and show how beautiful Oklahoma really is.
He does have a habit of making some of the best, even if they are long, films we talk about for decades after. Let's hope he has one more in him to finish on a high. Because when he's gone we may not get films like his ever again.
He has like 3 movies left. The Wager with DiCaprio, Grateful Dead biopic with Jonah Hill, and the Jesus movie that he's currently writing. Some reports say that he's still trying to get The Devil In The White City made by shopping it to other studios after Hulu cancelled it
I'm sure if the right project comes along he'll make a comeback
He's extremely overrated.
@@GamerFrisco”Comeback”? His career is still as as strong as it was since he first started making films, little buddy 😂🤣
@@MAGAMANyou probably watch obscure Soviet Union films no one in their right mind cares about
Idk. Watching it, I never felt it was to long. And I dont think every plot has to be "explosive" to be great. I enjoyed the slow realization of: There is nothing we can do, not all storys end good or satisfying. My movie of the year.
Ahh the drinkers and vaccinated bowing to more antiwhyte demoralization flicks.
I felt the same way.
Just watched it last night. I just don’t see what he’s talking about with the last hour being “laborious” it’s where you finally get some sense of justice and realization. I think he’s pretty off base with this one tbh
@@theeoddments960 why do you hate your own?
@@theeoddments960the whole film was way way wayy too long. Ridiculously long. Its exhausting. Boring
“Beautiful, poignant, bloated, Long”
That’s what she said - Michael Scott
Nice one, chap!
I loved this film. It didn’t feel its long length. It’s classic Scorsese. Powerful, beautifully shot, superb acting, a riveting and at times brutally harrowing story really well told in his very distinctive style. It felt like a real cinema experience. I’ll miss Scorsese when he is gone. He’s one of the true masters of filmmaking.
would you have the same opinion if this wasn't directed by scorsese and was directed by so no name? i really doubt it.
Funny, i love Scorcese movies and they all feel to me that they should've ended 1 hour sooner. It's almost like a gimmick 😂
@@reesecollins482would it have been the same quality?
Imaginary hypotheticals do nothing to serve whatever argument you are trying to put forward.
@DeanRTaylor it's a very simple straightforward argument, maybe you're a bit slow? His love and adoration for scorsese might be clouding his judgement. Same with irishman, people that don't care or know who scorsese is say the movie is very boring and long, "fans" of scorsese say it's a masterpiece.
@@reesecollins482 yes i understand the argument, i was being facetious.
The main point is that this movie was not and could not have been made to this quality with this cast, set design, budget and theatrical release so it's a redundant comparison or suggestion to make.
Been a fan or yours for a long time. And I've wondered how long until it would be until you reviewed a film that I had worked on. I'm glad it's finally happened. And I totally respect your opinion.
That's awesome! What did you do?
@milliondollarsoup75 I worked my way from unloading a truck for a weekend for the costume dept to becoming the head costume designers personal assistant and driver
He spitshined De NIro's shoes in between takes@@milliondollarsoup75
@@ShortlordFilmsso you didn’t work on the movie
being a driver or even loaders on set is literally a work for the movie@@Sizzllllnn
I'm a 53yo and grew up with Siskell & Ebert, Variety and Etv providing reviews and comment on theatrical releases. The last several years you've become my singular voice in this regard. It seems the rest of the world of opinion is stuck accepting promotional dollars and other renumeration for positive reviews and publicity. Please keep up the good work and accept my prayers and wishes for your success. Don't ever stop telling it like you see it because some of us trust you to sort through the chaff and point us to the wheat. Thank you!
I'm in the exact same boat as you, down to same age. I grew up watching movies, so became a asshole about the quality of my viewing, The Drinker, best articulates how I feel about most shows. I'll trust his thoughts on movies.
47 year old here, same! I love the Drinker.
Why he likes shit he claims he hates, only problem is, it is pretentious so it gets a pass
Daaang Siskell and Ebert! Havent heard those names in a hot minute
Same. The Drinker gives more nuanced and intelligent interpretation and critique on a completely professional level. When the masses go to watch a movie based on a critical, open, and viable assessment, the assessor is the new Siskel & Ebert.
Now the drinker just needs to sell his soul to get on CableTV 🤣
I read the book this film is based on and named after, and while it too drags on at times, it details the years-long conspiracy against the Osage tribe in a dramatic way that keeps you engaged throughout. Far more of the narrative is focused on Molly and the investigators who ultimately brought the conspiracy, showing how they compiled pretty circumstantial evidence until finally striking gold and exposing the conspiracy ring. To that end, one of the big ways the film deviates from the book is that the book does not immediately reveal that William Hale was behind the entire thing, and definitely not that Ernest Burkhart was helping him. The former is subtly implied but not explicitly stated, with casual references to his attempts to buy land from Osage families or otherwise get money from them. You follow along in the investigators' shoes, pulling together clues because you can't simply KNOW who was behind it. It's an excellent book that I would recommend to anyone interested in learning more about the real history behind this movie, the aftermath, and what we still don't know for sure.
Sounds like Scorsese deviating way too much.
The book was excellent and devastating. Absolutely a story worth telling.
@@ThatGuy-ky2yf I don't think so. They didn't do an adaption of the book, they are retelling a historical story based on the book. The book is written as a whodunnit and apparently the first draft of the script wanted to follow that closely and as a result it focused heavily on the second part of the book, the investigation, with DiCaprio playing agent Tom White. But at some point Scorsese decided he didn't want to do it as a whodunnit and focus more on the victims and the criminals than the investigators. The books author appears to be okay with it as he felt the early script handled only the middle part of his book.
That's what I didn't like - Scorsese took too much artistic license to make it seem like Burkhart actually loved Molly and was torn between her and his uncle - the truth is he was a con man from the get go.
@@gildor8866 Leo also asked to play Ernest instead of Tom White, so who knows if White would have still been the focus of the movie if Leo had kept that role.
I can’t believe that in a world where people spend 4 hours a day on UA-cam or Tik Tok, we can be upset that we have been given TOO MUCH of a Scorsese film. The story might be simple, but you GET to live in a world crafted by Scorsese for 3.5 hours, not HAVE to sit through it.
brilliant!
I mean, more and more people have been expressing how the short video format of YT and TT have depraved them from a normal concentration span. So going by those statements. Wouldn't it be logical why exactly those people are the ones complaining?
You should look up the stories of those who quit TT for example if you're curious. Those are the stories that make me secretly happy I never once installed the app 😅
EXACTLY
If it was quality storytelling to the end, no one would care. But it ain’t.
I thought y'all were calling this movie Woke. Chanting Martin Wokese because of the content jn this film. White man is bad, and all. Now what made you change mind? Because drinker went against his own code and talking points and enjoyed it?
The moment the movie was over, I didn't want to even judge it. I just thought about it, avoiding all reviews and comments. I kept thinking about his decisions for character, pace, and what he decided to show us. For me the movie kept lingering. I love that. I love how I can still hear the beat of the drums. And I absolutely love how it made me feel for the Osage, a tribe I unfortunately didn't know too much about. I think this is one of those movies where your traditional plot and character development is a distant device, and what is at the forefront is pure emotion.
I really love this point
Yes. The story itself is compelling. No trick is all the trick you need for an epic like this.
White guilt, tell us more about how cucked you are the poor Osage tribe that was probably murdering warring and possibly eating humans a few decades before the film takes place 😂
I did not expect to cry when Scorcese stated that the murders were not mentioned in Molly’s obituary. This movie was fantastic!
I don’t mind how long it was. The fact that long period/historical epics are coming back is such a blessing.
Edit: to all cry babies complaining in my comment, LONG movies are always Good, it gives you the experience to get into the world, story and characters. And Marty and Eric Roth pulled that off with the sensible subject of this case… The experience is worth it and very crude. If you keep complaining of long movies obviously you people didn’t watch Lawrence Of Arabia, Seven Samurai, Spartacus and other Epics out there… (Yes I know of short epics too like Aguirre the Wrath of God and like that) so I’m pretty mad how people get influenced of the Drinkers opinion of How long the Movie was… or calling a “slightly disappointment” because of the run time. What a Joke to yourself Drinker.
Same here, I only checked my watch twice, first time I checked it, I was surprised that it was already 90 minutes. Hell I appreciate that the FBI investigation came in about 2 hours later, eventhough it's long to wait for that while watching a movie, it can give you a feel like the Osage people where they were too waiting for so long for the FBI to came it and do an investigation after few people got killed
they are only coming back so they can make George Washington a fat black woman and revise it to fit narratives they want
3hr is plenty long, over that is just self indulgence.
@@kernadan000 oh shut up, the movie was great.
@@genarosiles2951 how dare they have an opinion on artwork that doesn't match yours!
What I respect the most about you, Drinker, is that you never compromise. You don't get scared by a director's name or history. All you care about is the product you are reviewing, the movie itself. Nothing else. Although I disagree with you sometimes about your opinion on a movie, I'm always confident that you are honest and not biased or pretending.
"Not biased"😅. If its an all white cast, the film will be exceptional. Any hint of color, and the films is flawed and could've been better somehow. "Not biased" - funny guy😊
Except he did compromise, Dino boy This movie is exactly what he would deem woke. Because it paints the white man as bad, as the villain, even though it is historically accurate, and portrays a non white WOMAN as a lead character who is strong, smart, independent and funny. So did he let his anti woke act fall and reveal that he's just a mouthpiece for the anti progressive youtuber agenda, pretending to hate all these modern movies for having anti white dude sentiments and having women, or non white characters as the sympathetic protagonist?
@@vidmasterK1 CD is of course heavily biased to prefer "white". You see, CD did not grow up in a vacuum. He was exposed to the same pro white, white saviour visions and programming that we ALL grew up with. Even folk outside of western countries had that constant feed of white is right nd good programming from our early years - from John Wayne and those "Injun savages" to this film. I just wish people like CD would just admit that he is just pissed that times have changed and that the lie that white westerners have been spoon fed is slowly being unraveled and that the truth is slowly (however painful) of the reality of white historic domination is coming to the surface. He should really see this as a learning opportunity - but alas, him and his ilk will not. Or should I say more aptly, unable to.
@@vidmasterK1I don't think CD is anti-woke at all. He's keen to point out when movies lean too heavily on ideological motives in lieu of good story-telling and well developed characters. He's made it clear in other videos that he respects good characters regardless of race or gender. This film is based on real events, therefore there is no anti-white propaganda about it. The things that happened, happened.
@@ratboy555 that doesn't matter. He's an SJW, and South Park leaped at the opportunity to mock him and call him lazy and use Cartman as their proxy.
Osage here, I am thrilled that Scorsese made a movie about our small and unknown tribe, and my nephew was in the movie, though I am slightly let down as well. I think De Niro, though great, was miscast not JUST because of his age, but his delivery as an actor, it just doesn't work for Hale, DiCaprio as well for the same reasons The Drinker stated. I think if it showed two perspectives it could of delivered so much more of the history into a more digestible story with more of emotional understanding of the content. One perspective being Mollies, and one being Tom Whites(The investigator) and his team with it all tieing together at the end. I really enjoyed the book and I enjoyed every minute of this movie, but I am slightly disappointed because I know this could of been an all time great. Also we weren't placed on this land as Scorsese said in an interview, we bought it and that's the reason why they weren't able to kick us out after the oil boom.
Apparently DiCaprio was originally gonna play the FBI agent and the film was going to focus more on him and Molly but DiCaprio ended up becoming more interested in the Ernest character so Scorsese decided to pivot the story.
@@tallerwarrior1256 Focusing on Ernest was a big mistake. He's just not likeable. The reality is that in character driven drama's like this the audience needs to sympathize with the main characters, and that's not going to happen with a mentally-deficient murderer with no real charm.
@@ulfskinn1458
A main character doesn’t always have to be likeable in fact sometimes it’s better if they aren’t. I mean look at Uncut Gems, where your constantly stressed out over the stupid and poor decisions that Howard does throughout the film. Howard isn’t a likeable character in my opinion and he doesn’t have some sort of backstory that gives him a reason to act like he does. I felt the same with Ernest; I was constantly saying in my head how dumb he was for not realizing that his uncle was playing him, how sorry I felt for the fact that he really did love Molly, and how betrayed I felt when it was revealed that he had known for a while that what he was giving her wasn’t insulin.
@@ulfskinn1458 I disagree. Characters don't have to be likable. All they need is to be interesting and well written. Joker in the 2019 film is also not very likable in the movie is he?
@@WH250398 Arthur Fleck is a much more complex character than Ernest Burckhardt.
DeNiro and DiCaprio both in a Scorsese movie together.
I didn’t think the day would ever come
Considering we got Pitt & DiCaprio recently.
...yet again. (EDIT: Seems I remembered wrong.)
he'll never be a real director until he casts Jussie Smollett.
@@Dowlphin That’s the joke.
@@ianswift3521 Then he can really [UA-cam 🖕censorship ruining the humor as usual ] .
Enjoyed this film better than anything in a long time.
Keep Scorsese alive - please!!
What I really liked about the film was the blending of the genres; the way it subverted the typical Western (the land is settled and the cowboys are serving the Indians) and started almost as a rom-com (boy meets girl of different social class, they have some unresolved sexual tension and then get married), then turned almost into a gothic horror (mysteriously ill woman alone in a house with an untrustworthy husband who tells her it's all in her head and people around her keep dying) then zigzagging it's way through various courtroom and crime dramas took an amazing amount of skill and experience to pull off so smoothly.
I also thought that treating the exploitation of the Osage people less as a political-drama or a civil rights issue and as "just" a gangster story was a very interesting move; it emphasised that what was done to them was, first and foremost, a crime, and the perpetrators were nothing more than greedy and selfish criminals (and not even impressive criminals - they weren't massively charismatic, daring, or even particularly competent, and the Al Capone-level criminal would have eaten them all for breakfast if the stakes had been high enough to actually draw their attention)
But yes, it was undeniably too long, and the final third where it turns into a fairly standard "law catches up with the criminal" plot was the weakest part of it, right when your energy was flagging and you needed something gripping.
Al Capone was active when this was happening. Also, the Osage (some 2000) people were collectively getting 30 million $ in 2023 (that's 400 million today). Mollie's annual income was 135,000$ in the 1920's.
Seeing something from a true FILMMAKER is such a breath of fresh air. Despite its imperfections and drawn out run time, you can tell actual emotion, effort, and talent was put into it instead of it just being an assembly line product shot on a soundstage
When my friend asked me what the movie was like on Saturday, I told him that the cinematography and acting were top notch, plus it shed light on an unknown story I'd never heard of before.....but it felt a bit like a documentary at times and it was needlessly long. And now I hear Drinker basically say the same thing. I'm so proud of myself haha.
Obviously, this is still pretty much the best movie I've seen this year.
Doesn't say much for the state of modern movies.... does it?
I'd say Oppenheimer and The Covenant are pretty
close.
You say needlessly long but I genuinely think its length is part of the point. You are watching them get slowly topped off one by one and getting more and more frustrated as the movie goes along, the same way that the tribe is getting annoyed and frustrated that it's seemingly impossible to find justice
Best movie I've seen in many years, this is the true American history they never teach kids in schools.
What is this notion of 'needlessly long'? You don't need a movie to be long, you should want a movie to be long.
I think in regards to the runtime it is as long as it needs to be, if this was a made up tale then you could argue it could have ended earlier, but this movie is more like a docudrama, and goes in depth into the Osage murders right to the ending narration of what happened to Ernest, Molly and King. And for me, it certainly didn't feel like 3 and a half hours, I WISH half my working day went by that fast. Honestly I loved this film, and between this, Oppenheimer, and Napoleon, we are really been spoiled with some good historical drama, a refreshing change of pace from the oversaturated comic book movie industry.
Couldn’t agree less
It remains to be seen how good Napoleon will be. The movie will cover everything between his promotion during the French Revolution on through to the end of his life. That is too wide a canvas to paint such an important historical figure. Where Flower Moon was too long a movie for the story it was trying to tell, Napoleon will probably have the opposite problem. The Russian campaign alone is worthy of a stand-alone movie, to say nothing of the Battle of Waterloo.
@@Lennis01 "War and Peace" and "Waterloo" are still two outstanding historical movies that IMO still stand up, especially W&Ps Battle of Borodino.
@@superbitesizedbuckets2451 with what? The runtime? Or the being spoiled with historical movies? Or both?
Openhimer was trash tho.
Y'know, even if it isn't perfect, its a breath of fresh air regardless to see a movie that has real artistic merit and lofty ambitions, instead of a movie that only cares about pandering to a very specific demographic. I don't love every movie Scorcese ever made, but I gotta hand it to the guy for sticking with this industry for so long and caring so much about saving it.
The Creator accomplishes everything you listed here more than this movie for me.
The creator is 🚮
@@iheartcicada It's story is a repeat of dozens of other better movies.... overrated.
@@greggibson33 you could say that about so many good movies 💀
One of the most incredible things about genuine art from an Auteur is it's impact, This film left an imprint and frustration towards systems, governments and most importantly, Personal integrity. Scorsese mentioned in WSJ article about how his protagonists are usually self-righteous, willing to commit small sins and keep persisting (fooling themselbves) on being good/decent. It's sad that few directors remain that are this committed to art.
I didn’t watch any trailers before going to the theater with my friends, so going in I thought that Leo was the good guy trying to help the tribe figure out who was responsible for the killings. Oh boy was I wrong, and oh boy did I end up still enjoying the movie. I really hope one day well get more movies that were given care like this one in theaters over all these lazily done movies we tend to see now
Martin’s problem is that there’s nobody left in Hollywood to tell him “no.” Hence, the pompous 3 1/2 hour slogs like this and “The Irishman.”
Very true, The Irishman could've been great but it really needed to trim some fat. 45 mins to an hour of that movie could've been cut and it would've been better.
All the skill has left. Nothing but sycophants and anti-visionaries.
‘Martin’s problem’ hmmmm.
Pretty sure he knows what he’s doing.
there seems to be a lot of that. Nobody told Taika 'no' and that resulted in that dog turd Thor movie.
@@BishopWalters12I think The Irishman is fucking great
Back in the mid-60s, L-O-N-G movies like Cleopatra had an intermission. I kept wondering why "Killers of the Flower Moon" didn't have an intermission until I recently read a news article that some theaters in Europe and North America had a short intermission at the mid-point. When the studio found out, they put a STOP to it. The studio argued that the movie is supposed to be watched uninterrupted.
I watched it last week and it had an intermission
Does the studio not know that people have bladders?
I mean, I still had an intermission because it's my cinema's custom. And while I get that it's probably better to not have it be interrupted, I was glad I could get out of my seat for 5 minutes after watching 2 hours worth of film. It's unhealthy to sit for too long, y'know.
Yeah apparently it was because of Thelma Schoonmaker, who was the editor for the film. She found out about the intermissions and called for theaters to play the original uninterrupted cut of the movie.
@@gregb6469 That's on you. I hard a large coke - 3 course meal, 1 choc top ice cream, and limitless popcorn (Gold Class, cost my partner and I over $160 for tickets and the dining experience). By the end of the film, we both had most of our drink left, because we know how to keep the bladder in check until after the movie, not during it.
I would definitely take an over long but beautiful movie over anything most big studios put out. It's becoming harder to find then and you really have to savor them when you get one.
I understand and probably agree that movies don't have to be so tremendously long yet I will say I'm glad to have movies like this in this day and age.
I actually got those old classic feelings of joy when I seen this trailer at the cinema. It was like the way films used to be. It got me excited to see it.
If a 206-minute movie from Martin Scorsese feels shorter than a 50-minute episode of Rings of Power, then clearly it's good.
It seems you donkeys don't seem to get the point that this is a Rings of Power piss take. A single episode of that felt way bloody longer than 206 minutes. This film isn't the best of Scorsese but as the Drinker said, the worst of Scorsese is better than anything modern filmmakers can make today.
let us know when that happens. the irishman felt like 2 days. not interested in this one at all.
Never said it was the GOAT, it's just good and no more...
Being trapped upside down in a partially submerged car next to a dead body for 206 minutes feels shorter than a 50 minute episode of Rings of Power, so that bar is pretty low.
Wait, you watched RoP?????? So you are one of ...The Nine that actually watched it.😂
Apples meet oranges.
I really do appreciate these extra long movies they give you a little more bang for your buck. What would it hurt them to throw in an intermission like old school movies used to.
I believe this movie does. I saw a review that says there was an intermission.
@@Boobalopbop Maybe at the discretion of the theater/distibutor. The showing I saw did not have one. Could have used it. Good movie, but a slow, relentless pace that just goes on an on, no matter how good the subject matter and acting, just wears at you while watching.
@@Boobalopbop Nope. No Intermission.
The problem is when I don't WANT that much "bang for my buck." Sometimes less is more.
There should have been an intermission, but frankly there should have been a different editor attached to this project entirely. That editor was a vandal. If anything the radio play at the end should have also featured in the beginning and middle if only to tie the movie back together. Hard as fuck to follow.
I see this film and his previous two epics-Silence and The Irishman-as part of the elderly Scorsese summing up all the themes and concerns his entire career has dealt with in a mature style: slower paced, long and contemplative , subtle. I think these last 3 films are as remarkable as his masterpieces as a younger man, but in a very different style, similar to the John Ford of ‘Liberty Valance’ compared to the director of ‘Stagecoach’ and ‘My Darling Clementine’ or the Kurosawa of ‘Ran’ compared to the maker of ‘Seven Samurai.’ Of course only time will tell how late Scorsese movies will be judged, but we should celebrate this giant of American cinema has gotten the chance to create these long codas to his career when so many of his peers, and many greats of the past, were dismissed as old and out of touch and no longer relevant.
🥱
Well surmised. Haven’t seen it yet, but I too have looked at his last two films in a manner similar to Kurosawa’s last big films. An aged, contemplative, deliberate auteur can be a beautiful thing.
Ran is one of the all time great films no doubt
The last half hour of The Irishman is definitely an epilogue to all of his mafia movies. It was beautiful and De Niro killed it as the old hitman who was released into the world that doesn't need him or care about him or his exploits, with all of his friends dead or in jail. The final scene of the movie is perfect.
Silence was great too as an exploration of faith and what it means to believe in something. Andrew Garfield should've been at least nominated for his role in this movie.
It seems that the main problem of directors like Scorsese, Tarantino, Nolan: they don’t have a partner that can reign their ego in & tell them to cut their movies down
It would help out a bunch
Yeah I agree. I noticed the difference in Nolan’s films when his brother was helping him out. They felt more concise and reigned in. After Jonathan left to do his own thing, Chris’s movies started to feel more bloated
Very true, I love long movies when they work but some directors get way too far up their own a@@.
It's a problem of extremes. Everyone complains about studio interference but if you let people run wild these are the kinds of films they'll make. You need someone to say no and to look at the thing objectively and say it's too long or this part is unnecessary etc.
Tarantino doesn’t have this problem. I have never seen a Tarantino film that I wanted to end. I am literally angry when they’re over.
Scorcese could have easily cut an hour from the runtime and ended up with a far better movie. That scene of the firefighting ... he lingered on that far too long. Yeah, it's a cool shot but we get the point, it's insurance fraud.
Nice video Drinker! I actually played a few background extras in the movie. And while it wasn’t a fun experience per se, it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to be in a Scorsese film.
Do you get something if it wins an Oscar? Like a certificate or something? That would be cool
@@mateo1726 I don’t think so. But to be in an Oscar winning film is something that doesn’t happen everyday. While I don’t like the Academy’s policies, it would be neat to see this film win a few awards, for fun.
Just giving you the gift of not being wrong in the future, but it's per se
@@paddington1670 Thanks for the grammar correction. Just fixed it.
Which extras were you?
I'd wouldn't mind being an extra someday.
Cost my partner and I $160AUD to see this film. Gold Class + Dining experience. Money well spent. Glad to support the cinema and the movie. Food was great. Movie was fantastic. Had arancini balls for entree, then loaded wedges for main, and sticky date pudding for desert + unlimited popcorn as desired. All while sitting back in a leather reclining chair. I don't go to the cinema much, but not because of the quality of movies, but because I'm used to the gold class life and I'm not rich.
I loved this movie. Actually found that the 3 and a half hours went by fast. The slower pace I think helped the film because it gives you time to let it sink in how crazy it all is. Makes it feel real.
Same here, Scorsese is one of few directors who can make a movie that long so quick. I only checked my watch twice, the first time I checked it I was surprised that it was already 90 minutes in the movie. And given that it took like 2 hours for the FBI to came it really felt like the audience was the Osage people since it really did took the FBI people quite long to investigate in reality
It needed some time to let you know how suffocating and desperate poor Molly must have felt.
Having read the book I thought it was great Martin brought this story to the big screen. Yeah it is super long but it didn't feel like it until other films where they were too long for their own good. I was glued every second. I suspect nominations for De Niro, Dicaprio, and especially Glastone. The rest of the supporting cast were great also.
Okay, so this was a book; the blame for how long the story is does not belong to Scorsese, in that case.
If they followed the same narrative of the book .This could have been a great mystery series as well but would have shifted to focus to white savior cliche which the director wanted to avoid.
@@har1292the book clearly sets up the BoI solving the Osage murders as a means of Hoover to save face politically. There was no white savior undertones, as culturally no one liked the Osage anyways. Hoover wanted to create the mirage of the “Rule of Law” at the federal level, nothing more.
I disagree. Every scene felt dragged out.
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.
Sometimes an important story doesn't fit into a package that is as pleasing as fiction. Telling the story how it is, can be more important, than making it properly cinematic. Life rarely fits into screen plays. Life can be anticlimactic. Life can be an unbearable movie.
That's why the book was written as investigative non-fiction... not a novel.
Thank you! Finally someone who stated the obvious. He even goes on about how he wanted to know how 'white men felt working for native Americans' and 'how native Americans handled their changing world'. I mean those are movies all on their own and not the point of the movie.
I work out Daily, The only thing It’s given me is Some Confidence when walking from the gym to my home…Nothing else.
I’ve worked out for over 2 years now, My physique still looks like Shit but I’ve been trying new Stuff out. I’ve been treated like a weak little boy and worse for so much time now that I get angry at my childhood memories. MY SUBCONSCIOUS MIND IS MESSED UP. I have social anxiety, Shyness, i feel like my skull isn’t fitting right in my skin. I get cold and chills easily. I have this problem and that problem. I get angry at my parents when they try to stop me from doing something. Especially angry at Mom because SHE JUST DOESN’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE WORLD IS LIKE and keeps yapping despite not understanding. I think of her as Estrogenic Cancer that’s holding me back. I’d say some mean and vile things to her but what’s the point? She’s just gonna cry to dad and he’s gonna scold me…It’s a annoying f-ing tactic that she’s used over and over. SHE HAS THE GALL TO TEASE ME THAT I HAVE NO FRIENDS OR A GIRLFRIEND! They just did this morning.
Sometimes I wonder what the point is. I’m the first son of my family but i’m passive, docile, weak and girly. Everyone around me has somehow emasculated me and made fun of me/insulted me that made me feel feminine. It’s LIKE A CURSE THAT WONT GO AWAY I DONT EVEN LOOK LIKE A GIRL. BRO LIKE WTF.
I’ve never had TRUE LOYAL FRIENDS, yet there are teens my age who have less that admirable qualities WHO ARE DROWNING IN REAL FRIENDS. Why couldn’t i be their friend? They are masculine, ride bikes and hangout and play sports and have fun in general. Why Was i born so girlie? Why is my sister and lil brother more manly and vigorous and daring and strong than me? WHY GOD WHY???!??!? ITS NOT FAIR! I WANT TO BE A REAL MAN! I WANT ENERGY AND VIGOR AND HIGH TESTOSTERONE AND SMARTS!
It’s all my Moms fault. That stupid woman probably ate something or did something that turned me into such a Pathetic beta. No matter what I do…no matter how much I exercise or do masculine things or take care care of myself I never have high energy permanently. I should’ve died in the Womb, I’m a worthless dickless small balled freak whose own body doesn’t love him. I have a White head on my PENIS! I have a blackhead THAT JUST WONT GO AWAY under my right nipple. I have burn marks and a condition that makes parts of my skin black NATURALLY.
WHY GOD WHY
JUST MAKE A REAL MAN OR KILL ME GOD! CURE ME GOD!
@@myselfandeye3884 Bad choice to make this a western GoodFellas. Scorsese only knows one way - He shoehorns bad guy is the good guy in every film. This book could've been a GREAT film with another director.
Well said.
Huge influence on this is the aging of Thelma Schoonmaker (legendary editer of Scorsese’s films) who has been slipping a bit over the last decade. For another example of how important editors are to “auteurs” (not deriding the term or suggesting Martin isn’t the main creative force behind the film’s he directs) is the tragic death of Sally Menke, the editor of Tarantino’s films from the beginning to Inglourious Basterds. Everything after that has been inspired and interesting but FAR too long with extraneous scenes and details that feel wrong. A good editor is an “auteur” in their own right.
This is a fair point. It’s hard for the director, so close and personal to the creation, to completely be unsentimental about the product. A proper editor trims the fat while emphasizing the flavor of the story. It’s honestly a really difficult task and the good ones deserve more credit for saving many a film from mediocrity.
Can't believe you've reviewed a film not intended for teenagers. Bravo sir.
Can't believed he liked a movie that portrayed the white men as villains, and a non white woman as a charming, funny and smart and independent female character. Because it's based on truth, it's not woke? Because if this was entirely fiction, you know Drinker would be on his tirade of this film being woke
@@vidmasterK1I begrudgingly agree. At least Nerdrotic watches every style of cinema.
This movie managed to get a 9 from IGN, meaning yeah, this move is somehow as great as Ep5 of Ahsoka.
I high bar to clear, this movie wasn’t as red and didn’t Vader as much, but yunnoh it was alright.
but how can a movie compare to the true cinema that is ahsoka?
I’m obsessed with the story of the Osage tribe because of this movie. After watching it, I wanted to know more, and UA-cam is full of documentaries that satisfied my curiosity. Scorsese hinted that he might make a movie of a previous book about the Osage tragedy called “A pipe for February “. I hope he does!
🤣
I think with it being so long, it could have worked well as a miniseries, but it is nice to have an actually decent, interesting movie in theaters.
I had the same thought. I'll buy it when it's digitally available and watch it over two sittings. I wouldn't want it as an actual miniseries though, the platforms cancel series all the time and they usually do it when the story is in full swing. Deadwood, Rome, etc.
But then it would have ended up feeling like a miniseries.
@@Scroll_LockA mini series is one season so there wouldn't be a change to cancel it
I am Indian and im so used to watching bollywood films that are 3 hours 30 mins long that this didn’t feel dragged out at all.
The epilogue was amazing send off for the movie. With the modern Osage a great way to close a very tragic story.
People brainwashed themselves into liking this movie. It was a true-crime without a mystery and a character driven drama without an arc. The trailer AND the setup of the movie led you to believe this was a different movie. It took 3 hours to realize the big payoff wasn't coming and it took the insulting 'radio show wrap up' to realize the point wasn't to tell a story, but to do another lamentating meta-commentary.
There was certainly talent and skill present here, but storytelling wasn't part of it. Where it could have been epic and moving and drove the message home with a sledgehammer, it settled for workmanlike fart-smelling. No one is rewatching this in 5 years.
Seeing something from a true FILMMAKER is such a breath of fresh air. Despite its imperfections and drawn out run time, you can tell actual emotion, effort, and talent was put into it instead of it just being an assembly line product shot on a soundstage.
I disagree, real cinema is original, not an adaptation based on pre-existing material.
It might be a bit long, but it is magnificently filmed, most of the performances are solid and the story angle is refreshing. However, I can’t explain it, I still think “The Irishman” had something extra going for it.
The Irishman had a kind of meta poignancy with Pesci and De Niro starring in almost certainly their last Scorcese mob film, playing roles that show characters at the very end of their lives.
Personally I loved it. Rewatched it again recently, and remains
@@duncanhamilton5841Goodfellas, Casino, and The Irishman felt like Scorsese's very own gangster trilogy
It did t feel long at all to me…..it felt like it was almost 3 hours
Thank you for reviewing our film. I do love your channel and appreciate your own honest review - that's all we could ask for. Not everyone will agree about the length, that's a given. I can tell you, acting in this film was an amazing experience. More amazing was to work for five months under The Master that is Scorsese. By the way, I play Vera, Molly's (Lily Gladstone's) Housekeeper.
Scorsese was so busy with the film that he forgot to hire an editor
Whats your favorite movie?
Besides the one he’s worked with the past 44 years, you mean?
it's a joke dude, relax @@booneh
@@mrstefano11 And a lazy one, Mrs. Tefano.
@@mrstefano11 It would have been a good joke if the 3x time Academy Award winner and an additional 5x Nominations (and counting) wasn't the butt of your joke. Put some respect to Thelma Schoonmaker's name.
I think you’re missing that Scoresese wanted to tell the story as truthfully as possible. So, that meant this three and a half hour extravaganza. The length didn’t bother me so much, once I got through the first half hour or so. But I’m a history buff as well , so that may be part of it. I do think they spent way too much to make this. $44mil opening weekend is brutal for that budget.
I spent hours in the theater watching a beautiful movie telling a story. I'm content with the content.
Totally agreed. I heard so many people praising the movie but honestly when I walked out of it (apart from feeling depressed because of how the story went ^^) I thought: 'This could have been an hour shorter!'
How so? As is it still left out a ton of other story lines, such as the whole FBI origin and Tom White's background. I didn't mind the length
@@rawpower12xu That's precisely the complaint: Scorsese padded the runtime with lots of unnecessary shots, long silences, pauses in conversations ... yet still managed to miss answering a lot of really obvious questions about the Osage murders.
Yes
(As someone who liked the film)
@@rawpower12xuyou can summarize what happened in the 3 1/2 hours in 3-5 minutes. It was way over my head any mystery or conspiracy, I thought it was clear in the first 20 mins what their plan was. Then it unfolded over 3 hours, through conversation and minimal action. I had a really hard time staying awake
@@zachwong1994thank God there's someone else. I usually love long movies like once upon a time in America or the godfather, once upon a time in the west..
But this one was just boring to watch. I knew what to expect after 45 min - no surprises afterwards.
Would earnestly recommend reading the book- it is a investigative documentary of sorts with a lot of surprises at the end when the whole plot gets revealed to the public at large. There are some very unexpected yet very human responses from the people of Pawhuska when they learned that one of the pillars of their community, a man of such largesse and generosity was actually responsible for the cold systematic murder of a family... it's not what you think.
what is the book called? Same name as movie?
I am about as big a Nolan stan as they come, so I was obviously hyped to see Oppenheimer. I really enjoyed it, but personally thought Killers was better. Lily Gladstone is the standout performance, though I do think it's one of DeNiro's best roles in many years. Length wise, I think Oppenheimer felt longer than this, even though it was a half hour shorter. Also, the cameo at the end really caught me off guard (though I shan't say who, just for those who haven't seen it yet).
Hehe, I said about the cameo to my 19 years younger friend who I just went to the cinema to see it with and she didn't even recognise him! 🤦♂️
Who cameo ?
@@YorgosL1the old dude who reads mollies obituary.
Oh you're so woke
@@vidmasterK1 What?
I watched Taxi Driver for the first time a few months ago and I was impressed by how deep and dark it was. I'm glad to see that Scorsese's still making great if not a little too long.
I usually watch Critical Drinker to get a good laugh, but this review is 100% on point. And before I go on, I probably have to say I'm one of the biggest Scorsese fans out there, have many books about him and saw all but maybe two of his movies on the big screen (yes, I live near Amsterdam...).
A movie can be too long. Heck, even short movies can be too long (and most of them are nowadays). A good actionmovie can have a perfect runningtime of 90 minutes, same goes for a comedy. The Godfather II was not a minute too long and had almost the same runningtime, and I watch it over and over again. Killers is beautifully shot, well acted, has an interesting and refreshing premise, and never had me thinking 'Please, make it stop'. Because it was entertaining from start to finish. But it would've been better if it was shorter (kill your darlings).
And to make more people angry: Tarantino's last three were also way too long. And Pulp Fiction wasn't.
Thank you, sir, for your honest assessment of this movie. Making movies is really tough, and Scorcese's flawed work is still better than most others' best.
Thank you for the video. Realistically, I'm not gonna sit down for 3.5 hours to watch this, so happy your breakdown is thorough
I might down sit for 2.5 hours and leave afterwards
I could sit for a 3.5 hours, I watched the Irishman and I enjoyed it on full time.
That's a shame.
3.5 hours is fine with me as long as I'm streaming it at home.
@@exodustimes4266Lol
Definitely a movie to watch at home in your free time and NOT in the theater. I mean Jesus I felt exhausted with the 2 hour 20 minute runtime for Star Wars: Attack of the Clones, but this movie is 3 hours and 26 minutes of slow paced drama! Even Titanic was only 3 hours 14 minutes!
Thanks and I suspect it will be showing on Netflix or Amazon prime eventually.
I was going to watch it in theaters, but DAMN the runtime is soul-crushing. This might have to be an at-home watch.
As I listen to you lamenting the run time of this picture, I begin to feel and understand your point, thanks to your use of the repetition of Tantoo Cardinal opening her eyes. You sir are nothing short of a goddamn genius.
I pretty much completely agree with this review, its a decent movie and there are plenty of breathtaking scenes throughout, all the actors are on point in their scenes too. Unfortunately the script is just so meh that it made the movie a bit boring. I was expecting at least a little twist and turns in the narrative, but it was so straightforward throughout. I think Scorsese really should have kept to the first draft of the script, which focused a lot more on the FBI investigation and uncovering the conspiracy, would have made for a much more interesting narrative.
I'm really curious about this movie. Stellar cast under Scorcese hits all the right keys for me
Worth reading the book by Grann, it actually focuses on a lot of the things you listed. Ernest was an accessory to Molly's story, and the Feds who helped bring Hale down.
I felt the length twice in this movie. Once about 2 hours in and I was surprised it had been that long. The last one was about an hour later thinking it was dragging. Lilly Gladstone with a masterclass. Story gave itself away too easily which made the last 30-45 minutes pretty irrelevant. Best compliment I can give it is it is a very emotional story that needs to be told and I’m glad it was made.
Also it’s not helped by poor acting by almost all native Americans in this film. I felt no charisma or emotional bond between any of them. Meant I didn’t care when they were murdered one by one.
@@tom4od leo was also terrible in this movie (he was the personification of breaking the 4th wall in this movie)
he was overacting and this was his worst performance that i can remember .
the director failed to build up the atmosphere necessary for this kind of a story and for the film that is this long .
i felt indifferent to all of the characters and i did not care what will happen to any of them (and that is a problem for a drama movie)
and it was really DRAGGING - i had to watch it in 3 parts .
It never was a mystery to begin with! Because it was so fucking obvious what was going on and the perpetrating scum were imbecile piece of shits! It's the story of America, how blatant and obvious the crime is against POC and no govt body helped for so long!
I wish Scorsese the best, hopefully someone follows in his footsteps and makes good films.
Nowadays walking to the cinema to see a 3h30 film is the only source of exercise I get
Heh, imagine if Lord of the Rings trilogy came out today for that 😂
I watched it last week and it truly felt like a documentary with actors rather than a drama. This movie would have benefitted from a tighter script and run time.
@@garygoldstein9442 They aren't showing up... $23 mil over weekend... not good.
I have to say this movie could have served better as an unconventional old west story. I really feel it could’ve been a lot more engaging and entertaining if they focused more on that aspect and told the story from an entertainment lens as opposed to it being treated more as a history documentary. There really are times throughout this film where you really just wonder. When is this thing going to end? But not because it’s bad necessarily but because it’s just so long and it really doesn’t feel like it needed to be.
Unfortunately it wasn't a documentation either. It was a weird mix
I bet that no one would say that about an overly long, repetitive, Holocaust film.
I feel it’s not really meant to be entertainment. Martin is edging towards the end of his career and wants to tell stories that have unjustly been swept under the rug. Most people, myself included, didn’t really know about this particular piece of American history before this film came out. I saw the movie in theaters over the weekend and at certain parts had to force myself to stay in my seat cause it’s just that heart wrenching.
The movie is not made for entertainment, is a history movie, real life story.
@@ernestov1777 Then make it a documentary with an appropriate length or explain the characters or dialogues a little better. I can't stand dialogues like:
"don't do it"
"oh yes I'll do it"
"no don't"
"yes I'll do"
There were a number of meaningless dialogues like this.
The long runtime is actually something I'm starting to look for in a movie from a real director these days. Maybe it's the fast pace and constant reward cycle of UA-cam etc. but I'm starting to crave that feeling of being immersed in a story and letting go of the urge to consume the next bit of media content as soon as possible. Now obviously if the movie drags on in the end and becomes an uninteresting slog, it might not work so well but I like the idea that the director hasn't been limited in what they wanted to create, unlike the executive managed hellscape of Disney movies and the like. The long runtime of Oppenheimer was a positive for me and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Hoping this delivers in similar fashion.
Believe me the movie is simply brilliant.Firing full cylinders on craft and performances.Has to win the Best Picture go watch if you haven't.
Love your reviews
You never sell out not even with legends like martin
A true reviewer
Sounds like a prime candidate for a theatrical cut and then a director's cut. Have the theatrical cut end sooner, then release the director's cut with the full 3 1/2 hour runtime.
That is the way Scorsese wanted and intended you to see it. Typically extended cuts are film cuts forced onto the director by the studios. Scorsese has enough power and influence not to have his films cut down. If you can’t handle the run time then maybe TikTok is more for you.
@@erichwagner6958 _"That is the way Scorsese wanted and intended you to see it. Typically extended cuts are film cuts forced onto the director by the studios. Scorsese has enough power and influence not to have his films cut down. If you can’t handle the run time then maybe TikTok is more for you."_
Sometimes the handling is less to do with short attention span, but that there isn't enough meaningful content to justify it. That was exactly the point Drinker too was making in his review if you happened to listen what he said (
Somewhere out there, there is a 6 hour long cut of The Phantom Menace, I kid you not.
People need to go see this because we need to be supporting directors like Scorsese.
The first time that I came across hearing about this real case, was in a movie with actor James Stewart called, "The FBI Story" by Warner Bros. made in the 1950's. One of the first cases that Stewart handles in that movie is this case, which Killers Of The Flower Moon is based on.
I got really interested in this movie after watching a brief 90 minutes short clip. Maybe i'll be watching it this weekend, if I have time.
I’m amazed how basically every time I hear one of your reviews, I agree 100%. Was trying to figure out how to put it in words, and you hit the nail on the head.
I can agree that it was pretty long, but I think Ernest was a good main character because, as an audience, we are supposed to identify with his moral ambiguity.
From the beginning, we are shown his cowardice (being a cook in the war and not being able to stand up to his uncle) and every chance he gets to be the good guy, we want him to, and even that last moment in the end when Molly asks him what he put in her insulin, we want him to tell her the truth because we want him to finally change and be that decent man and take responsibility, but he can't do it (Oscar moment) because in the end, he's still a coward.
The opening could have been a lot shorter, absolutely, but in terms of writing, cinematography, acting, and sound design, I still think it's a masterpiece.
I didn’t mind the length. I read the book, and it was a very complex conspiracy with dozens and dozens of characters. Besides, if filmmakers like Scorsese and Nolan have the freedom to make these types of films, sitting through a longer film is worth it. Better than the marvel movies and other repetitive, corporate products that are released now
`if filmmakers like Scorsese and Oppenheimer have the freedom`
Wow, didnt know Oppenheimer is alive and doing movies. Good to know.
Just kidding, I know you meant Nolan.
I think as he comes to an end of his own career this is one of the most fitting stories he could tell. The atrocities against the Osage are a mirror image of the destruction of the movie industry today that Scorsese himself has touched upon. He sees it happening all around him whilst he can do nothing. Absolute beauty. He captures that feeling for everyone who watches, I feel as we’ve all gone through some kind of pain like that. No matter who you are we all bleed red.
I'll see almost anything starring Tanto Cardinal. She brings such strength, calm, and wisdom to her characters, no matter how pissed off her characters get. Go watch Frontier, or Angelique's Isle.
So even in this movie De Niro is a Mafia-style gangster. To the extent that his body of work doesn't follow this trope exactly, he's at least a big city guy with a penchant for anger and violence.
Massively overrated actor and if you call him a piece of sh Google will delete your comment for hate speech.
I was even laughing in the cinema that even when Scorsese isn't directing mob movies,he still is directing mob movies. And I don't think De Niro is overrated, he's rated as well as he should be,he was just better when he was younger.
@@MAGAMANDeNiro at his best is without
question one of the greatest actors of all time. How often he's been at his best in recent years is another matter. His idiotic posturing politics yet again shouldn't negate his iconic performances.
@@MAGAMAN You hold that ridiculous opinion because De Niro said "fuck Trump" repeatedly and it hurt your feelings.
@@kroft6799hes not goated, he has no range... brad pitt has more range.
When you're hoping a film like this doesn't turn out to be the absolute must see, so you can skip slogging through the 180 minutes without a bad conscience...
Scorsese is a living legend and proves you can still make incredible films that are not tainted by Wokeness
I think it did a pretty good job at making it feel "real", not shying away from the awkward silences and failed attempts at sounding witty that normal people experience. To an extent it made you feel like you were there in the story. Unfortunately the story made me not want to be there :/
Same here, I really felt immersed which is rare for me. Great story but a hard watch that sticks with you.
I saw a review (I think it was in the Observer) which summed up exactly how I felt about this film. In the end, I recommend seeing it, but it's a film I respected and admired more than I actually enjoyed.
Great video, I'm so glad someone else felt the way that I did. I think I was definitely a bit more disappointed than you though. I felt misled by the trailers. For movies from directors I love (like Scorsese of course) I generally try to stay away from trailers or even introductions for what the movie is about, but for this one the trailer was unavoidable. Either way, I saw the trailer and for me it seemed like the movie was going to be a mystery thriller with a detective trying to figure out who was killing these people and...it was instead an extremely slow burn drama. I think my expectations definitely had an effect on how I viewed the movie because I was disappointed in how it turned out. Also, the entire film felt like it was leading to some climax due to all of the built up tension from the murders but then we are hit with....nothing? I mean I get what Scorsese was going for here, because in the real world there wasn't a climactic ending either (no justice for the Osage tribe, no consequences for Hale) but that just doesn't make for a satisfying film. I'm not even saying that it had to be a happy ending, but just that there could have been some way to release the tension that the bloated 3.5 hour runtime was building to. Still a beautifully shot, wonderfully acted film that exposes an interesting point in history, but I don't think I'll be rewatching this one.
Yeah, the attempted release in tension in the overall audience implication (especially if you’re White, which can come off a tad woke) and the radio show signaling that we peasants now only know of this story because of entertainment...more deflating than anything else.
I was fully engaged from the first moment to the last. The film is a sinister tragedy. There's never been anything quite like it onscreen before. Another Scorsese triumph.
Then you must not watch a lot of movies. There were a lot of movies like this one depicting human tragedies due to greed. Remember The pianist? How about Shindlers list? Or how about goddamn Oppenheimer released a couple of months ago?
Nothing meandering or documentary about this movie. The irony of a husband living in the house while killing off the entire family is the dramatic element. Nothing meandering about that. Nothing documentary about that. The reviewer here fails to address the heart of the movie: the insanity of DiCaprio's (Earnest's) position, loving his wife while killing her family. The movie is loaded with irony, mishaps, humor, and incredible performances from stars and supporting actors alike. 3.5 hours did not feel long. To be bored of DiCaprio's working for Scorcese is to miss the fact that this is one of his best performances, if not his best. The chemistry between DiCaprio and Gladstone is also the best DiCaprio has achieved, much stronger than his glamorous turns in Romeo + Juliet and Titanic. It's subtle, human and so much more believable. This movie has a few imperfection, but overall it is a masterpiece.
As you read the novel 'Killers of the Flower Moon' , you do not know who is commiting the murders. You suspect Hale and Ernest to be on the side of the Osage. Thats why this felt like a documentary - from the start of the film we know what Hale and Ernest's true intentions are, and therefore the film feels like its at least an hour too long.
That would have been a much more gripping narrative
@@derek96720a more “suspenseful” movie would go against the movies purpose
@@someguycp how so? The same information is portrayed in the end. And the suspense would help the audience emotionally connect with what the characters are feeling more. Plus the novel was written first, so I don't see the issue with doing it that way.
Try One hour too short 😂
@@derek96720 spoilers (long comment)
ok here we go:
the live radio show scene at the end of this film blew me away with how it contextualizes the purpose of the film and the creative decisions behind it. while they could’ve easily presented the information onto a few black screens, they chose to tell it in the form of a classless live radio show as a critique of not only the entertainment industry for the commercialization of other people’s suffering, but also himself for partaking in it. while one could argue that it doesn’t matter if you tell the story with a certain amount of respect (and that it’s an inherently beneficial thing that the stories are even being told), Scorsese understands that there’s always gonna be a certain amount of exploitation that comes with turning real human suffering into the advancement of one’s artistic endeavors. thats not to say that its an inherently evil thing to make art based off real suffering, but he knows that stories like this (especially in the money-driven state of our culture) aren’t always gonna be given the environment to respectfully tell the source material the way that he can. thats partly why the story is so long. this isn’t a movie made to please and entertain you (the movie tells you who is behind the murders early on), but to inform you about the osage tribe and this dark chapter in their history. he has the influence to command a theatrical release for a two hundred million dollar, three and a half hour movie based on a book documenting a part of history that most people weren’t taught. he uses the budget to not only tell this story in the most authentic way he can, but to be able to flesh out the most information that he can.
going back to the radio scene, when Scorsese himself shows up to deliver the final words of the movie, its a self-reflective moment where, nearing the end of his career, he realizes that his movies have, in part, contributed to the popularization of art based on the suffering of others. he uses the movie to first tell the story of the osage tribe, and second showcase how much effort and resources real-life stories should have to tell them in a way that isn’t completely exploitative
so yes, a more “suspenseful” narrative would’ve gone against the point of the movie. it would’ve put the focus on the entertainment value of solving the murder mystery instead of the human suffering that came from the murders. feel free to disagree. this is only my perspective and i probably fucked up on a few points that i made
also yes, the book is framed around finding who have committed the killings. it’s also told as a book, a medium which gives David Grann the environment to put as many details as he can to tell the story in a respectful way.
I haven't seen it yet though I've heard others echo that the film is unnecessarily long while a few have argued that it flew by. I suspect expectation plays a large part in this perception; 'Beau is Afraid' and 'Oppenheimer' drew similar criticisms which I was aware of before seeing them so I was able to accept their runtimes better. I think people have forgotten the tradition of big biographical epics like 'Lawrence of Arabia', or even 'Gone with the Wind', where 3 to 4 hour runtimes were par for the course and part of the experience (back when going to the movies was a night out, not just cinematic fast food).
Movies also used to have intermissions...
@@unfilthy another thing I miss about going to the movies pre-multiplex era!
Those movies were actually epic though. Being long because you don't know how to edit doesn't make a film epic.
@@JDoe-gf5oz true, but I do think that Thelma Schoonmaker knows how to edit.
@@petergivenbless900 Technically sure, but she does what Marty "No Picture Too Long" Scorsese tells her to do. Because he's old and all the boomers call movies pictures.
Exactly my thoughts. I'm from India and sitting for 3 plus hours for a film isn't anything new to us. But I was disappointed that the movie was soo long but still left a lot to be desired. There were no elements of suspense, shock, dramatic flare. It's was just "sit back and watch as we show you a hyperrealistic documentary of what happened to the Osage people" and that's pretty much it.
Editing and pacing are the two most under utilized tools needed in filmmaking. If you want an alternative to superhero sludge you need to master these concepts. Just as much as you need a creative to make a movie you also need a man willing to say no.
Thelma Schoonmaker is a legandary editor, and the pacing isn't even bad.
show me a movie with better pacing than "goodfellas"
@@ojacobsen3727 Goodfellas and Star Wars 1977 are, in my opinion, the most perfectly paced movies of all time
I have no interest in this movie and don't care about the story but I'm glad Marty is still around.
Read the book. It's brilliant.
@@leopercara3477 I'll give the book a shot.
I feel like the ending is perfect because
1 all that happening would make the movie too long
2 its great to retell true events with a true event on tv
3 the last oart of Scorsese talking represents the whole movie, the audience learning about the tragic tale of a woman who never got justice that was told by Martin Scorsese
Drinker, I would give A LOT to have you see the Eras Tour movie and then share a review of it! 😂