well, tbh theatrical films are now the longest they have ever been, and the trend stated in the 2010s thanks to Star Wars, Marvel, DC, etc, but i do prefer longer films, as long as they are worth the time invested, obviously, and no, i don't particularly care for Marvel, though, i have seen some Marvel films ofcourse, i mean seriously who hasn't at this point, unless u live off-grid as an Anarcho Primitivist lol
@@JjAnteros I doubt movies are currently the “longest they’ve ever been.” That would probably be 1955-1965. You had bible and history epics like “Ten Commandments,” “Ben Hur,” “Spartacus,” “Cleopatra,” “Greatest Story Ever Told” and “Lawrence of Arabia” all at well over 3 and, in some cases, 4 hours. Shoot, back then, even musicals clocked in at 3 hours.
I'm from Oklahoma and was forced to take Oklahoma History in high school and after seeing this, I was furious that neither the Osage Reign of Terror or the Tulsa Riots were even mentioned in class, an unbelievable disgrace.
@@bbqbros3648 that was not something taught in middleschool, if you actually did great but I honestly suspect you didnt. Especially calling it the “Tulsa thing”.
It's because you live in a red State and the Republikkklans are doing all that they can to erase history and rewrite it so that they don't look so disgusting and despicable.
De Niro is absolutely terrifying in this. Portrays a vile disgusting human and succeeds in making us despise him. One of the best of his entire career for sure
That alone is enough for me to want to watch this movie, I didn't think de niro would play a really great role again in his life lol. It seems like apart from working with Scorsese he just cared less in the past few decades
As non American never been to America , i find it very hypocrite of American liberals protesting over what is going on in the Middle East right now , when this same American liberals stole America from the native Americans
I’m not Native, and hadn’t known of this history before the last two years, but I’m glad Marty made this film. I think it’s a good film. I’ve read though that the book goes into much more detail on the Osage.
Are you guys serious...? That scene and the owl scenes were the only actually great scenes of the movie... I am very confused, cause i see almost nothing that the critics acclaim it is. And i am very used to seeing slow paced, local accuracy and historical movies, i love them. For me, Oppenheimer did a way better job.
@@ViniciusThor what??? Oppenheimer was dwarfed to this movie. The only thing that dominated Oppenheimer was close ups of Oppenheimer’s worried face with no narrative to offer the viewer any character insight. The movie often and quickly jumped from scene to scene with each scene leaving the viewer confused as to which time period is which. The characters were mono tone and boring with Matt Damon having one of the more interesting characters even though he was a very surface level character himself. The court room and interrogation scenes weren’t always easy to follow and the movie truly requires a second watch which is a shamed because I’m unwilling watch that boring 3 hour snore fest ever again.
Oppenheimer, Killers of the Flower Moon, then later Napoleon. 2023 has been a surprisingly great year for movies, and a massive breath of fresh air from the past decade of Marvel/Disney dominance. I hope these films pave the way for a return to high quality, story driven, serious historical dramas. We desperately need authenticity in a sea of corporate, manufactured, lowest common denominator seeking media. Edit: I saw Napoleon and it was mediocre. I guess I rescind this comment. I hope hollywood will be better next year.
Past Lives is another great one! The ones I’m really anticipating now are Poor Things, The Holdovers, Dream Scenario, Anatomy of a Fall, The Zone of Interest and Saltburn. People are saying good things about those. 2023 looks like it’s going to have been a great year for movies, despite some major setbacks mostly during summer …
Yeah, I'm very worried about Napoleon. Joaquins Phoenix's age really shows in the first part and I'm not sure how you can condense his whole life effectively in three hours. And Ridley Scott I just think is not the right filmaker to make it work. I'm glad we're getting a Napoleon miniseries later this or next year though. Wish we had gotten Kubrick's take @@benmorgan9748
Brandon Fraser’s performance was one of the only things that felt awkward. I think DiCaprio played the part perfectly in terms of a big, lazy, not so smart low life who gets lucky by having a powerful uncle and charming a wealthy wife. He’s pretty basic, only loves money, never wants to work for it, and he loves his wife. He’s a simpleton and he’s a loser, but he thinks he’s smarter than he is, so it was a nice change of pace seeing him being a weak character and not the smart, in control, troubled hero he normally plays.
Yeah that's what I seem to get from the movie because at the end the performance explaining the tragic events for the crowds entertainment. Also mentions how mollie passed away with no mention of the tragic incidents
@@stephenshea7909every single scene was slow and drawn out from the very beginning. One of the first scenes with Leo and De Niro meeting is a perfect example. There was no need for the scene to be that long and it turned into the opposite of gripping
@@MrJeffcoley1I felt the same. It dragged on a LOT. I feel like the whole plot wasnt too exciting. The osage never fight back, its just funeral and then another funeral scene..
@@816twiggs same for me - it capitvated me the whole way through and what an incredible performance by lily gladstone. Automatic lock for best actress.
I actually liked Brendan Frasers performance. He does a great job portraying a lawyer, and his gaslighting scene is very well executed. Almost like both concepts go hand-in-hand or something.
I found him HILARIOUS. The first thing he did in court was intentionally throw a hissyfit to have it adjourned. Such a welcome and fitting piece of comedic relief in such a tragic story
Having been moved so deeply by the film, the ending caught me by surprise. It’s a big slap in the face (in the best way possible) and a wake up call on the trivialization and consumption of true crime.
The flaw of the film was telling it from Ernest's point of view that he's the least interesting interesting of the lead characters, fairly one dimensional in his greed and stupidity.I would have preferred more time spent on mollie and the Osage community since they are the heart and of the story as well as the primary motivations behind everything that goes on in the film
I think a huge part of the film is Marty being self-aware about his limitations in telling such a story as he’s an old white man himself (I mean that fucking ending man). I think that goes well with Leo’s character being one dimensional and wholly unlikable. I totally understand your sentiment here, but I think Scorsese’s decision to really focus on the too little, too late aspect of it; and the awareness of how this story and many other like this are just boiled down to entertainment works. Feel like he was able to capture that better than a more holistic Osage experience, as that is literally impossible for him as a white person to do.
@aryavirsangwan6837 it would have added even more to the evil theme if we had spent more time with the Osage and made their plight feel even deeper with the audience
I think too that a bit more of Mollie could have been put in this film BUT I think the film is about how Hale and Ernest, sadly. Their motivation and their evilness. One thing it tried is to remove the White Savior-y elements that is often criticized for this kind of film - which is why they focused towards the aforementioned men. Sadly, the book was about the FBI Agent . Apparently, Mollie is barely in the book - and was practically focusing in how the case was solved.
I’m seeing this tomorrow, I cannot express the level of excitement I’m feeling. The fact that we get to see a brand new Martin Scorsese movie in theaters in 2023 just feels so unbelievably special. This man is probably the biggest champion of cinema alive today. So glad you loved it, makes me that much more pumped
I agree on pretty much everything. I was skeptical about its length at first, but as I was watching I understood why it is as long as it is, not only it gives scorsese all the time to tell this story like it deserves to be told, it makes it more effective because you’re soaking up this rotten and tense atmosphere and it’s terrifying. The ending was perfect. It’s definitely my favourite scorsese movie
i admired the acting of everyone the whole movie, but i distinctly remember thinking to myself so many times about how gladstonr deserved an oscar for the scene i was witnessing. it felt gritty and real, you lose yourself in it and forget that it's a movie, which is good because it's a real tragedy that hurt real people so i loved how mollies descent was slowly dragged on so we the audience, could feel that creeping feeling of distrust with her.
I felt similarly about the ending. It threw me off at first, but once I got a grasp on it found it to be brilliant. Marty has certainly been guilty of simple text crawls when he gets to the end of his films Based On A True Story. So to do what he did here instead was not only really refreshing, but as you said a great way to tackle the true crime subject matter.
I went into this movie not even reading the synopsis or knowing what the Osage Murders were. I didn't even know the movie was 3 and a half hours long that's how transfixed I was. I ended up going back and rewatching the movie twice because of how incredible it was.
SPOILERS PLEASE WATCH THE MOVIE AND DONT READ IF YOU HAVENT SEEN THE ENDING Did not think the ending would hit me in the way that it did. Not that I wasn’t sad for the whole movie cause God it’s just brutal to even think about,but when Marty showed tf up,I kinda giggled at first but when he looked at the camera and talked about Mollie,I broke down dude. I was so immersed in the movie and the story and that moment broke the line between cinema and reality and in a very short instance,it all just crushed me,especially with the scene that follows of the tribe at the end that didn’t even take up the entirety of the frame. Completely agree with you,I’m gonna be thinking about this ending for a really long time
Felt exactly the same. The movie is rough at parts and it tells a really sad story. But it was that final part of the epilogue gave really struck me. Couldn't say a word when the credit rolled. Goosebumps from the moment Martin started talking. It felt really honest.
The last half of Oppenheimer does feel slower but it gets better after multiple viewings. I find every minute of it riveting and actually wish it was a bit longer.
For what reason when most of the movie she was sick and in bed damn there immobile. There wouldn’t be much to tell from her perspective. We definitely do need a story told from the side of the indigenous people during these time. Just this story wouldn’t have worked being told that way.
She IS the main character. The story is about the betrayal of her love and trust. SHE is the one who sends for the FBI, etc. She is the one asking what was in those injections at the end.
@@apollocobain8363 They are talking about screen time not "the importance of their actions to the plot. We needed more of her perspective. A filmmaker could show a side character for 5 seconds and they encapsulate the theme and dramatically change the story at the same time, doesn't mean we "explored" that character as much as others. That difference impacts the story.
I actually really liked the kind of self-aware ending, that it works a lot, especially with the people in that sequence. I love the last sequence between Ernest and Molly, Molly's emotions were palpable it was insane. Leo actually does do some intense overacting, but his performance was very reminiscent of Wolf for me.
Just saw it twice in 24 hours. Once on a standard screening and once in Dolby Cinema. I liked the smaller screen for this film and I felt the length was perfect. If it had an intermission, I would of sat for another 3 hrs. Its a great film ,it really sticks with you.
I literally watch the video, pause when you talk about the ending, then walk to theater, and now I'm back. I did not understand the significance of the ending until your discussion. It makes an already depressing movie even more devastating. Not only did the Osage got their land stolen, but even their narrative. Martie appearance only hits the point all the more. What a legend.
Not a bad thing but for me it was the complete opposite, both amazing movies with strengths and weaknesses, but KOTFL felt very slow in comparison to Oppenheimer
Both movies have strong enough 3rd acts to carry when the movie feels long but I definitely felt Killers length more because when Oppenheimer hits that final part it shift a lot more and almost feels like you started something new, although with Oppenheimer I knew it was that long well on advance, with Flower Moon I found out at the theater, I think the difference in preparation definitely changed things
It was about 3 years ago that I tried going to the cinema alone, and it is such a good experience. I was surprised tbh.. Because it is so cliché to go together to see a movie. But now I actually prefer to get stoned and go to the cinema alone.
I’ve listened to the audio book ab a week before I saw it yesterday and the ending is actually mentioned in the book quite a few times as they say that once the killings settled down they started doing exactly what occurred at the end of the film.
After seeing this, i think this is a movie everyone should try to go out and see in theaters. despite the run time, I honestly felt like it flew by and kept me engaged for its entirety. much shorter movies drag on more imo. Ive learned so much and researched even more after seeing it bc the sad truth is that this is an important part of history that is not really taught in classrooms. happy this was made
Amazing film. What a story put together so incredibly well to the big screen by Martin Scorsese. I do feel the last hour or so was a little slow for me and felt a tiny bit dragged out and the initial falling in love of the two character of Mollie and Ernest felt a tiny bit rushed but those are my only complaints of the movie. Amazing performances all around, gorgeous cinematography, a disturbing story that’s told and put together incredibly well. Highly recommend.
This was the hardest watch of my life, the end gutted me, I love how the trailers were used against me, I unknowingly was wanting a white savior movie which exposed my internalized racism as a black man, I can’t express how this movie is burned in my brain
I went and saw this today in IMAX. It's not the kind of film which I was enormously enthusiastic about while watching it but then after the ending I could appreciate the whole thing for what it was. This film feels special in a way very few films do. This is proper cinema. Would pick this over Oppenheimer for the Best Picture. Also, Lily Gladstone - wow! When you said 'If the movie is good the ending should feel like when the actual movie starts' I could not agree more. It took me a bit by surprise and I too was very affected by it and haven't been able to stop thinking about it either. This is a gem that is better than people may first realise and has high rewatch value as a result - although I may wait a while to do that given the runtime!
i think the beginning montage where the native americans are being a gunned down was so scary cuz its using the same scorsese-esque montage of people getting cleanly assassinated, but unlike his other movies here the victims are completely innocent, kind of like how irishman aped some of the style of goodfellas but in a completely different context
You and I had so many similar thoughts, I felt the exact same way about Leo's and Lilys acting, and I also loved the very first and very end scenes of the film. I thought I was going to cringe at the end, but it was great, however the beginning of the film having the men dance in oil was perfection to me
Haha our audience was laughing the whole time Brendan was on screen. It just stood out so much compared to everyone else's performance and the tone of the film
The ending (imo) feels like the ending of No Country for Old Men, but with a climax. But also, the absence of climax in No Country is kind of the point of the movie. Which is why I found the ending of Killers a bit of a let down.
I think this movies ending works better with a climax and resolution to the story of the Osage. Closure is a point of this movie. It is the essence of what the movie is trying to be.
This movie seemed like a slam dunk as a long time fan of this dudes work. Can’t wait to see it. I dropped a big penny on a 75 inch wall mount smart tv with a sound bar set up with a subwoofer totaling out around 2600 😂 I built my dream set up for movies like this
I really had an issue with how oblivious the Osage were. This wouldn't have been that big of a deal had Hale not preface the people as a "very wise group that doesn't speak much" group at the beginning of the movie.
Can’t wait to see it. Scorsese is a true master of cinema and I’ve long adored his filmmaking style. The editing, cinematography etc. Just how his films look and m feel are unlike anyone else. Any new films we get from him at this late stage of his career are a blessing and must be totally cherished before he is gone.
I just watched this movie in the theater. Scorsese could have cut an hour from the runtime and ended up with a better movie. It drags for about the first two and a half hours but then picks up pretty well in the last hour and a half.
I did feel like Leo was being “Leo” for this role so if he gets an Oscar for THIS, it will be much like when Jamie Lee Curtis won it last year. Lily & De Niro are the lay ups here, not Leo with an accent lol
Agree, we all know that Leo is one of the best actors of our generation, but I'm gonna be mad if this year's Oscar is not for Cilian or Joaquin Phoenix.
my only gripe with the movie was that they showed how Mollie was being poisoned. Now imagine if they didn’t explicitly show it…that ending scene would’ve hit a lot harder imo
I am usually the world's biggest long film defender, however I do genuinely think this film was just too long. Really, I think is is partially because the middle hour fell flat with cinematography. It opens amazingly, it closes brilliantly. But the middle section just doesn't fly by OR draw me in. Looking forward to my second viewing, but won't be jumping for a third.
If I say it was a little slow for me, I’m going to feel as an uncultured person who doesn’t appreciate good cinema and needs the constant stimulation that modern movies like Marvel provide. That being said, it felt a little slow to me.
I enjoyed the story but I felt like without a proper narrator, this film lacked the psychological breakdown that makes films like Goodfellas and The Irishman work. Like some of the decisions that Ernest made needed more context to them. I agree Leo is good but the other two stand out way more.
@@dustinbarton2337 since writing this review i rewatched this movie twice and I completely changed my opinion on the film. I think it’s up there as one of Scorsese’s best
Performances from Cara Jade Myers (Anna), William Belleau (Henry Roan) and especially the non-actor Osage like Everett Waller (Paul Red Eagle) were particularly outstanding.
@@dkelly26666 Hell yeah, and a hunk. I'm straight as a arrow but that man maybe one of the most attractive men in America. He's also a really funny standup comedian, check him out if you haven't.
@@dkelly26666 The son of Russell Means! I didn't make that connection until now. He was great in the movie; subtle but still had a presence that stood out from the crowd.
1:56 wait wait wait wait wait, "check your phone"? Don't tell me. No. You wouldn't. Commit the cardinal sin of not turning your phone off and checking it during the movie, no, surely there must be a reasonable explanation for this, no this can't be.
Personally I felt the pacing was awful 🤷♂️ It only begun picking up steam for me once Jesse Plemons character showed up but even that quickly dwindled De Niro was a highlight, loved the setting I don’t think this movie would be getting such high praise if Scorsese wasn’t attached Movie was forgettable and found dialogue way too exposition-y and/or drawn out I feel like the ‘movie’ would have worked better if it had a greater mystery element, I don’t really care if that isn’t meant to be “the point” of the story that was being told. If anything the story would have worked better as a limited series and I probably would have enjoyed it more if it was longer but broken up into chunks “It insists upon itself”
I feel like I’m the only person who absolutely didn’t enjoy this movie. At first I felt there must be something wrong with me. But I realize it’s the world these days, and the quality of movies that all of you are used to that is wrong.
My experience when watching the film. It keeps unfolding and as it begins to take shape, so many little side incidents and characters are introduced. Even though it takes place in a small town, the settings are always changing, new characters keep appearing, and it feels gradual instead of overwhelming (my major complaint about Oppenheimer was that it packs too much without giving us time to breathe). There is nothing slow or tedious. There’s a looming tension that gradually builds. There are horrifically violent aspects of the film as well as unexpected moments that are comedic without being silly. Scorsese knows how to slowly pull you in, hit you with an unexpected “wtf was that!?!” scene, slow things down and take you on a left turn so masterfully that I was more than happy to go on this ride. I liked The Irishman but I didn’t love it. I respected its craft and there were some great scenes, but overall, it just didn’t land. This one did. It seems like he fine tuned what he was aiming for and just knocked it out of the park. Because it’s so engaging, because it’s simmering with an uncanny quality that nobody is to be trusted and that anyone is expendable, it reminded me of that feeling after the Lufthansa heist in Goodfellas where everything begins to crumble and you’re not sure how it’s going to play out but you know it’s not going to end well. This was superior filmmaking from the tone, the cast, the supporting players, the little breadcrumbs sprinkled throughout the film, and the music. Amsterdam, the David O Russell film from last year felt like an ambitious project that was fine, it here, you see a similar ambitious period piece and it feels more confident and more finely tuned. I also liked that it was a more elegant, more subdued version of Scorsese that feels more lingering as opposed to his usually kinetic style (obviously, he’s been able to make these kind of movies before, but they tend to be overlooked by his faster paced crime films). This was so good it reminded of watching There Will Be Blood and feeling like a new way to tell a story set in that time period was presented to us and it was excellent.
I heard so much about Fraser before the movie that I was surprised when I got to his scene. Big man goes big for a few seconds, it didn't feel out of place in that context. Lawyers can be extremely theatrical.
Ernest was the best person to center the movie on because he’s the only character that’s even close to being lukewarm in his reasonings. He was an idiot, he was full blown stupid and seemingly was convinced by his blood family that what he was doing was somehow good. It played to the concept that these “halfbreeds” don’t deserve their money and somehow he was doing what was needed for the good of “his people” while also still protecting the woman he loved. He was so blinded by “being a soldier” that he just never really questioned the things he was doing enough to make a choice to stop. You feel bad for him in a pathetic way and just think “what a sad fucking sack of shit. Fuck that guy.”
I love Leo, but he was miscast on this one. Sam Rockwell would have been FANTASTIC on that role! That said, Lily Gladstone is OUTSTANDING! OSCAR nomination for sure!
I COMPLETELY agree about Leo. It was fine but nothing more. I’m not sure if it’s more due to way the character was written or the performance itself (I plan to rewatch it), but I wish Ernest wrestled more with what he was doing. I get that he’s supposed to be this idiot who blindly follows his uncle but it felt like a bit of a caricature by the end.
@@steven4217Yeah, exactly. It’s hard for me to distinguish whether it was Leo’s acting or Scorsese’s direction, but either way, I wish there was a little more nuance to show that he was capable of critical thought.
@@benmorgan9748 I think there should have been more internal conflict between Ernest and his Uncle. I found it problematic that Ernest, without question or compromise, just allowed himself to be involved in the murders and scams without questioning or picking a fight with his uncle about it. I would have liked to see Ernest’s back against the wall in regards to staying moral yet wanting riches. Ernest was just too gullible and easily manipulated in this film when it would have been entertaining with the audience to see Ernest come to his moral senses at least once or twice throughout the film
When you get to the point and realise that Bil Smith is disgusted at Ernest for the low life he is and how he recognizes that his presence is destroying the life of his 1st and 2nd wife it really made me rethink my bias from the start. His ending also is painful, yelling, hurting and cursing those who killed them.
This is one of the movies of this year that I'm most hyped for apart from Zone of Interest, Sanctuary and May December, so I'm really hoping it will turn out amazing.
I’ve never seen a Scorsese film in theaters. This will be my first. I just bought my ticket to go on Tuesday. I’m so very looking forward to this movie 🎉
I didnt like it. I was super excited to see it, loved the trailers. But for me, who was not born on the US and have no context about the crime they commited against the native people in their history, It didnt feel as heavy as it should. Regardless, I felt like the plot was too repetitive, and it never gave a chance for the osage to fight back, maybe because it was based on true facts, but it was just boring seeing a massacre + funeral happening for 3 hours. The victims were never close to the truth until the very end, and at the end, they didnt even get a propper revenge scene with the villains, not talking about violence, but there wasnt even a good line delivery at the end, from them.
Scorsese has never disappointed me. I've seen all his films and if he wants me to sit down for 24 hours and watch a film, I'll do it out of respect. !!! BOOM !!!
I don't know if you would be open to watch a movie in Assamese (a language spoken in North East India), but a great recommendation would be the movie 'Aamis or The Ravening'. The movie is a romance and please do not read about the movie before watching it. A must watch. Btw love your videos!
Great review, i echo your opinion on Leo being the weakest of the main actors, I often feel like Di Caprio is a fairly limited actor who is elevated by the screenplay/director and those around him. He does well in the movie but a big part of it is due to how well supported he is.
Yea man.. I felt the same about Oppenheimer... By the end checked my clock once or twice... But if I'm into the movie.. I mean I can live in there. All day. Going to see this one tomorrow morning. Your review perked me up a bit.. a few other reviews were a little more mixed.
I honestly did not like the ending. I really feel like it killed the tension and completely glossed over the divorce. If the romance and the conflict in it is the focus of your movie, I feel like you need to give the breakup proper focus
When you're Scorsese and you shoot for "masterpiece" every time and you repeatedly turn your nose up at Marvel movies, and all of your fans blindly declare every film you make a masterpiece, then yes, these are the options for this film. It comes with the territory when you're Scorsese, Spielberg, Nolan, Tarantino, and Boll.
@@ryanhopkins5239 as my response was harshly sarcastic, I think you actually mean to say you fully AGREE with me, lol. Yes. all movies are subjective, and each viewers subjective response to a film will be subjectively different based on a host of individual factors. I support any opinion of a film so long as it starts off with "My opinion of the film is...." as opposed to "This film definitively IS xyx."
My criticism for it is that it follows the same rhythm Scorsese goes for in all his crime movies. The introduction to the world , the rise , the ruler of everything, things falling apart, the end with separated families and strained relationships.
Excellent review! I totally agree. I dozed off watching Oppenheimer but I was captivated watching Killers of the flower moon. The story needed to be told the way it was!
Just saw this. Incredible but dense, and at times, triggering. Nice homage to The Untouchables in that DeNiro scene. (If you know, you know) The ending helped pull me back into reality. Creativity at its finest. 😊
By chance I read the HIGHLY recommended book upon release 2017. Movie is well done but the subject matter worthy of a Ken Burns-type 8 hour documentary. Get to your local library asap!
A good story does not make a good film! Had a lot of potential but there was no need for this to be a 3 1/2 hour movie. Every scene was drawn out and it felt like the ending would never come. This would be a decent movie to watch at home but I wouldn’t suggest torturing yourself in a movie theatre for this long
I think I must have seen some spoilers because the ending didn't quite work for me, in terms of the true crime radio bit. However I did love the final scene panning out on the pow wow
I can understand not liking it but I don’t see how it could be considered a mess, it doesn’t seem like at any point the film was unclear in what it was getting at or what was happening
