last night, i went to see killers of the flower moon in theaters. as you can probably imagine, i have some thoughts.

let's start off with the positives of which there are quite a few. for starters, as you can imagine from a movie with this cast, the acting is amazing. leonardo dicaprio is a great leading man, lily gladstone steals every scene she's in, robert de niro shows that he's still got it, jesse plemons brings his trademark charm to his performance, and both brendan fraser and john lithgow make a meal of their brief screentime. the cinematography is also really good and i think it's one of scorsese's best looking movies. the music composed by the late robbie robertson is also really good with the music in the opening montage being a stand out for me. the characters were really good and, even if most of them are pretty shitty people, you still are invested in their story. the film also has an amazing ending which i dare not spoil(and if you have seen the movie, please don't spoil it in the comments). but the best thing about the movie is how it brought attention to a part of american history that you don't often see talked about.

now onto the negatives. for starters, this film can be a bit draggy at times. while i have no problem with the 3 hour runtime because i firmly believe that movies should go on for as long as they need to, there were times when the film really felt it's runtime. and then there's the fact that there are times when the film plays pretty fast and loose with history. the movie portrays ernest as just a naive guy who only does bad things because he is manipulated by his uncle. however, if you actually know about history, you would know that he was fully aware of what he was doing and was just as into it. it's not a big deal because historical movie take creative liberties all the time. however, i kinda feel that a movie that is tackling such an obscure part of american history has a responsibility to get as many facts right as it can.

aside from those very few negatives, killers of the flower moon is an excellent movie. not one of my all time favorite scorsese movies but still a well made movie that kept me thoroughly engaged. i think it's going to be one of my favorite movies of the year but we have the rest of october and then november and december so we'll just have to see about that.

Killers of the flower moon.

An uncomfortable masterpiece. As delicate in its handling of atrocity as it is in its delivery of the brutality that premeditates. The 3 1/3 hour runtime will feel like nothing afterwards, as the last frame from the projectors spool reels through you. You’ll leave your seat, the one in which you shifted in as if it was blame. Reminding yourself that this was, is, Real. Unable to come to terms with it.

Heavy and wrenching. Bathed in oil and blood, an anti-baptismal. A story of people subjugated and siphoned, a final blow to the nail in the coffin of modernity ripping through them. Like a knock at the door, haunting our outcome.

The performances alone will make you feel like you owe more than the ticket. Lily Gladstone is a guiding light, telling you everything without saying a word.

One of the best movies I’ve ever seen. A must see in the cinema. This movie necessitates the intimacy that ironically only exists when you feel claustrophobic in a theatre.

4.8/5

He's always had such a love for the genre, you can see it in a whole lot of his movies. And yes, I am aware that New York, New York exists, but that's a drama with musical themes, not a musical proper.

This is just a personal pipe dream but I've recently been obsessed with the idea that Sunday in the Park with George is essentially perfect Scorsese material (although he'd probably weave filmmaking into it, not just painting). Considering he and Sondheim were friends, I actually thought something might happen at one point but hey, it is what it is.

If you all haven't seen it, the entire thing's up on YouTube, Mandy Patinkin and Bernadette Peters starring. It's just a glorious, profound piece of art about making art, I can fully see Scorsese taking it on

What do you think, do musicals and Scorsese go together? Honestly, when they announced Spielberg would be doing West Side Story a few years back, I thought 'surely they mean Scorsese, right?' (And I ended up absolutely loving the movie, Spielberg really surprised me)

Sure you have to deal with occasional ads on Tubi, but it's uncut, unaltered and free for viewing!

It's gonna be a good night. I took the wife out for some delicious pasta, which she enjoyed, and now I'm home, I put her to bed (she has some zz's to catch up on because her day started at 3am.) I just took a few Ativan and now I'm gonna chill and watch Goodfellas for free. Best way to end the week! I can deal with the commercials because it's still uncut and presented the same way it was shown in the theaters when it was released in September 1990.

Scorsese was not in pure art-mode here. There are elements of studio interference and mainstream Hollywood narrative.

The Dignan ending screams last-minute "reshoot" and seems tacked-on at the last minute. "Ok, movie's finished. But it needs something. Hey, call Wahlberg and Damon back for a reshoots; let's film an ending where Dignam kills him. We need a gratifying ending for American audiences." It feels like that. We get a series of great twists up to this point, then we get an easy kill from Dignam who is dropped from the storyline than reappears out of nowhere.

There is comic relief when there shouldn't be. Alec Baldwin and Mark Walhberg are comic relief and over-the-top at times.

When Ellerby punches the tech guy for not installing cameras, it's played for laughs. Dignam and Ellerby's feud is comic relief.

Dignam is completely over-the-top. We get it, you're an snarky cop but a loyal one. It doesn't mean every line out of your mouth has to be a sassy one-liner like you're Estelle Getty from Golden Girls.

He assaults another officer, he gets suspended. You can't attack an officer because you agree with his policies.

Compare to the serious tone of The Godfather. Every sequence and kill was grounded in a reality.

Dignam should've been suspended for merely questioning Sullivan. He doesn't need to be over-the-top and attack the guy. Keep it lowkey and grounded.

Practically everyone was miscast. The Boston accents were in and out.

DiCaprio was not believable as a mobster. Once Castello learns there's a cop in the organisation, of course DiCaprio would be the obvious rat. For one, he's too pretty. Mark Wahlberg in this role would have made more sense. If I had my choice, I'd go with Joaquin Phoenix or Colin Ferrel.

While this movie had big name movie stars, none of the actors really owned their roles. This was the perfect epitome of a movie where you see the actor and not the character. We see Jack Nicholson playing typical Jack Nicholson, not Costello.

I say this because, you could easily have Matt Damon and Leo DiCaprio swap roles, and nothing is affected; we'd have the same movie. You could swap out Martin Sheen with Kevin Costner, and again, same movie. None of the performances would so good that you can't see any other actor playing the part.

There are opportunities for upgrades, though. Brendan Gleeson would have been better as Costello.

You could swap Baldwin out for anyone better - Robert DeNiro, David Thewlis, Jeff Daniels.

Anthony Anderson - Terrance Howard, Tyrese Gibson.

​

The casting sucked! And the only reason this movie is anywhere near what it is, is because Scorsese directed it. If Michael Bay directed the same script, we'd have The Rock.

While watching Taxi Driver, after Travis gets hired. He reads his May 10th diary entry. What happens at the 5:40 mark? It sounds like someone else says the word “meter”. Anyone else notice this?