Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 15 of 20

baraka92's avatar


Where to start?! Greed, guilt, remourse, judgement, misoginy, race, spirituality, tradition. This is a dark and ugly story that doesn't end well, and worse it's forgotten. Scorsese, literally, comments on the way stories are told and consumed in the brilliant closing scene. Edit: Seriously! He doesn't break the fourth wall, he does something beyond that. A masterful way of exploiting the form to send a message. Some Godard or Welles level stuff.

DiCaprio's Ernest feels close to The Irishman's Frank Sheeran. A simpleton man, destined to ruin the only meaningful relationship in his life by his own hand for the sake of other people; and near the end, when he's trying to "fix things" and save his soul, it's too late.
BTW, Lily Gladstone was born to be in movies. She has "one of those faces".

Scorsese, of course has explored similar themes and characters but at 80 he keeps mixing them with fresh elements to his style. There are echoes of Gaslight, Days of Heaven, Pontecorvo and Gavras.

On the downside, I do think that out of his long movies this is the one that overstays its welcome the most. I could see at least 40 minutes cut without losing much, specially in the first half (after 2 hours I thought to myself "are Jesse Plemons and Brendan Fraser even in this thing?"). And, honestly, de Niro is good but I believe there were better actors suited for his two-faced role.

Not an S-tier but quite close. Forget it; I think it might be.

Add the hellish Dark Was the Night, Cold Was the Ground sequence to the hall of fame of Scorsese's music moments.
9 months ago
K.'s avatar


I'm kind of shocked at the level of criticism I'm seeing the film receive online. It appears to be the new "film I love to hate!" It looks to me like it's become the unfortunate victim of Scorsese's stupidly infamous "Marvel comments". If you look for instance, at the user reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, this is the only film reviewed by many of those who gave it a negative rating.

I'm going to catch flak for this, but so be it. There are people criticizing the film for being "too long" and "repetitive". However, people seem to never tire of gazing at their social media wall or watching the most meaningless videos on YouTube or TikTok. You don't hear people calling TV shows that run for 5 or more seasons "too long" or "repetitive", even after they've binge-watched a whole season of very "repetitive" content. But when a film like Killers of the Flower Moon has a runtime of 206 minutes, there are people who start losing their minds and lash out against it.

Edit 12/9/2023: And I am not saying that "social media" is to blame as one comment states. I am calling out the hypocrisy of people who call a 3-hour film "too long", but never say the same about TV shows or sports broadcasts, and fail to consider that many people spend more time each day on "social media" than they would watching this film. If you don't like the film, that's fine. But before worrying about Killers of the Flower Moon being "too long" and "repetitive", maybe stop and think about how many things we do in life that are much more deserving of that criticism.
8 months 2 weeks ago
CodeV's avatar


A depressive story about Osage Indian murders. Shows what money can do to people and how this affectes everyone around us. Acting is great, but overall it was too long experience into this darkness.
9 months ago
NevertrustGoogle's avatar


While the film presents itself as partly a tale of the osage tribe, partly a film of the crimes committed by the whites, it's really a film about capitalism. Capitalism is the root cause of all the troubles and wrong doings committed in this film. spoiler. Overall, a great film, though it did overstay it's welcome. Could have been at least 45 minutes shorter.
8 months 4 weeks ago
Camille Deadpan's avatar

Camille Deadpan

Lily Gladstone stole every scene she was in. What presence.
2 months 3 weeks ago
greenhorg's avatar


I don't believe 3.5 hours is "too long" it is simply too long for a movie. The beauty of the mini-series is it divides stories into chapters, much like a book, which gives more satisfying structure and an ability to nest leitmotifs (regardless if you binge or not, it changes the perception of time). This should have been longer and a series would have allowed us to focus more on individual charters, in particular Molly, instead of forcing me to ride alongside the dull simpleton Ernest for three straight hours. Not someone I enjoyed sympathizing with for that duration.... sorry Marty, the story just needed to be told differently and told better.
5 months 3 weeks ago
monclivie's avatar


Not really boring but I didn't find a single character to like, or to care about, and that's a bigger problem than any runtime. Those Indians were apparently too dumb to live. It was like watching a true crime slasher turning into a courtroom drama with The Whale cameo.
5 months 4 weeks ago
mysteryfan's avatar


I have given a lot of negative comments on this website for most of the movies

I have been fast forwarding most movies recently, even the Oscar nominated ones

This movie is 3.5 hours long, why I didn't fast forward it? It really surprises me.

And it shows that it's not me, it was those movies, they were shitty.

Rated this 8/10 on IMDb
4 months ago
Earring72's avatar


Powerfull drama. DiCaprio en Niro are in topform, but their are no faults in the cast. Movie is overlong by at least an hour but it's never boring.

Shocking real life crime drama. Really enjoyed it
8 months 1 week ago
JG94's avatar


8 months 3 weeks ago
boulderman's avatar


No one in the screening went to the loo (usually some go in 90min films!)

Didn't feel too too long and the beats were fine, no scene felt unwanted.

Nice pace and score

Simple plot and a bizarre protagonist/antagonist which was a pity

I'd give it 7/10 at most, not great

Acting was fine, Leo was Leo
8 months 3 weeks ago
Gordon_Gekko's avatar


No Scorsese without a great long shot :)
8 months 4 weeks ago
Caerus's avatar


Good, not great.

The story is harrowing (I've read the book) but I wasn't a huge fan of how the movie presented it.

From a narrative standpoint, I really wish it had been presented purely as a mystery from the Osage perspective. It was hard to stay invested when at every point you're aware of exactly what is happening with both sides.

It simultaneously needed more and less. More background on the headrights structure would have helped a lot, and other than a few statements here and there it really undersells the scale of the bloodshed.

Important story and am glad its getting more attention, but I wasn't a massive fan of how the movie told it.

It's a fine movie, but in the context of Best Picture nominees its somewhere around 5 or 6 for me.
4 months 2 weeks ago
chunkylefunga's avatar


Could have easily cut out an hour of material, definitely drags on too long in parts.

Overall though it's an interesting movie, sadly highlight how racist America was and still is.
6 months 3 weeks ago
shakha's avatar


@K. Look, I don't want to start a fight, I'm sure you're a perfectly decent person, but Jesus Christ, am I sick and tired of the "social media is the reason people don't like what I like" argument! For someone who is espousing a "don't be closed-minded" position, this suggestion that difference of opinions comes from the latest (but not quite the latest) new thing reeks of old man yells at cloud sensibilities. It was dumb when Ridley Scott used it to explain why his movie bombed and it's dumb now.
8 months ago

Showing items 1 – 15 of 20

View comments