Released to theaters on October 19th, Martin Scorcese’s Killers of the Flower Moon follows members of the Osage Native American tribe as they die off under mysterious circumstances in 1920’s Oklahoma. After 2016’s Silence and 2019’s The Irishman, I was a bit hesitant to step into Scorcese’s new film. Both Silence and The Irishman were extremely plodding, filled with scenes of extended, subdued dialogue. It’s no secret that his films have gotten slower and more reflective. I feel that this comes in part because of Scorcese’s recent public interest in the styles of Japanese cinema. Japanese cinema is historically slow, filled with reflection and the in’s and outs of life. This can be a great thing, I’m just not certain it works for me within a Scorcese crime drama. Although I think his recent films have become slower and less exciting in general. I think that they’ve also gotten more mature in a sense. It’s just not all that particularly exciting.

The film stars Leonardo Dicapro, Robert De Niro, and Lily Gladstone all giving powerful performances. De Niro really shines here in one of the most intimidating performances of his long career. This is impressive given his considerable age, but the performance really achieves a unique level of intimidating. He plays a snake in the grass, jolly and friendly on the outside, but also capable of the unspeakable, without remorse or shame. Dicaprio threads the needle between irredeemable thug and “loving” husband. Gladstone has gotten the most praise leading up to the film’s release and she really does shine here. She acts as the moral center of the film. Her performance is so effective that we forgive some of the character’s willful ignorance throughout the film. We don’t need to forgive her because she makes us understand her so deeply.

This is a beast of a film that covers a lot of historical ground. It feels truly epic in that sense, but also suffers from some of the same pitfalls that other recent historical epics such as Oppenheimer have fallen into. The movie is seemingly focused so much on historical accuracy that it is often lacking in moments that truly feel cinematic. Like Oppenheimer the film can’t seemingly find a way to avoid the extremely cliche third act courtroom sequence. Yes, this feels necessary to tell the story in a historically accurate way, but it also just feels like one of many examples where accuracy is favored over cinematic thrill. I suppose it’s a fine line to walk, and I understand the desire to not want to sensationalize this story, but I strongly feel cinematic entertainment should be a primary goal with any film, especially if you’re asking the audience to sit for 3+ hours. Though if Scorcese’s goal was to sensationalize this story as little as possible, I feel he succeeded, but at the expense of the cinematic thrills of films such as Goodfellas, Raging Bull, After Hours, The Wolf of Wall Street, or even something like The Aviator. 

I also feel as if the film’s editing is a bit all over the place in the front half of the film. Some viewers may feel that this keeps the story fresh and interesting, but I couldn’t help but wonder if the story would breathe more easily under a traditional editing style. For example, a murder would occur and then we would flash back an hour later to actually see how it went down. The thing is, this didn’t feel like it achieved anything in a storytelling or thematic sense, making me almost sure that the scene would’ve held significantly more tension if we didn’t already know how it played out.Overall, like Oppenheimer earlier this year, Killers of the Flower Moon succeeds in almost every technical sense, but I can’t help but wonder if this movie would be better served if Scorcese truly did have more people keeping his creative choices in check. I hate to say it, but this is his third film in a row that I’ve felt is slightly self-indulgent. Although I don’t feel as if he’s lost his edge, I do feel as if his personal film interests have trumped making the most entertaining film possible. It feels like Scorsese is more concerned with entertaining himself as opposed to entertaining a wide audience. B