Killers of the Flower Moon
Killers of the Flower Moon has cinema “gravitas” in its DNA. The Director is Martin Scorsese, the 81 year old Dean of American moviemakers. The budget was 200 million dollars. It features Hollywood Hall of Famers Robert DeNiro and Leonardo DiCaprio. It is based on a non fiction best selling book written by David Grann. It has already been named Best Film of 2023 by the National Board of Review; a Top Ten movie of 2023 by the American Film Institute; 10 Academy Award nominations; 9 BAFTA nominations and 7 Golden Globe nominations. It has been cited for excellence in Direction, Acting, Editing, Cinematography and Musical Score. The experts and insiders are telling us the movie is a “Home Run". Are they correct?
Well, the movie is ambitious. It is gorgeous on screen-shot expertly in Osage and Washington Counties, Oklahoma. It is very long-3 hours and 30 minutes. It is timely- a white power structure treating minorities and indigenous communities with impunity is a current cultural favourite. I recommend you see the movie- it is worth the time commitment although ultimately flawed. It is not a “Great” Scorsese movie. It is a good movie that presents an important historical moment. Unfortunately, it requires substantial viewer patience. It is tedious at times (looking at your watch level) and ultimately exhausting. 3 stars- I could have opted for three and a half stars to match the movie’s running time, but I could not get there in good faith.
Before drilling down on the movie, let’s talk Scorsese. He is an ultra-talented Director. Five of his movies have been inducted into the National Film Registry by the Library of Congress. He has received every conceivable international honour. I make a special effort to view his films. My appreciation of his efforts have varied widely. I LOVED Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, The Aviator and The Departed. I respected and enjoyed (with some qualms) Shutter Island, The Wolf of Wall Street, The Color of Money, Casino and The Irishman. Killer of the Flower Moon falls comfortably into this category. I HATED New York/New York, The Last Temptation of Christ, The Gangs of New York, Kundun and The Age of Innocence. These movies were bloated, histrionic, boring, confusing and egomaniacal- match the description with the particular movie in your free time. He is an all time great but not all of the risks he takes or the choices he makes come up winners.
The movie is a strange, but sadly true story. It is set in Oklahoma from 1920 to 1926. First idiosyncratic observation- the Tulsa Race massacre was in 1921 so it is fair to say white supremacy was thriving in 1920s Oklahoma. The native Indians don’t fare much better than the Tulsa blacks here. The federal government has moved the Osage Tribe to a desolate and dusty reservation. Much to the surprise of all concerned, the reservation sits on huge oil deposits. Oil is discovered and the Osage people get rich- by virtue of the mineral rights associated with the land. The promise of oil dollars attracted the white leadership in the state and guardians were appointed to manage the affairs of the “incompetent" Indians. White fellows marrying Indian squaws became all the rage. The movie takes the economic oppression one step further by highlighting a systematic series of planned murders of Osage families with ownership rights- a calculated effort to gain legal control of the oil reserves. Eventually, the murders become so egregious that the newly created FBI comes to investigate the deaths. They arrest and prosecute the citizens who planned and executed the murders- a healthy cross section of the white community in Osage. J Edgar Hoover used the case and the publicity surrounding it to establish the reputation of the agency and begin to build its powerful position in Washington. Mr Grann’s book spends far more time on the FBI component of the story than Mr Scorsese’s movie. I am comfortable with that choice. The underlying cultural and societal conflict is more important than a standard criminal police procedure story.
The movie never becomes true “alive.” It is rather formulaic. There is no genuine suspense- the identity of the perpetrators is very predictable. The casting decisions made by Scorsese are clearly in his comfort zone, long time favourites, but were not convincing to me. DiCaprio is Ernest Burkhart, a veteran of World War I, who settles in Osage County, accepts the guidance of his Uncle William King Hale (played by DeNiro), is employed as a driver- and pursues and marries Mollie Kyle (played by Lisa Waldman). They have three children. DiCaprio is too old for this role. He is fifty now- not a credible age or a returning doughboy. Also, DiCaprio projects intelligence in his best roles- active mind, lively eyes and a command of language. Burkhart is an idiot, at best a mediocrity. He has a poor understanding of reality and lacks depth and judgement. DiCaprio is not a good fit for this character profile. He strives to meet the acting challenge with frequent facial grimaces, fatigued body shrugs and pensive shaking of his head. He has no interesting dialogue in the entire movie. I am not surprised DiCaprio was not nominated for an Academy Award. Plus, there was no chemistry between he and Waldman. She is fine in her role, stoic and dignified, but never clear why she would choose to marry the banal Burkhart. She admits he is an opportunist, but proceeds anyway. Finally, DeNiro is solid, but he remains a better fit on the east side of New York than as western cattle rancher. To the extent he pulls off the role as the smooth, if amoral malefactor- is a function of DeNiro having a great talent for playing gangsters- essentially what Hale represents with a “cowboy” era tint. He seemed to thoroughly enjoy the role though.
The treatment of the Osage people is uneven. The short scenes depicting the Osage Council acting with pride, intelligence and purpose were refreshing. It is implied that Osage women were attracted to their white husbands, no matter how mediocre, because they were more reliable than the hard drinking, irresponsible and silly Osage male options available to them. There is no strong Osage male character with a leading role in this narrative. Scorsese does sometimes struggle when he strays from his Italian American/New York comfort zone. The themes are consistent in his best movies- crime, corruption, violence, machismo, guilt, redemption. Kudos to his drive and zeal in bringing this story to the screen. It is a praiseworthy effort, but falls short of entering the pantheon of cinematic greatness. A near miss!
