Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

[SteelbookCat]

looks like this will be a 5 dollar t mobile tuesday deal coming up soon.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by SteelbookCat

looks like this will be a 5 dollar t mobile tuesday deal coming up soon.

Don't cheap out on this. Scorsese deserves premium prices.

[format916]

Originally Posted by Poya

Don't cheap out on this. Scorsese deserves premium prices.

He's getting a matinee from me. Maybe even a discount day.

[SteelbookCat]

Originally Posted by Poya

Don't cheap out on this. Scorsese deserves premium prices.

not this time, its a perfect exchange for my bladder damage.

[RevolverOcelScott]

Finally found a single good showtime for Thursday the 19th. Every showtime Thursday-Friday is either 1pm or 7-8pm, and just wouldn't work. There was a single 4pm showing on Thursday so I got that one. Would have liked to see this in RPX/IMAX, but Taylor Swift is eating up all the good IMAX/RPX screen times.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by RevolverOcelScott

Finally found a single good showtime for Thursday the 19th. Every showtime Thursday-Friday is either 1pm or 7-8pm, and just wouldn't work. There was a single 4pm showing on Thursday so I got that one. Would have liked to see this in RPX/IMAX, but Taylor Swift is eating up all the good IMAX/RPX screen times.

Same here. I couldn't find it on RPX or IMAX the first weekend! Swift has all of them.

Still, the regular theater I'm seeing it in is still a nice, luxury theater. This place is still pretty new, too, it just opened in 2019. Should still be a very nice way to see the film. My son and I are seeing it Thursday, the 19th, at 8:05pm. (We're night owls, anyway, LOL).

[spanky87]

Very thorough career retrospective/interview with Martin Scorsese hosted by Edgar Wright. Happened last week at BFI London film fest:

Martin Scorsese interviewed by Edgar Wright | BFI London Film Festival 2023 Screen Talk - YouTube

Killers of the Flower Moon is talked about toward the end.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Poya

Don't cheap out on this. Scorsese deserves premium prices.

You can literally get a IMAX ticket for that $5 deal. And like A List, it still counts as a full ticket price purchase for the box office total, T Mobile subsidizes the difference.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by spanky87

Very thorough career retrospective/interview with Martin Scorsese hosted by Edgar Wright. Happened last week at BFI London film fest:

Martin Scorsese interviewed by Edgar Wright | BFI London Film Festival 2023 Screen Talk - YouTube

Killers of the Flower Moon is talked about toward the end.

Just finished getting through this and it’s great. Mad to think he kinda forgets the stuff in his films that we all consider iconic now.

[Jonathan McLeod]

Vue in the UK are offering this film with an interval for selected screenings - first time I've seen that in a long time. At almost 3.5 hours long good to have the option.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by Jonathan McLeod

Vue in the UK are offering this film with an interval for selected screenings - first time I've seen that in a long time. At almost 3.5 hours long good to have the option.

Well, that's good for people who think they need it.

But, again, the absolute obsession people have with this film's length is irritating, as I didn't hear any of that this summer, over "Oppenheimer", last Christmas, over "Avatar 2", I didn't hear that over "Avengers Endgame"; and historically, I didn't hear that over "Titanic" or "Avatar".

And the 'Nolan and Cameron and Marvel are more popular' argument is irrelevant, because we're not talking about that. We're talking specifically about film length. If you won't like this film, you wouldn't like it any better if it was 90 minutes long.

People just want to specifically complain about Scorsese, and this makes for an easy argument for them. Or, they're just following the online pack/trend that says to be concerned about it. Since no one mentioned "Oppenheimer" being almost as long as this film, no one cared about that.

People are so easily swayed and influenced and controlled by the internet.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Well, that's good for people who think they need it.

But, again, the absolute obsession people have with this film's length is irritating, as I didn't hear any of that this summer, over "Oppenheimer", last Christmas, over "Avatar 2", I didn't hear that over "Avengers Endgame"; and historically, I didn't hear that over "Titanic" or "Avatar".

And the 'Nolan and Cameron and Marvel are more popular' argument is irrelevant, because we're not talking about that. We're talking specifically about film length. If you won't like this film, you wouldn't like it any better if it was 90 minutes long.

People just want to specifically complain about Scorsese, and this makes for an easy argument for them. Or, they're just following the online pack/trend that says to be concerned about it. Since no one mentioned "Oppenheimer" being almost as long as this film, no one cared about that.

People are so easily swayed and influenced and controlled by the internet.

I heard plenty of people complain about the length of Oppenheimer, Avatar 2, and Endgame.

[Pieter V]

95 (102 reviews)
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kil...he_flower_moon

90 (33 reviews)
https://www.metacritic.com/movie/kil...e-flower-moon/

[cheez avenger]

Since the Taylor Swift concert is now losing premium screens because it's going to fall off hard by next weekend, they have added some Dolby Cinema screens at my AMC. I went ahead and canceled my IMAX tickets for DC a screening on Saturday.

I should be finished with the book by then as well.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

I heard plenty of people complain about the length of Oppenheimer, Avatar 2, and Endgame.

I didn't, and certainly not at this level.

There's a ton of people saying they're staying away from it solely because of its length. I find that hard to believe.


I never really heard anyone complain about those other films' length. Then again, I likely never perused those films' boards as much.

I know they were still blockbusters and made zillions, and people sat through their length just fine.

If you'd like this film, you can do the length just fine.

People sit through sporting events, concerts etc. for hours. Hell, Taylor is nearly three, herself.

People are acting like it's the longest film in history.


This board has been remarkably quiet except for the length complaints.

Over on Facebook, the hate for this one is real, LOL. Leo likes girls under 25, Marty hates Marvel, Lily is too 'w'-word, and De Niro, well, you know..... they'll 'never spend another cent on his movies'. LOLOLOL....

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Well, that's good for people who think they need it.

But, again, the absolute obsession people have with this film's length is irritating, as I didn't hear any of that this summer, over "Oppenheimer", last Christmas, over "Avatar 2", I didn't hear that over "Avengers Endgame"; and historically, I didn't hear that over "Titanic" or "Avatar".

And the 'Nolan and Cameron and Marvel are more popular' argument is irrelevant, because we're not talking about that. We're talking specifically about film length. If you won't like this film, you wouldn't like it any better if it was 90 minutes long.

People just want to specifically complain about Scorsese, and this makes for an easy argument for them. Or, they're just following the online pack/trend that says to be concerned about it. Since no one mentioned "Oppenheimer" being almost as long as this film, no one cared about that.

People are so easily swayed and influenced and controlled by the internet.

Here's a post for the ages. The movie is three and a half hours long, and the person directing it, Scorsese, has something to do with it, but not as you have inferred, but the exact opposite.

That it is an R-rated film intended for an adult audience that will be released to streaming within weeks of its theatrical premiere is the issue. If it was any director except Scorsese, or two or three others, they would be fired for refusing to cut the film under three hours if those putting up the money, i.e., Apple, were counting on theatrical box office, which they're not.

Why? Where can adults, you know, the ones with jobs, kids and commitments, find not only the time for the movie, but the time to travel to a theater, plus have something to eat, or at the very least a drink and a small bite, before or after?

When we screened The Irishman (209 minutes) at The Belasco in NYC, when you add the time getting settled in your seat plus the time which was added beyond the announced time for stragglers, you are clocking close to four hours.

Attendees, an older crowd for sure, were groaning when they left their seats.

Their expressions, especially given the subject matter and the film ending, was grim.

Now, switch the film content from getting the gangster gang back together to an even sadder history lesson illustrating how awful the Osage were treated, well, I guess we're going to find out.

Three and a half-hours worth, and ticking.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

[Show spoiler]I didn't, and certainly not at this level.

There's a ton of people saying they're staying away from it solely because of its length. I find that hard to believe.


I never really heard anyone complain about those other films' length. Then again,

I likely never perused those films' boards as much.

[Show spoiler]

I know they were still blockbusters and made zillions, and people sat through their length just fine.

If you'd like this film, you can do the length just fine.

People sit through sporting events, concerts etc. for hours. Hell, Taylor is nearly three, herself.

People are acting like it's the longest film in history.


This board has been remarkably quiet except for the length complaints.

Over on Facebook, the hate for this one is real, LOL. Leo likes girls under 25, Marty hates Marvel, Lily is too 'w'-word, and De Niro, well, you know..... they'll 'never spend another cent on his movies'. LOLOLOL....

I feel like there’s your answer.

I don’t want this to sound like an attack or anything. But it’s confirmation bias. You have a strong interest in this and Scorsese as a whole so you are hyper aware and hyper sensitive to information pertaining to this movie. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, it’s how a lot of people online react to things you pick your thing and become a personal defender. I’ve seen tons of articles from before this movie complaining that “movies are too long”. It’s a thing that pops up all over this forum and the internet as large. So it’s par for the course.

[UltraMario9]

Originally Posted by Jonathan McLeod

Vue in the UK are offering this film with an interval for selected screenings - first time I've seen that in a long time. At almost 3.5 hours long good to have the option.

I'm surprised this isn't bigger news.

Also surprised that only Vue is doing it from what I've seen. Did they do this for Avatar 2, RRR and Oppenheimer?

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

Since the Taylor Swift concert is now losing premium screens because it's going to fall off hard by next weekend, they have added some Dolby Cinema screens at my AMC. I went ahead and canceled my IMAX tickets for DC a screening on Saturday.

I should be finished with the book by then as well.

Huh? What gave you that impression? It just had the second biggest opening of October and is only playing during weekends, so the good word of mouth and lack of showtimes during the week will certainly build demand for its second weekend.

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

Huh? What gave you that impression? It just had the second biggest opening of October and is only playing during weekends, so the good word of mouth and lack of showtimes during the week will certainly build demand for its second weekend.

Just speaking about my theater in particular getting two DC screenings for Killers of the Flower Moon where before yesterday had none. Killers only had IMAX and now there's some DC screens for the weekend for Killers.