Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Shin sam

I do work in the industry. And there were some poor edits. Nothing major that the general public would spot. But for QC opps like me, there noticeable. Stop blindly defending stuff. It was an observation that probably wouldn't even have been mentioned if it wasn't for the other issues.

In what capacity?

[cheez avenger]

I'll take KOTFM over the MCU any day of the week.

[RevolverOcelScott]

Originally Posted by slumcat

The Scorsese dick riding here is nauseating. He's just a director, right? People act like he's the second son of god, completely above reproach, and cannot be criticized at all - nor his films.

**** that.

Someone's opinion saying that he's a talentless hack sellout and that his films are a steaming pile of horse shit is just as valid as someone who thinks Scorsese is the second coming of christ.

The scoffing at anyone expressing remotely any reservation about Scorsese or his films is bizarre.

I don't think anyone can call him talentless with a straight face. If someone can look at his entire library of films and not find a movie they really enjoy, they are flat out lying. I'm not even in the "He's the greatest ever" camp, he's made some films I don't care much for.


But yes, everyone is entitled to their opinions on him.

[Shin sam]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

In what capacity?

I've been at it over 25 years now. Senior Tech opp. Mainly QC.

[50strat54]

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

I'll take KOTFM over the MCU any day of the week.

I haven't seen the movie yet but I'm going to and I just read it's a huge bomb like Indiana and Dead Reckoning and the recent Disney films..

I love the MCU so I'm not sure I would take KOTFM over it but I'll comment once I've seen the film.

Scorsese is a great Director but some of his last few films were not so great.

So maybe KOTFM is probably better than Thor Love and Thunder...we'll see

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

Maybe we should have a separate boxoffice section in the forum, because it's pretty obvious most people in the movie thread don't like seeing too much talk about this aspect.

Entertainment and business don't mix well together.
Movies are not in the business to make money.

Why they spend so much to make them in the first place?

Killers of the Flower Moon is right there on top for Best Picture Oscar.
Best Director?

When you win an Oscar what do you get? A golden statuette, a bag of goodies (not the Halloween type), a recognition that it's worth ...

Separating money from moviemaking is like a popsicle without the stick.

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Precisely. I'm afraid I've fallen far too often to responding to these 'industry insiders', LOL, in these threads, who use yardsticks to measure penis size based on box office performance, as if it's ever been any indication of a film's quality. But of course, tell them that, and they have a field day mocking you about how their crap made tons more, just like that bonehead 'Avengers' guy just did to Scorsese.

Honestly, you should really only care about the box office if you've personally got a stake in the film. otherwise, it should be immaterial to you.

And the, "The people have spoken with their wallets" argument is actually quite laughable, as we all should know the masses are asses.

I concede to falling prey to fighting back at them, LOL. This thread is looking more and more though like just a series of ignored posts for me. Heaven help me. Maybe they'll all move over to the "Napoleon" thread in a couple of weeks, LOL.

PS: I just love the "I work in the industry" guy who claimed Thelma Schoonmaker's editing was bad, LOL.

Good one ... "penis size" ... as if it truly matters.

Originally Posted by slumcat

The Scorsese dick riding here is nauseating. He's just a director, right? People act like he's the second son of god, completely above reproach, and cannot be criticized at all - nor his films.

**** that.

Someone's opinion saying that he's a talentless hack sellout and that his films are a steaming pile of horse shit is just as valid as someone who thinks Scorsese is the second coming of christ.

The scoffing at anyone expressing remotely any reservation about Scorsese or his films is bizarre.

Phoquing A right man; we're here as movie critics...what we like and don't like.

Can everyone hear all the dialog loud and clear in this flick?
Would you have cut few minutes or not?
Happy with the editing @ all times?
Do you see $200 million on the screen?
Martin Scorsese, cinema god or Marvel movie critic?

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

I'll take KOTFM over the MCU any day of the week.

Totally two different genres; one for adults, the other for kids.
Guess where the money's from ... Five Nights @ Freddy's.

The exception is Oppenheimer. ...With Barbie's help.

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by 50strat54

I haven't seen the movie yet but I'm going to and I just read it's a huge bomb like Indiana and Dead Reckoning and the recent Disney films..

I love the MCU so I'm not sure I would take KOTFM over it but I'll comment once I've seen the film.

Scorsese is a great Director but some of his last few films were not so great.

So maybe KOTFM is probably better than Thor Love and Thunder...we'll see

Boxoffice does not dictate on whether it's a good film or not.

[slip220]

Originally Posted by 50strat54

I haven't seen the movie yet but I'm going to and I just read it's a huge bomb like Indiana and Dead Reckoning and the recent Disney films..

I love the MCU so I'm not sure I would take KOTFM over it but I'll comment once I've seen the film.

Scorsese is a great Director but some of his last few films were not so great.

So maybe KOTFM is probably better than Thor Love and Thunder...we'll see

Who said its a bomb? It's highly rated on most movie related sites with great reviews.

who really gives a shit about box office despite the hollywood executives? I've seen people earning little above the minimum wage very concerned that some greedy corporation will lose money over the weekend because of a movie. who gives a shit

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Shin sam

I've been at it over 25 years now. Senior Tech opp. Mainly QC.

And does part of your job entail QC'ing film editing from an artistic standpoint? Or, can you elaborate on what you mean by "poor edits"?

[Gacivory]

People complaining about “continuity errors” in this movie as if this is a new thing for Scorsese or movies. I shall refer to a Thelma quote I think about often.

The priority is absolutely on the best take for performance, and frankly I don’t understand why people get so hung up on these issues, because if you look at films throughout history, you will see enormous continuity errors everywhere, particularly when you’re talking about the Academy aspect ratio where you see more in the frame. Even in The Red Shoes, a film that nobody ever has complaints about, there are enormous continuity bumps, and it doesn’t matter. You know why? Because you’re being carried along by the power of the film. So throughout our history of improvisational cutting, we have decided to go with the performance, or in this case particularly with the humor of a line, as opposed to trying to make sure a coffee cup is in the right place.

I remember that when I was nominated for an Academy Award for GoodFellas and we lost to Dances with Wolves for editing, the editor of that movie said to me: “Why did you make that bad continuity cut?” And I said “Which cut? Which continuity error? We have tons of them.” He was talking about a scene with Paul Sorvino and another actor who was an amateur, but wonderful, though he didn’t know about matching. It was much more important for us to get this beautiful performance by this untrained actor than to worry about where the cigar is in Paul Sorvino’s hand. One wasn’t want to do that, one would hope not to do that, but if the choice comes between a beautiful, clean line and a laugh, we would always go for the laugh. - Thelma Schoonmaker

[Ernest Rister]

There's continuity mistakes even in animated films -- go figure that one out... (besides the obvious answer -- crunch to meet release dates and production costs...).

[50strat54]

Originally Posted by slip220

Who said its a bomb? It's highly rated on most movie related sites with great reviews.

who really gives a shit about box office despite the hollywood executives? I've seen people earning little above the minimum wage very concerned that some greedy corporation will lose money over the weekend because of a movie. who gives a shit

Box Office Bomb = no one wants to see it

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

People complaining about “continuity errors” in this movie as if this is a new thing for Scorsese or movies. I shall refer to a Thelma quote I think about often.

The ironic part is that that's been one of her trademarks in a Scorsese film since she started working with him and it's only now that morons start kicking up a fuss. Like, where have these idiots been? It all works in context.

It's not a "continuity error" if it's done WITH purpose.

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by 50strat54

Box Office Bomb = no one wants to see it

It doesn't mean that it's not good. I haven't seen the new Indiana Jones film, but by all accounts, it's terrible.

Folks all of a sudden decided to get an "attention span" and decided to not give KOTFM a chance. That's fine. They can wait it out until it hits ATV+. I'm sure you'll have a few people out there kicking themselves for not having seen it in theaters.

[slumcat]

Originally Posted by t-mel

Nothing but strawman arguments here. People defending his work is apparently "dick riding." I would love to see what you would call the Marvel fanboys who can't take criticism of their beloved IP. Everyone is also free to criticise his films. You live in a fantasy world if you think he has never received criticism. Ebert, probably his most notable champion, had negative things to say, for example about The Colour of Money.

This is a limp argument. I think nothing should be put on a pedestal and anybody and everything should be critisized.

Originally Posted by t-mel

I've yet to see any substantial rebuttal of his criticism of the approach taken with most of these superhero films and how they aren't in fact like theme park rides. Look at any reaction video of them and it's very clearly that kind of experience.

I don't have any problem with his criticism of Marvel films. I agree with him even to a large degree. I don't care for MCU movies and am happy to trash them myself.

But in the same breath, I am happy to trash Scorsese movies too - specially his misguided ones like Killers.

I have a third tack in this discussion - nobody is above criticism. MCU should be criticized. And so should Scorsese and his movies. Everybody's shit stinks. Nobody's perfect here. I am for equal opportunity - criticize and cut everything down to size.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by t-mel

I've yet to see any substantial rebuttal of his criticism of the approach taken with most of these superhero films and how they aren't in fact like theme park rides. Look at any reaction video of them and it's very clearly that kind of experience.

Theme park rides are much more fun, MCU has become more like a SNL skit in terms of writing (and VFX).

The theme park rides that are in 3D, well, it's a world of difference between the caliber and quality of those vs the 3D in the MCU. One is fun and wows the audience, the other makes the audience wonder if the film is even in 3D.

^Some rebuttal to how Scorsese gave the MCU too much praise when he compared their recent efforts to theme park rides.

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

It's not a "continuity error" if it's done WITH purpose.

If the viewer notices the continuity error, and the director did not intend for the error to be noticed (ie: it's not a plot point), then it is indeed an error.

If, as the editor's story went, they needed to have a continuity error to capture a great acting performance, then the editor and director should have edited and reshot the surrounding scenes so that they jibed with the error.

[Cremildo]

The Shawshank Redemption was a notorious box-office flop in theaters back in 1994. It's been the #1 movie on IMDb Top 250 for decades now. It's a beloved classic nowadays.

That CGI Lion King remake raked in over a billion dollars, and yet you're hard-pressed to find someone who loved it.

If someone invokes box-office grosses as a measure of quality, I assume they're either too young to understand certain complexities or just plain dumb. Several factors can influence a movie's theatrical gross, including release date, competition and marketing.

[Mikezilla3k]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

The Shawshank Redemption was a notorious box-office flop in theaters back in 1994. It's been the #1 movie on IMDb Top 250 for decades now. It's a beloved classic nowadays.

That CGI Lion King remake raked in over a billion dollars, and yet you're hard-pressed to find someone who loved it.

If someone invokes box-office grosses as a measure of quality, I assume they're either too young to understand certain complexities or just plain dumb. Several factors can influence a movie's theatrical gross, including release date, competition and marketing.

Plus Transformers Age Of Extinction was the #1 film of 2014 and no one likes it.

Box Office shouldn't be used to go pointed fingers and mock films as if it's the be-all-end-all. This goes both ways as well.

[Bugg]

Originally Posted by 50strat54

Box Office Bomb = no one wants to see it

More like = not enough people want to see it. Even movies a lot of people go to see, can still be flops, due to astronomical budgets. Like when Cleopatra (1963) was a huge money loser at the time of it's release and almost bankrupted 20th Century Fox, despite being the #1 box office hit of that year.

[dkelly26666]

Like I've said all along, I think this film will have a very long shelf life.

Doesn't matter if it's an instant hit with the franchise crowd making up most of the theater-goers.

A film like this, of this length and content , will likely be much bigger in home viewing.

I remember specifically when people mocked that "The Aviator" and "Million Dollar Baby" were not massive box office hits in theaters, in spite of being critical and awards darlings. However, both films wound up selling millions of DVD units and were top rentals and pay-per-view rentals, as well as cable ratings hits, for years after.

The reason undoubtedly being that mostly older audiences were interested in those films, and they'd rather watch at home.

Thanks to everyone who's stepped into the discussion the past couple of days. Many of you express things I try to say much more eloquently, anyway.