Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

[Poya]

She's getting backlash on social media for asking for more time for her speech because she said "it's a historic win".

Everything gets backlash these days.

[Member-866753]

Originally Posted by Poya

She's getting backlash on social media for asking for more time for her speech because she said "it's a historic win".

Everything gets backlash these days.

That's dumb. It is a historic win and her words carried weight.

And if you've seen the film, she is absolutely the heart and soul of it. Much deserving.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Poya

She's getting backlash on social media for asking for more time for her speech because she said "it's a historic win".

Everything gets backlash these days.

You know you don’t have to report everything that some crazies on Twitter say. It’s alright to ignore the “backlash”.

[Member-866753]

The only backlash from last night I'll accept is Roman Roy's cheapshot at Pedro.

[TheBondFan]

Would be disappointing if it only gets 1 Oscar.

[Member-866753]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

Would be disappointing if it only gets 1 Oscar.

It really drew a raw hand coming out the same year as Oppenheimer. And we can argue with film is better (I prefer Oppenheimer, some prefer KOTF) I think both films are absolutely zeniths of cinema but coming out the same year means one film was going to get clipped by the other. Oppenheimer has the benefit of people feeling Nolan is overdue (he is).... and of course the box office (a billion for a 3 hour R-rated drama deserves to be celebrated).

Luckily Oscars don't matter and both these films will be celebrated.

But if Killers came out last year, I think it wins over EEAAO.

[BluBonnet]

[y2jman]

well it seems next sun there is a critics choice awards i do see couple of award categories of this film i'm sure will win a few: best score best costume design best editing best production design best cinematography best adopted screenplay best director best acting ensemble best supporting actor<-Robert de niro best actress lily best actor leo best picture

[BluBonnet]

[prkchopexpress]

i really like this movie and think it is great. a true masterpiece.

but her winning best actress is a joke.

she is serviceable. plain and simple. she is too new to have gravitas. she doesn’t bring the movie down. but she doesn’t do anything memorable. she is like anna paquin in the irishman, but arguably not as impactful.

important? no. this is “punditry” masquerading as change.

great indigenous performance? i don’t remember ever hearing anyone championing graham greene for clearcut. that wasn’t the fashion when it came out though,

(clearcut is a really great and criminally underseen movie)

[sanriel]

Originally Posted by prkchopexpress

i really like this movie and think it is great. a true masterpiece.

but her winning best actress is a joke.

she is serviceable. plain and simple. she is too new to have gravitas. she doesn’t bring the movie down. but she doesn’t do anything memorable. she is like anna paquin in the irishman, but arguably not as impactful.

important? no. this is “punditry” masquerading as change.

great indigenous performance? i don’t remember ever hearing anyone championing graham greene for clearcut. that wasn’t the fashion when it came out though,

(clearcut is a really great and criminally underseen movie)

I have absolutely no idea what your talking about.

[prkchopexpress]

Originally Posted by sanriel

I have absolutely no idea what your talking about.

lily gladstone does not deliver an award worthy performance by any stretch of the imagination.

[slip220]

It's a quiet and subtle performance, she portrayed well Molly's inner resilience.

Not every award worthy performance has to be over the top.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by slip220

It's a quiet and subtle performance, she portrayed well Molly's inner resilience.

Not every award worthy performance has to be over the top.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by slip220

It's a quiet and subtle performance, she portrayed well Molly's inner resilience.

Not every award worthy performance has to be over the top.

Over the top like Emma Stone

[russweiss1]

Originally Posted by slip220

It's a quiet and subtle performance, she portrayed well Molly's inner resilience.

Not every award worthy performance has to be over the top.

They don't need to be over the top but should at least be memorable. I'm not the huge fan of this film as so many others are but I always thought it was odd that people were talking Oscar performance for her role. It reminded me of the talk for Mia Goth in Pearl last year.

[Member-866753]

Originally Posted by slip220

It's a quiet and subtle performance, she portrayed well Molly's inner resilience.

Not every award worthy performance has to be over the top.

And also, like Cillian Murphy, there’s something to be said about your presence carrying the weight of the movie on your back. Maybe neither performance is showy, but they’re both similar in that they’re in these massive 3 hour, showy, auteur-driven somber epics and the movie lives and breathes with their physicality, facial expressions, and again, overall presence.

I think she deserves to be a lock as much as Cillian is. I think it’s similar. The enormity of both projects were carried by them.

[prkchopexpress]

Originally Posted by AspiringMinimalist

And also, like Cillian Murphy, there’s something to be said about your presence carrying the weight of the movie on your back. Maybe neither performance is showy, but they’re both similar in that they’re in these massive 3 hour, showy, auteur-driven somber epics and the movie lives and breathes with their physicality, facial expressions, and again, overall presence.

I think she deserves to be a lock as much as Cillian is. I think it’s similar. The enormity of both projects were carried by them.

this is absolute nonsense. you’re not selling tickets to a movie because of lily gladstone.

gimme a break. you’re selling tickets with the names of dicaprio, deniro and scorsese. she’s not carrying the movie, because she has hardly any scenes by herself.

she shows no range in the movie. she does no accent. you could have put anyone in that role and it would be the same movie. but i don’t think you could put someone like tom hardy in oppenheimer and have it still work.

murphy at least is doing a convincing accent not in his natural speaking voice. and he has a lot of dialogue.

you want to talk about someone carrying a movie, emma stone in poor things is doing the majority of the heavy lifting. without her, the movie doesn’t work.

[Member-866753]

Originally Posted by prkchopexpress

this is absolute nonsense. you’re not selling tickets to a movie because of lily gladstone.

gimme a break. you’re selling tickets with the names of dicaprio, deniro and scorsese. she’s not carrying the movie, because she has hardly any scenes by herself.

she shows no range in the movie. she does no accent. you could have put anyone in that role and it would be the same movie. but i don’t think you could put someone like tom hardy in oppenheimer and have it still work.

murphy at least is doing a convincing accent not in his natural speaking voice. and he has a lot of dialogue.

you want to talk about someone carrying a movie, emma stone in poor things is doing the majority of the heavy lifting. without her, the movie doesn’t work.

You’re all over the place. What does ticket sales have to do with carrying the movie thematically? It’s different. Art vs Sales. I’m talking about the movie itself. I’m sorry you don’t appreciate subtle acting. The scene where she’s interrogating Leo with her eyes during their first date is sublime quiet work that many actors cannot do without words.

[prkchopexpress]

Originally Posted by AspiringMinimalist

You’re all over the place. What does ticket sales have to do with carrying the movie thematically? It’s different. Art vs Sales. I’m talking about the movie itself. I’m sorry you don’t appreciate subtle acting. The scene where she’s interrogating Leo with her eyes during their first date is sublime quiet work that many actors cannot do without words.

if you think she gave one of the five best performances of the year, my first thought is did you even watch five movies?

this isn’t a role where she brought a lot to the character. scorsese is arguably the greatest living filmmaker and has always gotten great performances. you can’t say that anything she does isn’t a result of his direction.

it also seems like you also missed the point of the movie. none of the performances are really showy (theatrical or charismatic). these are real people and these are really awful people. she is friendly personable and taken advantage. you have sympathy with her as a character because bad things are done to her and her family. even de niro as the bad guy is an awful person, but not necessarily even charismatic like in mean streets or taxi driver or like joe pesci in goodfellas or casino.

these are awful people who are kind of bumbling (dicaprio). you have a great ensemble, but the whole cast delivers muted performances. with maybe the exception of brendan fraser, because it almost orders on farce that a lawyer has to defend these clearly awful unredeemable people.

the tone is a deliberate choice. thats why the one light momemt is the radio show recap at the end. and it’s fun and trying to entertain. but then scorsese comes in and just says things almost dry and flatly, informing us about the outcomes. and that’s the best way to do it.

Originally Posted by russweiss1

They don't need to be over the top but should at least be memorable. I'm not the huge fan of this film as so many others are but I always thought it was odd that people were talking Oscar performance for her role. It reminded me of the talk for Mia Goth in Pearl last year.

i swear, it’s like “stan” culture where they decide they want someone to win and just look for justifications. but mia goth did a nine minute monologue that she wrote. yeah, and it feels like it rambled on too long and wasn’t focused, but i was already tuned out of the movie at that point. so it doesn’t matter lol.

if you want to talk about a performance that is subtle, the female lead from godzilla minus one is absolutely more impressive. she is not in a lot of scenes, but she is felt and thought about the whole movie. she plays everything on her face. she feels conflicted through the whole movie, but is never uncharming or unlikable. (never thought i would say a godzilla movie would have some of the best performances of the year, but here we are.)

this isn’t to say that i dont respect the movie. killers of the flower moon is unequivocally a five star movie and one of the best of the year. personally, also one of the most depressing of the year. there is no escapism in it. it’s almost like watching an old timey version of true crime forensic files type show with the best production.