Reviews for Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon are live, and they are glowing, to say the least.
The legendary filmmaker is back with another historical epic, this time tackling a series of murders within the Osage tribe in 1920s Oklahoma after oil is found on indigenous land.
The movie is based on the beloved 2017 book of the same name by David Grann and stars the likes of Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro, and Lily Gladstone.
Coming from Apple Studios, Killers of the Flower Moon has the longest runtime of any theatrically released film in Scorsese’s illustrious career.
Killers of the Flower Moon Gets Glowing Reviews
Apple
Critics shared their strong reactions to the Martin Scorsese-directed Killers of the Flowers Moon in anticipation of the film’s theatrical debut.
Advertisement
Scorsese’s latest blockbuster has been Certified Fresh on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, sitting at 95% on the platform. The general consensus is that Killers of the Flower Moon is a sweeping epic with many praising its scale, sobering themes, and stellar performances.
David Crow from Den of Geek remarked in his review Robert De Niro’s William Hale may be “the most vile creation ever realized by an actor who’s also played Al Capone and Jimmy Conway:”
“William Hale might even be the most vile creation ever realized by an actor who’s also played Al Capone and Jimmy Conway… While Hale might be the culmination of ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’s’ conspiracy, he is just one thread in a larger national tapestry of pitiless conquest… Even though the film is told through the eyes of the killers, the movie has the grace to end on the Osage themselves… Scorsese sees both sides, but it’s obvious which he hopes will carry forward.”
YouTuber Zach Pope heaped praise upon the film, calling it an example of “why Scorsese is the best director to ever live:”
“Showcases why Scorsese is the best director to ever live. Delicately crafted to retell the tragic Osage Murders but give a glimpse into what Greed, Power, and corruption bring. A cinematic masterpiece that will be studied for years to come. Speechless”
ScreenAnarchy’s Shelagh Rown-Legg described Killers as “unflinching, honest, sweeping, intelligent, and necessary:”
“’Killers of the Flower Moon’ is the one of the best of Scorsese’s filmography – unflinching, honest, sweeping, intelligent, and necessary.”
Chris Bumbray of JoBlo’s Movie Network was just as positive, pointing to Leonardo DiCaprio’s starring performance as “One of [his] most complex:”
Advertisement
“Absolutely ranks alongside Martin Scorsese’s masterpieces. One of DiCaprio’s most complex performances.”
DiCaprio and De Niro both “[flirt] with characters they have played before, now bring even greater depth” and “humor as sharp as their sadness,” according to The Movie Minute’s Joanna Lanfield:
“You will hardly be able to take your eyes away from Lily Gladstone, but you won’t want to miss a second of what Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert DeNiro are doing. Both men, flirting with characters they have played before, now bring even greater depth and, often, humor as sharp as their sadness. How lucky are we to get to watch all of these creative people, coming together, at the top of their game.”
Julian Roman from Movie Web said the movie “immerses you in a seedy world of good old boy corruption, death, and deceit:”
“’Killers of the Flower Moon’ immerses you in a seedy world of good old boy corruption, death, and deceit. Scorsese’s trademark visual flair and sharp editing highlights a methodical storyline that fatigues from lack of mystery.”
Reeling Review’s Laura Clifford opined the film almost feels like “binging a prestige HBO limited series” than watching a movie:
“… In witnessing those murders – abrupt, violent and brutal – and in a paddling scene that oddly feels like a man being made in the mafia, that we most recognize Scorsese’s auteurship here, his lengthy period film often feeling more like binging a prestige HBO limited series.”
Dan Scully from Scullyvision called it “equal parts thrilling, educational, and dramatic:”
“It’s equal parts thrilling, educational, and dramatic, and there’s always room for bits of comedy to shine through… ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ is equal parts family drama, organized crime movie, police procedural, courtroom drama, and historical epic. One could take the somewhat defensible position that this is Scorsese playing the hits, but it would be an unfair and reductive angle that dismisses how well all of it is synthesized.”
Native Viewpoint’s Vincent Schilling noted that “as a Native American” he ” absolutely loved this film,” praising its bringing of “the reality of this ugly history to light:”
Advertisement
“As a Native American, and as a critic in general, I absolutely loved this film… Some moments were horrible and agonizing to watch, not because the film was horrible or agonizing, but because Scorsese brought the reality of this ugly history to light. I am so incredibly grateful for that.”
Robert Kojder (The Spool) conveyed his shock that “at 80 years old, Martin Scorsese continues to evolve his previous narratives and storytelling tactics:”
“At 80 years old, Martin Scorsese continues to evolve his previous narratives and storytelling tactics, implementing new imaginative tricks and putting out exquisite, scintillating work once again with some of his most trusted collaborators, in front of and behind the camera. I sincerely hope he has one more in, but if not, what a hell of a way to go out with this scalding, haunting, unflinching condemnation of America’s past that is still relevant today.”
Despite Killer of the Flower Moon‘s three-and-a-half-hour runtime Victoria Alexander from AlexanderFilmsInReview.com said, “The film’s length should be praised instead of criticized:”
“Scorsese intentionally strips the film of any traces of his style. It appears that DiCaprio structured his performance to show his character suffered being evil. The film’s length should be praised instead of criticized.”
San Francisco Chronicle’s Mick LaSalle gave the movie the superlative of “a bladder-buster of a movie” with no “obvious bathroom break, [or] section where the story starts to sag:”
“Martin Scorsese’s ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ is a bladder-buster of a movie with no obvious bathroom break, no section where the story starts to sag. This makes it, almost by definition, a good and admirable piece of work. But ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ is also a lumbering mess, an ungainly and tonally odd film that, for all the strength of its parts, has little cumulative impact. Scorsese had ambitions to make a great American epic about the exploitation of Indigenous people, but he somehow ended up with a tawdry crime story, stretched to three and a half hours.”
Wenlai Ma from PerthNow praised Scorsese for his ability to “conjure a fully fleshed-out world of compelling people and a lived-in place,” but spotlighted some may “have the patience to be won over by [the film]:”
“That’s Scorsese’s mastery. He can conjure a fully fleshed-out world of compelling people and a lived-in place and demand you immerse yourself in it, even when it feels dirty (ahem, Wolf of Wall Street). Not everyone will have the patience to be won over by ‘Killers of the Flower Moon,’ but those people have the speedy distractions of TikTok.”
The Australian’s Stephen Romei called attention to DiCaprio and De Niro’s performances off of one another, wishing “the cinematic gods had intervened to make them work together more often:”
Advertisement
“Every moment Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert DeNiro share the screen will make you wish the cinematic gods had intervened to make them work together more often.”
One of the few negative reviews came from Beyond the Trailer’s Grace Randolph, who lambasted the film for providing “almost no context [for its story] making the film a frustrating watch that offers more questions than answers:”
“Less ‘Goodfellas,’ more ‘Gangs of New York’… Martin Scorsese and co-writer Eric Roth assume the audience already knows so much about this true story, there is almost no context making the film a frustrating watch that offers more questions than answers.”
What to Expect from Killers of the Flower Moon?
Looking at the glowing reviews for Killer of the Flower Moon, audiences should expect another cinematic marvel from one of the most celebrated filmmakers of all time.
Like Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimerbefore it, one of the more impressive feats Martin Scorsese’s latest achieves is its use of its elevated runtime.
Long movies are a massive deterrent for some, but if a film’s momentum can keep the audience engaged for well over three hours, then potential fatigue never has the time to set in.
And Killers of the Flower Moon seems to have it that in spades.
Advertisement
After nearly 60 years working in Hollywood, Scorsese looks to still have some powder left in the chamber, as this marks his second-straight feature film to hit at least 95% on Rotten Tomatoes (after 2019’s The Irishmen).
With 27 total feature-length projects under his belt, Killers of the Flower Moon seems like it has the critical juice to be an awards season juggernaut, potentially leading the iconic auteur to – what would be – only his second-ever Best Picture Academy Award win (after previously winning for 2006’s The Departed).
Killers of the Flower Moon comes to theaters on Friday October 20.
One of the great debates around Christmas time is whether the classic Bruce Willis action-movie Die Hard should be considered a Christmas movie or not. Sure, it takes place at Christmastime, but is it really a Christmas movie the same way Home Alone or Miracle On 34th Street are Christmas movies?
The obvious answer is “Yes” though a more nuanced one would be “It’s up to you.” If you consider it a Christmas movie, it’s a Christmas movie. If you don’t, that’s cool by me. “To each their own” is an old saying that more people should study and practice.
Whether you consider Die Hard a Christmas movie or not will determine whether you consider Netflix’s new thriller, Carry-On a Christmas movie. Like Die Hard, it takes place near Christmas and like Die Hard 2 it takes place in an airport. Unlike Die Hard, it does not have the star power of Bruce Willis to elevate it into the halls of classic action movies. On the other hand, it’s much better than the later, lousier Die Hard films that released after Die Hard With A Vengeance, perhaps the greatest in the entire franchise.
Advertisement
Carry-On will never be considered a Christmas classic or an all-time great action-thriller, but it’s still a lot of fun and I’m happy we have another holiday action flick that doesn’t suck, because a lot of Christmas movies across genres are pretty terrible.
The movie stars Taron Egerton as Ethan Kopek, a TSA agent stuck in a job he hates with a remarkably patient and attractive girlfriend, Nora, played by Sofia Carson. They learn they’re having a baby, because having a pregnant girlfriend makes the stakes that much higher when things go bad. Nora also works at the airport, but not as a TSA agent. She tells Ethan that all she wants for Christmas is for him to follow his dreams of becoming a police officer.
Things take a turn for the worse when a mysterious criminal, only known as Traveler, shows up. Jason Bateman is terrific in the role. He’s casually, almost nonchalantly, villainous. Using Nora’s life as collateral, he forces Ethan to allow a suitcase through the baggage check. The contents of the luggage turn out to be worse than Ethan could ever imagine. What follows is a tense series of events as Ethan tries (and often fails) to outsmart the Traveler and prevent a terrible tragedy, all without getting his girlfriend and unborn baby killed.
Danielle Deadwyler plays Detective Elena Cole, a police officer investigating a murder which leads her down a trail of breadcrumbs right to the airport where she dives headfirst into the conflict playing out there. The Rossi plays the Traveler’s sniper and tech genius, Watcher. And Breaking Bad’s Dean Norris plays Ethan’s boss, Phil Sarkowski. It’s a good cast overall, though mostly the film focuses on Ethan and Traveler and their interactions.
Advertisement
The movie works because it does a great job at keeping the tension high and the pacing tight. It never outwears its welcome, moving along at a nice clip, with most of its best moments just a conversation between Ethan and Traveler. There’s action, but not Die Hard levels of action.
I did feel like the ending was a bit dangly, with some big plot points unresolved. I won’t spoil any of that because, well, you should watch for yourself. And while the writing is just fine throughout, it’s nothing special either. There are no classic yippee-ki-yay lines here. I doubt I’ll rewatch this over the years, not because there’s anything particularly wrong with the movie, but because there’s nothing particularly stellar about it, either. Carry-On is a fun, tense, popcorn movie with some holiday tinsel on top. Give it a watch.
A still from ‘ED – Extra Decent’
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement
Dark comedies have a different ring to them, and a small misstep can leave them neither here nor there. Aamir Palikkal’s ED – Extra Decent has managed to fit into that space quite well, with the right mix of suspense, intrigue and some laughter.
The film opens with Binu, the protagonist, being hit on his head by his apartment’s security. He loses his memory and efforts are on at the hospital to make him remember something from the past. But his parents (Sudheer Karamana and Vinayaprasad), sister (Grace Antony) and brother-in-law (Shyam Mohan) are wary of that situation. It seems they fear for their lives. That is where Binu’s past, which is dark and disturbing, unfolds.
Binu, the jobless, subdued protagonist, is a loser in the eyes of his father, a retired tahsildar, whereas his mother and sister are sympathetic towards him. Binu’s behaviour is attributed to childhood trauma and bad parenting. But there comes a point when the embittered Binu goes into psycho mode and sets out to settle scores with his family in a ruthless way. However, for the residents of the apartment, he is that ‘extra decent,’ smart youngster who loves his family, and they do not know that he is in the process of transforming from extra decent to extra dangerous.
Even though certain actions of Binu look far-fetched, the impact is not lost on the audience, thanks to the fine actor that Suraj Venjaramoodu is. The National Award-winning actor, also the co-producer of the film, has pushed his limit as an artiste. The quirky and twisted but engaging narrative is shouldered by Suraj, whose measured performance transitions unabashedly between humour and villainy. The transition is subtle and with a smile that does not give away who he really is. It seems the actor has been let loose by writer Ashif Kakkodi and director Aamir, and his talent shines through in a scene where he loses control.
Storyline: Binu, mentally shaken by childhood trauma and therefore low on confidence, is labelled a loser by his father until one day he reacts in a ruthless, psychotic way
The taut screenplay has several moments that keep the viewers hooked. Even though the audience knows that all is not well with Binu, one keeps guessing about what he will do next. Just when you think the script is losing its grip, the writer springs a surprise.
Although promoted as a dark comedy, the humour is not that pronounced in the film. In fact, the film would have worked even without certain dialogues and situations.
A scene from ED – Extra Decent
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement
Sudheer Karamana and Vinayaprasad have done well as Binu’s parents. Grace is always a delight to watch on screen, and so is Shyam, especially after his impressive outing in Premalu.
Ankit Menon’s music is almost a character in the movie, with the tracks playing in the background, complementing the emotions unfolding on the screen. Editing (Sreejith Sarang) and cinematography (Sharon Sreenivas) add to the layers of the narrative, especially in the scenes shot inside the apartment that involve several close-up shots.
Advertisement
ED – Extra Decent is currently playing in theatres
Mufasa: The Lion King traces the origin story of two lions, Mufasa and Taka (who later becomes Scar), focusing on their childhood and the events that led to their eventual rivalry. Mufasa is an orphaned cub, befriended by Taka, a young lion prince, near a waterbody. Over time, as Mufasa’s true origins are revealed, it affects his friendship with a resentful Taka.
Performances
Advertisement
It’s absolutely delightful that a leading star like Mahesh Babu chose to dub for Mufasa. He complements the character with his trademark wit and dialogue delivery, excelling both at humour and intense situations. Satyadev, as the voice artiste for Taka, is equally impressive and gets adequate scope to showcase his vocal modulation as per the transformation of the character.
The artistes who truly bring the roof down with their delightful comic timing are the legendary duo Brahmanandam and Ali as Pumbaa and Timon. Their improvisation, while staying within the boundaries of their scenes, is impeccable and yet again reiterates the value they could bring to a film, even if it’s through their voices. Ayyappa P Sharma brings a new dimension to villainy as Kiros.
Analysis
It’s interesting how franchises are ruling the roost in world cinema – helping studios ensure a minimum guarantee sum at the box office in unpredictable times through glitzy technological upgrades. One also can’t deny the prospect that franchise-driven cinema limits the avenues to tell newer stories. Is there a middle ground though, where the producers and film connoisseurs are equally satisfied?
The iconic ‘The Lion King’ got a new lease of life with its 2019 reboot, which may have lacked the soul of the original but was successful in capturing the imagination of a new generation of filmgoers. The idea for a spinoff in this universe is by all means redundant and exploitative, though you give it a chance because of Mufasa – and the desire to know him beyond the obvious.
Advertisement
Mufasa: The Lion King transports you back to Mufasa’s childhood, where he’s separated from his parents during a flood and eventually bumps into a young lion Taka. Much to the disappointment of Obasi (Taka’s father), Taka and an orphaned Mufasa are raised by Eshe (Taka’s mother). While Mufasa wins over their family, his rise eventually threatens his friendship with Taka.
The film is constantly on the move, taking the viewers through many critical junctures in Mufasa and Taka’s journey towards Milele, how they forge an unlikely friendship with a lioness Sarabi, a hornbill Zazu and a mandrill Rafiki. The visual world-building is meticulous and jaw-dropping, alternating from a musical to an action-adventure, integrating drama with humour.
The heart of the tale lies in Mufasa’s childhood portions, which simply sweep you off your feet. From exploring Mufasa’s vulnerabilities as a child to his playful friendship with Taka and the action sequences that establish his leadership skills- you truly get a sense of his genius and instincts in crises. However, the film takes a turn for the worse as the stakes are raised.
The subplot portraying the supposed animosity between the white lion Kiros and Obasi is hurried and doesn’t grow on the viewer. The screenwriting choices are particularly absurd – in how Taka is reduced to a staple antagonist (due to Mufasa and Sarabi’s growing affinity). It’s baffling why a film that tries so hard to create a visual extravaganza fails to liberate the plot from its obvious problems.
As films chase photorealistic remakes of iconic films with posterity and attempt to give them a believable visual exterior, they sacrifice the idea of ‘willing suspension of disbelief’ (while chasing something realistic). If The Lion King aims to be more relevant with times, writers must relook at the franchise’s storytelling tropes, altering gender equations and reanalysing animal behaviour.
Advertisement
Mufasa: The Lion King has the story of an Indian potboiler that takes its audiences for granted. Many a time, you end up feeling if the creators simply replaced humans with animals in a typically massy story. How else can you explain the adopted son-true son conflict, betrayal between friends and a love triangle among lions? This spinoff has the scale but is devoid of magic and soul.
Music and Other Departments?
If there’s anything that keeps the film together in its direst situations, it is Nicholas Britell’s emphatic music score and the terrific imagery – constructed photo-realistically using CGI, under the expertise of James Laxton. However, the same can’t be said about the ‘musical’ aspects of the film.
Neither are the songs catchy nor do they add much value to the proceedings. The Telugu dialogues for the film are inconsistent at best, the slangs keep changing conveniently and the wordage is hardly appealing to its target audience.
Highlights?
Advertisement
Dubbing of Mahesh Babu, Satyadev, Ali and Brahmanandam
The visual imagery and music score
The first hour focusing on Mufasa’s younger years
Drawbacks?
Too many illogical, cinematic liberties
Advertisement
The humanistic behaviour of lions
Musical portions
Did I Enjoy It?
Yes, in parts
Will You Recommend It?
Advertisement
Yes, if you’re a hard core fan of The Lion King universe
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25782636/247422_ChatGPT_anniversary_CVirginia.jpg "Inside the launch — and future — of ChatGPT")
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25789444/1258459915.jpg "OpenAI cofounder Ilya Sutskever says the way AI is built is about to change")
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25546252/STK169_Mark_Zuckerburg_CVIRGINIA_D.jpg "Meta asks the US government to block OpenAI’s switch to a for-profit")
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23951353/STK043_VRG_Illo_N_Barclay_3_Meta.jpg "Meta’s Instagram boss: who posted something matters more in the AI age")