Killers of the Flower Moon
Killers of the Flower Moon is playing in theaters at the time of writing. Rated R. Common Sense says 16.
STORY: C-
Anybody who has even a basic understanding of our country’s history will see where this story is going.
It feels like the filmmakers we would find this tale of evil men doing evil things shocking. It’s not. Are we disgusted? Yes. Are we appalled? Absolutely. Are we shocked? No. Surprised? Absolutely not.
I’m grateful Martin Scorsese brings this story to light. This is an important story that must never be forgotten. Many of us may not have known the story’s specifics, but we are all (or at least should be) well aware of the horrible things settlers have done in order to disenfranchise Native Americans. The story’s lack of surprise and insight makes us feel nearly every second of its mammoth runtime.
PEOPLE: A-
Lily Gladstone ascends to the A-list.
DeNiro and DiCaprio are household names. Well grab your hammer and some drywall, because that household needs to make space for another name: Lily Gladstone.
Both veteran actors deliver phenomenal performances, but Gladstone outshines them both. She possesses an inner peace rarely seen on screen, quieter than the wind but stronger than steel. Her unforgettable performance indicates she’ll be around a long time. Here’s hoping that gives Native American actors more opportunities as well.
FILM NERD STUFF: A
The thoughtful, magnificent set design helps tell the story.
From what I have seen on social media, many people of the Osage Nation are sharing legitimate criticism of how Scorsese tells their story (see below). However, nearly everyone is also commending him and his team for their respectful, authentic representation of the Osage culture.
Here’s an example of how Scorsese uses the set design to tell the story. In the opening scene, elders are meeting inside a wooden Native American structure (I am not sure what it’s called, and I’d rather admit my ignorance than inaccurately define the building). They are in the midst of a burial ceremony, symbolizing the loss of their traditional ways.
In a later wedding scene, a few Osage guests sit underneath a white party tent. The way the tent is positioned makes it look very similar to the Native structure from the first scene. It’s as if the Native American building has been white washed.
When Robert DeNiro’s character (clad in a white suit, of course) strolls over to the Osage guests sitting beneath the white tent, the wedding’s symbolism is complete: the White man has taken over.
FRONT AND CENTER (Elective Class): F
This is not a film about the Osage people.
Much has been mentioned about how an earlier draft of the script was thrown out. It was rewritten in order to focus more on the Osage people. I don’t want to even imagine what that first draft must have looked like, because this is definitely not a film about the Osage people.
The Osage may be present in this movie, but they’re only there as obstacles to the men scheming to steal their wealth. To riff on the Bechdel test, I can’t recall a scene where two Osage people were gathered and had a conversation that did not mention the White man.
All of the respect and care taken to portray the Osage accurately ultimately rings hollow. It comes across as a fancy backdrop for a story about racist White men. It’s decorative, like a mural on the side of a downtown building or an ornate plaque commemorating a significant event in “American” history.
It seems White men, even the most evil and racist of them, still matter the most.
FINAL COMMENTS:
Christopher Cote, an Osage language consultant who worked on the film, states what I would like to say far more eloquently than I ever could. I think I’ll let the Osage take the spotlight, something the film should have done more often. Here are his words (SPOILER WARNING):