Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised so many here didn’t like Killers of the Flower Moon. The story of the worst kind of betrayal by one’s intimates - friends, spouses, doctors -was so powerful. A true requiem for this nation and how it came together. The acting was uniformly fantastic too. I don’t understand why there weren’t more nominations (di Caprio?) and why Lily Gladstone didn’t win Best Actress. When is she ever going to have another shot at this? (As an indigenous actress…)

I found it really slow and boring, to be honest.

De Niro played De Niro. DiCaprio‘s character was just dull. Gladstone’s character was two dimensional. I think they were so focused on the depictions of Osage traditions and life, and the sorry state which they had come to, they just didn’t interview any of the Osage characters with much personality, complexity or humanity.

+1

It was about two white dudes- one was absolutely ridiculous and the other was a snarling villain. They made all Osage characters one dimensional and mostly played into stereotypes except Lily’s character (one sister was an alcoholic, one guy was depressed, etc.). It was awful. They could have really focused on and fleshed out the Osage characters and instead focused on Robert and Leo. Like Scorcese has done in every other movie he’s made for the past twenty years.

Anonymous wrote:I actually thought Maestro was the best film. I’ve seen them all.

Thankfully the Academy disagreed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised so many here didn’t like Killers of the Flower Moon. The story of the worst kind of betrayal by one’s intimates - friends, spouses, doctors -was so powerful. A true requiem for this nation and how it came together. The acting was uniformly fantastic too. I don’t understand why there weren’t more nominations (di Caprio?) and why Lily Gladstone didn’t win Best Actress. When is she ever going to have another shot at this? (As an indigenous actress…)

I found it really slow and boring, to be honest.

De Niro played De Niro. DiCaprio‘s character was just dull. Gladstone’s character was two dimensional. I think they were so focused on the depictions of Osage traditions and life, and the sorry state which they had come to, they just didn’t interview any of the Osage characters with much personality, complexity or humanity.

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised so many here didn’t like Killers of the Flower Moon. The story of the worst kind of betrayal by one’s intimates - friends, spouses, doctors -was so powerful. A true requiem for this nation and how it came together. The acting was uniformly fantastic too. I don’t understand why there weren’t more nominations (di Caprio?) and why Lily Gladstone didn’t win Best Actress. When is she ever going to have another shot at this? (As an indigenous actress…)

I found it really slow and boring, to be honest.

Anonymous wrote:Maestro won’t win shit

You sound smart.

I am surprised so many here didn’t like Killers of the Flower Moon. The story of the worst kind of betrayal by one’s intimates - friends, spouses, doctors -was so powerful. A true requiem for this nation and how it came together. The acting was uniformly fantastic too. I don’t understand why there weren’t more nominations (di Caprio?) and why Lily Gladstone didn’t win Best Actress. When is she ever going to have another shot at this? (As an indigenous actress…)