
Gladstone, De Niro and DiCaprio in Killers of the Flower Moon
What? Why are you writing about that “old” movie now? Well, yes, Killers of the Flower Moon was released way back in October 2023, and yes, it’s been nominated for a variety of awards but has won very few apart from Lily Gladstone as best actress.
But this is as good a time as any to mention why and how I write. I don’t write reviews; I write analyses. There’s nothing wrong with writing reviews, and obviously my personal thoughts are going to be included as I write. But film reviewers are up against a deadline, usually only see a movie once before having to review it, usually spend half the review recounting the plot, and finally, end up with some kind of recommendation (see it, don’t bother, see it but know what you’re getting into, etc.)
Also, this particular film is three-and-a-half hours long, and for this writer to find that window of time when he’s not already doing something more time-critical than watching and writing—and is sure that he won’t fall asleep—well, that opportunity often takes a while to present itself. So what could be more important than watching a film? Well, babysitting the cutest twin girls in the universe, counseling, keeping up with friendships, and writing a play—for starters.
Killers is old news at this point, and already has a curious history. When it was released, there was excitement about a new Martin Scorsese film starring Scorsese stalwarts Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert DeNiro. It was looking like this was the front-runner for Best Picture for a while, but then it began to fade in light of the Barbenheimer silliness, and in the reality of the impressiveness of Oppenheimer. By the time the awards season was in high swing, very few awards came its way outside of Lily Gladstone’s apparent dominance in the Best Actress category. But even that ran into a speed bump by the surprise lack of a BAFTA nomination, and then the finishing touch was Emma Stone winning Best Actress for Poor Things, which only a few folks saw coming.
So here are some thoughts, more for the record than anything else:
With the 2016 Scorsese film Silence running just under three hours, and the 2019 The Irishman and 2023’s Killers of the Flower Moon both clocking in at 3.5 hours, Scorsese is clearly going for more than just box office success. In fact, all these films were money-losers, even while the exact numbers for The Irishman can never be known in the light of Netflix accounting. Scorsese seems more interested now in passion projects that reflect end-of-life concerns, be they spiritual, the painful process of mortality, or just the desire to address a nearly lost chapter in American history that’s been burning in his heart and mind. It can be a challenge to see his recent (and future) films outside of the bright light that is the director himself. But they are films that can stand on their own, albeit with some work required to pry them away from their director’s aura.
Killers is the baby that Giant and There Will Be Blood might have had, and perhaps those comparisons don’t always work in its favor. Killers is long and epic and about something important, but doesn’t always have the historical scope of the former and the forward momentum of the latter. It moves along, like The Irishman, at a pace that is not boring but neither is it engaging. Given the scope of Killers, the editing, as deft as it is, is hamstrung by having to cover too much of a story with too many characters and side plots. To make matters more challenging for the viewer, the film seems to have leaned away from dramatic intensity in favor of nimbly moving us from one action and event to the next. There is beautiful music, some breathtaking cinematography, and some very good to excellent acting. And while the film portrays a horrifying chapter in American history, we’re never invited in to experience the horror. It’s a crime that took place over time, which can be hard to dramatically sustain when we spend so much time with individual stories. Plus having two film superstars and a superstar performance at the center of your story, it’s easy to get distracted from the big historical picture.

I still am not sure what to make of DiCaprio’s performance. He is one of our great young(ish) actors, and he can non-condescendingly play down his intelligence at the service of his characters. But his character’s relationship with his future wife is the dramatic center of the film, and his starting point and turning point are ill-defined. Casting Leo was a smart move for his acting skills and likeability, and we are obviously supposed to connect with him as he takes us on the film’s journey. But it’s hard to know who he really is and why we should like him when he and the film send us so many mixed signals.
Both DiCaprio and DeNiro wear frowns looking like upside-down U’s, and that look can border on the satiric at times. Both, and especially DeNiro, give performances that transcend the frown, but the facial expression can be much at times.
Lily Gladstone, whom I was pretty sure would win the Oscar, holds the film together with something that is between a leading and supporting performance. Her acting is deeply felt and expertly expressed, with an emphasis on the quiet inner life of the character. (A Hollywood cliché is that sometimes the film that wins awards for the best music, best editing, or best acting is actually the film with the MOST music, the MOST editing, and the MOST acting. In this light, one can see why Emma Stone won over Gladstone.) There is a softness but not a weakness to Gladstone’s performance, and that helps to give some understanding to what DiCaprio’s character is doing in this story. Perhaps if she had been the center of the plot instead of either the big historical story or what the two leading men were doing, it might have been a more powerful film.
Some events end up birthing films that don’t do the subject matter justice, e.g., Red Tails, or more recently, The Boys in the Boat. A Scorsese film with great actors, powerful music, and great cinematography ought to provide the perfect setting for a story that shouldn’t be forgotten. I’m afraid that with the length of the film combined with its ultimate lack of dramatic punch, the film doesn’t quite offer a telling commensurate with the power of its real-life story.