Killers Of The Flower Moon

C Kent said:
I wonder if apple will break it in 2 and show it over 2 nights, apparently there's a moment that feels like a natural break
Click to expand...
Pretty sure I had to do that with The Irishman anyways, these extra long films are difficult to watch in one sitting!
 
Last edited:
m@rty said:
Pretty sure I had to do that with The Irishman anyways, these extra long films are difficult to watch in one sitting!
Click to expand...
Based on comments from a few that have seen it, they could / should have ended it at around 2h30m but for "reasons", the film continues for another hour. :)
 
I saw it last Monday, and even though I thought it was a good (albeit hard to watch) film, it was far too long. I don't think it massively benefitted from the large screen, and I think this is one of those instances where a serial would've been a better option, personally. Either that, or whack an intermission in the middle and give us all an official whazz and little-ice-cream-with-a-tiny-spoon break.
 
Last edited:
Karl said:
I saw it last Monday, and even though I thought it was a good (albeit hard to watch) film, it was far too long. I don't think it massively benefitted from the large screen, and I think this is one of those instances where a serial would've been a better option, personally. Either that, or whack an intermission in the middle and give us all an official whazz and little-ice-cream-with-a-tiny-spoon break.
Click to expand...

Given the scope and where its both funded and going to be ultimately shown - streaming, it would seem to suit a mini series. I'd imagine thats very hard for Martin Scorsese to swallow, but he was heavily involved with getting Boardwalk Empire up and running, so its not a completely new concept for him.

My aging bladder cant do 3.5 hours in a cinema and whilst the chances of this film attracting ****heads to a screening are lower, its still more than possible and it only takes one, who could deal with 3.5 hours of some idiot shouting out , talking, on the phone etc for that long... the main reason i very rarely goto the flicks these days.
 
Last edited:
Just back from the cinema and it was a pretty good movie experience. It was enjoyable and liked the build up to set the scene for the audience. It was a tad longer than necessary but it did what Martin Scorsese set out to do. i was walking in with no knowledge of the events but

was expecting Ernest (Decaprio's character) to be one of the few good guys to fight against the antagonists. What they all did to the Osage people for their wealth was an absolute atrocity.
 
Last edited:
Was wanting to watch this but know my bladder won’t hold out so hopefully there will be a break otherwise it’ll be a watch at home job with pauses
 
I think they have a point. Particularly for a film by Apple where we know it's coming to streaming in the not-too-distant future.. I'm tempted to wait and watch it at home. And that's the model that are supposed to be encouraging, and it's certainly not what Scorcese wants. When he says people sit in front of the TV for 5hrs.. yes they do. But with toilet breaks, drink breaks etc. He's kinda missing the point there.
 
Btone said:
funny enough one of the selling point i went to the cinema, was that i wouldn't sit for for over 3 hours at home. there just to many distractions, In the cinema there just me and the screen
Click to expand...
indeed.

saw this the other week. don't rate it that highly. i feel the movie is without heart, didn't do enough for us to appreciate the indians view of the land and situation, and over all felt stretched too long. the same could have been achieved by a 2.5 hour movie. there aren't really any stand out scenes that spring to mind. it's still good, just disappointing for this director.
 
unwashed potato! said:
indeed.

saw this the other week. don't rate it that highly. i feel the movie is without heart, didn't do enough for us to appreciate the indians view of the land and situation, and over all felt stretched too long. the same could have been achieved by a 2.5 hour movie. there aren't really any stand out scenes that spring to mind. it's still good, just disappointing for this director.
Click to expand...
I thought i was going to really enjoy it (didnt have any issues with the Irishmans length), but I'd go with everything you said.

Looking at the wiki for the murders , theres a hell of lot more to go at, so maybe it would be a better mini series not just focusing on Ernest and Mollie.
 
Last edited:
I’d been looking forward to seeing this since it was first announced. Finally got a chance to see it and I didn’t enjoy it all that much really.

As mentioned here and elsewhere, an hour could easily have been cut. Something was just ‘off’ about it. Nice to see De Niro and Caprio together and Lily Gladstone was excellent, set design and cinematography too. Just lacking as a film.
 
Converge said:
I’d been looking forward to seeing this since it was first announced. Finally got a chance to see it and I didn’t enjoy it all that much really.

As mentioned here and elsewhere, an hour could easily have been cut. Something was just ‘off’ about it. Nice to see De Niro and Caprio together and Lily Gladstone was excellent, set design and cinematography too. Just lacking as a film.
Click to expand...
Sums up my thoughts on it too.
 
I enjoyed the movie and setting but sweet Lord it didn’t need to be 3 hours 20 minutes long. Glad I didn’t go to the cinema.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom