October 27, 20231 yr 5 minutes ago, BarbieErin said: I f****** HATED this article, seems more like a hater writing, lainey's cousin... Spoiler Btw, Taylor Swift sucks and she can go to to the f******* stratosphere that I don't mind. 🙄
October 27, 20231 yr 10 minutes ago, BarbieErin said: Hide contents Btw, Taylor Swift sucks and she can go to to the f******* stratosphere that I don't mind. 🙄 I kinda respect what she achieved but I'm mostly not a fan of how she handeled things like her private/love life, public stunts/image, her crazy stans and criticism (she towards others and then when it backfires).
October 27, 20231 yr 28 minutes ago, Jade Bahr said: I kinda respect what she achieved but I'm mostly not a fan of how she handeled things like her private/love life, public stunts/image, her crazy stans and criticism (she towards others and then when it backfires). Exactly, I kinda like her music and I respect she as an artist... but her personality and the way she plays with media, with this fake friendships and "relationships", it's all a game and she's the master of playing it, it seems ALL sooo fake, argh, really makes me sick. 🤮🤢
October 27, 20231 yr On 10/25/2023 at 11:02 PM, akatosh said: Cute 🥰 On 10/25/2023 at 11:02 PM, akatosh said: Cute On 10/25/2023 at 11:02 PM, akatosh said: Cute 🥰 😍😍😍that’s not in the movie, do you know if it’s a deleted scene or a behind a scene moment?
October 27, 20231 yr I sure hope Jeff knows what he is talking about I want to see Leo on those award events red carpets !!
October 27, 20231 yr 6 minutes ago, oxford25 said: I sure hope Jeff knows what he is talking about I want to see Leo on those award events red carpets !! Hopefully I’m refreshing my feed waiting for the news hoping that the strike is over As much as a I’m happy that we have a new film, I’m also sad that there’s no promotion with leo, I’m dying for the stirke to end so we get to see leo
October 28, 20231 yr Some people really don't have problems. Looking for the theaters? Is she for real? She is lucky so many theaters are showing this dead ass long movie at all. Weird move. Thelma Schoonmaker Says Theaters Showing ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ With An Intermission Is A “Violation”
October 28, 20231 yr What Indigenous Artists Are Saying About Killers of the Flower Moon‘ Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon, based on David Grann’s 2007 book of the same name, tells the true story of the Osage Nation and the crimes committed against their people in 1920s Oklahoma. Scorsese’s goal in telling the story was to refocus the narrative on the Osage themselves, rather than the early days of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Despite having an endorsement from Principal Chief Geoffrey Standing Bear of the Osage Nation, the film, in its second week of release and trailing closely behind Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour, is beginning to widen into a bigger and deeper conversation about, as Chief Standing Bear calls it, “challenging history.” Devery Jacobs, who starred in Hulu’s acclaimed Reservation Dogs, critiqued the film, calling it “painful, grueling, unrelenting and unnecessarily graphic.” Jacobs, who is a Native actress from Canada and activist, shared “strong feelings” in a Twitter thread on October 23. “I don’t feel that these very real people were shown honor or dignity in the horrific portrayal of their deaths,” she wrote. “Contrarily, I believe that by showing more murdered Native women on screen, it normalizes the violence committed against us and further dehumanizes our people.” “Indig ppl exist beyond our grief, trauma & atrocities,” she said. “Our pride for being Native, our languages, cultures, joy & love are way more interesting & humanizing than showing the horrors white men inflicted on us.” In a statement from October 20, Chief Standing Bear said the atrocities laid bare the truth. “Killers of the Flower Moon is an Osage story of trust and betrayal as directed by Martin Scorsese,” Standing Bear in a statement. “While watching, you need to know that this is a true story. Many Osage lives were lost, and whole family trees were forever altered. The film lays bare the truth and injustices done to us, while challenging history not to be repeated. We honor our ancestors who endured this time by continuing to survive and ensuring our future, guided by our Wahzhazhe culture and traditions.” Gianna Sieke, an Osage Nation princess from 2021 to 2023 who worked on the film, discussed the difficulty of the history portrayed with Today. “It does tell our dark history, but it’s also including things that no one really knows, and it hasn’t been expressed to Osage people and anyone because it’s a dark history,” Sieke said. “People don’t really talk about it that much. And because of that, [the movie] has made a really big impact. Families are learning to cope and understand.” Regarding a scene in which Mollie Burkhart (Lily Gladstone) learns about a family tragedy, Osage Nation Congress member Brandy Lemon, who worked as a liaison between the film and the Osage community, told Today she “still wasn’t ready for it.” “It just hit me in the gut so hard, and every time I watch it, it still does,” she said. Another point of discussion became Scorsese’s choice to make Ernest Burkhart, a white man who committed the film’s central crimes played by Leonardo DiCaprio, the main character. Christopher Cote, an Osage language consultant on the film, told The Hollywood Reporter on October 19 that “Martin Scorsese, not being Osage, I think he did a great job representing our people, but this history is being told almost from the perspective of Ernest Burkhart — they kind of give him this conscience and kind of depict that there’s love,” he said at the film’s Los Angeles premiere. “But when somebody conspires to murder your entire family, that’s not love. That’s not love, that’s just beyond abuse.” “I think in the end, the question that you can be left with is: How long will you be complacent with racism?” Cote said. “How long will you go along with something and not say something, not speak up, how long will you be complacent? I think that’s because this film isn’t made for an Osage audience: It was made for everybody, not Osage. For those that have been disenfranchised, they can relate; but for other countries that have their acts and their history of oppression, this is an opportunity for them to ask themselves this question of morality, and that’s how I feel about this film.” Devery Jacobs Criticizes Scorsese’s ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’: The ‘White Perspective’ Was Centered "Being Native, watching this movie was f*cking hellfire," the "Reservation Dogs" actress tweeted. Actress Devery Jacobs is speaking out against Martin Scorsese’s “Killers of the Flower Moon.” The “Reservation Dogs” star took to Twitter to address the 1920s-set epic that follows the real-life killings of indigenous Osage after oil was found on their land in Oklahoma. Lily Gladstone stars as Mollie Burkhart, who alerted the federal government of a series of murders. Leonardo DiCaprio stars as her husband, who helped a criminal mastermind (Robert De Niro) plan targeted attacks to inherit head rights. “I HAVE THOUGHTS. I HAVE STRONG FEELINGS,” Jacobs tweeted. “This film was painful, grueling, unrelenting, and unnecessarily graphic.” She continued, “Being Native, watching this movie was fucking hellfire. Imagine the worst atrocities committed against yr ancestors, then having to sit thru a movie explicitly filled w/ them, w/ the only respite being 30min long scenes of murderous white guys talking about/planning the killings.” Jacobs wrote, “I don’t feel that these very real people were shown honor or dignity in the horrific portrayal of their deaths. Contrarily, I believe that by showing more murdered Native women on screen, it normalizes the violence committed against us and further dehumanizes our people. I can’t believe it needs to be said, but Indig ppl exist beyond our grief, trauma, & atrocities. Our pride for being Native, our languages, cultures, joy, & love are way more interesting & humanizing than showing the horrors white men inflicted on us.” Jacobs called out Gladstone’s performance, which has garnered the actress Oscar buzz. “It must be noted that Lily Gladstone is a an absolute legend & carried Mollie w/ tremendous grace,” Jacobs wrote. “All the incredible Indigenous actors were the only redeeming factors of this film. Give Lily her goddamn Oscar.” Yet, Jacobs pointed to Osage character being “painfully underwritten” compared to De Niro and DiCaprio’s respective parts. “But while all of the performances were strong, if you look proportionally, each of the Osage characters felt painfully underwritten, while the white men were given way more courtesy and depth,” Jacobs penned. “This is the issue when non-Native directors are given the liberty to tell our stories; they center the white perspective and focus on Native people’s pain.” She continued, “For the Osage communities involved in creating this film; I can imagine how cathartic it is to have these stories and histories finally acknowledged, especially on such a prestigious platform like this film. There was beautiful work done by so many Wazhazhe on this film. But admittedly, I would prefer to see a $200 million movie from an Osage filmmaker telling this history, any day of the week.” “Killers of the Flower Moon” star Gladstone previously told Vulture that the film is “not a white savior story” and instead centers around “the Osage saying, ‘Do something. Here’s money. Come help us.'” She added that “you don’t say no to that offer” to star in a Scorsese film, but there’s a “double-edged sword” when it comes to telling stories of Indigenous people. “You want to have more Natives writing Native stories; you also want the masters to pay attention to what’s going on,” Gladstone said. “American history is not history without Native history. It was clear that I wasn’t just going to be given space to collaborate. I was expected to bring a lot to the table. That’s what being equitable is — not just opening the door. It’s pulling a seat out next to you at the table.” How ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ Fails Native Americans Like Me Despite Martin Scorsese’s best efforts, ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ can’t escape its fundamentally white lens. It’s the genteel kindness of the white characters in Martin Scorsese’s new film Killers of the Flower Moon that hit me hardest. The ease with which they could both comfort and kill their Osage friends and families. The veneer of love and compassion that masked envy and a disbelief that people they deemed “incompetent” could live better lives than themselves. The Osage people at the heart of the film persevered against a sustained assault and genocide. They fought to thrive in a world they did not create with rules that were not their own. And yet, they are not at the center of their own story. Instead, Killers of the Flower Moon is once again told through a white lens, despite concerted efforts by Scorsese and co-screenwriter Eric Roth to incorporate Osage voices. Osage language consultant Christopher Cote, who worked on the film, argued that it would have been better to tell the story through Mollie’s (Lily Gladstone) eyes, but would have needed an Osage director to make that happen. Reservation Dogs star Devery Jacobs recently said that the white characters were portrayed with greater “courtesy and depth” than the Osage characters. As a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation, I couldn’t agree more. Killers of the Flower Moon presents an unflinching account of greed and apathy fueled by America’s thirst for oil and the progress that came with it in the early 1900s. Americans replaced their horses with cars, and their candles with electricity powered by oil that improved their lives with the conveniences we take for granted today. And it was Osage men, women, and children who paid for Americans’ newfound prosperity. The U.S. government deported the Osage people and other Native Americans from their homelands to Oklahoma in the 19th and early 20th centuries to make room for white settlers moving west. The Osage people had no choice but to give up the world they knew and start new lives. They arrived in Oklahoma as the oil-based economy took shape and negotiated terms that enabled them to sell parcels of land while keeping ownership of the minerals beneath them. The Osage people did not expect to find any oil, let alone end up with the highest per capita wealth in the country. They lived the “American dream” of electric-powered prosperity better than white Americans ever dreamt possible. But white settlers followed the money, devising ruthless schemes to take Osage land and oil for themselves. This is the world that Killers of the Flower Moon presents its viewers. It is a three-and-a-half-hour barrage of senseless killing masterminded by William Hale (Robert De Niro), a white patriarch who embedded himself within the Osage community. Hale called himself “King of the Osage Hills” and a “true friend” of the Osage people as he planned their deaths. Hale persuaded his nephew Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) to woo and marry Mollie Kyle (Gladstone), who came from a wealthy Osage family. More than 60 Osage people, including many members of Mollie’s family, lost their lives to mysterious poisonings or shootings before J. Edgar Hoover’s newly created Bureau of Investigations intervened and brought Hale and others to justice. The devastation of the Osage people was a means to an end, a trade-off the settlers were willing to make. Long before the movie came to screens, it took a white author, David Grann, to give this story the national profile it deserves in his 2017 book Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI. However, Grann wasn’t the first author to tell the Osage people’s story; Chickasaw author Linda Hogan recounted it in her Pulitzer prize-winning book Mean Spirit in 1990, and 15 years later, Osage author Charles H. Red Corn gave his own people a voice in his book A Pipe for February. Neither of those books caught the attention of Hollywood in the way Grann’s book did. I can only hope the power and success of this film will give Native creators an opportunity to tell their stories to inform, educate, and entertain the wider world. But more than anything, Killers of the Flower Moon gives audiences a false sense of comfort. It is easy to condemn atrocities that took place a century ago and assure ourselves that we are better people today. However, this story and the moral questions it raises are as pressing for us today as they were then. As America and the wider world find new engines to power our lives, replacing oil with lithium, cobalt, and other raw elements, again, it is marginalized people who pay the price for progress. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) “modern-day slaves” scrape the depths of mines to extract the cobalt used in more than 90 percent of the lithium batteries that power our cars. The DRC should be one of the wealthiest countries in the world, a Norway of Africa, but it remains one of the poorest. Similar devastation is found where the quest for nickel, another vital element for electric car batteries, has destroyed villages and landscapes in Indonesia, Brazil, and other countries. The waste byproducts poison the water, kill food sources, and increase the risks of respiratory disorders and cancers for those living nearby. Native Americans are also facing the threats of today’s industrial progress. Earlier this year, the U.S. federal government approved what will be the country’s largest lithium mine. Several Native nations objected to development in Thacker Pass, a nine-square-mile region of northern Nevada that they consider sacred land. It was on that same land that U.S. federal agents killed between 30 and 50 Native men, women, and children in 1865. Members of these tribes sued the federal government to stop this development, arguing that they were not sufficiently consulted. They lost their case in July, and development continues. Killers of the Flower Moon raises painful questions that need urgent answers as we pursue our quest for energy, prosperity, and a sustainable future. No form of energy is truly “clean,” which means that someone will pay an economic, environmental, and social cost for its production. It’s far easier to make trade-offs in the name of progress when those trade-offs are made against people we don’t know in places we don’t see. As these cases show, this means that marginalized people will pay the highest price as others prosper. We can’t right the wrongs of the past—or the present—without putting those directly affected at the heart of decisions made. They must shape the options available, and they must share in the benefits realized, as the Osage people did when they were forced to Oklahoma. However, they must also be protected with transparency and legal accountability to ensure they retain their rightful benefits and that any development is undertaken with their permission on terms acceptable to them. They, and their world, must be respected as highly as the world of the companies that extract resources or the consumers who drive the cars that their land made possible. Achieving this will not be easy, but it is essential. Killers of the Flower Moon Is Not the Story an Osage Would Have Told. You Should Still See It. I’ve never seen a movie immerse itself in a culture like this film did with ours. I’ve always been so proud to be Osage. I’m thankful that I have a father that instilled that identity in me from a young age, as well as a non-Indigenous mother who has always reinforced it. But being Indigenous comes with a heavy load. All too often, it feels that we’re carrying on our ancestors’ Sisyphean task of struggling to become more visible and have our issues heard by non-Indigenous communities. So when I heard years ago that this story I had grown up hearing was being adapted into a feature film and that none other than Martin Scorsese was directing it, I was knocked off my feet. I also had conflicting thoughts. On one hand, this was an opportunity for us to have our history told like never before. On the other, it was being done by an outsider who hadn’t grown up with it like we had. In 2021 those nerves were somewhat quieted. That year, I decided that I wanted to get more involved with my tribe and be given a name. My recent ancestors chose not to follow traditional naming practices (an effect of colonization), so finding my family’s clan has required a ton of work that I’m still undertaking. But because our Wahzhazhe Cultural Center was busy with this film, they were hardly able to handle any other requests for a long time. Knowing that Scorsese and his crew were making use of them and many other resources on the rez began to ease my concerns and gave me hope that we would be properly represented. And represented we were. Before I saw Killers of the Flower Moon, I spoke with Jim Gray, a former chief of the Osage Nation. In our conversation, he told me that he’s never seen a film immerse itself in a culture like this one did with ours. Having now seen it, I have to wholeheartedly agree. Language was taught by our teachers, including Christopher Cote, who gave a wonderful interview after he saw the film at the Los Angeles premiere. The costumes were made by Osage artists. Everything feels authentic to the time period. As far as the story itself goes, I do not think that this is how an Osage would’ve told it. From all I’ve read about Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio initiating a shift in the story’s focus to center the Osage perspective rather than that of Tom White and the then-named Bureau of Investigation, I was hopeful that we would experience this tragedy through Mollie Burkhart (played sensationally by Lily Gladstone), the real-life Osage woman whose family was the target of one of the schemes of William Hale (Robert De Niro). Instead, the filmmakers opted to follow her white husband, convicted murderer Ernest Burkhart (DiCaprio). While I am disappointed in this choice, I do think that viewing the plot through the lens of Ernest grants the non-Osage audience the opportunity to gain more knowledge and understanding of the murderous scheme as the movie goes on. Like Christopher said, I think it would take an Osage to make this film from the perspective of an Osage person. The problem is that, as Gladstone has said, no one is giving an Osage filmmaker Scorsese money to tell our story right now. I hope that as more and more Indigenous filmmakers are given opportunities, an Osage will have the chance to adapt Charles H. Red Corn’s novel A Pipe for February. The book tells the story of the Reign of Terror from the perspective of someone that lived through it, and I think it serves as a necessary companion to David Grann’s more journalistic Killers of the Flower Moon. As I was watching the film, I kept wondering how Scorsese would end it. After all, there’s no white savior here. We were not saved by what is now known as the FBI. Our people got through this by relying on one another. Many cases weren’t investigated, much less solved. It’s hard to put an end to a chapter that’s still present. To me, the finale just might be perfect. It elicited every single emotion I’ve ever felt when learning about the Reign of Terror. It made me so angry, so sad, and so disillusioned with our country’s justice system. It also serves as a painful reminder of how stories centered on nonwhite groups are often told. The affected population is all too frequently granted a mere footnote in their own story in favor of making sure the “good guys” are glorified for “saving the day,” regardless of historical accuracy. Additionally, I feel that this scene turns the camera both inward and onto the audience simultaneously. (Slight spoilers ahead.) The all-white cast of what seems to be a radio program delivers this story of depravity not only to an in-studio audience of the same demographic, but also to the (presumably) predominantly white audience in the movie theater. The message from Scorsese? To my mind, it’s that he knows that he and the viewers are and have always been complicit in these atrocities. It’s now up to the audience whether they understand and accept their culpability. There’s been so much made of the run time of this movie, but I wholeheartedly encourage you to see it. It doesn’t fly by per se, but it does maintain a good pace that I never found tedious. There’s a lot to tell here—my ancestors lived through more than a decade of this. A length of three and a half hours is more than justified. Besides, the masterful performances by everyone involved help to keep you locked in. It’s important to me that you, the non-Osage reader of this article, know that this is merely a chapter in Osage history. While the effects of the Reign of Terror still live with us today, we do not live as victims. We are a proud, resilient people and our tribe is a thriving nation. I know that for many of you, this will be your first exposure to our people. I do hope it’s not the last. For any non-Indigenous person seeing this film and encountering this history for the first time, I encourage you to be angry. I think it’s a very healthy emotion to feel when learning about an event like this. This is a depiction of greed, racism, and an attempted extermination of a people, after all. But rather than sitting and wrestling with that anger internally, I hope that you can turn it into a drive to get engaged. Indigenous communities still have many issues that affect us today. I hope you use your anger to help us fight for visibility and for change. Finally, I leave you with this: As the opportunity for Native peoples to have a voice in the entertainment space increases, more stories will come to light. Although some people will be content to plug their ears or bury their heads in the sand, that doesn’t change history. No matter what you want to believe, you cannot understand the formation of the United States as we know it today without first reckoning with and understanding the sins it was formed through.
October 28, 20231 yr So KOTFM will be Leos first financial "debacle" (lol) in... 13 years? At least it was very profitable for Leo LOL Apple’s $44 Million Open For ‘Killers Of The Flower Moon’ May Not Matter You may have missed it this past weekend, but a little art film hit theaters, telling a little-known but painfully true story about white people being horrible to indigenous people, again. It was hailed as a hit after hauling in $23.2 million domestically over the weekend, and $44 million worldwide. That's a solid opening for a limited-release film grappling with a challenging subject, especially given the problems theaters are facing since the pandemic. It's even heart-warming to think how an up-and-coming director has connected with the movie-going public through his complex, deeply crafted work illuminating an important story. Except, of course, that Killers of the Flower Moon is anything but a little art film, and its 80-year-old director Martin Scorsese is no up-and-coming auteur. He’s made some of the last half century’s most celebrated movies, from Taxi Driver to Raging Bull, Goodfellas to Casino, The Departed to Wolf of Wall Street. So it was a success, right? Well, not really, at least under the standard calculus of Hollywood theatrical releases. In fact, if Killers had come from a traditional Hollywood studio, like almost all of Scorsese’s previous projects (Netflix distributed his last epic, The Irishman), and had an opening weekend like this one, it would almost certainly be regarded as a financial debacle. Studio executives likely would blame the poor economic climate, the industry’s strikes and post-pandemic hangover, or some other gremlin (when in doubt, blame marketing), as they prepared to write off a nine-figure sum, and likely the company’s entire quarter. That’s because Killers cost a widely reported $200 million to produce, 10 times the budget of even a relatively well-funded arthouse film. And marketing from Apple and Paramount PARA -1.8%, which Apple is paying to distribute the film in theaters, likely will top another $100 million, given its wide release in more than 3,600 U.S. theaters. Killers will be challenged to have a profitable run in theaters. There’s that expansive length, 3 hours and 26 minutes, which makes it difficult for theaters to run more than one showing in an evening, instead of two or more with a shorter project. And the day-to-day dropoff in box office isn’t promising either. From Friday to Saturday, domestic grosses dropped 13%, and from Saturday to Sunday, it fell another 30%. So much for positive word of mouth on social media. There’s even the distribution fee Apple is paying Paramount, which eats further into Apple’s share of box office. It’s true that the film was warmly received by those who did see it. By the calculations of BoxOfficeMojo, Killers had the 42nd-best opening weekend of all time among R-rated films, and the 53rd-best such weekend of any October release. Rotten Tomatoes’ survey of critics gave it a 92% “fresh” rating; the audience scores were nearly as good, at 85% from more than 1,000 people. It’s absolutely Apple’s biggest awards contender in this strike-addled Oscar season. Scorsese personally has 14 previous Oscar nominations. Though he, puzzlingly, won only one of those previous nominations, on The Departed, his films have attracted plenty of other awards and nominations too, and will almost certainly get a houseful of nominations again this time. And that matters for Apple’s obvious quality-over-quantity strategy, relying on awards and critical praise to communicate value for TV+. More awards equal more subscribers, especially for a company that’s always made its mass-market products premium experiences with premium prices. But it's hard to see the box office haul for Killers as an achievement. Apple and Paramount gave Killers the 50th-widest release of any R-rated film ever, on 3,618 screens, according to BoxOfficeMojo. Basically, if people wanted to see Killers, it was available on a nearby screen. That wide release translated to a per-screen average, that other measure of art-film success, of $5,216. In art-film terms, that’s kinda meh. But ask an industry analyst what all this means for Apple, as I did Tuesday at a conference on streaming video advertising on the Warner Bros. Discovery lot in Burbank, Calif., and they scoff about whether it means anything at all. One analyst shared in conversation that Killers’ nice but hardly huge opening weekend isn’t a loss for Apple until it says so. And if ever Apple decides something like Killers is actually an issue, traditional Hollywood media companies better look out. As the analyst noted, Apple reported $111.4 billion in free cash flow last year, has a market capitalization of $2.7 trillion, and is one of the world’s most valuable companies. Selling literal boatloads of iPhones (232 million last year) gives the company some considerable leeway when side hobbies like a streaming service hit a speed bump. It’s just harder to figure out what Apple is doing with TV+. It’s not like CEO Tim Cook was in the room Tuesday with other media company CEOs in restarted negotiations with the striking actors of SAG-AFTRA. TV+ just matters a lot less to Apple than, say, Disney+ does to Disney’s stumbling fortunes (and Disney CEO Bob Iger was in on the strike negotiations). True, Apple TV+, has had some undeniable successes, like Ted Lasso’s two Outstanding Comedy Emmys, and CODA’s Best Picture Oscar. Series such as The Morning Show, Severance, For All Mankind, Foundation, Silo and Shrinking have gotten critical and pop-cultural notice. The service’s library, however, remains painfully thin, despite four years of notoriously heavy spending on originals and acquisitions. That library looks particularly underfed compared to competing services from Hollywood media companies that have been making movies and TV shows for a century. Even fellow tech giant Amazon buffed up Prime Video, spending $8.5 billion on MGM and its vast library of film and TV. Apple has generally declined to lay out a business case for Apple TV+, other than make it part of the Apple One bundle of services that it sells. Apple One also includes, at its beefiest, the iCloud backup service, Apple Music, the Apple Arcade game service, Apple News+, and Fitness+ as well as TV+. The “premier” tier provides all six services for up to six people, for $32.95 per month (Apple just raised prices on Apple One, TV+ and Arcade on Wednesday). Apple has used the streaming service as part of its long-running strategy to expand its Services division, which includes all the Apple One services plus profitable ventures such as its Apple Care warranties. The company won’t report its latest quarterly results until Nov. 2, but in August, Apple reported Q2 Services revenues of $21.2 billion, thanks to more than 1 billion subscriptions of all kinds. Again, that’s for just the quarter. For perspective, those quarterly revenues equal nearly as much as the entire market capitalization for Warner Bros. Discovery ($24.6 billion). So when we try to evaluate whether a grim, 3.5-hour historical drama from an acknowledged master is a “flop,” it’s important to remember one thing: as long as people keep subscribing to TV+ and Apple One, maybe encouraged because Killers wins an Oscar or two, who cares? It. Just. Doesn’t. Matter. At least until Apple decides it does matter. Then, as that analyst warned me, Hollywood better look out.
October 28, 20231 yr For those who wondered after the movie... like me. In short: Ernest also fucked up the life of his living children. What a surprise. What Happened To Mollie & Ernest’s Children After Killers Of The Flower Moon Killers of the Flower Moon is based on a true story, which means the story continues through Mollie and Ernst’s kids after the movie has finished. "Killers of the Flower Moon" tells the true story of the Osage murders while focusing on the Burkharts and their legacy. James "Cowboy" Burkhart, son of Ernest and Mollie Burkhart, grew up, married, and had children after the events of the movie. Elizabeth Burkhart, the daughter of Ernest and Mollie, remained in Osage and later moved to Fairfax, but little is known about her fate. Martin Scorsese's Killers of the Flower Moon tells the true story of a series of murders in the Osage Nation of Oklahoma during the 1920s, specifically through the lens of Ernest and Mollie Burkhart, and although the movie ends in one particular way, the story actually continues in real life through the Burkharts' children. Killers of the Flower Moon is famed director Martin Scorsese's most recent release. It is based on the 2017 book of the same name, written by David Grann, and stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Lily Gladstone, Jesse Plemmons, and Robert De Niro. While Killers of the Flower Moon focuses heavily on the Burkharts' roles in the Osage murders, the movie acknowledges the family they built over time. During the span of the film, Ernest and Mollie fall in love and have three children together. Though not much is seen of these children, they definitely impact Ernest's actions throughout the film. For example, when one of their children dies of whooping cough, Ernest is moved to testify in court. Ultimately, though Killers of the Flower Moon eventually ends, the legacy of the Burkharts and their story continues on through what happened to Mollie Burkhart and her children, James 'Cowboy' Burkhart and Elizabeth Burkhart. What Happened To James 'Cowboy' Burkhart After Killers Of The Flower Moon Ernest and Mollie Burkhart's son James Burkhart grew up and started a family after the end of Killers of the Flower Moon. According to an article by The Washington Post, James, who went by the nickname "Cowboy," married and had two daughters, Doris and Margie. Although James was a loving father and a kind man, he had a quick temper that could make him erratic and violent. Of her father, Margie said, "He was a complicated man." James was also a long-time alcoholic. Often, he would drink to such excess that his young daughters would have to drive home from the bar, one working the pedals and the other steering. Ultimately, James' vices and shortcomings came as a result of what his family faced when he was a child. At just 9 years old, James' father Ernest went to prison for conspiring to kill members of the Osage nation in order to steal their oil. This was not just a traumatizing betrayal, but led to James and his family being ostracized by the Osage. The Burkharts were never the same after Ernest's sentencing, and this led to James' predilection for alcohol and fighting. According to Margie, James could never quite forgive his father for what he did. What Happened To Elizabeth Burkhart After Killers Of The Flower Moon Unlike her brother James, not much is known about the fate of Elizabeth Burkhart. James' daughter Margie mentions Elizabeth in The Washington Post, referring to her as aunt Liz, but nothing else is explored about the Burkharts' daughter. It seems that Elizabeth remained in Osage, Oklahoma after the events of Killers of the Flower Moon, and later, moved to a town called Fairfax in 1940. She also married a man named Claude Henry Shafer. It is unclear whether Elizabeth had children, and her date of death in unconfirmed. However, it can be assumed that, like James, Elizabeth was deeply impacted by the events of Killers of the Flower Moon.
October 28, 20231 yr I disagree. They are both terrible human beings no doubt but at least Candie never made a secret of his evilness while Ernest hided his true face behind a mask of pretended love and careness (well at least in the movie). The proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. When he reveals his true face it's already too late. The worst of all enemies in my book.
October 28, 20231 yr 43 minutes ago, Jade Bahr said: I disagree. They are both terrible human beings no doubt but at least Candie never made a secret of his evilness while Ernest hided his true face behind a mask of pretended love and careness (well at least in the movie). The proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. When he reveals his true face it's already too late. The worst of all enemies in my book. Ernest at least showed some remorse. Calvin was completely evil. They are both evil but I think Calvin wins here. 2 minutes ago, Jade Bahr said: So funny.😄 Leo thinks he can just walk like this and nobody will recognize him. But they always recognize him.
October 28, 20231 yr 41 minutes ago, akatosh said: Ernest at least showed some remorse. Calvin was completely evil. They are both evil but I think Calvin wins here. Well to be fair Calvin was killed in the middle of his evilness. He never really got the chance nor time to regret anything. If devils survive they mostly regret their bad doings at some point just like King Louis in TMITIM another anti human character of Leo.
October 29, 20231 yr Not sure if this article was posted but it has an interesting take on Ernest's deeds: Spoiler https://www.indiewire.com/features/interviews/martin-scorsese-talks-killers-of-the-flower-moon-explained-1234918654/ Martin Scorsese, the Interview: On Reframing ‘Killers,’ Subverting DiCaprio’s Star Power — and ‘The Wager’ When Eric Roth first adapted non-fiction master David Grann’s extraordinary 2017 work, “Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI,” Leonardo DiCaprio, who first optioned the book, and director Martin Scorsese weren’t feeling it. The story was fascinating and terrible: A group of white men, led by William “King” Hale, exploited and effectively exterminated at least 20 (and likely many more) members of the oil-rich Osage Nation in Oklahoma back in the 1920s. DiCaprio, in his sixth collaboration with Scorsese, was set to play the book’s riveting hero, FBI investigator Tom White, who solved many of the murders and put Hale in prison. Only problem was, after an early table read right before the pandemic, DiCaprio didn’t want to play White. He proposed that he should play Hale’s nephew, Ernest Burkhart, who executed many of the murders at his uncle’s behest. A very different movie emerged, one that focused on how Hale (Robert DeNiro, his 10th movie with Scorsese) directed his nephew to romance and marry Mollie, a rich Osage woman (Lily Gladstone). As is his wont, Scorsese went on to create a gorgeous $200-million, three-and-a-half-hour epic, financed by AppleTV+ and shot by Rodrigo Prieto with production design by Jack Fisk, that focused more on the Osage and less on their white FBI savior (Jesse Plemons as White), who now doesn’t turn up until the two-hour mark. The movie debuted at Cannes to rave reviews, and opened October 20 in theaters via Paramount Pictures. After 45 days it will stream on Apple TV+. As the award season gets under way, “Killers of the Flower Moon” is poised to exceed “The Irishman”‘s 10 Oscar nominations. And might even win some. I spoke to Scorsese, as engaging a subject as any interviewer could desire, in L.A. The following interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Please note: spoilers abound. Anne Thompson: If you had made this movie before the pandemic, what movie would it have been? Martin Scorsese: We would have found ourselves at that juncture where we realized that the path we were taking was something that we weren’t going to do. And I don’t think the picture would have been made, between myself and Leo. The creative process of finding the heart of it, and figuring out where it had to go, would have happened anyway? Yeah, because [Leo is] the main thing for me, meaning, which character is he going to play? Would I have enjoyed the Texas Rangers in the past? Yes, I would have, but not at my age now. If it was me, 20 or 25 years ago, I’d say, “Yeah, let’s do a foray into the American West, from the European American’s point of view.” That doesn’t mean it has to be hagiographic for them in any way, or revisionist; it’s an honest look at it. But over the years, that’s changed. And so it changed a great deal from the early ’70s, when I was 29, 30 years old, and began to realize that the Western the way I imagined it from the beautiful, extraordinary films made by the Hollywood studios in the ’40s and ’50s had been designed with a certain philosophy and political point of view. Do you think this is a Western? It’s a gangster movie! No, not really. That’s what I’m saying. It’s kind of a gangster movie. Yeah, there is not much difference between what [Bill Hale and his cronies] do and what the crime families did in Chicago, and then New York at the turn of the century 1900 to 1950, where I grew up around them. It’s just that it may have been not as wide-ranging. With organized crime, you have an overall structure of evil. Here, it’s specific, in certain areas, locations. It reflects a point of view, and a sense of, “We are superior to you. You don’t know what’s good for you, you don’t know how to handle money. We do. And by the way, in the meantime, if you don’t know how to handle money, well, we can help you with that. As long as we get a good, good chunk of it ourselves.” One slip adds to another, and then ultimately: “If this particular person, she’s so old, she’s going to die anyway. He’s drinking too much. Or he has a problem over here and he’s just going to crash his car one day, the way he drives. OK, so maybe we should just push them over the edge and they’re gonna go anyway, and so we’ll make some money on it.” As you worked with Eric Roth and DiCaprio on the script, his character Ernest Burkhart is a tad dim and does what his uncle tells him to do. Ernest loves his Osage wife Mollie at the same time that he’s killing her. This becomes the heart of the movie? We realized that was really the heart of the film. And having met with the Osage so many times and heard from Margie Burkhart, who was the great-great-granddaughter of Ernest, she knew them. She kept saying, “Don’t forget it isn’t as simple as villains and victims. You have to remember Mollie and Ernest were in love.” And that always stayed with me when we were still working on the other version of the script. I said, “Well, if they’re in love, we got to show that too.” And then that became difficult in terms of showing all the machinations of the Bureau investigation. Plus, this love story, it was getting unwieldy. And then finally Leo said, “If I play Ernest, we could turn it upside down and go in from the ground level.” And I said, “Absolutely.” So DiCaprio was the first driver of that change. Absolutely. Because we were trying to find something for him to play with [FBI investigator] Tom White. Jesse Plemons is excellent as Tom White, but I found that Tom White was an extraordinary man, but in effect, I’ve seen it before. What would I do with Leo? You threw away the whodunit aspect from the book. And told us from the beginning what was really happening. Because it doesn’t matter who did it? They all did it. So it’s why they did it? Well, what is in us that makes us do that? What is our flaw in our own human nature, that makes us take advantage of others, that sees us as superior? Being one of them too, European American, of course, I come from a southern climate, Sicily, a little different from northern climates in Europe and Scandinavia. So many people came over as as immigrants, as settlers. And there was an ethic of you sow and you reap. You work, and then God blesses you with rewards. It just doesn’t seem right, from the point of view of that group of people from Europe. “Why should these people [the Osage] who don’t work, suddenly be blessed with all this richness, because it comes out of the ground? First of all, they’re not Christian. They don’t know anything about how to handle money, what money is.” So what does the Tom White character do, when he turns up after two hours, if he’s not solving the murders? De Niro’s character Hale does a mop-up operation, he kills off, silences all his associates. And then, as it’s all circling, and circling and circling onto Ernest, Ernest feels his uncle wouldn’t do that to him or Mollie. He thinks his uncle is going to take it to a point where Mollie would be OK. He’ll be OK. Does he not realize that he’s killing Mollie? No, he doesn’t. Yes, he does, subliminally. But he refuses to accept it. That’s why he takes that sip himself. You know, he refuses to accept. You see it on Leo’s face during the flames. He knows. But he still refuses to accept that he’s part of it. It’s his character’s weakness. He’s deluded. Totally. You look at history: How did that government get into power? Well, a lot of good decent people let that government get into power. Look at the world and Europe between 1930 and 1940. There’s a lot of good people who maybe through letting one thing slide and letting another thing slide and another thing slide, that they could have taken a moral stand on? They didn’t. Because they had their own troubles. “My kids are sick, I got to do this. I need to make money for that. OK, that’s fine. It’s a good government. Let them go.” And they become complicit. DiCaprio presents himself in a less glamorous way. He messed around with his teeth and mouth. Was that something you debated? He needed to be sexy enough to seduce Mollie; clearly he has enough glamour and allure to spare. Are you talking about a movie star or an actor movie star? People say, “Oh you know, Cary Grant, he was a great movie star.” He’s a great actor, but he never got an Oscar. Here, you have the elements that Leo DiCaprio brings with him from all the other pictures, in terms of the allure of the movie star, right. But, he is a great actor, so he wasn’t afraid to move ahead that way. Sometimes I have to say, “Hey, that’s too much” with this or that. But we narrowed it down. I had people around saying, “It’s a little too obvious and trying for something to break the image,” but he looks pretty good for the character. And also his charm still comes through. And we stopped it there and even Bob played around a little bit too, with some facial things that we did. You know, it’s a matter of how much Marlon Brando put cotton in his mouth. This is a restrained performance for De Niro. No, he doesn’t need to do much. He’s the king of the Osage Hills. He doesn’t need to get upset and to get angry, to raise his voice. Maybe once he has to raise his voice in the Masonic Hall for his nephew, when he says, “Get control of your house, of your home!,” but the rest is like, he’s the king. What I learned from the Osage [was], these aren’t villains coming in killing up people. [They] are living together as friends. That letter at the end that Larry Fessenden reads in the radio show, that letter is actually word for word from Bill Hale. That’s real. I love the jail scene. Oh, thank you. That’s my favorite. How did that scene come together? That’s a case where I kept working on the script as we were shooting, with the actors, with the Osage. People would say things, even friends of mine would walk around and I’d write something down. The movie was a living organism that started to keep growing. And I didn’t have the anxiety that we had, let’s say, on “The Departed,” where I didn’t know if I was gonna to get it. We kept rewriting and working it. Here, I felt comfortable that what we could feel was honest. And so ultimately, that particular last scene, [we were asking], “When is there going to be the showdown between the bad guy and the good guy?” There is no good guy. What showdown? First, we thought, “Oh, they could be in the jail in the same cell, and they start fighting and beating each other up.” Then I said, “Well, that’s like any formula film,” — I’m not saying formula films are bad — I’m saying that this picture demands something else, I don’t know quite what it is yet. And then we said, “What if Bob’s behind bars, and Leo’s on the outside and they grab each other through the bars?? So that’s a little better. So why are they grabbing each other? It’s beyond hitting. It’s dead. It reminds you of when Joe Pesci looks at Bob De Niro at Howard Johnson’s towards the end of “The Irishman,” and he says about the killing that has to happen, he says, “It’s going to happen. It’s fallen on us.” That’s quiet. It’s about power. And here we finally worked and worked and worked on the scene: We got the dialogue down. Two or three days before shooting, we waited and waited and waited. We had the jail area built. So we had the patience to do the other scenes first. And we slipped into it. And, it’s finally Leo coming up and saying, “Well, you know, I’m gonna have to testify,” meaning like, “I’m gonna have to leave you.” It’s almost like a breakup, like a divorce: “I’m going to try to be amiable.” What they call an amicable divorce. I don’t know if there’s such a thing, but people do have feelings. But he’s afraid to say, “Bill, I’m gonna go against you.” He has to put it that way. And he uses his family as an excuse. “I got to think of my family now.” And Bill’s last weapon is, “I love you, my son.” And the two actors, do they rehearse? Rehearsal for us is like reading it, arguing, discussing. Not even arguments or debating, it’s saying, “You know, that line is too much. Do you need it? Oh, you could say it. And we’re here, here and here. You don’t want to do one without it? For God’s sakes!” We’re together. It isn’t antagonistic, we know each other for years. And they do too. And there’s mutual respect. Exactly. At times, we find that Leo is younger, and his energy goes flying. And Bob and I are older. So we wait until he calms down a bit. And then I give my opinion and Bob gives his, and I give mine from both. It deals with a lot of patience and trust. So when you get to the set, you know what you’re going to do, more or less? There are surprises, like Ramsay going to find A.C. Kirby in the hotel where he knocks on the door: “A.C.!” and you hear the guy say, “Yeah, this is John. Don’t shoot!” And he opens the door. “Don’t shoot.” The actor did that. I realize he’s right. A.C. Kirby’s a bad guy. He just starts shooting through that door. (Laughing.) So we said, “Fine, print it. Let’s move on.” What was the allure of of Lily Gladstone? You need her to be able to stand up to Leo, right? Yeah, she was able to stand up to anybody. She’s tough and strong, and tender, and sweet. And when I say strong, it’s there in her eyes and her face, and she has right on her side. She knows what she thinks and what she feels. And if as a character, she has the weakness, it is the weakness for Ernest. The trust that Ernest would never hurt her. Mollie is also deluded. In that sense, yeah, I would think yes. Things go a long way before she realizes. Oh, god, yes. But that’s what happened. That’s what gave us the confidence to keep moving that way, because even Tom White and his men in David Grann’s book, they kept pointing out that she kept showing up at the trial and she’s still with [Ernest]. They couldn’t believe it. Really, it’s in the book. That’s true. Look, she’s still there. And all we know is that she was in bad shape, she was terrible and then those Bureau of Investigation guys came in and took her to a hospital and she got better. What was the most difficult scene to shoot? In terms of physicality? There was a period after the wedding scene, when if we were shooting anything exterior it was at times 110 degrees. So when you see everybody in their three-piece suits and blankets and everything it was extraordinarily difficult. And one of the hardest scenes to shoot was the explosion of the house and the aftermath. It was just the flames and the heat and the placing of Rita to look like a saint in repose. We were bug-eyed by that point. It was a long shoot, 100 days, on the Osage reservation in Oklahoma. I’m so sorry about you losing your old friend Robbie Robertson. I was working at UA when you released “The Last Waltz.” So I remember the coke in Neil Young’s nostril. That had to be an optical. I think it cost about $10,000 at the time, it just distracted visually from this beautiful song that they were singing, “Helpless.” How finished was Robertson’s score? It was done, it was done. The only time he couldn’t travel was unfortunately to Cannes. He would have seen the film there at Cannes and experienced that extraordinary reaction. And had some closure that way. But we made him understand that it was something that we couldn’t expect in terms of the reaction to his music. I’m so sorry. And you would have wanted him to be around for the new “Last Waltz” restoration. We did work on that. And it would just have been wonderful to be here in LA and have a little sip of a drink or something after the screening. I’m unable to do it. It’s devastating. It must be very frustrating to not have your actors around? Well, it is. I understand why. And I agree why. But this is usually a time for myself and the actor sometimes to at least look at each other and smile and say, “I think we did well.” It’s just a time of coming together and allowing ourselves a little bit of enjoyment for the reception to the picture. Not every picture gets the same reception. I’m just saying in this particular case, we felt good about it. We always feel good about the films, but very often in my career, not all my movies get received warmly. So we’re used to that. But we really miss each other. And I’m sad about it. Because not only is it Leo’s best work, but one of Bob’s greatest works. And certainly Lily Gladstone is transcendent in her work in this picture. It’s beyond! I couldn’t take the lens off her face. She looked like something out of the Renaissance. For me, of course, because I’m Italian. l am a David Grann fan, which means that I’ve read and loved “The Wager.” Also, I love seafaring movies like “Master and Commander.” Oh, me too. But even Peter Weir complained about what a difficult shoot that was. You’d have to endure a period water shoot with this one? First of all, the issue is now that the writer’s strike is over, and because so much is on me to go out there and spread the word about “Killers of the Flower Moon,” let me take a break. And we’ll get working with writers and see if we get it on the page. And maybe it’s something I could co-direct, so to speak. It’ll be difficult. But there are ways now, with certain technical things we could do, to make it bearable. Depending on how we get the script together. DiCaprio would play the Lieutenant Byron? Or the crazy Captain? I’m not sure. There’s a lot of good parts. Yeah. It’s a brutal, gruesome survival tale. So this is less than 100 percent until you have a script, which is normal? That’s the case. That’s normal. Like for example, I don’t think we would have done “Killers” if we hadn’t made that change.
October 29, 20231 yr Shredded by Freddy. Oh boy. But it's a beloved horror franchise just like Scream, Halloween and Friday The 13th 🎃 Box Office: ‘Five Nights at Freddy’s’ Heads for Monstrous $78M-Plus Opening (...) Martin Scorsese‘s adult-skewing Killers of the Flower Moon, now in its second weekend, is looking at a third-place finish behind Freddy’s and Eras Tour with an estimated $10 million (a 57 percent drop). Apple Original Films produced and financed the $200 million film, with Paramount handling distribution duties. The movie, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Lily Gladstone and Robert De Niro, is counting on being a slow burn as Oscar season unfolds. Source
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.