I'm sorry when some of you don't like such opinions here (and then claim people want to fail the movie what a bunch of sillyness) but when the osage community feel that way about the movie I think it's their right to express their disappointment. Saying critical/negative things about Leo (and his work) doesn't mean someone is a "hater" just saying

 

‘Killers of the Flower Moon,’ a missed opportunity

Hansen Murray: “It feels disloyal to my Osage friends who poured themselves into this project, to suggest it could be different and better. Osages didn’t fail the project, Hollywood failed us.”

 

After two years of anticipation, I saw Killers of the Flower Moon with Osage friends in Tulsa. Across the nation, Osages are gathering to see the film and sharing reactions on social media. Afterwards, we had dinner and talked.

 

“Rate the film from 1-10,” someone asked. “What do you give it?” The group ranged from teens to elders. The ratings ranged up and down the scale—from 5 to 9. I was relieved to have my reaction reflected. We talked about scenes left out, details. Later, I also felt both let down and relieved of the anticipation, the hype and relentless promotion.

 

As Osages we’ve watched the film being made from the set, or in town, or across the country with investment and with trepidation. We’ve watched via reports from community members and survivors’ descendants.

 

We wondered if this would be more than another Hollywood Indian movie laden with the familiar tropes. The consultants were optimistic, and filmmakers insisted they understood our concerns. We waited.

 

The film has many strengths. I loved the casting of the misfit criminals, the collection of FBI men, Lily Gladstone. The conversations between the sisters, which were too few. Loved seeing a summary of the many details we’ve heard from those days, the cemetery, the towns where we live on screen. Best of course, glimpses of friends and family in parade scenes, buying a car, gossiping, and the Osage people, our language, our ways.

 

There’s a lot in the film for Osages to love. The film succeeds in some admirable ways. I enjoyed looking at the details of clothing, as I’ve done on a friend’s patio, pouring over old photo albums considering pins and shirt details. A strength of the film is the verisimilitude to the Osage of the 1920s. The hero in the film is the Osage language. It’s spoken by our Osage actors and extras, and by Lily Gladstone, Leonardo DiCaprio and especially Robert De Niro. It’s a joy to understand some of the words, the flow.

 

The moral question, suspense about what motivates Ernest Burkhart is diminished by the suggestion that he is, as William Hale’s attorney says, “dumb.” Ernest is amiable and feckless; he was a cook in the infantry. The tension about whether he’ll stop poisoning his wife, or what he feels about his wife is not compelling. Part of what made William Hale so despicable was his hypocrisy with the Osage. Here, De Niro plays a genial devil, the breadth of his betrayals barely surfaced.

 

The gratuitous gore present in David Grann’s book carries forward to the film, though I had understood Scorsese agreed to deemphasize the Native woman as victim trope. The victims are our relatives. The Osage characters have more depth than in the past, but they remain a backdrop.

 

I found myself watching the slow demise of the Burkart family and wondering when intermission was, because then the film would deepen, the suspense would gather and spiral into the messy, shenanigans of the local and state politics the trial set in motion. But it did not. I made assumptions about the trajectory of the film from the scores of clips and stills that have been teased. In fact, by the time I watched the movie, it felt like an assemblage of those clips.

 

Maybe knowing the story, as I do, as many Osages do, made this felt reductive. But I wasn’t bored reading Dennis McAuliffe’s book The Deaths of Sybil Bolton, nor the play adapted from it, nor Charles Red Corns’ A Pipe for February.

 

The film would have been enriched by showing an intact Osage community struggling with this blight. With Chief Bonnicastle (Yancey Red Corn), spiritual leader (Talee Redcorn), and Chief Paul Red Eagle (Everett Waller) struggling to find the best thing to do and feeling the pain of the losses. With Molly’s family life and the tensions of her place in community. It could have been magnificent.

 

I love seeing our Osage people brought to life in film, the range of our life together. The film is a gloss over Osage history with archival film and beautiful costume and set design, showing the ways Osages used their wealth, while maintaining their culture in a chaotic oil boom reality.

 

It feels disloyal to my Osage friends who poured themselves into this project, to suggest it could be different and better. Osages didn’t fail the project, Hollywood failed us.

 

Chris Côté went viral for describing how he reacted to the film. Among other things, he said, “this film was not made for an Osage audience.” I’m looking for a time when Hollywood trusts mainstream audiences to have empathy for characters in a community beyond their own. That failure of imagination cost us a film centering Osages and a rich portrayal of Osage people and community life within the web of the political and financial entanglements that continue to exist.

 

 

Not the Brightest Killer of the Flower Moon

Leonardo DiCaprio’s Ernest is unlike any Scorsese protagonist because, well, he’s dumb as rocks. And that changes the film in a fundamental way.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio as Ernest Burkhart in “Killers of the Flower Moon.”Credit...Apple TV+

 

The demimondes depicted by the American master Martin Scorsese vary widely — his New York stories alone span three centuries — but they have one common requirement: It takes intelligence, of one kind or another, to navigate them. His protagonists are smart, street smart, shrewd, skillful or some combination of those qualities as a rule.

 

That rule is broken in “Killers of the Flower Moon.” Normally, a character like Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) — a World War I veteran turned henchman in a plot to murder Osage people for their oil profits in 1920s Oklahoma — would either rise to the top of his uncle Bill Hale’s organization, or wise up and fight to stop it on his own. Ernest does neither, precisely because he lacks the qualities Scorsese has spent a lifetime depicting.

 

Henry Hill (Ray Liotta with Lorraine Bracco) serves as our guide to the Mafia in “Goodfellas.”Credit...Warner Bros.

 

The quintessential Scorsese protagonist, Henry Hill (Ray Liotta) also serves as the narrator of “Goodfellas.” It’s not just that he is a canny operator who helps plan a fictional version of the most lucrative heist in American history — his voice and his street smarts guide us through the Mafia’s underground society. It’s difficult to imagine Ernest having the know-how to pull off either task.

 

DiCaprio in “Gangs of New York.” To survive, his character has to think fast.

 

Ernest is not the first DiCaprio character to live a double life in Scorsese’s world. Amsterdam Vallon and Billy Costigan, his characters in “Gangs of New York” and “The Departed,” are undercover agents embedded in sophisticated crime organizations. They must think on their feet much faster than a man whose only task is to swindle a sick woman.

 

DiCaprio in “The Aviator” as Howard Hughes, a leader more typical of a Scorsese protagonist.Credit...Miramax Films

 

In his more antiheroic roles for Scorsese, DiCaprio has played leaders like the tycoon Howard Hughes (“The Aviator”) and the stock scammer Jordan Belfort (“The Wolf of Wall Street”), rather than stooges like Ernest.

 

“Ace” Rothstein (Robert De Niro with Sharon Stone) dealt with various risks in “Casino.”Credit...Universal Pictures

 

Sam Rothstein, a.k.a. Ace (Robert De Niro), the mob-associated gambling executive in “Casino,” and Jesus of Nazareth (Willem Dafoe) in “The Last Temptation of Christ” are also leaders, ones who operate under great personal physical risk at that. Their very different lives routinely present them with challenges the likes of Ernest could never surmount.

 

Daniel Day-Lewis and Michelle Pfeiffer as a couple figuring out their position in a stratified society.Credit...Philip Caruso/Columbia Pictures

 

The same goes for Newland Archer (Daniel Day-Lewis) and Countess Ellen Olenska (Michelle Pfeiffer) from “The Age of Innocence.” Their doomed romance forces them to navigate the societal mores of wealth and status, with no all-powerful figure like King Hale (De Niro) to back them up.

 

De Niro as Travis Bickle in “Taxi Driver.” He was expert with weapons, if not social cues.Credit...Sony Pictures

 

No one would mistake Travis Bickle or Jake LaMotta, the iconic De Niro characters from “Taxi Driver” and “Raging Bull,” for geniuses, but each was brilliant in his own way at the application of violence.

 

As a comedian, Rupert Pupkin (De Niro, with Jerry Lewis) isn’t too sharp but he has other skills.Credit...20th Century Fox

 

Unlike Bickle or LaMotta, Rupert Pupkin, the painfully unfunny would-be comedian played by De Niro in “The King of Comedy,” is no good at all at his chosen field. However, he successfully carries out a plan to kidnap the talk-show host Jerry Langford (Jerry Lewis) and ransom him for a turn in the spotlight.

 

Paul Hackett (Griffin Dunne) has seen better days in “After Hours.”Credit...Warner Bros

 

Perhaps the closest a Scorsese character gets to Ernest is Paul Hackett (Griffin Dunne) in the black comedy “After Hours.” Like Ernest, Paul is a man in over his head (Hackett can’t hack it). But he’s an otherwise normal and competent person having one crazy night in downtown Manhattan, not a murderer.

 

Ernest is not an average Joe suffering a series of mishaps, like Hackett. Nor is he able to serve as a Henry Hill-esque narrator-navigator for the criminality of King Hale. He barely seems aware of what’s happening with his own small stake in the wider conspiracy, much less able to explain the entire thing to others. With even the mean success of a normal Scorsese criminal out of reach, Ernest is good for little more than relaying messages about murdering unarmed sick people — a task at which he fails as often as he succeeds — and occasionally chipping in by poisoning his own wife.

 

Indeed, Ernest is too thick — intellectually, emotionally morally — to do much of anything but allow his hand to be forced, first by King, then by the federal agents tasked with taking him down. He never really learns, never really comes clean, never really grasps the monstrousness of what’s happening until it’s too late. He’s just not sharp enough to see it, or to allow himself to be shown. The man is a zero — the mental and moral void into which King Hale’s Osage targets and their allies disappear.

 

The Scorsese movie we get out of him is very different as a result. A sharper character would have implied that it takes some canniness, cunning or charisma to plunder a land and its people. Instead, Ernest shows us that the bigotry and greed that fueled the genocidal campaign against the Osage are ultimately stupid, and the resulting tragedy all the sadder for it.

So now Leo moved from "predicted nominees" to "next in line".

 

Oscars Predictions: Best Actor – Bradley Cooper and Paul Giamatti Among Six Contenders Battling for Five Slots

 

With overflowing talent, there isn't enough space for all the Oscar-worthy performances in the running

 

2024 Oscars Predictions:

Best Actor

Weekly Commentary (Updated Nov. 2, 2023): The best actor race will surely be a bloodbath, with every new contender dropping at a festival, living up to (or exceeding) expectations. The top six are dominating the buzz department, but there’s always room for some more.

 

We know that Cillian Murphy (“Oppenheimer”) and Leonardo DiCaprio (“Killers of the Flower Moon”) will be in the mix for noms but we’ve seen big misses on nomination morning before. Nobody is “locked” until the names are read. Remember Tom Hanks (“Captain Phillips”) and Paul Giamatti (“Sideways”)?

Speaking of Giamatti, “The Holdovers” is receiving very warm reception from the festival circuit. It could be a movie that lands in multiple categories, and could gain momentum as the days continue in the season.

 

The strength of “American Fiction” will lie in the Actors Branch. Despite Emmys and Tonys under his belt, Wright has yet to be recognized by the Academy. He has garnered enormous respect over his career, and if he can clinch a prize such as a Golden Globe for lead comedy actor, he’ll be well on his way to an inaugural Oscar nod.

 

There are moments while watching Bradley Cooper’s transformation into Leonard Bernstein where you just know you’re watching one of the great actors of our time doing what he does best. Four acting noms later (nine overall), isn’t it time he received a statuette of his own?

And the Predicted Nominees Are:

1. Bradley Cooper — “Maestro” (Netflix)
2. Jeffrey Wright — “American Fiction” (MGM)
3. Cillian Murphy — “Oppenheimer” (Universal Pictures)
4. Paul Giamatti — “The Holdovers” (Focus Features)
5. Colman Domingo — “Rustin” (Netflix)

 

Next in Line

6. Leonardo DiCaprio — “Killers of the Flower Moon” (Apple Original Films/Paramount Pictures)
7. Andrew Scott — “All of Us Strangers” (Searchlight Pictures)
8. Adam Driver — “Ferrari” (Neon)
9. Matt Damon — “Air” (Amazon MGM Studios)
10. Anthony Hopkins — “Freud’s Last Session” (Sony Pictures Classics)

 

Other Top-Tier Possibilities

11. Joaquin Phoenix — “Napoleon” (Apple Original Films/Sony Pictures)
12. Zac Efron — “The Iron Claw” (A24)
13. Nicolas Cage — “Dream Scenario” (A24)
14. Austin Butler — “The Bikeriders” (20th Century Studios) **
15. Christian Friedel — “The Zone of Interest” (A24)
16. Barry Keoghan — “Saltburn” (Amazon MGM Studios)
17. Gael García Bernal — “Cassandro” (Amazon MGM Studios)
18. Jamie Foxx — “The Burial” (Amazon MGM Studios)
19. Kôji Yakusho — “Perfect Days” (Neon)
20. Paul Dano — “Dumb Money” (Sony Pictures)

 

Also In Contention

21. Teo Yoo — “Past Lives” (A24)
22. Alden Ehrenreich — “Fair Play” (Netflix)
23. Benoît Magimel — “The Taste of Things” (IFC Films/Sapan Studio)
24. Jesse Garcia — “Flamin’ Hot” (Hulu/Searchlight Pictures)
25. Eugenio Derbez — “Radical” (Miercoles Entertainment)
26. Michael Peña — “A Million Miles Away” (MGM)
27. David Strathairn — “A Little Prayer” (Sony Pictures Classics)
28. Jay Baruchel — “BlackBerry” (IFC Films)
29. Mads Mikkelsen — “The Promised Land” (Magnolia Pictures)
30. Michael Fassbender — “The Killer” (Netflix)

 

Revisiting Leonardo DiCaprio’s 7 Oscar nominations in honor of ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’

 

“Killers of the Flower Moon,” the latest acclaimed epic drama from Martin Scorsese, is now in theaters, and the film’s star Leonardo DiCaprio is already an early favorite to receive a Best Actor Oscar nomination for his performance. In honor of the new movie from Apple Original Films, let’s look back at his seven Oscar nominations and talk about why DiCaprio finally won his first gold trophy at the 2016 Academy Awards for “The Revenant” (2015).

 

His first Oscar nomination came in the Best Supporting Actor category for “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape” (1993). DiCaprio’s only Academy Award nom of the 1990s put him up against older acting titans — Ralph Fiennes for “Schindler’s List,” John Malkovich for “In the Line of Fire,” Pete Postlethwaite for “In the Name of the Father” and Tommy Lee Jones, who won for his performance in “The Fugitive.” DiCaprio’s biggest hurtle that first time around was that he was the only Academy Award nomination for “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape,” a film that did well with critics but was pretty much shut out of awards season.

 

Many thought DiCaprio was going to receive an Academy Award nomination for “Titanic” (1997), but his performance was snubbed in a stacked year for Best Actor. He gave two more great performances in 2002 in “Gangs of New York” and “Catch Me if You Can,” but he also missed at the Oscars for those. His next Academy Award nom arrived in the Best Actor category for “The Aviator” (2004). DiCaprio won the Golden Globe Award for Best Drama Actor and was likely in second place to win the Oscar, but nobody that season could beat Jamie Foxx, who won nearly every prize he could for his celebrated performance as Ray Charles in “Ray.”

 

Two years later, many thought DiCaprio was going to receive his third Oscar nomination for “The Departed,” but although the 2006 Scorsese movie went on to win Academy Awards for Best Picture and Best Director, DiCaprio was mostly recognized that award season for his terrific performance in “Blood Diamond.” Actors aren’t allowed to be nominated at the Oscars in the same category for two films, and so the academy elected to nominate him for “Blood Diamond,” which also netted a Best Supporting Actor nom for Djimon Hounsou. And once again, DiCaprio was no match for the front-runner, this time Forest Whitaker, who swept the season for his acclaimed performance as Idi Amin in “The Last King of Scotland.”

 

DiCaprio’s best chance yet at an Academy Award win arrived when he received nominations for both Best Actor and Best Picture for Scorsese’s “The Wolf of Wall Street” (2013). Giving one of his most confident and courageous performances to date, DiCaprio won the Golden Globe Award for Best Comedy Actor, and if Matthew McConaughey hadn’t been winning most of the major prizes for his physically demanding performance in “Dallas Buyers Club,” DiCaprio probably would’ve taken the Best Actor prize at the Oscars. Sadly, he had to remain in his seat once again.

 

However, DiCaprio’s time finally arrived two years later with his incredible performance in “The Revenant” from director Alejandro G. Iñárritu. For the first time in his many years nominated at the Oscars, DiCaprio had a massive box office and critical hit released at the tail-end of the year and had no formidable competition throughout awards season. Bryan Cranston for “Trumbo,” Michael Fassbender for “Steve Jobs” and Eddie Redmayne for “The Danish Girl” were just happy to be there, and although Matt Damon gave a well-liked performance in “The Martian,” nobody could get close to the overdue narrative for DiCaprio. Thus, he finally won the gold trophy in the Best Actor category for “The Revenant,” the crowd leaping to their feet after Julianne Moore announced his name. DiCaprio ended his speech by saying, “I thank you all for this amazing award tonight. Let us not take this planet for granted. I do not take tonight for granted.”

 

After a four-year absence from films, DiCaprio returned in Quentin Tarantino’s “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” (2019), which became a big hit with critics and audiences. Brad Pitt won numerous Best Supporting Actor prizes for his role in the movie, and DiCaprio was nominated most everywhere. When he lost the comedy Golden Globe to Taron Egerton for “Rocketman,” some might have doubted DiCaprio’s chances of making it into the Oscars. But after his performance was recognized with nominations at SAG and BAFTA, the Academy Awards became a sure thing, too. DiCaprio got in there while Egerton was surprisingly shut out. However, DiCaprio couldn’t compete anywhere against Joaquin Phoenix, who had his own overdue narrative that season for his celebrated performance in “Joker.”

 

After being ignored at the Oscars for his turn in Adam McKay’s “Don’t Look Up” (2021), DiCaprio looks to return to the Academy Awards in 2024 with his eighth nomination to date for his well-regarded performance as real-life criminal Ernest Burkhart in “Killers of the Flower Moon.” Some of his potential competition will likely be Cillian Murphy for “Oppenheimer,” Bradley Cooper for “Maestro” and Colman Domingo for “Rustin.” Does DiCaprio have a shot at a second Oscar victory? Only time will tell.

 

 

Next "eras" article.

 

Heartthrob Leonardo DiCaprio Is Great, But His Scumbag Era's Even Better

DiCaprio's latest roles have him leaning into being treacherous, and it's awesome!

 

• Leonardo DiCaprio's performance as Ernest Burkhart in Killers of the Flower Moon is praised as some of his best work, showcasing his ability to make an unlikable and ugly character magnetic.
• DiCaprio's career trajectory has led him to play characters defined by their muddy morality and selfish mentalities, moving away from his initial golden boy image.
• His dedication to fulfilling his potential and not resting on his laurels is evident in his choice of complex roles and continuous efforts to challenge himself as an actor.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio continues receiving rave reviews for his performance in Killers of the Flower Moon, another much-revered role in collaboration with director Martin Scorsese. His work as the gormless stooge Ernest Burkhart has been praised by critics as perhaps his best work, citing how Ernest is such a thoroughly unlikable and actively ugly person, yet DiCaprio still makes him magnetic and the anchor through which the story works. If you look at the trajectory of his career, you'll find that it's been leading towards a moment like this, as DiCaprio is at his maximum power playing characters that are defined by their muddy morality and selfish mentalities. It's a far cry from the golden boy image he first became famous for, and it shows the dedication he has to fulfilling the potential he's always had and never resting on his laurels.

 

How Did Leonardo DiCaprio Get His Start in Hollywood?

 

The roles in Leonardo DiCaprio's early career as a child actor allowed him to be both a young boy with an edge and also still maintain an underlying charisma that offset that edge. The first film role that really got people's respect was This Boy's Life – which also happens to be the first time he'd share screen time with Robert De Niro. DiCaprio plays a teenager dealing with an abusive stepfather. Young DiCaprio leaps off the screen with how unafraid he is to go for broke with his anguish and how he is able to hold his own against proven veterans like De Niro and Ellen Barkin. He pulls off being a "bad boy" who acts out his frustrations – a traumatized victim lashing out at his abuser with weathered restraint and occasional rage. In This Boy's Life, DiCaprio demonstrates a range of emotions nobody was expecting from the at-the-time unproven actor.

 

Later that same year, Leonardo DiCaprio appeared in What's Eating Gilbert Grape, a film that further boosted his newfound image as an explosive new talent. Here, he plays Gilbert's (Johnny Depp) younger brother Arnie, a person with an intellectual disability. DiCaprio's performance in this role is much different than his This Boy's Life performance. Arnie is a boy so easily lovable in his earnestness and charm. DiCaprio seamlessly switches from pain and aggression to sweetness and affection throughout the movie. The mainstream took notice, giving him his first of six total acting Oscar nominations for his performance. With this new platform, DiCaprio sprung into an incredible streak of performances that solidified his image.

 

How Did Leonardo DiCaprio Become a Romantic Icon?

 

The back-to-back phenomena of Titanic and Romeo + Juliet can't be understated, as both films did huge at the box office and cemented Leonardo DiCaprio's image as a romantic icon and the major male star of the future. Romeo + Juliet gave him more room to flex his dramatic chops; in a film full of the kind of excess and hysteria that only Baz Luhrmann can orchestrate, DiCaprio screams and smolders, carrying on the sacred tradition of doing justice to Shakespeare. Titanic presented him in a more matinée idol mode, fully selling us on this perfect man that makes Rose (Kate Winslet) feel like the only girl in the world, worthy of her spending an entire lifetime idealizing him. Once again, we see two extremes on full display, doing the absolute most effort and then the seemingly effortless with equal ease. All the while, the audience has been asked to see him as unambiguously charming and permit him to coast on that; this approach can only last so long, and DiCaprio moved on from this phase to prove that he had dynamic skill by starting to go for characters with much more conflicted moral makeup.

 

What Was Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese's First Movie Together?

 

Despite some unfortunate duds like The Beach, DiCaprio eventually found his footing by teaming up with Martin Scorsese on Gangs of New York, and while this isn't one of either of their finest hours, it does display DiCaprio's newfound drive to go for characters that could potentially be upsetting to some audience members. Amsterdam Vallon may be framed as a man traumatized by witnessing his father murdered while being an Irish immigrant to New York City in 1862, but he is also a man bloodthirsty for revenge against his father's killer (Daniel Day-Lewis), and the film goes out of its way to underline how much he's changed from the sweet boy he once was. It's tempting to read this as unintentional subtext about DiCaprio's career trajectory, but he himself seems uncomfortable in the role, with a shaky Irish accent, and he perhaps felt the uncertainty of untested waters. It doesn't help that he gets blown off the screen in every scene he shares with Day-Lewis in one of his fiercest performances. When viewed in the context of the rest of his career, it's a rough start to what otherwise becomes an incredible run of star turns where he gets more and more liberated to unleash his inner grot.

 

When Did Leonardo DiCaprio Start Playing More Complex Roles?

 

Starting with Catch Me If You Can, a delightfully underrated Steven Spielberg caper, Leonardo DiCaprio becomes more adept at finding new avenues to channel the underlying sickness that comes with his charisma. Frank Abagnale, Jr. was the ultimate con artist (so much so that even his claims of fraud wound up being fake), able to schmooze and woo anyone he came across, all while gleefully enjoying how easy it all came to him. DiCaprio is having the time of his life, gliding through every scene and doing everything he can not to wink at everyone he encounters. Even the later scenes where he gets caught have a pathos to them thanks to just how vastly humbled and ashamed he makes Frank, so regretful that his fun is finally over.

 

If Gangs of New York was a test run, then the Scorsese double bill of The Aviator and The Departed were the successful races, as these feature two of DiCaprio's very best performances. Playing renowned billionaire recluse Howard Hughes and undercover cop Billy Costigan respectively, both roles are dazzling for how shredded to the nerves he is at all times. Whether he's trapping himself in a bathroom because he can't touch a doorknob or sweating bullets because he needs to keep his cover with major crime bosses in the room, he excels at playing men becoming trapped by social systems, both the ones they've created and are forced into. Both of these roles are essentially men building roles for themselves that they are compelled to uphold even when it's actively torturing them, DiCaprio was unafraid to make himself look ugly, cowardly, or downright disturbing to serve the truth of the character.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio's at His Best Playing Truly Treacherous Villains

 

Leonardo DiCaprio reached unparalleled heights of debauchery with arguably his two greatest roles, as Calvin Candie in the Quentin Tarantino masterpiece Django Unchained and Jordan Belfort in Scorsese's The Wolf of Wall Street. Here were arguably the two most disgustingly deplorable creatures he's ever done: as Candie, he was a monstrous slave owner with a fierce entitlement to his faux cultured sense of the world; as Belfort, he was a fraudulent stock trader reveling in his riches and smugly euphoric in his urge to share his insider knowledge with the audience. The key to why these performances in particular are so amazing is how unapologetically they take the "DiCaprio persona" we've grown comfortable with over decades of exposure and put them under pressure tests to see how far audience investment can be stretched.

 

Tarantino ironized DiCaprio's tendencies, turning his charisma and swagger into a masterclass of anti-charismatic repulsion; look no further than the iconic zoom-in shot of Candie, flashing a smile that should have a foghorn noise coming out of it. Scorsese, on the other hand, magnified all of his traits to 11 and shoveled them into a shiny yet loathsome package. Jordan is always selling the idea that he's sympathetic, with even the mildest of introspective moments reflexively flung back in our faces, mocking us for thinking he'd change. His conspiratorial fourth wall breaks and manic commitment to the lack of shame Jordan felt is DiCaprio truly unhinged in a way that's unmatched at any other point in his career, and it's a wonder to think he didn't win the Oscar for it.

 

Why Does Leonardo DiCaprio's 'Killers of the Flower Moon' Stand Out?

 

This brings us back to now. Leonardo DiCaprio's performance as Ernest Burkhart is the culmination of a lifetime of learning how to break bad, at a point where he can no longer rely on the fallbacks of youth or natural charisma. If you were to argue this is his actual best performance, it's due to how it feels spun from whole cloth and not as reliant on his past history as other highlights. Ernest may have a boyish charm, and he may still look like Leonardo DiCaprio, but in every other way, he's a completely new invention. A thuggish, easily manipulated war veteran with a blighted sense of love and an abused puppy sense of loyalty, Ernest is a promising sign that DiCaprio is more committed than ever to pushing himself to the limit in exposing man's basest impulses for all to see. Fingers crossed he actually gets to play Jim Jones one day, he would crush it.

.

1 hour ago, BarbieErin said:

Great, I hope the movie, Scorsese, Leo, Lily and EVERYONE involved in this DOESN'T GET NOMINATED FOR ANY AWARD! And I'am not even kidding.  

 

After all it seems this movie sucks, it's a BIG box office fail, it's too slow, it's horrible. Leo it's a bad actor, he can't do movies anymore guys, people hate him and his work, he should retire, he's a has been as Rick Dalton would say, guess it's happening. (Contain Irony). 

 

Now, I think movies like this should STOP being made because no one is EVER satisfied. I'am not indigenous so I can't really judge from this perspective, but they worked with the Osage people and heck, they changed the script to make it more respectful, unfortunatelly It seems this was not enough...  

I am indigenous and I believe I warned that the movie was likely to be whitewashed. It doesn’t mean it’s a bad movie. It just means it’s a typical movie. With that being said, I’ve always had issues with Scorsese movies, because they lack female character development. Doesn’t mean he makes bad movies. Just means he wouldn’t be the director to go to if you want a female lead/cast. 
 

I, personally, am able to recognize that this movie is great in some aspects and fails in others. Leo did his job and he did it well. The movie lacked indigenous character integration. I am able to hold both of these thoughts at the exact same time and be correct.

5 hours ago, Sugarwater said:

 

.

Yes please. More work for Leo!

 

28 minutes ago, BarbieErin said:

 

Ok, thanks for your opinion. 

 

The movie should NOT have been done at ALL. 

Your compelling argument has made me change my mind. If they weren’t going to  be able to do it absolutely perfectly the first time they tried then why even bother. What is there to learn about being greedy and stealing other peoples’ lives and homelands away from them? What were they thinking? What a bunch of dumb asses!

33 minutes ago, akatosh said:

Yes please. More work for Leo!

 

Just work Leo! 😂

On 11/3/2023 at 4:12 PM, Sugarwater said:

On 11/3/2023 at 4:12 PM, Sugarwater said:

.

 

3 minutes ago, BarbieErin said:

 

Thanks for the sarcasm, that's not what I mean. But think whatever you want. 

I don’t think that’s what you mean at all. I think you are just hurt by those of us who dare criticize the film. For what it’s worth, I very much enjoyed the film and loved Leo’s performance.

Some good news 

 

My folks loved the movie. I would watch Leo reading a phonebook for hours. He's brilliant in what he's doing and he's brilliant as dumb Ernest and it's a joy to watch his performance in KOTFM also by the 2nd time. I never questioned that. I still have some issues with the movie but heck that's just my opinion and nothing personal. Overall the movie works and I learned a lot about the Osage that I didn't know before (actually I never heard about the Osage before this movie). For me that's a step in the right direction and I think it's very important that it's made. I also think it's important people talking about it and sharing the good and the bad so maybe next time it can be done differently.

 

@BarbieErin maybe you can give us your review of the movie. I would like to hear your thoughts instead of fighting with us especially when you know we are all here for years, following Leo, celebrating him, sometimes defending him and really none of us is wishing this man any harm. Ever.

Leo and Lily at LACMA Gala:

 

https://www.instagram.com/stories/daily_leo_dicaprio_fan_page/3229251369806653287/

I'm sure there will be more pics soon.

Thanks to ALL who have shared with us the latest Leo related news, vids, and pix   

 

Akatosh

 

Thanks for wonderful Leo & Lilly  /LACMA vid  

 

How wonderful that she joined him at the gala which allowed those who attended an opportunity to compliment both actors on their wonderful KOTFM performances  

The killers gang reunited. No pics of Leo yet.

 

 

Cara Jade Myers was also there:

https://www.instagram.com/stories/cara.jade.myers/3229173971617862705/

 

 

SAG AFTRA considering the "last" offer of AMPTP. Fingers crossed 🤞

 

8 hours ago, akatosh said:

Leo and Lily at LACMA.

I'm sure there will be more pics soon.

Vittoria also attended.

 

 

 

I finally found pics of my favourite duo 😍

 

Tantoo Cardinal was also there: