Sorry again that this has taken so long, I meant to get it out sooner, but getting it right is better than doing it rushed. Also, today (November 17th) is Martin Scorsese's birthday, so it's almost like I had planned it! (I did not.)

@jamesatkinsonja

8 ай бұрын

No worries at all. Great to hear your thoughts about the film. By the sounds of it, it did need time to settle so I appreciate you taking your time with the review.

Well, I think this is one of your strongest reviews, and that's not just because I agree with most of the points you made. You have the ability to put things into words in a way others can't, and it makes a more casual moviegoer like myself feel less intimidated to watch your reviews. With others, it feels like you need to be a major film buff to understand where they're coming from, but you have a much more accessible, friendlier approach, and I appreciate that. You inspire people who are not big movie buffs to watch more movies, or at least that has been my experience. I just wanted to say that. Great job.

I very much agree with you on Ernest as the central character, especially since we aren't watching a charismatic villain, but a guy falling into that sort of "mundane evil". I also couldn't tell if he was supposed to be... neurodivergent in some way? I'm autistic and I felt some of that during the movie and that that could be reflected in how deeply emotionally connected to William Hale and how consequently unquestioning of his authority he is. In the book, besides the FBI agent Tom White, Mollie is more of the perspective character and we are not given the inside story about the murders until the FBI starts figuring these things out. I think that the way Scorsese did it from the inside of the organized crime is very much his style, but I'm not sure if it's better than if he followed the book more and made us connect with Mollie to later feel the betrayal of Ernest that much harder. I agree that Mollie was our best connection to the Osage and it felt like the movie gradually lost that. I also felt like after we learn about Ernest's crimes he becomes FAR less like an audience surrogate and we become more connected to and worried for Mollie. I still enjoyed the movie, but I know that my mom was extremely confused by how Ernest could still love Mollie and I had a lot of trouble coming up with any sort of evidence to explain that, which did sour my feelings on the use of Ernest as a central character more.

@FilmBrain

8 ай бұрын

I don't think he's necessarily neurodivergent (although an interesting read), but I think the film makes clear that he's not very bright, and in way over his head.

@stewartkee6115

8 ай бұрын

The book does not show it from mollies perspective it shows it from the FBI perspective. The movie shows us more from Mollies perspective.

This is a masterpiece. Easily on the top 3 movies he's ever made. I've seen it 3 times, already. I'm grateful to hear your opinion.

Making Earnest the main character is an interesting example of where the message possibly overtook the storytelling, but possibly that was the right thing to do here. Obviously Molly would be a more interesting and relatable lead, but that would undermine the film’s point that systemic crimes against groups are maintained by everyone. We therefore need a boring and uncomfortable lead to reminder us that we too could be earnest.

I really love these reviews and all the detail you go into [such as the behind the scenes information], especially with a complicated film like this. You put so much effort into the reviews and this especially was a great watch. Great job.

HELLUVA review! Interesting to see Scorscese take aim at a far less sympathetic portrait of American criminals, though I do wish he'd taken a chance with some different casting.

@robogreek3157

6 ай бұрын

Yeah... I feel ray Liotta was his only different casting choice

2:48 I saw a few 'click bait' headlines saying the film 'bombed' when as you rightly say the theatrical run is a window before it heads to streaming [Like the Irishman or 'Glass Onion''s short cinema release last year].

Once again,you bring the movie to life w just your words. You have a gift,Mathew.

Happy Birthday!!!

I dont think the movie wants you to connect with the Earnest character. Not all mobies are like that. It wants you to be intrested in him. I was fascinated with the character.

Great movie. Please review The Holdovers

This is a good review.

Hi Film Brain! This movie wasn't so boring for me cause I've constructed a Lego guitar while watching it

I will see this movie. But I will approach it like a Wagnerian opera. Set aside a whole evening. At home, streaming*. Start early. Take an intermission (even if none is offered). Approach it like something so serious it should be treated from a historical PoV more than artistic. And marinate on it for days afterwards. * I have seen Wagnerian operas livestreamed at a theater. They were overall nice experiences, but they did drag. Though, they did have an intermission or two, greatly appreciated.

The film did not need to be 3.5 hours. Could easily have been edited down to 3 hours.

I am really glad this story got to be told in cinema. I read the book when it came out back in 2017, at the same time I was taking a course in Native American history coincidentally enough, so this lined up real nicely with my studies. I got to discuss the book with my professor, who herself got to learn more about this piece of history through it as well. I should talk to her again now that the movie came out to see if she saw it and what she thinks of it. Thanks for this review Matthew, especially on pointing out how well this movie captures how the Osage's newfound wealth became yet another thing for the whites to exploit in various underhanded ways even before the murders started.

Did you know that movie runs for over 4 hours

Well they say the movie is much less of a white savior troop than the book was.

@mastermarkus5307

8 ай бұрын

It felt like the author REALLY liked Tom White and talked a lot about how great and cool he was, but I didn't think it read like a white savior story. It didn't feel like "and then the FBI figured it out and it was all fine" or whatever you're thinking.

IMO, the choice of change of narrative perspective was a grave mistake. Putting the villians -- and likely villians -- in the forefront with some scenes of the Osage required scenes of purel writingy fictional and highly speculative interactions that are in direct opposition to the non-fiction narrative of the book. True, the book focuses on the early days of FBI and investigation, but it takes pains to underscore the treatment of the Osage and the character of Molly whose relationships are at the center of the murders. If they really wanted to honor the Osage at the heart of the true story they should've done what Gran did for the book and speak with descents of those who lived through the events. That way they could've created scenes that focused on the Osage characters and based on memory rather than the Hale/Ernest scenes that are speculative distraction.

@mastermarkus5307

8 ай бұрын

I think a lot of Osage scenes would have to be speculative too, but I agree that there should have been more focus on Osage characters, especially in the latter half of the movie. For instance, it would've been nice to see more of Rita and Bill's relationship, especially to contrast with Mollie and Ernest. I also would have liked to see more of what some of the Osage thought regarding who might have done the murders, as apparently people WERE rightly suspicious of William Hale.

@stewartkee6115

8 ай бұрын

The book is no more real than the movie is. Dont be naive. The book told the true story from the inside perspective, not the outside. You get a more realistic sense from the movie. The book is a whodonnit detective story with the fbi riding into town to rescue the natives. The movie is more realistic. The Osage people were behind the movie and glad that it did not follow the book.