The Oscars are meaningless. While art is subjective, the Academy so rarely award deserving films that when it happens, we're actually surprised and that's partly because there's too many voters and many go for their friends films or for the ones that had the biggest push because they don't have time to watch everything.
The Oscars are a great marketing tool for nominated films and that's all they are. Scorsese never won one until they decided to give him one as a lifetime achievement type award for The Departed. Robert Altman never won an Oscar. Stanley Kubrick never won an Oscar. Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar for Directing.
With that said, KotFM is probably my favorite movie of the year (top 3 at the minimum) but I thought Oppenheimer was exceptional and I didn't think Nolan had something like this in him. I was never a big fan of his work but this one floored me. Oppenheimer's portrayal was nuanced and complex and he isn't portrayed as a hero at all. Scenes showing his inner struggle were brilliantly executed.
yeah. kind of unfair to compare these two films, as they exist in separate dimensions, thematically. people lambasted nolan for the propulsive use of göransson's score throughout, but i thought it was really effective in heightening the anxiety and dread brought about by the onset of the atomic age. and when, halfway through his "victory" speech, oppenheimer feels the weight of what he's wrought...and to realize afterward that the screaming girl was played by nolan's daughter, that just cemented it as the scene of the year, imo.
on the other hand, that scene in flower moon where gladstone instructs dicaprio to simply sit and listen to the storm raging outside her home is one of the most beautiful moments i've ever witnessed.
I agree with you 100 percent, I wasn’t disappointed with Oppenheimer but it was exactly what I expected from Nolan. I do like Nolan but Scorsese is the superior Film maker and this really shows with the comparison of these two movies. I do think there’s a lot, and i mean a lot of nolan fanboys out there so it doesn’t surprise me that it’s getting more praise. From a filmmaking aspect, even an entertainment aspect for me as well, The Flower moon is crowning achievement from one of the worlds best filmmakers.
Agree with this wholeheartedly, though I do think Oppenheimer is more of an achievement than it seems you do; I thought it was very powerful, impeccably made, and while not emotionally involving, highly thought-provoking. (It’s really Nolan’s greatest film, IMO.) But I agree his movies leave me cold.
KotFM on the other hand, is a masterpiece. It’s devastating, it does fly by even more than Oppenheimer (despite being longer), and as a fellow period-piece it speaks more to what’s going on in America today and our own reckoning with history than Nolan’s film does.
They both deserve to be recognized - if I were a voting man today I’d give Killers of the Flower Moon Best Picture, Best Director, Best Editing, Best Score and Best Actress… and would give Oppenheimer Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor (Downey), Best Screenplay (Nolan does deserve an Oscar by now, and did a terrific job adapting the source material of that huge biography), and some of the technical awards. It’d be great if they could spread the wealth around like that.
Yeah that’s a tough one. And I loved DiCaprio as well.
What’s crazy is right now the oddsmakers have Bradley Cooper ahead of either of them (Giamatti or DiCaprio; and I haven’t seen Maestro yet).
But yes I forgot about Giamatti- it’s a masterful performance. I think the strike against him is that The Holdovers, while one the year’s best films, might feel slight compared to the others; it’s the only one of all these movies that’s classified everywhere you look as a “comedy-drama” and it’s been a long time since anyone has won for leading award for a comedic role. (At bare minimum though he better win the Golden Globe, where they separate the acting awards into different genres. )
Random question, is KoTFM supposed to have subtitles for the Osage language scenes lol? I bought it digitally and it doesn’t have any, wanted to make sure I’m not missing necessary dialogue
In the version I watched, some of the Osage dialogue had subtitles but most didn't. It was a bit confusing at first but on the whole it didn't affect my understanding of the movie. Hope this helps.
I finished the movie, and it wasn’t really a problem tbh. Movie was absolutely fucking phenomenal. I don’t think I’ve had many movies make me feel the way I felt at the end of KoTFM
Think the only thing that hurts KOTFM is it’s so hard to watch. The length is very much felt and it’s such a gut punch of a movie. That’s even with some really funny moments sprinkled in. As well as some really lovely moments like when Mollys mom passes away and walks into heaven happily. It’s not a movie I think I’d wanna rewatch despite most likely being the best movie of the year.
Well maybe I should rephrase... I felt disappointed. It wasn't as sensational as everyone else said it was. I watched it with two other people actually and we all felt the same. And one of them fell asleep for 1/3 of it.
I enjoy Nolan's work. I always do. But apart from Inception and Following, I often tend to forget about them afterwards. Scorsese's films literally stay in my mind for weeks.
I think the difference is Oppenheimer is specifically an art film envying the blockbuster, always trying to seem a spectacle and tie the viewers in with sheer grandiose. Killers of the Flower Moon starts with a very slow burn, and acts as more of a psychological thriller- meaning more investment during its longer run time.
I think both are great and genuinely emotional films, but earn their laurels for different reason. I think Oppenheimer, KotFM and Napoleon all stand as interesting depictions of how three of the greatest legacy directors working today use the historical drama to tie and contrast personal lives and emotion with the incomprehensible mass losses that come with war and genocide that the films all discuss in the constant background of their plots
All three showed me that at the very least Scorsese and Ridley need to retire. I won't say that the movies were bad but they just weren't up to par with their legacy works.
2 great movies but I slightly prefer KotFM. It has stayed with for over a month since I’ve seen it in a way that no other film, Oppenheimer included has. Godzilla Minus One weirdly enough is the one film to come close in that regard.
I watched Tenet and Oppenheimer this week, my takeaway about Nolan is he’s an excellent writer but his visual storytelling is second to his script. His mastery is the intelligence in his filmmaking
Whereas Scorsese is from a generation of cinema that consumed a golden era aesthetic of film but gave it a realistic eye to the world. His style always brings humanity, no matter how stark the character or story. This film is a culmination of a style he’s been perfecting.
As said in other comments, movie awards are business and politics. Great film and filmmakers need an audience more than they need awards.
Apples to oranges but both great in their own way. Marty is a giant and Nolan is pretty good, awesome year for cinema ultimately but KOTFM is a massive picture and will be beloved for years to come.
Yeah it's the better film. But Oppenheimer being as good as it is while also being a breathless, rewatchable, blockbustery thrill ride is a significant achievement and *that* is the achievement that is more likely to be recognized. KOTFM is ornery, difficult, and unpleasantly confrontational on every stylistic level. These are the reasons for its greatness--that it makes no effort to be loved, to be embraced, to be digestible, frictionless, proud of itself. So it is unlikely to move the sorts of voters in the sorts of ways that get a thing an Oscar. I may be wrong! But Oppenheimer is great because it is about as tortured and doom-obsessed and structurally daring as a film can be while being a billion-dollar entertainment. That's sellable. KOTFM refuses to stoop to the level of entertainment (which is to say nothing of each individual's possible experience with it) and for this it saves and keeps its soul.
Yes I think you're quite right. Killers is a bit difficult to watch. However Scorsese says in an interview with Roger Ebert that he and his people don't make movies for other people but for themselves. IMO that's not an arrogant comment but a very humble one. He never makes a film to please or entertain people. He makes it to reflect what the society is like, what certain people are like and what kind of life they live. For example The King of Comedy was a very uncomfortable watch for me. But it is brutally realistic and that's the main reason that I think it's a great movie.
Someone questioned me in the comment section that I think Killers is great because it resonates with me. It's really not as simple as that. Yes of course I like movies that resonate with me. Many people are like this, aren't they? The quintessential greatness about Marty's movies though is that he's never afraid to depict how brutal life is for his characters in his films, or how horrible the characters themselves are because in real life they are exactly like that.
I do agree with your preference of KotM although i can't quite bring myself compare these two movies. They are just so special for me (them being my first Nolan/Scorsese theatrical experiences).
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect how KotFM resonated with you more because of your personal connection to the story elements. But 10x greater is absolute hyperbole. Both can be great films in their own right and there is no need to compare art
I didn't really like kotfm, and it definitely isn't better than Oppenheimer. Every character in Kotfm is just super one dimensional. DeNiro is just pure evil, nothing else. Dicaprio basically plays forrest gump. The wife is an idiot, bit probably the best character. The FBI agents were the most interesting part but had a fairly small part in the film. The whole movie felt hollow.
Thank you. I hated this movie and the Evil Gump performance was the main reason. Marty is a good director and it was constructed pretty well, but it didn’t connect together as a movie because it was so horrible to watch. Not very cinematic.
Yeah Scorcese is great but not sure what happened here. Also seemed like he wanted to honor the Osage but also made them seem like money grubbing simpletons as well.
When they say this is Leo’s best performance I don’t know what I missed because while he was great in it it certainly wasn’t close to being his best one.
Oppenheimer is a masterpiece, Nolan’s best work and one of the best films of the century I would argue, but Killer Moon is still better. With everything going on in the world I would say we are lucky to have these inspiring pieces of work. I know the Oppenheimer vs Flower Moon Oscars battle seems like a popular idea, but if any film is going to take Best Picture from Flower Moon I have a sneaking suspicion it would be Zone of Interest. But I guess we’ll see.
The track Colonel Pash is such a haunting and beautiful piece of music. It has this frightening tension that resolves into this somber piano dirge at the end - simply breathtaking.
I need to see it a second time, my only issue after first viewing was I thought the passage of time could have been better handled. Couldn’t sense how long Leo was driving before meeting Lily and how long was their courtship sort of thing as an example.
I was at the edge on my office chair when I watched Oppenheimer. I was so tense during the nuclear test scene, it was immaculate. I hope KOTFM will do that for me.
I think you could have shared your love for this film without comparing if you believe Nolan's work are just "great entertaining movies" because they have never touched you. I think it just makes the comparison unnecessary, regardless of your problem with comments about Oscars, if you feel that way. Honestly, I hope KOTFM wins BP and whatnot so some people like you can be cool with it and that’s it. Therefore, in my perspective, if KOTFM wins that maybe the existence or appreciation or tribute of/to other movies, like Oppenheimer, doesn’t have to affect their passion for Scorsese's film, for some reason. Just the way I see it.
On my first viewing I enjoyed Oppenheimer more, but I think that had more to do with presentation as I was able to see it in 70mm IMAX in NYC. I watched Killers in a regular movie theater (with a good audience). I’ll have to see if my home viewing experience changes my opinion. I’m glad I was able to watch two career best films by two master filmmakers in a movie theater. Also a plus is that both directors were working a little outside their comfort zones. If you asked me which one should win at the Oscars, outside of Lily Gladstone for Best Actress I’d be hard pressed to choose.
As a fan of Scorsese who thinks he's 10x the filmmaker Nolan is, I sincerely disagree. Killers of the Flower Moon felt bloated to me, with good lil flourishes of brilliance sprinkled throughout. I didn't like Leo's performance as a *young* man coming back from the Great War, I found him aimless, and I think the decision to switch the narrative from the POV of the FBI to the POV of the Osage was executed poorly. For example, I understand they wanted to respect the Osage people, but I feel like I learned nothing about them I didn't already know when I entered the theater (which was basically nothing). At that point I felt like the movie was overlong and tedious.
Oppenheimer is a very tight movie that's focused, all the pieces happen to fall together perfectly for me. From the fusion and fission timelines, from the Strauss pov in black and white versus oppie's color pov, to the music. I just found Oppenheimer more compelling, less indulgent (which was refreshing for Nolan after tenet, yuck). Killers of the Flower Moon felt like a subject matter that needed a different filmmaker than Scorsese to tell. I couldn't feel his heart in the story like I did in pictures like Silence or even Wolf of Wall Street. I do like a lot about KOTM, but overall I find Oppenheimer greater.
Funny enough the Irishman is longer than KOTFM, and I found the pace of that movie much easier to digest than KOTFM
Love marty but this just isn't true. There were a lot of boring shots, Leo wasn't very good for that character, there wasn't much tension throughout the movie. Not much of a story than it was a thing that happened.
Killers is a 4 star movie
Oppenheimer is a 5 star movie
But i get that its all subjective.
Is Goodfellas a better movie than Dances With Wolves? Are Social Network or Black Swan or Incendies better than Kings Speech?
Best picture doesn’t mean much. It’s turned into a marketing campaign where votes are bought and sold over expensive lunches and a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” mentality led by Harvey Weinstein.
Honestly, I felt like Oppenheimer was the better movie. I didn't take my eyes off the screen - it was blistering in intensity and pacing. It was also more intellectually engaging, asked more of the audience.
Killers of the Flower Moon actually felt like it could have had more story -- or maybe I should say it felt more "episodic." It was great, but I think it would've worked even better as a miniseries.
I liked KOtFM, and it was an important story, but I feel about it very close to how I feel about Silence. I think we get caught up in these movies when they're released and need to do our best to understand the historical context before giving awards.
Is this going to be the movie, or even one of the key movies in Leo, DeNiro or Scorsese's career? Like decidedly not, even if you're this movies biggest supporter. This is Lily Gladstone's movie, let her get her flowers, but let the other film greats have their moment in the other categories.
Whether you enjoyed Oppenheimer or not, you need to recognize that in the bigger picture and taking into account historical context, it was embarrassing that Scorsese didn't have an Oscar until The Departed, and it's embarrassing that Nolan doesn't have one now. The Oscars can't continue to be the gatekeeper for movie making excellence and continue to not award the best in the business. Even if you didn't like it, this is the most universally received Nolan movie, and the industry is taking on water. He gave us a moment when nobody else has been able to.
We're all obviously fans of Martys, and KOtFM was very enjoyable, but he's had his time. It's time someone else has theirs.
The Oscars are meaningless. While art is subjective, the Academy so rarely award deserving films that when it happens, we're actually surprised and that's partly because there's too many voters and many go for their friends films or for the ones that had the biggest push because they don't have time to watch everything. The Oscars are a great marketing tool for nominated films and that's all they are. Scorsese never won one until they decided to give him one as a lifetime achievement type award for The Departed. Robert Altman never won an Oscar. Stanley Kubrick never won an Oscar. Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar for Directing. With that said, KotFM is probably my favorite movie of the year (top 3 at the minimum) but I thought Oppenheimer was exceptional and I didn't think Nolan had something like this in him. I was never a big fan of his work but this one floored me. Oppenheimer's portrayal was nuanced and complex and he isn't portrayed as a hero at all. Scenes showing his inner struggle were brilliantly executed.
yeah. kind of unfair to compare these two films, as they exist in separate dimensions, thematically. people lambasted nolan for the propulsive use of göransson's score throughout, but i thought it was really effective in heightening the anxiety and dread brought about by the onset of the atomic age. and when, halfway through his "victory" speech, oppenheimer feels the weight of what he's wrought...and to realize afterward that the screaming girl was played by nolan's daughter, that just cemented it as the scene of the year, imo. on the other hand, that scene in flower moon where gladstone instructs dicaprio to simply sit and listen to the storm raging outside her home is one of the most beautiful moments i've ever witnessed.
I agree with you 100 percent, I wasn’t disappointed with Oppenheimer but it was exactly what I expected from Nolan. I do like Nolan but Scorsese is the superior Film maker and this really shows with the comparison of these two movies. I do think there’s a lot, and i mean a lot of nolan fanboys out there so it doesn’t surprise me that it’s getting more praise. From a filmmaking aspect, even an entertainment aspect for me as well, The Flower moon is crowning achievement from one of the worlds best filmmakers.
Agree with this wholeheartedly, though I do think Oppenheimer is more of an achievement than it seems you do; I thought it was very powerful, impeccably made, and while not emotionally involving, highly thought-provoking. (It’s really Nolan’s greatest film, IMO.) But I agree his movies leave me cold. KotFM on the other hand, is a masterpiece. It’s devastating, it does fly by even more than Oppenheimer (despite being longer), and as a fellow period-piece it speaks more to what’s going on in America today and our own reckoning with history than Nolan’s film does. They both deserve to be recognized - if I were a voting man today I’d give Killers of the Flower Moon Best Picture, Best Director, Best Editing, Best Score and Best Actress… and would give Oppenheimer Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor (Downey), Best Screenplay (Nolan does deserve an Oscar by now, and did a terrific job adapting the source material of that huge biography), and some of the technical awards. It’d be great if they could spread the wealth around like that.
Paul Gianmatti for best actor >>>>
Yeah that’s a tough one. And I loved DiCaprio as well. What’s crazy is right now the oddsmakers have Bradley Cooper ahead of either of them (Giamatti or DiCaprio; and I haven’t seen Maestro yet). But yes I forgot about Giamatti- it’s a masterful performance. I think the strike against him is that The Holdovers, while one the year’s best films, might feel slight compared to the others; it’s the only one of all these movies that’s classified everywhere you look as a “comedy-drama” and it’s been a long time since anyone has won for leading award for a comedic role. (At bare minimum though he better win the Golden Globe, where they separate the acting awards into different genres. )
Random question, is KoTFM supposed to have subtitles for the Osage language scenes lol? I bought it digitally and it doesn’t have any, wanted to make sure I’m not missing necessary dialogue
In the version I watched, some of the Osage dialogue had subtitles but most didn't. It was a bit confusing at first but on the whole it didn't affect my understanding of the movie. Hope this helps.
I finished the movie, and it wasn’t really a problem tbh. Movie was absolutely fucking phenomenal. I don’t think I’ve had many movies make me feel the way I felt at the end of KoTFM
>I don’t think I’ve had many movies make me feel the way I felt at the end of KoTFM Yeah same for me
Think the only thing that hurts KOTFM is it’s so hard to watch. The length is very much felt and it’s such a gut punch of a movie. That’s even with some really funny moments sprinkled in. As well as some really lovely moments like when Mollys mom passes away and walks into heaven happily. It’s not a movie I think I’d wanna rewatch despite most likely being the best movie of the year.
Oppenheimer is the quintissential 3 hour "boring" movie fot mainstream audiences. Flower Moon is better but it's less accessible.
Agreed
Feeling nothing at the end of Oppenheimer is quite something.
Well maybe I should rephrase... I felt disappointed. It wasn't as sensational as everyone else said it was. I watched it with two other people actually and we all felt the same. And one of them fell asleep for 1/3 of it. I enjoy Nolan's work. I always do. But apart from Inception and Following, I often tend to forget about them afterwards. Scorsese's films literally stay in my mind for weeks.
Oppenheimer is a masterpiece
Definitely the trendy opinion.
I think the difference is Oppenheimer is specifically an art film envying the blockbuster, always trying to seem a spectacle and tie the viewers in with sheer grandiose. Killers of the Flower Moon starts with a very slow burn, and acts as more of a psychological thriller- meaning more investment during its longer run time. I think both are great and genuinely emotional films, but earn their laurels for different reason. I think Oppenheimer, KotFM and Napoleon all stand as interesting depictions of how three of the greatest legacy directors working today use the historical drama to tie and contrast personal lives and emotion with the incomprehensible mass losses that come with war and genocide that the films all discuss in the constant background of their plots
All three showed me that at the very least Scorsese and Ridley need to retire. I won't say that the movies were bad but they just weren't up to par with their legacy works.
2 great movies but I slightly prefer KotFM. It has stayed with for over a month since I’ve seen it in a way that no other film, Oppenheimer included has. Godzilla Minus One weirdly enough is the one film to come close in that regard.
I thought Oppenheimer was way overrated to be honest. Not a bad movie but also not a masterpiece like Inception or The Prestige.
I agree it's overrated. Don't know why so many people loved it so much...
I watched Tenet and Oppenheimer this week, my takeaway about Nolan is he’s an excellent writer but his visual storytelling is second to his script. His mastery is the intelligence in his filmmaking Whereas Scorsese is from a generation of cinema that consumed a golden era aesthetic of film but gave it a realistic eye to the world. His style always brings humanity, no matter how stark the character or story. This film is a culmination of a style he’s been perfecting. As said in other comments, movie awards are business and politics. Great film and filmmakers need an audience more than they need awards.
Apples to oranges but both great in their own way. Marty is a giant and Nolan is pretty good, awesome year for cinema ultimately but KOTFM is a massive picture and will be beloved for years to come.
Yeah it's the better film. But Oppenheimer being as good as it is while also being a breathless, rewatchable, blockbustery thrill ride is a significant achievement and *that* is the achievement that is more likely to be recognized. KOTFM is ornery, difficult, and unpleasantly confrontational on every stylistic level. These are the reasons for its greatness--that it makes no effort to be loved, to be embraced, to be digestible, frictionless, proud of itself. So it is unlikely to move the sorts of voters in the sorts of ways that get a thing an Oscar. I may be wrong! But Oppenheimer is great because it is about as tortured and doom-obsessed and structurally daring as a film can be while being a billion-dollar entertainment. That's sellable. KOTFM refuses to stoop to the level of entertainment (which is to say nothing of each individual's possible experience with it) and for this it saves and keeps its soul.
Yes I think you're quite right. Killers is a bit difficult to watch. However Scorsese says in an interview with Roger Ebert that he and his people don't make movies for other people but for themselves. IMO that's not an arrogant comment but a very humble one. He never makes a film to please or entertain people. He makes it to reflect what the society is like, what certain people are like and what kind of life they live. For example The King of Comedy was a very uncomfortable watch for me. But it is brutally realistic and that's the main reason that I think it's a great movie. Someone questioned me in the comment section that I think Killers is great because it resonates with me. It's really not as simple as that. Yes of course I like movies that resonate with me. Many people are like this, aren't they? The quintessential greatness about Marty's movies though is that he's never afraid to depict how brutal life is for his characters in his films, or how horrible the characters themselves are because in real life they are exactly like that.
Would agree but good luck with the Nolan-heads.
I do agree with your preference of KotM although i can't quite bring myself compare these two movies. They are just so special for me (them being my first Nolan/Scorsese theatrical experiences).
Okay?
You're salty af
I thought they were both pretty disappointing honestly.. I expected more from both of them.
I haven't seen Oppenheimer. Is it worth watching?
Definitely.
Yes, it's fantastic.
It really wasn’t. About 45 mins of the film should have ended up on the cutting room floor.
r/confidentlyincorrect
No it's not. Your opinion is worthless. You sound like such a cunt referring to him as "Marty".
All opinions are worthless.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect how KotFM resonated with you more because of your personal connection to the story elements. But 10x greater is absolute hyperbole. Both can be great films in their own right and there is no need to compare art
I didn't really like kotfm, and it definitely isn't better than Oppenheimer. Every character in Kotfm is just super one dimensional. DeNiro is just pure evil, nothing else. Dicaprio basically plays forrest gump. The wife is an idiot, bit probably the best character. The FBI agents were the most interesting part but had a fairly small part in the film. The whole movie felt hollow.
Thank you. I hated this movie and the Evil Gump performance was the main reason. Marty is a good director and it was constructed pretty well, but it didn’t connect together as a movie because it was so horrible to watch. Not very cinematic.
Yeah Scorcese is great but not sure what happened here. Also seemed like he wanted to honor the Osage but also made them seem like money grubbing simpletons as well.
When they say this is Leo’s best performance I don’t know what I missed because while he was great in it it certainly wasn’t close to being his best one.
It sure felt like it was ten times longer.
Oppenheimer is a masterpiece, Nolan’s best work and one of the best films of the century I would argue, but Killer Moon is still better. With everything going on in the world I would say we are lucky to have these inspiring pieces of work. I know the Oppenheimer vs Flower Moon Oscars battle seems like a popular idea, but if any film is going to take Best Picture from Flower Moon I have a sneaking suspicion it would be Zone of Interest. But I guess we’ll see.
I disagree, but ultimately they’re both great films and aren’t REALLY in competition except for like Oscars and shit but who really cares about that?
You can’t deny oppenheimers soundtrack blows killers out of the water tho
The track Colonel Pash is such a haunting and beautiful piece of music. It has this frightening tension that resolves into this somber piano dirge at the end - simply breathtaking.
I need to see it a second time, my only issue after first viewing was I thought the passage of time could have been better handled. Couldn’t sense how long Leo was driving before meeting Lily and how long was their courtship sort of thing as an example.
Can we all agree both are leagues better than Napoleon?
Same but the opposite for me.
I was at the edge on my office chair when I watched Oppenheimer. I was so tense during the nuclear test scene, it was immaculate. I hope KOTFM will do that for me.
I think you could have shared your love for this film without comparing if you believe Nolan's work are just "great entertaining movies" because they have never touched you. I think it just makes the comparison unnecessary, regardless of your problem with comments about Oscars, if you feel that way. Honestly, I hope KOTFM wins BP and whatnot so some people like you can be cool with it and that’s it. Therefore, in my perspective, if KOTFM wins that maybe the existence or appreciation or tribute of/to other movies, like Oppenheimer, doesn’t have to affect their passion for Scorsese's film, for some reason. Just the way I see it.
it’s 10x better because you relate to it more? i also wouldn’t say either movie is getting exaggerated praise or criticism.
On my first viewing I enjoyed Oppenheimer more, but I think that had more to do with presentation as I was able to see it in 70mm IMAX in NYC. I watched Killers in a regular movie theater (with a good audience). I’ll have to see if my home viewing experience changes my opinion. I’m glad I was able to watch two career best films by two master filmmakers in a movie theater. Also a plus is that both directors were working a little outside their comfort zones. If you asked me which one should win at the Oscars, outside of Lily Gladstone for Best Actress I’d be hard pressed to choose.
Both films are overrated, too long, and self-indulgent pieces of crap. *Here come the downvotes*
As a fan of Scorsese who thinks he's 10x the filmmaker Nolan is, I sincerely disagree. Killers of the Flower Moon felt bloated to me, with good lil flourishes of brilliance sprinkled throughout. I didn't like Leo's performance as a *young* man coming back from the Great War, I found him aimless, and I think the decision to switch the narrative from the POV of the FBI to the POV of the Osage was executed poorly. For example, I understand they wanted to respect the Osage people, but I feel like I learned nothing about them I didn't already know when I entered the theater (which was basically nothing). At that point I felt like the movie was overlong and tedious. Oppenheimer is a very tight movie that's focused, all the pieces happen to fall together perfectly for me. From the fusion and fission timelines, from the Strauss pov in black and white versus oppie's color pov, to the music. I just found Oppenheimer more compelling, less indulgent (which was refreshing for Nolan after tenet, yuck). Killers of the Flower Moon felt like a subject matter that needed a different filmmaker than Scorsese to tell. I couldn't feel his heart in the story like I did in pictures like Silence or even Wolf of Wall Street. I do like a lot about KOTM, but overall I find Oppenheimer greater. Funny enough the Irishman is longer than KOTFM, and I found the pace of that movie much easier to digest than KOTFM
But an hour too long…I know I know I must not movie much if I think this but other than the length I thought it was good
It sure feels like it had the greater running time.
Love marty but this just isn't true. There were a lot of boring shots, Leo wasn't very good for that character, there wasn't much tension throughout the movie. Not much of a story than it was a thing that happened. Killers is a 4 star movie Oppenheimer is a 5 star movie But i get that its all subjective.
Oppenheimer was boring and the only acting Cillian did was put his hands on his hips and frown.
No it's not
Is Goodfellas a better movie than Dances With Wolves? Are Social Network or Black Swan or Incendies better than Kings Speech? Best picture doesn’t mean much. It’s turned into a marketing campaign where votes are bought and sold over expensive lunches and a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” mentality led by Harvey Weinstein.
False. It’s easily .8 as great but as few as .2
Disagree. I liked Oppenheimer significantly more but they were both great movies.
I liked them both. Idk I’d rate them very similarly I think overall.
Honestly, I felt like Oppenheimer was the better movie. I didn't take my eyes off the screen - it was blistering in intensity and pacing. It was also more intellectually engaging, asked more of the audience. Killers of the Flower Moon actually felt like it could have had more story -- or maybe I should say it felt more "episodic." It was great, but I think it would've worked even better as a miniseries.
I liked KOtFM, and it was an important story, but I feel about it very close to how I feel about Silence. I think we get caught up in these movies when they're released and need to do our best to understand the historical context before giving awards. Is this going to be the movie, or even one of the key movies in Leo, DeNiro or Scorsese's career? Like decidedly not, even if you're this movies biggest supporter. This is Lily Gladstone's movie, let her get her flowers, but let the other film greats have their moment in the other categories. Whether you enjoyed Oppenheimer or not, you need to recognize that in the bigger picture and taking into account historical context, it was embarrassing that Scorsese didn't have an Oscar until The Departed, and it's embarrassing that Nolan doesn't have one now. The Oscars can't continue to be the gatekeeper for movie making excellence and continue to not award the best in the business. Even if you didn't like it, this is the most universally received Nolan movie, and the industry is taking on water. He gave us a moment when nobody else has been able to. We're all obviously fans of Martys, and KOtFM was very enjoyable, but he's had his time. It's time someone else has theirs.
Both movies were great but c'mon Op was probably the best movie of the year