Killers of the Flower Moon

But it's a movie. The audience? People demand far too much in my opinion. Movies are not academic pursuits.
Sure, I understand that. But movies are culture, too, and you have a culture in Oklahoma thinking, "it's not giving a full insight." It's a good movie, yes, but it's not an accurate representation in depth of the Osage people involved. If I remember correctly that Choctaw and Creek and Cherokee had problems over the leases, etc., that ended up involving some blood shed.
 
Life at times is not dull. Until now I was not aware that Rocko and Dante were engaged in a sucking and rim job conversation.
 
And started a war over it by firing on a Federal installation minding its own business way out in the harbor.
SC wanted to renege on its sale of Sumter to the Union some thirty years earlier. Proto-MAGA that.
 
Sure, I understand that. But movies are culture, too, and you have a culture in Oklahoma thinking, "it's not giving a full insight." It's a good movie, yes, but it's not an accurate representation in depth of the Osage people involved. If I remember correctly that Choctaw and Creek and Cherokee had problems over the leases, etc., that ended up involving some blood shed.
That's it "it's not an accurate representation in depth of the Osage people involved." I say, so what? It's a movie. How many movies do what is being demanded? I'd say few to none. I think of people who like Oliver Stone's JFK. If they want to believe it's an accurate representation of things, I say -- stupid is as stupid gets.
 
That's it "it's not an accurate representation in depth of the Osage people involved." I say, so what? It's a movie. How many movies do what is being demanded? I'd say few to none. I think of people who like Oliver Stone's JFK. If they want to believe it's an accurate representation of things, I say -- stupid is as stupid gets.
Quarrel, boy, quarrel!
 
The murders of Osage and the massacre in Tulsa will forever be a dark page in the history of Oklahoma.
Yes. And it's the past. It's history. We know the real story.

Now about the movie...
 
I don't know how you could still feel your ass after over 3 hours sitting in a small chair.
It was rough. The girl I saw with wanted to watch it because she liked the book. I actually asked her if she wanted to leave, but she really wanted to watch the whole thing. It was torture
 
Last edited:
The murders of Osage and the massacre in Tulsa will forever be a dark page in the history of Oklahoma.
In the history of this country. It does seem like Oklahoma is a focal point for atrocities against people of color. As far as this movie goes, I am hesitant to go see it. A lot of my Native friends tell me after seeing the movie they hate Robert Di Niro. His character was the absolute scum of the earth. He must have done a great job. It's difficult for us to separate the actor from his role in movies like this.
 
In the history of this country. It does seem like Oklahoma is a focal point for atrocities against people of color. As far as this movie goes, I am hesitant to go see it. A lot of my Native friends tell me after seeing the movie they hate Robert Di Niro. His character was the absolute scum of the earth. He must have done a great job. It's difficult for us to separate the actor from his role in movies like this.
Oklahoma was almost a country unto itself. In those days, Okies hated the federal government and wanted to control their own state. And for the most part, until J Edgar Hoover stepped in, they did.
It was Hoover's relentless and doggedly going after Okie's powerful men did all of it end.

Which is a tale of it's own that Scorsese so obviously left Hoover out of the movie completely.
Hoover was a separatist, and as a separatist believed and fought for American Indians to be self determined within their own lands. You will find articles written by those that refuse to see any good from Hoover, that say he did it only to prop up himself. While Hoover OBVIOUSLY had a very high view of himself, and indeed was a power monger, he has plenty of writings and known statements where he was in support of the American Indians to be able to exist and prosper as a separate, but partner with the United States.
 
Oklahoma was almost a country unto itself. In those days, Okies hated the federal government and wanted to control their own state. And for the most part, until J Edgar Hoover stepped in, they did.
It was Hoover's relentless and doggedly going after Okie's powerful men did all of it end.

Which is a tale of it's own that Scorsese so obviously left Hoover out of the movie completely.
Hoover was a separatist, and as a separatist believed and fought for American Indians to be self determined within their own lands. You will find articles written by those that refuse to see any good from Hoover, that say he did it only to prop up himself. While Hoover OBVIOUSLY had a very high view of himself, and indeed was a power monger, he has plenty of writings and known statements where he was in support of the American Indians to be able to exist and prosper as a separate, but partner with the United States.
I don't really understand how you can tell this story without Hoover. Now you got me curious. I may have to watch it after all.
 
Back
Top Bottom