Killers of the Flower Moon

[iamwhatiseem]

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.

You can't.
It is a glaring hole in the movie. In my opinion, Scorsese's political leanings made him refuse to show Hoover in any good light. Hoover had many-many faults, but to ignore his contribution to ending the criminal power in OK and helping the Indians along the way is pretty bad.

 

[Flopper]

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.

My understanding of Oklahoma history is that there was never as any real drive to make Oklahoma independent of the union like Texas. However, there were 4 or 5 different plans as to how Oklahoma would enter the union which were hotly debated. I suspect that Okies hate federal government now more that then.

 

[Hellbilly]