KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON | 10.20.2023 | Paramount | current gross: $67,826,648

[dudalb]

7 hours ago, JOHN WICK said:

It's an interesting trailer and all and granted, it does have Scorsese name attached to it meaning it'll be of high quality, I'm just not sure what audience this is geared towards??

The idea that everyh film needs to be geared to a spedific audinece is one of the things that is killing movies as a serious art form.

[thajdikt]

Does this movie have a review embargo? Or will people be allowed to give their review after watching? Or just social?

[Ryan Reynolds]

1 minute ago, thajdikt said:

Does this movie have a review embargo? Or will people be allowed to give their review after watching? Or just social?

premieres at festivals don't have embargos , if they tried they could not be enforced 

[filmlover]

Just now, thajdikt said:

Does this movie have a review embargo? Or will people be allowed to give their review after watching? Or just social?

Embargo ends in a few hours.

 

 

[filmlover]

 

[Parasite]

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Parasite
The tweet I posted seems to have been deleted (the user probably forgot about the embargo), but it was praising the film, which is said to be a "mega banger", with an "exceptional script"

[TheDude391]

 

 

[TheDude391]

Screen Slate deleted their tweet reaction but, the first tweet read:

"Killers of the Flower Moon has the most vile, rapacious pieces of shit in all of Scorsese's project of exploring systemized American greed and crime. Leans heavily into Anthony Mann's westerns & noirs both. Probably would have benefited from an extra hour but truly nails the end."

[WittyUsername]

2 minutes ago, TheDude391 said:

Screen Slate deleted their tweet reaction but, the first tweet read:

"Killers of the Flower Moon has the most vile, rapacious pieces of shit in all of Scorsese's project of exploring systemized American greed and crime. Leans heavily into Anthony Mann's westerns & noirs both. Probably would have benefited from an extra hour but truly nails the end."

Hearing that a three and a half hour could’ve used an extra hour is not what I was expecting to hear, but I would take that as a good sign. 

[Lucas]

 

[Lucas]

 

[Lucas]

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Lucas

[TMP]

sounds like leo might get oscar #2 and de niro might get his third. Gladstone maybe competitive too. this thing sounds so fucking good

[Valonqar]

Mixed reviews.

[Maggie]

11 minutes ago, Lucas said:

 

I just read Justin's review. Leo's acting is mixed. I don't get the reverence for his acting. His best role is Wolf of Wall Street, but he's always so forced, like he tries hard to ACT. I'm not a fan

[Lucas]

1 minute ago, Maggie said:

I just read Justin's review. Leo's acting is mixed. I don't get the reverence for his acting. His best role is Wolf of Wall Street, but he's always so forced, like he tries hard to ACT. I'm not a fan

I agree about Leo, it's rare I like his performances.

[Firepower]

Even Scorsese can't catch a break with those always unhappy snobs?

[Maggie]

7 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Mixed reviews.

Lots of 100s on metacritic. It's in no way mixed

[Firepower]

95 Metacritic after 9 reviews, I mean it's certainly not mixed overall.

[titanic2187]

The initial review may appear mixed but let's not forget the best Scorsese's movie since Goodfellas, was actually a movie with only RT 83% fresh, 79% MC, Oscarless and a financial flop. People were too harsh to Silence, that movie is one of the best movie in history and most underrated film among Scorsese's filmography.