Martin Scorsese’s Western crime drama “Killers of the Flower Moon” has been out for over two weeks and the reactions have been fascinating. The three-and-a-half-hour, $200 million epic has received widespread critical acclaim while making a modest but expected $90 million at the box office so far. But it has also received criticisms, the most prevalent involving Scorsese’s choice to tell so much of his story from the perspective of the white villains rather than the Native American victims.
To be clear, there’s certainly nothing “unfair” about wanting to see this story told from the Native American perspective. I would watch that movie in a heartbeat. But it is a bit unfair to criticize Scorsese for not being the one to tell that story. There are a number of reasons. Here are just a few…
1. This is Scorsese’s Story.
The most basic defense is also one of the more reasonable ones. Simply put, Martin Scorsese is the storyteller here. He’s the creator, the author, and the artist. We have to be careful when we begin making such demands on art. Part of what makes art of any kind special is the freedom of individual expression. Obviously in cinema it takes more than one person to create. But most of the time it’s driven by a filmmaker’s vision. And as critics, we should judge their execution of their vision rather than the story we would rather hear/see.
2. Is He the Right Person to Speak From Their Perspective?
As mentioned, there is nothing wrong with longing for a film that shows these events from the Native American perspective. Whether a documentary or a narrative feature, it’s a movie I’d love to see funded and distributed. But is Martin Scorsese the person people want representing such a meaningful and intensely personal perspective? It’s not hard to predict the criticisms (many of them legitimate) that would immediately arise if he were to try. And who knows, maybe Scorsese didn’t feel he could do the indigenous perspective justice. That’s a reasonable and admirable position.
3. There’s Nothing Wrong with the Perspective He Chose.
Scorsese is a smart filmmaker and storyteller therefore his use of perspective isn’t done without consideration or purpose. In the case of “Killers of the Flower Moon”, it’s a decision made with a very distinct goal in mind. His aim wasn’t just to show the faces of evil. He intended to show us how evil operates, often in plain site. He shows the machinations of unbridled power and the poisoning effects of unconstrained greed. And he vividly does so through the eyes of the purveyors of such evil. I found it to be extremely effective.
There is the broader question of whether or not a Native American filmmaker would be given the same resources to tell this story from their perspective. I have a hard time believing that studios would invest as much as they would for an established big name director. That’s a meaningful conversation to have. But that’s certainly not Scorsese’s fault. He has earned his reputation and his legacy speaks for itself.
Scorsese’s approach to “Killers of the Flower Moon” combines a gritty realism with an earnest sensitivity. Those are essential ingredients to the story he’s telling – one that fits his vision, passion, and convictions. And those things are what make the film uniquely his. That gets to the heart of artistry. And once we start judging art on what we want it to be rather than what the artist intends, it slowly begins to lose its power. And that’s something we should never let happen.
Keith & the Movies 
I still haven’t seen the film though it is now becoming unlikely I’ll see it in theaters since I’m going in not knowing if there’s going to be an intermission or not as my bladder isn’t as strong as it was years ago. Plus, I don’t like being kept in the dark about whether there’s an intermission or not as I’m going to watch it when it arrives on Apple TV+ where I can at least take my time with the film at home.
As far as this idea on perspectives is concerned, it really doesn’t matter as long as there’s a strong story to tell and I usually trust Scorsese with his vision knowing that he always find something interesting in the perspective he’s telling. These stupid “woke” criticism tend to piss me off as it’s just a bunch of whiny assholes bitching about everything because they have nothing better to do with their pathetic lives.
It’s a well-meaning criticism that I’ve seen from a number of different people but it seems so against what art should be. I trust Scorsese too and this movie shows our trust was well deserved. He’s a filmmaker who knows what he’s doing and his instincts serve him well more often than not.
I’m awaiting this when it comes to APple. In the meantime I’ve been researching the history of it all in preparation, and I think so long as Scorsese hasn’t messed with history, he’s perfectly suited to tell the story. If he’s romanticised any of it, well that’s a different matter.
You’re exactly right. And he hasn’t romanticized it at all. You will not leave the movie with a warm feeling inside. He does it justice.
❤ ❤ ❤ 100% in agreement. Now what would be cool is if Scorcese would put up the funds to have an Indigenous total cast put it together from their perspective. Not his place or duty by any means, but the man has the means to do it if he chooses. Taika Waititi? or Have you seen any of Taylor Sheridan's series (Yellowstone, 1893, 1923)? He's done an admirable job of giving voice to Indigenous Peoples in them.
That would be so cool. He could certainly fund it or put together some producing partners.
p.s. The more we as the masses see the unadulterated depiction of how evil manifests and destroys and controls, the better we are at neutralizing it.
Great point. I whole-heartedly agree!
It is difficult to respond to this since I haven’t seen the movie yet, but speaking generically I can understand why some would want the story told from the Native Americans perspective, and understand why Scorsese chose to do it the way he did. I don’t see why anyone would judge either choice negatively.
It makes me think of others like Downfall or 9th Company, both of which were unapologetic in what took place but didn’t leave anyone feeling empathetic for them (except for the individual soldiers in 9th Company, who had no choice).
“I don’t see why anyone would judge either choice negatively.” Exactly. There’s no fouls here at all. I would love to see this story told from an indigenous perspective. At the same time I LOVE what Scorsese has done in his movie. Wouldn’t change a thing.
I’m still torn on whether or not I want to see this.
It’s tremendous. Not an easy watch by any means. But it’s brilliant. I highly recommend it but completely understand why someone would have reservations.
Either way I might wait until it comes out on streaming. That’s a long time to sit in the theater with no bathroom break!
LOL! Definitely wouldn’t want to take a big drink in the theater with you!
Pingback: The Top 10 Films of 2023 |