bnrobertson1

[bnrobertson1]

What does the owl mean?

Scorsese’s newest crime-as-narrative-device epic Killers of the Flower Moon is brimming with masterful detail, worthy of study as long as there is light and projection. The morphing of medium, the performances, the production design, and just about everything else weave into an adaptation that wows just as deeply as it wounds. Just the idea of approaching a full-film analysis is daunting* as its (also excellent) source material is thorough. But if there was a prevailing question that surfaced while I resurrected my legs after the hefty, mesmerizing runtime it was: “What does the owl mean?”

*If a picture is worth a thousand words- and that seems a bit low for a Scorsese frame- the movie is worth 324 million words, assuming the standard 24 frames/ second, although I’m sure MS jimmied the speed once or twice throughout. 

It's been a few years since I read Grann's revelatory book- and while many of the details have stayed lodged into my mind like a crown-entering bullet, I do not recall any owls. While well-written, what makes the book a modern masterpiece is its incessantly illuminating reporting- and its refusal to indulge in hypothetical connective tissue. The owls maybe in the book in the form of secondhand accounts, but Grann’s spectacular picture is not one inked by speculative surrealistic imagery. The pages' power comes from its unblinking objectivity, so while it may have reported that two women on their death beds saw owls, he would not give them the visceral, vivid, nightmarish treatment that Marty and DP Rodrigo Pieto have. Nor would he give the winged wonders the metaphorical density with which the maestro Martin has imbued them.  Marty, unlike Grann, doesn't hesitate to use his well earned artistic license, weaponizing it for maximum impact.

Because even if you're not one who really considers subtext when watching a film, it's obvious that the owl is meaningful. Like, really, really so. Utilizing the bird as liberally as Vin Diesel uses the word "family," Scorsese clearly wants the viewer to consider these creatures, and is willing to essentially stop the plot- twice- for the audience to consider these majestic animals- as they stare right back at us.

In the context of the film, The Osages believe that owls appear to those on the brink of death. Simultaneously resembling a demon and DiCaprio's Ernest Buckheart with proud, enigmatic, robust, and unwavering focus. But there is something unsure about their menacing waddle and beautiful bobbing head- perhaps a reflection of Burkhart's ambivalence in the face of avarice. Sure, the birds both literally and metaphorically portend death- but what else?

While aloof, owls are usually considered benevolent creatures, the mascot of the studious, an animal who’s call is a Midwestern shorthand for amusement (“a hoot”). Most western schools of thought identify them with wisdom and transformation. And wisdom is often connected with light (“brilliance,” for instance), which is associated with truth, which is associated with freedom, or at least, exodus. Knowledge typically goes hand and hand with modernity- can knowledge be bad?

Ask the Osage Indians. Or Adam and Eve. Modern transformation walks hand-and-hand with unrivaled wealth much like a bite of the apple was the gateway to knowledge- but at what cost? Are Innocence and education/evolution mutually exclusive by design? In the case of the Osage, this is not a wealth they necessarily sought- it was given to them nearly out of spite. Does God want us to stay ignorant, and simply be- or to use the resources which he has bestowed upon us? Is money the root of all evil?

Or, does the owl itself represent the wisdom- and thus freedom- that comes with death? “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” and Catholicism- a major theme throughout this, and pretty much all, of Scorcese’s work. But what is the Lord here? Is it capitalism? Is it man’s nature- or specifically, white man’s nature? Is the owl's stare a damnation for our ruining of the planet? Or maybe something is being said about our tendency to wrap meaning around western, feathered symbols?

Article Spoiler Alert: I don’t have the answer, because how I read it, there isn’t any. Or there's many. Same thing. But such is the nature of visual media. The "answer" may not be translatable into language much like the majesty of Guernica could never be caught with words (or Moby Dick captured with a brush or chisel). Much like DiCaprio’s Ernest can illicit feelings both venomous and empathetic, the owl can be multiple- if not infinite- things, most of which are diametrically opposed and/or didactically in concert. For exactitude, one must reference the image itself, brimming with menace. And meaning.  

#killers of the flower moon #martin scorsese

[bnrobertson1]

Utterly embarrassed by how much I like this song

#Spotify

[bnrobertson1]

The best part about Demolition Man is Wesley Snipes’ hair- but my God what a great best part.

[bnrobertson1]

Stone cold classic. Whole album.

#Spotify

[bnrobertson1]

This kid at the Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs show last night will grow up to be awesome and/or an arsonist

[bnrobertson1]

Thinking the worst of humanity is not wisdom

[bnrobertson1]

Gnarly little badass of an album

#Spotify

[bnrobertson1]

“BRAIN DUMP AKA ‘Great Meeting!”

[bnrobertson1]

Aurally fellatin’ Donny Benet

[bnrobertson1]

Not to spout hyperbole, but this is the best song ever written in a first-person/suit perspective

#Spotify

[bnrobertson1]

Happy to report South Park’s still got it

[bnrobertson1]

These happening rockers might just have what it takes to make it in this crazy business!

#Spotify

[bnrobertson1]

Hitchcock-quality thriller

[bnrobertson1]

How all dashboard cam posters envision themselves

[bnrobertson1]

Hell Yes

[bnrobertson1]

Misogyny= over #whew

[bnrobertson1]

With factoids like this it’s not hard to see why everybody says that QT’s CINEMA SPECULATION is neigh impossible to put down