Killers of the Flower Moon by David Grann is a gripping tale of murder and conspiracy, set in the early 20th century. This story is a fascinating read and has luckily recently been adapted into a movie, which I highly recommend you see, even if you haven’t read the book. However, if you have, definitely expect discrepancies between the two. Some of the biggest differences between the story portrayed in the book and that in the movie is due to the two mediums of media. The book is able to have more well developed and established characters. However, the movie is able to produce a visible setting that can highlight and evaluate certain scenes, which add emphasis to the more important parts of the plot. Ultimately, both are definitely worth your time.
Something that both the book and movie do well is accurately depict their respective time periods of the 1920s. In a time of such social change, with the prohibition era and such a prominent style, the mention of the time period and acclimation of it into the story help immerse the audience into the story. The story at its core, additionally, remains mostly consistent between the movie and book. Overall, the basic plot line is that there is a series of Osage Indian murders happening and then the FBI starts an investigation. The FBI team is led by Leonardo Dicaprio in the movie, his character named Tom White and both highlight his effortless attempts to achieve justice for the victims and catch the killer. However, the in depth explanation of the murders is more gruesome in the book for obvious reasons. The book is able to go more in depth with the “dark” side of society where corruption and greed take over.
One surprising similarity between the two is the portrayal of the characters. It is easy for the characters to be realistic in the book, and many are saying they believe the same about the movie. Some of the most notable qualities of the characters such as Mollie’s grief and guilt, Tom’s determination, and the pure evil of the antagonists in the book are extremely humane and make for a better watch. It definitely increases engagement with both watchers and readers that struggle with similar emotions or that have faced similar injustices towards them. Despite there being similarities between the emotions both extremely prominent in the book and movie, the movie emotions are very “made for the movie”. They are dramatic enough to be seen and acknowledged, but that is all they are good for. The grief that Mollie feels for example, has such a rawness to it in the book, that I don’t think could ever be portrayed in a movie. There just was not a way to put all internal thought in the book into the movie.
The movie is prettier than the book. There is no denying it. The visual elements in the book create a scene that words alone cannot create. The images of the Osage Nation’s land in the movie is simply breathtaking and the simple yet effective portrayal of the crime scenes that occur during the movie contribute a layer of depth that the book cannot emulate. Also, the scenes move much faster in the movie which can make for a more pleasant watch or understanding of the story. Although the book allows and gives time to get the know the characters a little more and what they think, it can sometimes be a bit too much and for someone that really wants to know the story, but may have a bad attention span or may be considered impatient, the movie is a great option.
Killers of the Flower Moon is an extremely interesting story, whether read or watched. Both versions do a great job at getting the main point of the story across. If you appreciate looking at something pretty while you learn, watch the movie. If you appreciate learning the characters and how they develop and grow, read the book. This movie adaptation is not a bad option whatsoever, especially when compared to movie adaptations in the past. However, the same holds true: the book is better.