It's good, not great. It's 45 minutes too long, ends with an irrelevant subplot that retreads the themes we've already covered, and has a bunch of needless cuts. The beginning of the film treats famous physicists like Marvel superhero reveals and is unintentionally very funny. The 30 minutes before and after they detonate the Trinity atom bomb are some of the most harrowing scenes I've seen in a long time, and capture how horrible the creation of this monster was. It's not a flattering portrait of Oppenheimer, and is resolutely anti-nuke by the end of the film. The fact that we don't even see a Japanese person once is uh certainly a choice but overall the politics aren't completely fucked, and the movie itself is well made (mostly).
I liked it but the politics are lib and the Robert Downey jr. plot is boring and pointless. Would have been way more interesting if it had focused on where the uranium came from and what happened to the people who got nuked. Even the brief “nuclear horror” scene is nothing compared with a truly disturbing film like Threads.
I think the fundamental problem is that the movie is about Oppenheimer, not the bomb. The only scenes he isn't in are basically the RDJ ones, he's in every other one. I don't know if he ever visited Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but he definitely didn't right after the bombs were dropped. They definitely needed to show more of the evils he was complicit in, rather than just making him a tortured genius.
the movie would have been so much better if they actually showed the bombs being dropped. like you're sympathetic to the Oppenheimer character, you know why he's doing what he's doing, you almost feel bad for him - and then halfway through, cut to a Japanese family and see the absolute devastation and misery cause by nuclear weapons. then you go back to Oppenhimer, seeing him as the monster he is.
I don't think that would have made the movie better, it would have made it align better with your view on the events. Honestly I would enjoy a movie made under your views better, but for what the film was only showing him was best. This might sound stupid, but the problem with the film is ultimately the society which created it. They do show his arrogance, but because of how great man theory works in westoid culture, this is just a quirk or slight failing. We feel bad for him once he feels guilt, even though we should feel revulsion at his actions, due to the fact we always treat what he did as justified.
I also disagree with the moment of the bomb dropping as the key moment of horror. Far more people died from the US fire bombing campaign than either bomb, the destruction of families was neither peculiar to the atomic bomb nor really a result of oppenheimer's actions in particular. The frame to show is the fallout. Fire bombs leave charred remains, atomic bombs leave a crater. And the poison it spread into the people who survived, radiation poisoning and cancer and the horror of seeing your loved ones made into shadows, that's what the bomb leaves behind. And that's what oppenheimer didn't prevent. It's not just a bigger bomb he made, and that's what the story should emphasize. He didn't know what it would do to people, but he never checked.
I enjoy all of Nolan movies but had to turn this one off about 40min in. I may give it another chance someday. The dialogue was unbearable. I think Nolans other movies being clearly supernatural nonsense fiction give them a pass in this regard. I felt embarrassed by the movie.
I'd like to know too. I mostly keep up with just horror and it's been a shit year for it. Saw Barbie and thought it was silly and fun. Might give Oppenheimer a go if it's not too propaganda-y.
Only thing I might say is that it focuses on the person only when grappling with the consequences of the bomb. That's the point of the film though, but it might seem tasteless given that many more lives were affected to a far greater extent than Oppenheimer's name itself
Haven't heard a whole lot from anybody getting to upset about the politics of it, most consistent comment I've heard of it is its too much too fast. Lots of fast cuts and three minute scenes that jump around without a whole lot of cohesion.
Is the movie any good?
It's good, not great. It's 45 minutes too long, ends with an irrelevant subplot that retreads the themes we've already covered, and has a bunch of needless cuts. The beginning of the film treats famous physicists like Marvel superhero reveals and is unintentionally very funny. The 30 minutes before and after they detonate the Trinity atom bomb are some of the most harrowing scenes I've seen in a long time, and capture how horrible the creation of this monster was. It's not a flattering portrait of Oppenheimer, and is resolutely anti-nuke by the end of the film. The fact that we don't even see a Japanese person once is uh certainly a choice but overall the politics aren't completely fucked, and the movie itself is well made (mostly).
Ugh it sounds like it's plagued with the same issues most other modern blockbusters are.
I liked it but the politics are lib and the Robert Downey jr. plot is boring and pointless. Would have been way more interesting if it had focused on where the uranium came from and what happened to the people who got nuked. Even the brief “nuclear horror” scene is nothing compared with a truly disturbing film like Threads.
I think the fundamental problem is that the movie is about Oppenheimer, not the bomb. The only scenes he isn't in are basically the RDJ ones, he's in every other one. I don't know if he ever visited Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but he definitely didn't right after the bombs were dropped. They definitely needed to show more of the evils he was complicit in, rather than just making him a tortured genius.
the movie would have been so much better if they actually showed the bombs being dropped. like you're sympathetic to the Oppenheimer character, you know why he's doing what he's doing, you almost feel bad for him - and then halfway through, cut to a Japanese family and see the absolute devastation and misery cause by nuclear weapons. then you go back to Oppenhimer, seeing him as the monster he is.
I don't think that would have made the movie better, it would have made it align better with your view on the events. Honestly I would enjoy a movie made under your views better, but for what the film was only showing him was best. This might sound stupid, but the problem with the film is ultimately the society which created it. They do show his arrogance, but because of how great man theory works in westoid culture, this is just a quirk or slight failing. We feel bad for him once he feels guilt, even though we should feel revulsion at his actions, due to the fact we always treat what he did as justified.
I also disagree with the moment of the bomb dropping as the key moment of horror. Far more people died from the US fire bombing campaign than either bomb, the destruction of families was neither peculiar to the atomic bomb nor really a result of oppenheimer's actions in particular. The frame to show is the fallout. Fire bombs leave charred remains, atomic bombs leave a crater. And the poison it spread into the people who survived, radiation poisoning and cancer and the horror of seeing your loved ones made into shadows, that's what the bomb leaves behind. And that's what oppenheimer didn't prevent. It's not just a bigger bomb he made, and that's what the story should emphasize. He didn't know what it would do to people, but he never checked.
why did they spend half the movie on this bizarre courtroom intrigue thing that nobody cares about?
it sucked, only watch if you have nothing better to watch
I enjoy all of Nolan movies but had to turn this one off about 40min in. I may give it another chance someday. The dialogue was unbearable. I think Nolans other movies being clearly supernatural nonsense fiction give them a pass in this regard. I felt embarrassed by the movie.
I'd like to know too. I mostly keep up with just horror and it's been a shit year for it. Saw Barbie and thought it was silly and fun. Might give Oppenheimer a go if it's not too propaganda-y.
Only thing I might say is that it focuses on the person only when grappling with the consequences of the bomb. That's the point of the film though, but it might seem tasteless given that many more lives were affected to a far greater extent than Oppenheimer's name itself
Haven't heard a whole lot from anybody getting to upset about the politics of it, most consistent comment I've heard of it is its too much too fast. Lots of fast cuts and three minute scenes that jump around without a whole lot of cohesion.
Watched it with the hextube, it was decent, 7-8/10 or so