but with 10 minutes of actual footage from the immediate aftermath of Hiroshima
i actually would be an Oppenheimer movie defender if there had been a third-act pivot to reality, even though i share your criticisms but with much more umbrage and lack of respect for nolan.
i don't care what sort of 'technical achievement' the effects department created for their Bomb Graphics in the film, actual nuclear footage is terrifying not least because it's real
I don't really know what you mean by ' Oppenheimer defender'. I don't like Nolan as a person. It's not a personality contest. I'm watching a film and honestly while I'm watching I'm not thinking about Nolan's personality, i'm thinking about the quality of the film I'm watching. I also don't necessarily care much about technical achievement for the sake of technical achievement in the context of a movie. It's justified aesthetically by how it is used. In this film is was used expertly (not simply by Nolan, but by the massive team of workers to made this film) with the sound design to try and capture some of the sick thrill that Oppenheimer experiences as he accesses 'divine power'. If you didn't feel that that's fine, but it is there.
i'd be the Oppenheimer defender, the suggestion you made is one i liked so much it'd overcome the intense ill will i feel toward other parts of the film
you don't have to self-flagellate & justify about why you liked it, i'm not accusing you of anything and if i was, why would it matter if you liked it? it's freak behavior to act like appreciating a work of art is an automatic endorsement of every bad thing about a creator and every problematic element of the art
Okay I think we just misunderstood each other. i wasnt suggesting you think that.
lmao self-flagellation the last of my fetishes.
I aint saying that appreciating it is an automatic endorsement of their persons. That's nonsensically reductive. I'm saying the opposite. Miles Davis was one of the greatest American artists of the 20th century and also a massive dick.
i actually would be an Oppenheimer movie defender if there had been a third-act pivot to reality, even though i share your criticisms but with much more umbrage and lack of respect for nolan.
i don't care what sort of 'technical achievement' the effects department created for their Bomb Graphics in the film, actual nuclear footage is terrifying not least because it's real
I don't really know what you mean by ' Oppenheimer defender'. I don't like Nolan as a person. It's not a personality contest. I'm watching a film and honestly while I'm watching I'm not thinking about Nolan's personality, i'm thinking about the quality of the film I'm watching. I also don't necessarily care much about technical achievement for the sake of technical achievement in the context of a movie. It's justified aesthetically by how it is used. In this film is was used expertly (not simply by Nolan, but by the massive team of workers to made this film) with the sound design to try and capture some of the sick thrill that Oppenheimer experiences as he accesses 'divine power'. If you didn't feel that that's fine, but it is there.
i'd be the Oppenheimer defender, the suggestion you made is one i liked so much it'd overcome the intense ill will i feel toward other parts of the film
you don't have to self-flagellate & justify about why you liked it, i'm not accusing you of anything and if i was, why would it matter if you liked it? it's freak behavior to act like appreciating a work of art is an automatic endorsement of every bad thing about a creator and every problematic element of the art
Okay I think we just misunderstood each other. i wasnt suggesting you think that.
lmao self-flagellation the last of my fetishes.
I aint saying that appreciating it is an automatic endorsement of their persons. That's nonsensically reductive. I'm saying the opposite. Miles Davis was one of the greatest American artists of the 20th century and also a massive dick.