Comments on: Recommendation: Oppenheimer is Bombastic Perfection

By: Taylor Holmes

Taylor Holmes — Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:09:47 +0000

No, I get that. I also thought the opening third jumped past a lot of his story that was fascinating. Nolan also jacked around with some of the facts of how that all went down, and I didn’t really appreciate that. But when I read the book I did so to enlighten the movie… mental shift? Not the other way round? So a subtle shift in perspective. But I really do understand that. But it was amazing visual story telling. To create such a gorgeous visual representation of that book and to delve into the complexities of his story, while also making sense of the greyness of it? No blacks. No whites. Just greys. And allowing us to be okay with all of that complexity and not oversimplifying the details of it. And that his transformation from a pro-bomb-dropper to an anti-bomb-dropper… actually made sense? I loved it. But, I actually agree with you Matt. I get it.

By: Matthew Johnson

Matthew Johnson — Wed, 16 Aug 2023 02:22:49 +0000

Taylor,

I think I must be crazy! I kinda viewed Oppenheimer as meh. I also had previously read the biography and feel that it gave me all the complexity and insight into him that I needed. The film was visually wonderful, but I thought the score was over-powered and the third act lagged with the story centered on the “trial”. As with you I have no idea how anyone who didn’t read the book could follow the opening hour. That was my favorite part of the biography and I felt it got short shrift in the film, maybe that’s why I’m salty? Anyways I feel like I’m the insane one here, probably need to go watch it again.

By: Taylor Holmes

Taylor Holmes — Thu, 10 Aug 2023 23:11:53 +0000

Hey Gas,
Incredibly thoughtful comment as always sir. Yeah, it’s funny how only Nolan could have pulled this feat off, of taking the focus off the seminal moment in his career. The biggest thing any human had ever created up until that moment – a bomb that splits the atom – was a sideshow to the bigger focus, and that was his conversion away from his pro-bomb stance.

But think about it. How many times have you listened to others, internalized data, and changed a core idea or belief in your life? It’s a really really rare occurrance. And it is more seminal than a simple atomic bomb. So rare is this internal sort of transformation. I think you are right.

Well said sir, we’ll said.

By: Gastroschisis?

Gastroschisis? — Thu, 10 Aug 2023 21:00:52 +0000

Excellent film and an excellent write-up. I’d like to put in my two-penny worth.
Nolan’s Oppenheimer is probably the only movie I’ve seen in my life where the scene with the explosion of an atomic bomb, let alone of THE atomic bomb, is only a set-up for something else. That’s my key take-away from the film – not the characteristic duality (dichotomy? triality?) of the story lines and their chronology, not the magnificent explosion scenes themselves, not even the gorgeous 65mm black-and-white IMAX shots.
Now, I should probably explain what I meant by the explosion scenes being a set-up: there is a central scene in the whole film and it’s not that of the explosion or the hearings. Following the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki there’s a scene which up to this point has been foreshadowed with the use of many auditory and visual cues and it symbolises the moment when J. R. Oppenheimer experiences a complete switch in his worldview (he’s not pro-bomb any more). Did you guess which scene I’m referring to and why I think the explosion is just a set-up for it? Well… it’s the victory speech scene where we see Opje’s visions play out in front of his eyes as if the Trinity explosion scene was an instruction to help us fathom the sheer impact of Oppenheimer’s actions on his mental state through the lens of this one crucial moment in his life. The flashes of light accompanied by the silent anticipation of the blast – it’s all there during the speech scene which is amplified tenfold thanks to the audience having experienced those very elements during the prior explosion scene just minutes ago. Nolan practically injects a memory into the viewer’s brain (the explosion), thus hijacking it and simulating a flashback which the audience experiences as their own (the viewer, just like the main character, has a fresh memory of the explosion and understands what the flashes and the silence mean on a much more intimate and visceral level).

I would also like to note the Jean Tatlock scenes for their exceptional cinematography. The colours here in particular stood out for me.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Fri, 28 Jul 2023 15:01:08 +0000

I think scientists like him get tunnel vision when they discover something and don’t really ponder the consequences of how it will actually be put to use. At least that’s how I perceived it. Even my son who is just turning 14 asked me how he could not realize that his creation would be so devastating. You could see how excited they were about it all until it was actually used and reality kicked in. So I think I can understand a bit why he didn’t fathom the consequences beforehand. But he was an interesting character outside of all of this as well. Truly fascinating.

By: Taylor Holmes

Taylor Holmes — Fri, 28 Jul 2023 13:23:43 +0000

In reply to Lisa.

I agree – it’s a movie that is really interesting just on the face of it… his life, his accomplishments, his trials (literal and otherwise). But it is also interesting from a societal standpoint. Our first inclination is to herald this as a Rocky moment… WE DID IT! We conquered the atom!!! But to do that is to blow right past the fact that we have just opened a really ugly Pandora’s Box. We have made it possible to annihilate ourselves for the first time. Previously, humanity would soldier on indefinitely in spite of our collective or individual stupidity. But now? If Putin flips a switch or two, he then could be sending 3 thousand ICBMs racing around the world. Or Biden. Or Xi Jinping. Whatever. It is a dark possibility. So when Oppenheimer gets a conscience, and decides Hydrogen Bombs aren’t advisable and then is pilloried for said conscience, it is fascinating. There is an argument to be made it might have been nice for him to have gotten his conscience prior to inventing the atom bomb? But I digress. See? It’s all very, very interesting. Complicated. And really messy from top to bottom.

Oh, and by the way, it’s gorgeously shot, edited, and sound designed. And all without an ounce of CGI… which I love. Can we now please say that CGI has long long long since jumped the shark? Can we please say that, collectively? And now the really cool kids in Hollywood, and outside of Hollywood will be disavowing the techniques as crass and puke worthy? Please? (Yes, I’m looking at you Marvel movies. There is a reality where Marvel movies made with practical effects and actual screenplays would be AMAZING. Cough – Chronicle – COUGH.) That would be great… please sign this petition.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Thu, 27 Jul 2023 20:03:19 +0000

It’s rare that a film actually lives up to all the hype leading up to it but this film is perfect in just about every way. Almost a week later and I’m still thinking about it. This is a history film but with the signature Nolan touch. You knew he couldn’t just tell a straightforward historical tale, right? We’ve got multiple timelines and overloads of information but somehow it comes together perfectly. I haven’t read the book but I felt the film did an excellent job of giving us all the necessary info. Every cast member in this film deserves an award for their performances. I don’t think any other film is even going to come close to this one this year and I predict an awards sweep right down the line. It would be a travesty if that doesn’t happen! There are films you just know are going to be classics when you watch them and this one definitely deserves to be. I could go on and on but I’ll stop there and just say you are doing yourself a disservice if you don’t go buy tickets right now.