Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan)

I went yesterday on my day off, initially booked the near empty Imax screening for morning, to suddenly find I was blocked in on my row by people with bags on the ground. So my experience was marred by my bladder being tested to its limit, and not wanting to be awkward passing by everyone to go back and forth. Also the film is so fast flowing with the dialogue and jumping from scene to scene there was no easy point to miss.

I would have to go see it again under better conditions.

One thing that bugged me is why the need for music constantly throughout. It never relented and gets annoying. Some scenes are better served for impact when there is no music on top. Such as the "Near zero" conversation before the Trinity test.

Speaking of the use of music I didn't really notice it and it didn't bother me but the lads on Red Letter Media brought it up as bugged them. They then gave us this gem 😀

I'm in two minds as well, and as someone who has read a number of books on Oppenheimer and the development of the bomb and its aftermath, I felt that it had a number of very curious omissions and oddities. Leo Szilard pops up only on occasion to spout off something and then disappears giving the impression that he was just some random guy. Edward Teller comes off as a kind of drunken, sweaty, bar fly and the relationship between General Groves and Oppenheimer was far, far, too warm.

One area where I'm not at odds with myself on, however, was the sound design. It was absolutely atrocious, to the point where I was wishing that there was a version without a soundtrack available. So intrusive are the musical interludes and so abrasive are some of the effects that i came away annoyed rather than tense or thrilled. It's easily the worst of Nolan's movies for its audio aspect, by a country mile.

On a positive note, Murphy was very good in the role and he managed to get some of Oppenheimer's mannerisms down and Downey Junior kinda steals the day with his portrayal of Lewis Strauss. But I would doubt that anyone in the audience who was relatively unfamiliar with Oppenheimer came away knowing more about him than they did when the went in. Nor would they have been any the wiser on many of the other characters (some of whom are very important) who come and go in a very fleeting way.

It's a film that's well worth seeing, though. But it's a bit of a curate's egg in a number of ways, with the subject matter being probably better suited to a mini series, like 'Chernobyl', rather than a feature length film. Because even at 3+ hours, there's a whole lot left out of the story.

Any examples of where you guys thought the score took away from the film? I quite enjoyed the huge dynamic shifts and brashness of it.

I went in expecting more of an art piece rather than a biopic, feel that's more along the lines of what I got.

yeah i saw the scene you refer to... so was there for that.. my son had gone in while i was getting parking and he said there wasnt much... i just hated not being seated and relaxed before it started.. spoiled the first 30 minutes of it

Just home, don't think it landed for me

A lot of it was amazing, the look and feel, the acting, all great. But I felt the story was a bit incoherent at the start. Felt like rushed vignettes from his life, and I found it a bit hard to keep track of the characters coming and going, which was annoying when some turned out to be important later on. I've seen some people suggest it would have worked better as a series and I agree

Once it got to Los Alamos it settled, but like others have said I'd have preferred more on the technical challenges there

I actually liked the hearing scenes, I think they had a bit more room to breathe than some of the early stuff. That said, I didn't think the Strauss hearing fully justified its significance in the film

Overall, lots of brilliance but it didn't quite mesh for me. Felt a bit like 800 pieces of a 1000 piece jigsaw

Wasn't the Strauss hearing necessary to effectively have him get his comeuppance? For the effective villain of the piece to get his deserved downfall? It's cathartic in one sense, but Nolan chose to remove any sense of triumph by having the final scene with Einstein.

I think the series would have been amazing if done A-La Chernobyl. But Nolan's specialty is managing to sustain story momentum over 2-3 hours. That he did it with a largely action-free film is really something. Speaking of tension, I'd also love to see the Safdie Brothers version of this. I think I'd have run screaming from the cinema 😂

Yeah, I do get that about the Strauss hearing. And bits of it when the stories started overlapping I really liked. I don't know, just somehow it didn't give me what I wanted, not that I'm sure what that was!

Like I said, I liked a lot but overall it didn't hang together for me. I won't over-analyse why though, I think it'll further spoil it for me and I definitely wouldn't want to argue with anyone who loved it, I just wish I was one of those people too

Right I love movies but there is a technical side this that film that I don’t understand.

Palas in Galway have a listing for Oppenheimer and for Oppenheimer 35mm.

Eye Cinema’s synopsis states it an “IMAX shot epic”.

Does all this mean that Palas and Eye are showing the IMAX version? And that Palas is also showing it in the “regular format”?

Has anyone here seen it at these two cinemas?

How is not the full IMAX experience?

I’ve never seen an IMAX film. I saw GRAVITY on a “giant screen” in China but I honestly cannot remember the experience. Pretty it wasn’t IMAX though.

Both of those guys are English.

I saw it yesterday, amazing cast and acting, however maybe it was my own hype but I was a small bit disappointed. Considering it was such a notable time in history, and considering it's quite obvious Oppenheimer was a far more fascinating character to talk about than I expected, I felt the film (or at least the decision to do a film about that specific book) wasn't great. I am just not sure if there is enough of a story in doing a film around Oppenheimer wanting to keep his security clearance, which is essentially what the film was about.

I'd love if the focus of the movie was more on his character (it would have brought even more out of Cillian Murphy), the story of the manhattan project and the fallout of the influence of scientists years later (I know that was all covered but it wasnt really the point).

Also, I know it was intentional, as it's supposed to be about Oppenheimer, not about what we think of nuclear weapons, but I didn't like the decision to hold off the graphics of what happened in Japan.

That being said, it's very possible Ill watch it again in a years time or something and appreciate it alot more. That has happened me before with Nolan movies.

It shouldn’t hinted at though it should be shown.

I wonder if Nolan had intended to show it but the studio feared it would put off the domestic audience.

It hasn’t opened in Japan yet and apparently doesn’t have release date.

The Americans deliberately murdered civilians m. Never understood how it isn’t considered a war crime.

But Oppenheimer himself didn't witness it, and it's his film. And he was removed from the process at that stage, I think not showing it highlighted that

I see what you're saying, but I don't think it was left out to hide away from it, and I don't think it's disrespectful of the victims to exclude it