Hey yall!
So we did it. Barbenhiemer double feature As I stated in my previous post:
https://lemmy.world/post/1887202
Oppenheimer review:
Overall I recommended people go see it in theaters, Preferably in IMAX.
The film tells Oppenheimer’s story well and conveys the complexity of Oppenheimer and the nuance of the situations that he was in. All of the performances where spectacular from a star studded cast. Its emotional, informative and visually pleasing. Go see it.
That being said: I ultimately found the film to be pretentious, tedious and kinda hard to sit through to the end. Many stylistic choices by Nolan get in the way of the films entertainment value.
SPOILERSZZZZZZZZZZZ BELOW
Some stylistic choices by nolan that I didn’t like:
1.)The entire movie is scene after scene of random jumps in time. There is almost zero contexts given for each scene. No year, or location is stated when scenes change. And the film takes place over 4 different time periods. Scenes just start up mid conversation: Oppenheimer in an office talking with some famous physicist for a 15 word conversation before another sharp cut to a different scene doing basically the same thing… For 3hrs.
While i feel this is purposeful by Nolan, maybe to prevent taking too much creative license with the story? Not sure, but it makes the film very confusing. There is such little effort made to explain the settings of each scene. Im glad I knew my history to fill in the gaps.
2.) Typical of a Nolan film: Its way too loud and too quite. The audio of explosions and visualization, shakes the whole theater while some fellow viewers cover their ears. Then the next scene, which is sharply cut from the previous one, is DEAD silent. Often followed by short whispered dialog. I couldn’t hear half of what was said.
3.) Maybe most frustrating thing: Nolan didn’t use cgi for the trinity test explosion.
Much of the movie builds to the Trinity test. Its the longest scene in the movie. The build up was emersive and exhilarating. Its honestly a incredible scene, until the explosion.
Unless you have lived under rock for the past 80+ years, you have probably seen the original footage of the trinity test. The real life footage is awe inspiring. Its surprisingly clear and detailed and shows the fury and scale of the first nuclear bomb. It’s mesmerizing and terrifying.
Christopher Nolan seems to think he can do a better job of creating an explosion than the real Oppenheimer and a real nuke. He’s wrong. The explosion during the Trinity test scene is severely underwhelming. So muxh so, It broke me out of the film. :(
Mission accomplished Mr.Nolan. Its painfully obvious you’re not using CGI. PS. If I wanted to watch movies made with 1930s tech, ill hit up turner classic.
I was so excited for this scene. Maybe its my fault for trying to enjoy Nolan’s recent films, instead of collapsing under the weight of the importance of the story.
Why he would choose to go this path can be nothing but pompousness. Like honestly, how are you going to make a 3rh movie about creating the atomic bomb, and then skimp on trinity test? Thumbs down Mr. Nolan.
Nolan is well on his way to become one of the legendary directors. Complete with a string of long “Epic” films I wouldn’t watch a 2nd time.
stay tuned for the Barbie review coming soon!
Theres a lot here and I dont have the time to tackle everything but I will say the movie isnt about making the atomic bomb, its about Oppenheimer and the complexities of the person who made the bomb because of his impact on history.
There only being silence when the bomb actually went off was the perfect way to depict the scene - Oppenheimer opened pandora’s box and the focus is entirely on the person instead of the explosion. I thought it was a bold and intelligent creative choice precisely because it makes you engage with the inner workings of Oppy’s mind and the central premise of the film. Making the dramatic tension about an explosion instead of what the movie is actually about is what would have came off as pretentious to me.
I think you can argue against the movie being pretentious in general because this isnt a work of fiction and Oppenheimer was incredibly important and influential and effected actual lives. Every little moment, quirk, or relationship molded him and created the person that literally changed the world. Folks can disagree on whether they have a positive or negative perception of Oppenheimer but to say the man and his life’s depictions are unimportant or pretentious doesn’t seem fair.
focus is entirely on the person instead of the explosion.
Then why not just use the original Trinity test footage. Why recreate the explosion in a different and obvisouly inaccurate way?
Agree to disagree
but to say the man and his life’s depictions are unimportant or pretentious doesn’t seem fair.
I never said this so I dont know where you getting it from.
I’m not sure how using that footage would have been more impactful than just focusing on the person like it did. Plus that would unnecessarily break the diegesis of the film.
You said the film felt ultimately pretentious, that’s what I was responding to in that comment. Idk how this movie came off as pretentious considering the real world implications of his life. I didn’t get the feeling anything shown was unimportant but was trying to portray itself as more important than it actually was. Maybe I just need more clarification from you around that opinion.
you are clearly misunderstanding OP . He isn’t complaining that the trinity test focused on it’s maker. That is clearly a creative decision that IMO it worked well and I even agree with OP that while the movie is good, it is not amazing or anywhere near perfect.
So what I believe he is saying is that you can focus on Oppie and still have an actual big bang for literally the biggest nuke known to man at the time. I really enjoyed the scene, and how they made it with that silence, but you can’t deny that if you take a still or just look at the explosion images it looks like they blew up a medium sized shack.
You said the film felt ultimately pretentious, that’s what I was responding to in that comment. Idk how this movie came off as pretentious considering the real world implications of his life.
People seem to be misunderstanding me here, i am saying Christopher Nolan is pretentious. not Oppenheimer the person. Not Oppenheimer’s actual life. I am not calling the events depicted inthe film pretentious.
Im calling the director, Christopher Nolan pretentious. specifically His chioce to make the movie so Loud it hurt my ears and was visibly uncomfortable other viewers.
But The main thing I find pretentious, is Nolan’s choice to not use CGI for the Trinity test scene.
I didnt even know this was the case when I went to the film. I was simply underwhelmed by the explosion in the scene. And later started googling the film only to find out that he didnt use CGI.
I dont care who you are. If you make movie about the Father of the nuke. The nuke scene should not be underwhelming. Thats my opinion at least.
Personally I liked the test scene. I was tense waiting for the pressure wave to hit them
I loved the test scene and it didn’t even occur to me that they weren’t using CGI. I thought the tension was amazing and the stylistic choice to not have any music or sound during the explosion was surprisingly effective.
But didnt you feel alittle underwhelmed at the explosion? It didnt even look close to the real thing.
I think CGI would have been the better choice but I will say I found the slow motion close-up shots of the fireball very evocative
Yeah maybe. I was just let down a little bit I guess . the lead up to that scene was epic. I had sweaty palms! Then just some shots pf fire and such.
I went and watched the original trinity test footage after. Its pretty crazy looking. I just dont know why they wouldn’t include that in the film.
Not in the slightest. The entire build-up/explosion/shockwave sequence on 70mm IMAX is one of the greatest cinematic experiences I’ve ever had.
Nolan is known for wanting to shoot as much as possible in-camera, partly because he loves to shoot on film rather than rely on digital effects. I think that’s admirable.
I thought the entire film was excellent. Zero complaints whatsoever.
Not in the slightest. The entire build-up/explosion/shockwave sequence on 70mm IMAX is one of the greatest cinematic experiences I’ve ever had.
I thought the build up was incredible that’s Why i am frustrated with this scene.
I think that’s admirable.
Why?
Because modern cinema is saturated with CGI, to the point where audiences are becoming desensitized to it. Unless it’s done really well, it also tends to feel less realistic than practical effects.
Being able to actually create a real representation of a nuclear explosion and filming it, rather than just shooting in front of green screen and adding it in post-production, takes a lot more dedication and skill.
Seems to me like you were expecting a movie about the making of the atom bomb, when the movie was clearly focusing on the life of the man who created it.
I went with someone who’s entire knowledge of Oppenheimer was the Epic Rap Battle video and they were perfectly able to follow the entire story and the multiple location and date changes.
I would like to hear more of your thoughts on why you thought the movie was pretentious.
As for the sound, in my theater everything sounded great, maybe just slightly too loud in some scenes. Could it be just a bad setup?
Finally, I did not find the Trinity test underwhelming in any way. However, I can understand why some people might. However this ties into my first point. The story is not really about the creation of the bomb, but how making it affected the man behind it. Could be just that didn’t work for you while it did for me.
Im glad you liked it. Sincerely. I did too. but it is pretentious af to make a nuke scene in a movie about the father of the nuke, without CGI. Fullstop. He could just use very little cgi. Idk. But for me that scene was not a believable depiction of the trinity Test.
Seems to me like you were expecting a movie about the making of the atom bomb, when the movie was clearly focusing on the life of the man who created it.
Omg. You’re the second person to say this. I find this take hilarious. Maybe you’re right. But Am I really that out of bounds to expect The Trinity test to be a little more big?
It didn’t even look like the trinity test footage.
So yeah I had expectations, I expected a director who seems to be very concerned about historically accurate depictions… to depict the trinity test historically accurate.
It’s a big deal to me. Sorry.
As for the sound, in my theater everything sounded great, maybe just slightly too loud in some scenes. Could it be just a bad setup?
I saw it in 70mm imax as Christopher Nolan himself recommended. The sound was unbearable for many scenes.
So Im glad your theather was good but if mr.nolan cant make his movie sound decent in his recommend fomat. I think he should maybe turn it down alittle? Im not the first person to make this critque of this movies.
Many people said the same of Tenet.
tenet was way worse in the sound department, i didn’t understand a sinle word, while oppenheimer was ok-ish
The soundtrack isn’t directly on the 70mm film, it’s digital and sort of manually synced to the film. I believe IMAX film and IMAX digital uses the same soundtrack and the same standards but obviously the room dimensions and other properties will have some influence on the outcome.
Glad people having different opinions than you makes you laugh!
As for the pretentiousness of the film, you’re really calling a film that for just one scene where you disagreed with the director?
“It insists upon itself.”
I found it to be a very “Nolan” film. All his usual flares like story told in rapid fire edits out of chronological order from different points in time, loud music and sound effects over dialog, etc. His movies can be heavy and hard to take in and the fact this one is three hours long makes hard to sit through in my opinion. I would still recommend it though. Amazing performances from an A tier roster of actors.
The movie’s nonlinear story telling is the worst part of the film. Oppenheimer’s security clearance hearing was a good place to anchor the movie, but it did not even attempt to set up its antagonist until the last quarter of the movie. Why should it have been a ah-ha moment that Strauss was against Oppenheimer. A better editor would have more effectively placed all of the scenes into a coherent narrative.
The sex scene was just bad. “Christopher, how do intelligent people have sex?” “Well, they can only be aroused by reading ancient languages that foreshadow their grandiose future achievements.”
When Oppenheimer, allegedly poisoned Blackett’s apple, it should have been a scene about his mental health issues at the time. Rather than a completely fabricated suspense scene. People who were aware of the incident questioned if it ever really happened. It would have been more impactful to have a scene where Oppenheimer meets with his analyst from that period. The movie decides to simply say that it happened and for some reason interjected Bohr.
The portrayals of characters was a highlight of the film. Most of the acting was great. It was, however, overly stuffed with high profile actors, which turned the film into a distracting cameo bingo game.
The physical and psychological aftermath of the atomic booms dropping on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not adequately portrayed. It did not show well enough the psychological toll it took on the scientists on the project or portray the horrific physical toll it inflicted on the Japanese people. The slide reel scene not showing a single image of the attack was a poor choice. It demonstrates that Hollywood is completely ok with an R rating for showing nudity, but not for confronting people with the horrors of human cruelty.
