People going to theaters expecting Oppenheimer to be a traditional Christopher Nolan movie, in the sense of groundbreaking action sequences, massive technological machinery and time/place dimension manipulation will be surprised, to say the least.
This is a heavily-focused political-history film, unlike any work Nolan has ever done before. However, despite the many and major differences to its predecessors in the director's filmography, it still works to a great extent.
This is a heavily-focused political-history film, unlike any work Nolan has ever done before. However, despite the many and major differences to its predecessors in the director's filmography, it still works to a great extent.
Below are my general takeaways from the movie, both positive and negative, and not sorted in any particular order for that matter.
1. Excellent Storytelling
Regular viewers, with no to little background information on the subject matter and the depicted historical events, will find themselves exposed to a large amount and a wide variety of information, characters, settings and occurrences. This is a great risk for a director who is treading new genre waters.
But Nolan is no regular filmmaker, and once again demonstrates his excellent storytelling abilities, opting (for the umpteenth time) to unfold the events in a nonlinear chronology. In the final, slightly overstretched act of the film, all pieces of the movie's puzzle come fitting together in near-perfect tandem.
2. Seamless Editing + Gripping Score
It will be a shock if the movie is not at least nominated for the Best Editing award in the upcoming Oscars season. Despite the continuous shuffling back and forth between time-periods and locations (a Nolan trademark), the movie continues to feel like one solid entity, grabbing the viewers' attention from the opening scene and not letting go until the very end.
Coupled with the nonstop (at times nerve-breaking) musical score, the film feels like one robust choreographed entity. I barely remember a scene where the music is not immensely present and effective. Music and sound, as with all previous Nolan movies, are again major success elements here.
3. Acting Performances
Robert Downey Jr. will always be recognized as Iron Man by the majority of people, but his roles in movies like Good Night and Good Luck, Tropic Thunder and Zodiac showcased how unique and versatile of an actor he can actually be. In Oppenheimer however, he reaches new heights, and I even dare to say that he almost steals the show from the leading (and equally incredible) Cillian Murphy.
Speaking of which, Murphy has clearly worked hard to make the central character his own. Despite wearing the trademark fedora and smoking in most of his scenes, the lead actor's performance gives no resemblance whatsoever to his famous portrayal of Thomas Shelby in the Peaky Blinders series. Both Downey Jr. and Murphy will likely be nominated in their categories come the awards season.
Matt Damon is significantly memorable in his capacity as a comedic relief, but I was a bit turned off by the performance of Emily Blunt, given that she has been one of my personal favorite actresses recently. Perhaps because the character she is playing is not that likable or special in the first place, as she is crying or complaining in most of her screen time.
Speaking of which, Murphy has clearly worked hard to make the central character his own. Despite wearing the trademark fedora and smoking in most of his scenes, the lead actor's performance gives no resemblance whatsoever to his famous portrayal of Thomas Shelby in the Peaky Blinders series. Both Downey Jr. and Murphy will likely be nominated in their categories come the awards season.
Matt Damon is significantly memorable in his capacity as a comedic relief, but I was a bit turned off by the performance of Emily Blunt, given that she has been one of my personal favorite actresses recently. Perhaps because the character she is playing is not that likable or special in the first place, as she is crying or complaining in most of her screen time.
Overall nonetheless, the entire cast, which is packed with many A-list actors, gives a commendable portrayal of the characters.
 |
| "Amateurs chase the sun and get burned. Power stays in the shadows." - Downey Jr. is Captivating and Unpredictable in his Supporting Role |
4. Big Screen vs Small Screen Experience
Given the nature of the movie, and apart from the breath-taking bomb test scene, which is a mighty highlight from the film (with no CGI involved), I felt that I would have enjoyed the movie more had I watched it alone on a smaller screen.
Also, and due to the incredibly fast pace of both the dialogue and events, there were several moments where I wished I could jump backwards and repeat some scenes, just to make sure I was on the same page with what's going on. In any case, the movie definitely demands multiple viewings, so I will surely be seeing it again; not in a theater though.
Also, and due to the incredibly fast pace of both the dialogue and events, there were several moments where I wished I could jump backwards and repeat some scenes, just to make sure I was on the same page with what's going on. In any case, the movie definitely demands multiple viewings, so I will surely be seeing it again; not in a theater though.
5. Nudity
I do understand that you have to shed light on the personal life of the central character, to give him more depth and for the audience to sympathize with him. But in the case of Oppenheimer, and because the film is so focused on the science, politics and history of that era, I felt that the nude scenes with Florence Pugh were completely distracting and out of context.
Nolan had already pointed out Oppenheimer's womanizer side, both explicitly and implicitly, so I thought there was no need for a couple of nude scenes to emphasize that point. To me, the scenes turned out to be kind of enforced, rather than being a fitting or contributing part to the whole final outcome.
Nolan had already pointed out Oppenheimer's womanizer side, both explicitly and implicitly, so I thought there was no need for a couple of nude scenes to emphasize that point. To me, the scenes turned out to be kind of enforced, rather than being a fitting or contributing part to the whole final outcome.
6. Pace and Character Recognition
As mentioned earlier, the film is very fast-paced at times that it is almost impossible for one to grasp the entire narrative and comprehend all the dialogue. This might be an issue for many.
In addition, I personally struggled with the recognition of the names and roles of many characters, particularly some of the professors and scientists cooperating with Oppenheimer on the project, as well as some of the military and judicial personnel. So at several instances, I was constantly asking myself "Who's this guy? And what's his position? Which side is he on?", and so forth.
In addition, I personally struggled with the recognition of the names and roles of many characters, particularly some of the professors and scientists cooperating with Oppenheimer on the project, as well as some of the military and judicial personnel. So at several instances, I was constantly asking myself "Who's this guy? And what's his position? Which side is he on?", and so forth.
7. Concluding Thoughts
The movie will certainly be considered as one of Nolan's best accomplishments when looking back on his career as a whole. It is thought-provoking, and forces the viewers to put themselves in the sticky situations J. Robert Oppenheimer's has faced.
It also motivates the audience to thoroughly research the subject matter and the time period, and to seriously consider the grave moral and political implications some individual decisions can result in.
However, a few drawbacks (many of which could probably be ignored on a second watch) prevent it from being the ideal biopic Nolan would have probably hoped for.
My rating: 9/10
