How good is Christopher Nolan’s new movie, does it live to the hype? – Slight spoilers ahead
By Michael Levitas
Photo Credit: https://www.screentrant.com/
Oppenheimer” is a biographical thriller film directed by Christopher Nolan the maker behind the Dark Knight Trilogy starring Cillian Murphy as J. Robert Oppenheimer, the physicist known as the father of the atomic bomb. The film generated significant anticipation and has been marketed extensively. The film might be the most interesting movie to come out during the summer
The story takes a non-chronological approach, split into two perspectives. One part is told from the viewpoint of Lewis Strauss, portrayed by Robert Downey Jr., while the other follows Oppenheimer. On multiple viewings, viewers can piece together the out-of-order storytelling, connecting the ending with the beginning. The film primarily focuses on the atomic bomb but also delves into Oppenheimer’s character, exploring his political allegations, relationships, and motivations for participating in the Manhattan Project. Cillian Murphy’s portrayal captures both the internal and external facets of Oppenheimer’s character. The movie does not deify Oppenheimer but rather treats him as a flawed contradictory human being. You might find yourself agreeing or disagreeing with his actions consistently throughout the movie.
Nolan’s direction and Hoyte Van Hoytema’s cinematography excel in the film. They both skillfully employ sound, imagery, and visuals to maintain audience engagement and prevent exposition from becoming burdensome. Particularly, the depiction of the atomic bomb detonation immerses the audience as if they are direct spectators. The film is loud when you expect it to be quiet and quiet when you expect it to be loud, creating a sense of unpredictability. Despite the film’s three-hour runtime, it is well-paced, and the scenes don’t feel dragged. Oppenheimer manages to avoid a common problem that plagues biopics.
The movie also delves into the subtext and philosophy of the nuclear bomb. While nuclear bombs are the most lethal weapons ever created, they have both advantages and disadvantages. The gravest concern is their potential to trigger a catastrophic chain reaction that will destroy the world. Scientific simulations and probability have stated that a war involving nuclear weapons and its consequences could kill 5 billion people over a period. The advantages of nuclear weapons are that they incentivize cooperation and collaboration between nations. Nuclear weapons greatly change the rules and costs of warfare, so we must all come together to work. World War 3 hasn’t started, most likely due to the risks involving nuclear weapons. The film delves heavily into the pros and cons. The audience, along with Oppenheimer, must wrestle with this conflict and truly reflect on whether we did the right thing. Oppenheimer deals with people constantly warning him about nuclear weapons or others dismissing his concerns. The film is thought-provoking, and you are left with numerous afterthoughts.
The film isn’t perfect; one problem with the film comes toward the ending, where Oppenheimer’s investigation takes precedence. Unfortunately, this shift didn’t engage me as effectively as the earlier parts. The pacing, initially strong, falters towards the conclusion. The film’s final act felt like it could have been a bit shorter.
In conclusion, “Oppenheimer” stands as a compelling movie achievement. Christopher Nolan’s direction, Cillian Murphy’s interesting portrayal of J. Robert Oppenheimer, and the film’s unique narrative structure combine to create an engaging exploration of the history and moral implications surrounding the development of the atomic bomb. The movie not only delves into the technical aspects of nuclear weapons but also raises profound questions about their advantages and disadvantages on a global scale. While the film’s pacing falters slightly towards the end, its overall impact on the audience’s reflection and understanding of history and ethics is undeniable. “Oppenheimer” challenges us to consider the consequences of scientific advancements and the problematic decisions made by those who shape our world. It is a film that leaves us with both lingering thoughts and a deeper appreciation.
“This piece was written without the aid of studio-provided materials while
WGA and SAG-AFTRA are on strike. These unions represent our
writers, actors, and artists across TV and movies in their
fight for a fair and equitable contract. SAG-AFTRA asks those who
cover shows and films to refrain from promoting stricken content at this time.“
