Oppenheimer - New Christopher Nolan movie (1 Viewer)

[mr. furley]

I think we generally agree he’s the best filmmaker of the 21st century (let’s say to emerge in the 2000s as Memento was a 2000 movie and put him on the map). Who is 2nd best?

Tarantino >>>>> Nolan. I can sit down an watch Once Upon a Time in Hollywood or Inglorious Basterds for the millionth time, and each one will fly by like a 22-minute sitcom episode. The prospect of slogging through The Dark Knight again is a non-starter.

Tarantino has made overrated shlock ever since Reservoir Dogs

 

[TripItUp]

I love Tarantino, but he's not in the same stratosphere as Nolan IMHO.

 

[The General]

QT, like Nolan, is one of a handful of people who will get me excited to see a movie in the theater.

 

[dkp993]

Asking me to pick between QT, Nolan and Villeneuve is like trying to pick between your children. It depends on the day.

 

[TripItUp]

Asking me to pick between QT, Nolan and Villeneuve is like trying to pick between your children. It depends on the day.

I rank them

Nolan
Villenueve
QT

But love all 3...they are this generation's Spielbergs.

 

[Moonlight]

Inglorious Basterds

Bar none THE best opening scene in movie history. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve just watched that milk scene. Masterful.

It was very good. This would make a good thread “best opening scene in a movie”.

 

[PIK95]

I'm not a QT guy, but I have him over those other guys.

 

[PIK95]

Inglorious Basterds

Bar none THE best opening scene in movie history. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve just watched that milk scene. Masterful.

It was very good. This would make a good thread “best opening scene in a movie”.

Finding and casting guys like Christoph Waltz is why QT is the best. Inglorious was an amazing movie and Chris stole every scene he was in. Chris is also a super knowledgeable
NBA degenerate, which I find hilarious for some reason.

 

[Grahamburn]

Kind of weird to have that in this movie, IMO.

The sex in the movie was not 15 minutes, 5 minutes, or anything close to being an issue unless you just can't tolerate sex in a movie at all.

I think all of us can safely say that five minutes is a really long time.

 

[bigbottom]

Kind of weird to have that in this movie, IMO.

The sex in the movie was not 15 minutes, 5 minutes, or anything close to being an issue unless you just can't tolerate sex in a movie at all.

I think all of us can safely say that five minutes is a really long time.

That Oppenheimer is such a show-off!

 

[bigbottom]

Inglorious Basterds

Bar none THE best opening scene in movie history. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve just watched that milk scene. Masterful.

It was very good. This would make a good thread “best opening scene in a movie”.

That scene is so good. But I may like the bar scene even more.

 

[Captain Cranks]

For those interested in diving a little deeper into the Manhattan Project and the science behind building the bomb, this quick documentary was well done.

 

[The Gator]

Fantastic movie.



Albert saying "this is yours, not mine" was a great line imo

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

So I guess I need to watch Dunkirk.

 

[The General]

So I guess I need to watch Dunkirk.

The thing I came away with is how a war like that is complete madness, know one really knows what the hell is going on, complete luck who lives and dies. Haven't watched it since it came out but I really thought about that movie for awhile after I saw it.

 

[Grahamburn]

All you guys saying you're going to go see Barbie is schtick, right?

 

[Wrigley]

Saw this yesterday in a dolby theater.

Great flick, it'll clean up come Oscar time.

I strongly suggest seeing it with premium sound

 

[Terpman22]

Saw it on Saturday. Overall I thought it was a good film, not great. Didn't quite live up to the hype I was expecting, but overally was done very well. I can see why critics like it.

 

[Corporation]

Saw it in regular IMAX, it is a great movie, but long. Lots of heavy material. Really great performances all around except I wasn't crazy about Emily Blunt, who I usually love. RDJ was amazing. Gary Oldman was unrecognizable. Nolan is just a terrific filmmaker.

 

[Ilov80s]

All you guys saying you're going to go see Barbie is schtick, right?

funniest movie of the year by a mile

 

[Moonlight]

So I guess I need to watch Dunkirk.

Suggest you watch it twice when you have the time. I liked it the first time but had trouble with some of the time jumping. I missed some things and had some confusion about others.

For me the second view was easier and more enjoyable.

 

[dkp993]

Nolan operating with all his powers as only he can. Fantastic movie.

 

[Capella]

All you guys saying you're going to go see Barbie is schtick, right?

This Friday night.

 

[Don Quixote]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

 

[The Gator]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Oh man, he's my favorite. You're in for some treats.

Since sci-fi isn't your thing, start with Sicario imo

 

[jobarules]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival

 

[higgins]

I thought it was great but (echoing others) not best of century, etc.. I do contrast it to Dunkirk below....

Spoiler....

Nolan typically likes to take time jumps, etc. but that didn't distract me....

Extreme 1
One extreme of a film could be exemplified by how little a movie is propelled forward by its script. Everyone knew the Dunkirk story by the time they were coming to see the movie, and, even if they didn't, it was easy to follow along. The dialogue (what there was of it) did not drive the story forward or come close to developing characters. Instead, the "known" story moved forward by the easily interpreted actions on-screen and I reacted to it emotionally by the cinematography (as if I were there) and Hans Zimmer's unique score. Again, the script/dialogue didn't move the story forward.

I loved this movie.

Normal
A typical good movie has good writing/script which moves the story forward, interesting characters (with some development over their arc), twists/suspense, yadda, yadda.

Extreme 2 (from the other direction)
Oppenheimer was a different extreme. It was obviously different in that we were looking through looking/living thru Oppenheimer's perspective over the course of his adult life. But what propelled the movie forward was the sheer volume of dialogue -- this is what distracted me. And it was the imho opinion ideal way to propel it.
How better can we understand the beginnings of the cold war than through the following (simultaneously!) :
- The beginnings of counterintelligence and compartmentalization that Oppenheimer lived thru
- The beginnings of the communism/socialism-bogeyman that Oppenheimer saw first-hand with his mistress/lover.
- The beginnings of a new scientific era (that has the most destructive potential) thru Oppenheimer's eyes.

All of the above can't even begin to be fleshed out in a 3-hour movie if you want to develop characters. It had to be done with a 30-second dialogue here, followed by a 2-minute narrative there, followed by an infinite number of rapid scenes that illustrate the 3 bullet points above.

My only 2 critiques were (1) the trinity explosion didn't impress me in the least on IMAX, so too high expectations? (2) way too much time on RDJ's character.

I loved this movie.

 

[bigbottom]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

 

[coopersdad]

Went w/ 19yo college son this afternoon. He liked it but said it was hard to follow. Sent him the wiki page on the movie, and he calls me this evening with lots of "oh's and ah's" answered.

Probably still prefer Dunkirk, but I could see myself watching this one again and pulling everything into a tighter bow.

 

[Ilov80s]

Went w/ 19yo college son this afternoon. He liked it but said it was hard to follow. Sent him the wiki page on the movie, and he calls me this evening with lots of "oh's and ah's" answered.

Probably still prefer Dunkirk, but I could see myself watching this one again and pulling everything into a tighter bow.

Yeah you definitely needed a good deal of context for the era otherwise the rooting out Communism angle won’t make any sense. I actually think you need more knowledge about that than any scientific background.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

Arrival is one of the best movies this century.

As for Oppenheimer, I think knowledge of the era is vital
It probably requires more than 1 viewing
Downey Jr was going for Oscar bait, but overacted the final scenes
Add Harry S Truman to the amazing list of characters Gary Oldman has played. Not a sympathetic portrayal

 

[Ilov80s]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

Arrival is one of the best movies this century.

As for Oppenheimer, I think knowledge of the era is vital
It probably requires more than 1 viewing
Downey Jr was going for Oscar bait, but overacted the final scenes
Add Harry S Truman to the amazing list of characters Gary Oldman has played. Not a sympathetic portrayal

I actually didn’t find Truman unsympathetic. If Oppy had such qualms about the bomb then he shouldn’t have helped build it. Truman is also right that it was really his call to drop it and he’s the one who will be judged for eternity.

 

[3C's]

Checked the local library for the book the film is based on and there's a wait list 10 people deep. Guess I might have to buy it if I want to read it any time soon.

 

[mr. furley]

Checked the local library for the book the film is based on and there's a wait list 10 people deep. Guess I might have to buy it if I want to read it any time soon.

checked Amazon for used copies and somehow they're more expensive than the new copies

 

[3C's]

Checked the local library for the book the film is based on and there's a wait list 10 people deep. Guess I might have to buy it if I want to read it any time soon.

checked Amazon for used copies and somehow they're more expensive than the new copies

Crazy right?!

 

[EZD222]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

The Juarez scene in Sicario is masterclass.

 

[The Gator]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

The Juarez scene in Sicario is masterclass.

That and the dark tunnel scene at the end leading to a great ending were

 

[Moonlight]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

Arrival is one of the best movies this century.

As for Oppenheimer, I think knowledge of the era is vital
It probably requires more than 1 viewing
Downey Jr was going for Oscar bait, but overacted the final scenes
Add Harry S Truman to the amazing list of characters Gary Oldman has played. Not a sympathetic portrayal

Wow didn’t recognize Oldman as Truman. Took me a bit to recognize Downey.

 

[Moonlight]

When we got back my wife looked up a photo of Oppenheimer and said he reminded her of Sheldon Cooper the physicist from the Big Bang Theory.
Wondered if that had some influence on his being cast.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival

Denis Villeneuve?

I was just looking up his filmography and I don’t think I’ve seen any of his films. It looks like a lot of sci fi and I don’t watch much of that, so may have gone under my radar — but I enjoy a good director regardless of genre. Which one would you start with?

Arrival is my favorite, but Sicario may be more to your liking.

Arrival is one of the best movies this century.

As for Oppenheimer, I think knowledge of the era is vital
It probably requires more than 1 viewing
Downey Jr was going for Oscar bait, but overacted the final scenes
Add Harry S Truman to the amazing list of characters Gary Oldman has played. Not a sympathetic portrayal

I actually didn’t find Truman unsympathetic. If Oppy had such qualms about the bomb then he shouldn’t have helped build it. Truman is also right that it was really his call to drop it and he’s the one who will be judged for eternity.

Yeah buts its “i never want to see that crybaby in here again” in earshot of Oppenheimer that was unsympathetic.
Plus they made Truman out to be an oaf, which he was.

 

[Don Quixote]

Yeah buts its “i never want to see that crybaby in here again” in earshot of Oppenheimer that was unsympathetic.
Plus they made Truman out to be an oaf, which he was.

The chapter on that in American Prometheus is particularly great. Here’s a snippet (there are paragraph breaks in there, but not working for me on mobile):

At one point in their conversation, Truman suddenly asked him to guess when the Russians would develop their own atomic bomb. When Oppie replied that he did not know, Truman confidently said he knew the answer: “Never.” For Oppenheimer, such foolishness was proof of Truman’s limitations. The “incomprehension it showed just knocked the heart out of him,” recalled Willie Higinbotham. As for Truman, a man who compensated for his insecurities with calculated displays of decisiveness, Oppenheimer seemed maddeningly tentative, obscure—and cheerless. Finally, sensing that the president was not comprehending the deadly urgency of his message, Oppenheimer nervously wrung his hands and uttered another of those regrettable remarks that he characteristically made under pressure. “Mr. President,” he said quietly, “I feel I have blood on my hands.” The comment angered Truman. He later informed David Lilienthal, “I told him the blood was on my hands—to let me worry about that.” But over the years, Truman embellished the story. By one account, he replied, “Never mind, it’ll all come out in the wash.” In yet another version, he pulled his handkerchief from his breast pocket and offered it to Oppenheimer, saying, “Well, here, would you like to wipe your hands?” An awkward silence followed this exchange, and then Truman stood up to signal that the meeting was over. The two men shook hands, and Truman reportedly said, “Don’t worry, we’re going to work something out, and you’re going to help us.” Afterwards, the President was heard to mutter, “Blood on his hands, dammit, he hasn’t half as much blood on his hands as I have. You just don’t go around bellyaching about it.” He later told Dean Acheson, “I don’t want to see that son-of-a-***** in this office ever again.” Even in May 1946, the encounter still vivid in his mind, he wrote Acheson and described Oppenheimer as a “cry-baby scientist” who had come to “my office some five or six months ago and spent most of his time wringing his hands and telling me they had blood on them because of the discovery of atomic energy.” On this important occasion, the composure and powers of persuasion of the usually charming and self-possessed Oppenheimer had abandoned him. His habit of relying on spontaneity worked well when he was at ease, but, time and again, under pressure he would say things that he would regret profoundly, and that would do him serious harm. On this occasion he had had the opportunity to impress the one man who possessed the power to help him return the nuclear genie to the bottle—and he utterly failed to take advantage of the opportunity. As Harold Cherniss had observed, his facile articulateness was dangerous—a lethal two-edged sword. It was often a sharp instrument of persuasion, but it could also be used to undercut the hard work of research and preparation. It was a form of intellectual arrogance that periodically led him to behave foolishly or badly, an Achilles’ heel of sorts that would have devastating consequences. Indeed, it would eventually provide his political enemies with the opportunity to destroy him.

 

[TripItUp]

The theme of "America is a powerful entity that needs to be managed or it might create and/or do bad things or have unintended consequences" is a powerful and most important lesson.

I love that Nolan made it a central theme.

I just love this film. Almost brought me to tears not just because of its multiple layers of greatness, but also because of its honesty.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

Yeah buts its “i never want to see that crybaby in here again” in earshot of Oppenheimer that was unsympathetic.
Plus they made Truman out to be an oaf, which he was.

The chapter on that in American Prometheus is particularly great. Here’s a snippet (there are paragraph breaks in there, but not working for me on mobile):

At one point in their conversation, Truman suddenly asked him to guess when the Russians would develop their own atomic bomb. When Oppie replied that he did not know, Truman confidently said he knew the answer: “Never.” For Oppenheimer, such foolishness was proof of Truman’s limitations. The “incomprehension it showed just knocked the heart out of him,” recalled Willie Higinbotham. As for Truman, a man who compensated for his insecurities with calculated displays of decisiveness, Oppenheimer seemed maddeningly tentative, obscure—and cheerless. Finally, sensing that the president was not comprehending the deadly urgency of his message, Oppenheimer nervously wrung his hands and uttered another of those regrettable remarks that he characteristically made under pressure. “Mr. President,” he said quietly, “I feel I have blood on my hands.” The comment angered Truman. He later informed David Lilienthal, “I told him the blood was on my hands—to let me worry about that.” But over the years, Truman embellished the story. By one account, he replied, “Never mind, it’ll all come out in the wash.” In yet another version, he pulled his handkerchief from his breast pocket and offered it to Oppenheimer, saying, “Well, here, would you like to wipe your hands?” An awkward silence followed this exchange, and then Truman stood up to signal that the meeting was over. The two men shook hands, and Truman reportedly said, “Don’t worry, we’re going to work something out, and you’re going to help us.” Afterwards, the President was heard to mutter, “Blood on his hands, dammit, he hasn’t half as much blood on his hands as I have. You just don’t go around bellyaching about it.” He later told Dean Acheson, “I don’t want to see that son-of-a-***** in this office ever again.” Even in May 1946, the encounter still vivid in his mind, he wrote Acheson and described Oppenheimer as a “cry-baby scientist” who had come to “my office some five or six months ago and spent most of his time wringing his hands and telling me they had blood on them because of the discovery of atomic energy.” On this important occasion, the composure and powers of persuasion of the usually charming and self-possessed Oppenheimer had abandoned him. His habit of relying on spontaneity worked well when he was at ease, but, time and again, under pressure he would say things that he would regret profoundly, and that would do him serious harm. On this occasion he had had the opportunity to impress the one man who possessed the power to help him return the nuclear genie to the bottle—and he utterly failed to take advantage of the opportunity. As Harold Cherniss had observed, his facile articulateness was dangerous—a lethal two-edged sword. It was often a sharp instrument of persuasion, but it could also be used to undercut the hard work of research and preparation. It was a form of intellectual arrogance that periodically led him to behave foolishly or badly, an Achilles’ heel of sorts that would have devastating consequences. Indeed, it would eventually provide his political enemies with the opportunity to destroy him.

Thanks for that.
Im a bit weird, but this was my favorite scene in the whole movie.
Precisely for what it said and what it didnt say. That chapter explains all the nuances perfectly.

Truman himself is one of the most fascinating Presidents. I think i ranked him 6th in an exercise we did around here a while back.
Not an intelligent man, but he knew his own limitations
He was an excellent leader though. This sentence sums the man up

As for Truman, a man who compensated for his insecurities with calculated displays of decisiveness

If it wasnt the most important decision a President has made, its in the top 3.
He was the right man for the right time.
He didnt cry about it. Made his decision and moved on.
Truman made plenty of mistakes, like underestimating Russia. Why he is so fascinating.

Oldman was perfect for such a role. He truly is an acting chameleon.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Trying to plan a dinner reservation after this. Does the 3hr runtime include credits? How long is it not counting the credits?

ETA: Movie is scheduled for 2:45pm. Only dinner res available is 6:30pm. Will take about 15-20 mins to get from theater to restaurant.

 

[Don Quixote]

Trying to plan a dinner reservation after this. Does the 3hr runtime include credits? How long is it not counting the credits?

I think that includes credits, but still think it was over three hours from start time because there were 20 minutes of previews before the movie started. (Maybe 3:15, but just a rough guess.)

 

[krista4]

Wow didn’t recognize Oldman as Truman. Took me a bit to recognize Downey.

Exactly the same. Didn't know that was Oldman until Mr. krista told me after. And it took me a few scenes before I said, oh hell that's Downey Jr. I thought they were both phenomenal in their roles.

 

[mr. furley]

Trying to plan a dinner reservation after this. Does the 3hr runtime include credits? How long is it not counting the credits?

ETA: Movie is scheduled for 2:45pm. Only dinner res available is 6:30pm. Will take about 15-20 mins to get from theater to restaurant.

went to the noon showing on Sunday and walked out at 3:15 almost on the nose.

 

[mr. furley]

in looking at the cover of American Prometheus i'm struck by how much Oppenheimer looks like @saintfool

 

[Desert_Power]

Wow didn’t recognize Oldman as Truman. Took me a bit to recognize Downey.

Exactly the same. Didn't know that was Oldman until Mr. krista told me after. And it took me a few scenes before I said, oh hell that's Downey Jr. I thought they were both phenomenal in their roles.

Oldman is the Chris Nolan of acting. If he's doing a part, you know it's going to have a high floor.

 

[3C's]

Trying to plan a dinner reservation after this. Does the 3hr runtime include credits? How long is it not counting the credits?

ETA: Movie is scheduled for 2:45pm. Only dinner res available is 6:30pm. Will take about 15-20 mins to get from theater to restaurant.

went to the noon showing on Sunday and walked out at 3:15 almost on the nose.

Yeah, I went to the 10am showing, got there at 1010, previews finally ended at 1025ish and I was out the door at ~1320 (when I answered a work text ) so certainly right at 3 hours but longer including the previews.