I completely agree. I actually don't understand how this film got an Oscar. It was a fascinating story but the endless background music and ultra quick edits and scene changes just wore me out. My brain likes to take in everything, notice everything, get immersed and this movie just wouldn't let me. For example, one minute he is talking to a woman, next thing they are in bed, next thing she's demanding he read Sanskrit to her. The camera never lingers. There is no silence and most importantly no time to care about any of the characters. The one bright spot for me was Robert Downey Jr.'s performance.
Thanks for this, Ann. I especially liked the following passage from your reflection: “The camera never lingers. There is no silence and most importantly no time to care about any of the characters. “ So true!
I saw this at the Santa Barbara Film Festival viewing today and it was followed by a Q&A with Cillian. He’s a nice guy IRL and I admired his work. But the more I think about the movie, I can’t stand it. In the middle I thought they should just title it “Men Talking” because that’s all it was. And because of the loud indiscernible speech I couldn’t follow WTF was happening and thus didn’t care. The female characters were flat and uninteresting. I’m actually very very annoyed this film is supposed to be considered by many to be a masterpiece. I’m a smart film lover and I vehemently disagree.
Thanks so much for sharing your experience of seeing "Oppenheimer," Kim. I consider myself a smart film lover, too, and I don't think we're wrong in being deeply dissatisfied with this movie. But I think this is Nolan's year, and the film will be lauded at the Oscars. But I'm going to be much more careful in approaching his next film.
You've captured my thoughts on Oppenheimer so well. I remember walking out of the theater feeling overwhelmed, thinking that the film was important, perhaps ambitious, but not necessarily immersive or entertaining. I couldn't pinpoint what bothered me about it exactly, but, at some point that same night, I said that the movie felt "choppy." And your remark about vignettes hits the nail on the head. That's the reason. I also think the back and forth to manufacture suspense wasn't that effective. The sex scenes also felt like they didn't belong. I don't necessarily immediately object the sex scenes, but they should serve a dramatic purpose. Here, they're difficult to justify. I added it as one of my "favorite" of the year because it felt important and it tackled serious ideas, albeit in a dull manner. I wonder if we'll both the same way when/if we rewatch it.
Thanks for this, Joe. "Choppy" is a really good word to describe the film--especially in its first 20 minutes or so. I look forward to something much better from Nolan next time.
Agree. To me, his best film to date is Dunkirk. I really disliked The Prestige when it first came out but after 2-3 rewatches, I now think it's one of his best too.
I found the movie interesting (I haven’t read the book it’s based on) in the telling of the coming together of so many scientists ( and egos) to create the atomic bomb. I also was surprised that Oppenheimer didn’t see past the making of it. Until it was made, he didn’t try to imagine the greater consequences? Strauss’ roll had to be explained to me post movie. I didn’t catch his deep offense at the imagined snub by Oppenheimer and Einstein or that his vanity had somehow played an important roll in events of the movie. Thank you for a delightful review!
So glad you enjoyed the review, Anne! Nolan and this film will be the toast of the movie awards season, as proved again by his haul at the BAFTAS last night, but I stand by my review. Oppenheimer was a very gifted but deeply troubled soul. If you like podcasts, there is a podcast called THE REST IS HISTORY that has an episode from last summer on Oppenheimer that is worth a listen. His moral blindness to what he was doing is better explained by this podcast than by Nolan's movie.
Saw the film last night on imax. Too loud, much of the dialogue very hard to understand. How can you care for a scene when you cannot understand what is being said. Just to look at it?
Very few scenes that used imax to advantage. Explicit sex scenes were superfluous and added nothing to the story. A hodgepodge of vignettes and scenes that were confusing, even while supposedly clear because of black and white and colored photography.
Very disappointing film, could have watched on my tv. Why did this film get so much praise?
And it’s especially gratifying that you agree with my opinion on the sex scenes. I took to Reddit my opinions of the sex scenes and was called a Karen for it. I didn’t think they were necessary at all to the film and to me it felt like Hollywood was just putting a young hot girl in the lap of an old man. But a lot of people on Reddit said the sex scenes were necessary for the movie because it showed vulnerability. I did not pick up on that at all.
I think the only thing that propelled this movie were the actors. They did a great job and that’s the only reason, IMHO, this movie kept my interest till the end.
I have never seen The Manhattan Project or read any books about “the bomb”. I have an understanding that it was a race of who would get the bomb first and that it was necessary to drop it to win WWII in the Pacific. I felt like you had to have a thorough understanding of what had happened IRL to understand this movie. Names and names of people thrown at you: I couldn’t keep them straight. Were these people important? I don’t know! So much dialogue and showing them “building the device”, but I still didn’t understand what and how it was happening.
I had also had zero knowledge of Apollo 13’s mission before I saw that movie. But I was able to understand it and follow it and I cared about the characters. I LOVE Nolan’s films, even TENET (though it’s not my favorite). I also know I’ll probably have to watch his films again to fully grasp it, but I can’t watch this one again. I feel like I need to read American Prometheus and read and watch documentaries on this subject to understand the movie! And if you have to read a book to understand a movie, then someone didn’t do their job properly.
This is the most well-crafted movie review I've read in a long time. Please do more (perhaps the other half of so-called "barbenheimer?").
I completely agree. I actually don't understand how this film got an Oscar. It was a fascinating story but the endless background music and ultra quick edits and scene changes just wore me out. My brain likes to take in everything, notice everything, get immersed and this movie just wouldn't let me. For example, one minute he is talking to a woman, next thing they are in bed, next thing she's demanding he read Sanskrit to her. The camera never lingers. There is no silence and most importantly no time to care about any of the characters. The one bright spot for me was Robert Downey Jr.'s performance.
Thanks for this, Ann. I especially liked the following passage from your reflection: “The camera never lingers. There is no silence and most importantly no time to care about any of the characters. “ So true!
I saw this at the Santa Barbara Film Festival viewing today and it was followed by a Q&A with Cillian. He’s a nice guy IRL and I admired his work. But the more I think about the movie, I can’t stand it. In the middle I thought they should just title it “Men Talking” because that’s all it was. And because of the loud indiscernible speech I couldn’t follow WTF was happening and thus didn’t care. The female characters were flat and uninteresting. I’m actually very very annoyed this film is supposed to be considered by many to be a masterpiece. I’m a smart film lover and I vehemently disagree.
Thanks so much for sharing your experience of seeing "Oppenheimer," Kim. I consider myself a smart film lover, too, and I don't think we're wrong in being deeply dissatisfied with this movie. But I think this is Nolan's year, and the film will be lauded at the Oscars. But I'm going to be much more careful in approaching his next film.
You had me at “there’s no goal.” I’ll miss it, thanks.
You've captured my thoughts on Oppenheimer so well. I remember walking out of the theater feeling overwhelmed, thinking that the film was important, perhaps ambitious, but not necessarily immersive or entertaining. I couldn't pinpoint what bothered me about it exactly, but, at some point that same night, I said that the movie felt "choppy." And your remark about vignettes hits the nail on the head. That's the reason. I also think the back and forth to manufacture suspense wasn't that effective. The sex scenes also felt like they didn't belong. I don't necessarily immediately object the sex scenes, but they should serve a dramatic purpose. Here, they're difficult to justify. I added it as one of my "favorite" of the year because it felt important and it tackled serious ideas, albeit in a dull manner. I wonder if we'll both the same way when/if we rewatch it.
Thanks for this, Joe. "Choppy" is a really good word to describe the film--especially in its first 20 minutes or so. I look forward to something much better from Nolan next time.
Agree. To me, his best film to date is Dunkirk. I really disliked The Prestige when it first came out but after 2-3 rewatches, I now think it's one of his best too.
I found the movie interesting (I haven’t read the book it’s based on) in the telling of the coming together of so many scientists ( and egos) to create the atomic bomb. I also was surprised that Oppenheimer didn’t see past the making of it. Until it was made, he didn’t try to imagine the greater consequences? Strauss’ roll had to be explained to me post movie. I didn’t catch his deep offense at the imagined snub by Oppenheimer and Einstein or that his vanity had somehow played an important roll in events of the movie. Thank you for a delightful review!
So glad you enjoyed the review, Anne! Nolan and this film will be the toast of the movie awards season, as proved again by his haul at the BAFTAS last night, but I stand by my review. Oppenheimer was a very gifted but deeply troubled soul. If you like podcasts, there is a podcast called THE REST IS HISTORY that has an episode from last summer on Oppenheimer that is worth a listen. His moral blindness to what he was doing is better explained by this podcast than by Nolan's movie.
Saw the film last night on imax. Too loud, much of the dialogue very hard to understand. How can you care for a scene when you cannot understand what is being said. Just to look at it?
Very few scenes that used imax to advantage. Explicit sex scenes were superfluous and added nothing to the story. A hodgepodge of vignettes and scenes that were confusing, even while supposedly clear because of black and white and colored photography.
Very disappointing film, could have watched on my tv. Why did this film get so much praise?
One wonders what Aaron Sorkin could've done with J. Robert Oppenheimer. I think his "Steve Jobs" is one of the best biopic screenplays out there.
Wow! Bravo review. I have not seen the film but glad you saved me the money and trouble of going to see it.
Thank you! I agree with everything you said.
And it’s especially gratifying that you agree with my opinion on the sex scenes. I took to Reddit my opinions of the sex scenes and was called a Karen for it. I didn’t think they were necessary at all to the film and to me it felt like Hollywood was just putting a young hot girl in the lap of an old man. But a lot of people on Reddit said the sex scenes were necessary for the movie because it showed vulnerability. I did not pick up on that at all.
I think the only thing that propelled this movie were the actors. They did a great job and that’s the only reason, IMHO, this movie kept my interest till the end.
I have never seen The Manhattan Project or read any books about “the bomb”. I have an understanding that it was a race of who would get the bomb first and that it was necessary to drop it to win WWII in the Pacific. I felt like you had to have a thorough understanding of what had happened IRL to understand this movie. Names and names of people thrown at you: I couldn’t keep them straight. Were these people important? I don’t know! So much dialogue and showing them “building the device”, but I still didn’t understand what and how it was happening.
I had also had zero knowledge of Apollo 13’s mission before I saw that movie. But I was able to understand it and follow it and I cared about the characters. I LOVE Nolan’s films, even TENET (though it’s not my favorite). I also know I’ll probably have to watch his films again to fully grasp it, but I can’t watch this one again. I feel like I need to read American Prometheus and read and watch documentaries on this subject to understand the movie! And if you have to read a book to understand a movie, then someone didn’t do their job properly.
*Also, Apollo 13 was better than this movie.
I've not seen it and had no plans to do so. Your review confirms my decision.
I told my husband I didn't want to sit down for a three hour movie out of fear of paying money to fall asleep. Glad I got to sleep in my bed instead!