Film Christopher Nolan's 'Oppenheimer'

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
38,990
Location
Cooper Station
Watched this now, and just...why?

A completely uninteresting relaying of a story of a perfectly uninteresting man, who is perfectly placed in a footnote of the abominable history of mankind. Einstein in his 3 lines was more interesting than fecking Oppy. Cillian Murphy did his best with a character with the depth of a sheet of paper, and with god awful writing and dialogues to boot.

The supporting cast isn't good, it's just random famous/familiar faces one after the other, with no particular reason for them to be there than "Oh, Chris Nolan called and I very well couldn't say no could I haha". Emily Blunt's "that one scene" turned out to be the dampest of damp squibs, and she ended up being the mumbliest of all the mumbly Nolan actors.

Nolan's edits and direction have moved from avoidable irritants to just flat out terrible now. I felt like I was tolerating this movie for almost the entire runtime. NOT ANY MORE I'M NOT, CHRIS.

The Oscars are a joke.
So did you like it or no?
 

Scandi Red

Hates Music.
Joined
Sep 25, 2022
Messages
4,724
Speaking of that sex scene... What the feck was that? :lol:

If you told me that one of the big name Hollywood directors is a virgin then I would put all my money on it being Nolan.
 

Eleven-Eighteen

Full Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2015
Messages
857
Watched this now, and just...why?

A completely uninteresting relaying of a story of a perfectly uninteresting man, who is perfectly placed in a footnote of the abominable history of mankind. Einstein in his 3 lines was more interesting than fecking Oppy. Cillian Murphy did his best with a character with the depth of a sheet of paper, and with god awful writing and dialogues to boot.

The supporting cast isn't good, it's just random famous/familiar faces one after the other, with no particular reason for them to be there than "Oh, Chris Nolan called and I very well couldn't say no could I haha". Emily Blunt's "that one scene" turned out to be the dampest of damp squibs, and she ended up being the mumbliest of all the mumbly Nolan actors.

Nolan's edits and direction have moved from avoidable irritants to just flat out terrible now. I felt like I was tolerating this movie for almost the entire runtime. NOT ANY MORE I'M NOT, CHRIS.

The Oscars are a joke.
Let me guess - you thought Barbie-Gerwig-Margot Robbie should've won instead
 

leontas

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
1,107
Watched this the other day and was a bit...underwhelmed. Starting to feel like Nolan is getting too full of himself and making movies unnecessarily more complicated than they need to be to appear more pseudo-intellectual.

The movie didn't really make me care for Oppenheimer and the constant jumping around in time just took me out of it. At least it was easier to follow than Tenet...
 

Rooney in Paris

Gerrard shirt..Anfield? You'll Never Live it Down
Scout
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
35,896
Location
In an elephant sanctuary
Watched this the other day and was a bit...underwhelmed. Starting to feel like Nolan is getting too full of himself and making movies unnecessarily more complicated than they need to be to appear more pseudo-intellectual.

The movie didn't really make me care for Oppenheimer and the constant jumping around in time just took me out of it. At least it was easier to follow than Tenet...
What in this film did you feel was made "unnecessarily more complicated" considering half of it is about a scientific project? What about Oppenheimer comes across as pseudo-intellectual?
 

Leg-End

Full Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
19,551
Was this not the easiest, by far, Nolan film to follow? Ok maybe Insomnia was his easiest but excluding that.
 

Leg-End

Full Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
19,551
Apart from Tenet, are his films actually difficult to follow?
I don't personally think so but some of the comments in this thread lead me to believe some do.

Yeah I somehow managed to forget the Batman trilogy, I guess I meant his standalone ones.
 

Rooney in Paris

Gerrard shirt..Anfield? You'll Never Live it Down
Scout
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
35,896
Location
In an elephant sanctuary
I don't personally think so but some of the comments in this thread lead me to believe some do.
It seems like it's a piece of criticism often used against him, there's sometimes some narrative choices that aren't Fast & Furious level of basicness, but it's hardly complex cinema to follow. And this isn't a knock on him, I love most of his films.
 

leontas

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
1,107
What in this film did you feel was made "unnecessarily more complicated" considering half of it is about a scientific project? What about Oppenheimer comes across as pseudo-intellectual?
The scientific project stuff wasn't the complicated part. It was how Nolan chose to tell the story, jumping across scenes prematurely without developing the dialogue and also the continuous jumping between Oppenheimer's hearing, Strauss's confirmation and the Los Alamos scenes felt unnecessary. Although I know that's how Nolan likes to tell his stories, he's starting to use it as a way to make his movies appear more complex than they actually are and not spending enough time to develop his characters.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,799
Location
Florida
Watched this now, and just...why?

A completely uninteresting relaying of a story of a perfectly uninteresting man, who is perfectly placed in a footnote of the abominable history of mankind. Einstein in his 3 lines was more interesting than fecking Oppy. Cillian Murphy did his best with a character with the depth of a sheet of paper, and with god awful writing and dialogues to boot.

The supporting cast isn't good, it's just random famous/familiar faces one after the other, with no particular reason for them to be there than "Oh, Chris Nolan called and I very well couldn't say no could I haha". Emily Blunt's "that one scene" turned out to be the dampest of damp squibs, and she ended up being the mumbliest of all the mumbly Nolan actors.

Nolan's edits and direction have moved from avoidable irritants to just flat out terrible now. I felt like I was tolerating this movie for almost the entire runtime. NOT ANY MORE I'M NOT, CHRIS.

The Oscars are a joke.
:lol:
 

Donaldo

Caf Vigilante
Joined
May 19, 2003
Messages
18,222
Location
Goes it so.
Supports
Arsenal
I think that was cgi'd on for certain international markets. I'm surprised that's the version on Apple.
I pay 1/10th the cost of subscription by hanging on to my India account while living outside, I'm not complaining. The Hindi subtitles (instead of English) were particularly challenging in a movie with the worst sound I've heard in some time though...
 

PepG

Full Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
1,186
Supports
Ajax
This might be Nolans best directed movie to date but people still find something to criticise him for. Its normal. I thing one of the things that irks many people is the pacing of his movies as of late. In his early movies every scene (visually, stylistically and musically) from start to finish was like watching Speed on steroids..very intense, very intriguing, engaging and keeping you on the edge the whole time..best example of this is The Dark Knight. The problem is that this style of directing cannot work with all kind of source material. And Nolan is very bold in choosing what to direct next. The total opposite of that was Dunkirk.. visually stunning but movie without any pace at all..wich is a shame because i expected exactly that haha i am still bitter and disappointed with this movie...
 

Donaldo

Caf Vigilante
Joined
May 19, 2003
Messages
18,222
Location
Goes it so.
Supports
Arsenal
@Donaldo in this thread

I quite like Nolan. I was a bit of a fanboy back in the day, even. I've liked almost all his works (barring Tenet which I think was just not very good at all) But I genuinely don't understand the point of this movie. My view doesn't stop others from liking it.