Oppenheimer - Explosive Historical Drama 

I have to say it’s a relief to see a movie that isn’t 99% unfunny jokes and takes itself seriously. I mean, you’d expect an Oppenheimer movie to be dark but these days you honestly can’t tell

Oppenheimer - the creator of what boomers thought would destroy society. Barbie - the manifestation of the ideology that actually destroyed society.

The biggest shock of this for me was the trinity test when you're in your seat bracing for a deafening explosion but instead get deafening silence. The tension in the cinematic was palpable during those 30 or so seconds and then you are hit with it. What an experience.

I think the Nostalgia Critic actually summarized the feeling of the last hour of the film best: you see a man give his life to a project, only to feel it slowly unravel along with his trust of humanity.

Im just glad that a little part of Hollywood still understands that people want to see stories: 1. That aren't remakes 2. About people without superpowers. 3. That arent pushing identity politics.

The cast and the acting blew me away. Having Gary Oldman for a scene that lasts a minute is such a Nolan thing to do😂

I would like to give a bit of a praise to how Oppenheimer's relationship with Teller is depicted. Oppenheimer has lot of conflicts with others throughout the movie, but I found his moments with Teller particularly memorable, because despite all their differences they both show mutual respect towards the other when needed. Understanding what is at stake makes it even more powerful. I found it quite refreshing after all the bantering frenemies we get in superhero flicks. Also, Einstein's comment about awards being more about those who hand them out than those who receive them is pure gold.

As an academic scientist, I can safely say all the scientists in the film behaved like scientists usually do and were portrayed excellently :) I really enjoyed the movie - the time flew by.

Having the movie “overly intellectual” was actually a plus for me. Almost every movie holds your hand and treats you like a child nowadays. Was so refreshing to have an intelligent movie with intelligent characters.

A few minutes scene where Emily Blunt Character stood up for Oppenheimer in that tiny court room showed more power and intelligence than all the mary sue(s) in the past decade combined... including Barbie

I love how this movie didn't oversimplify oppenheimer to "man sad because he made allegedly destructive weapon" which I expected. It was surprisingly complex

I truly hope the success of this film sends a message out that we at least sometimes want intellectual content, rather than just mindless escapism and patronising sanctimonious messages. Oppenheimer never once told us what to think about the events depicted in the film. It simply told the story and left us to decide for ourselves.

That scene where that general didn’t want to bomb Kyoto because his wife and him vacationed there is far more haunting than any schmaltzy depiction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki could’ve ever been. Nolan’s cold, precise, and technically focused style of filmmaking was the perfect fit for this movie.

I love how Emily Blunt played Kitty, how you can see her faults and struggles as a mother yet how much she respects Oppenheimer and is in his corner, literally the only one standing up for him. The scene where she was questioned was just amazing.

I agree that the first sex scene was just out of place and confusing but the 2nd one was supposed to show kitty's pov of it as oppinhiemer told the story of his affair to the board, I thought it added a lot showing kitty was very unhappy and angry at her husband yet still chose to stay with him and defend him which makes the scene where she is questioned even better

The fact that this movie didn’t start nor stop with the Manhattan Project is what gives this movie it’s namesake. While the project is without doubt the best part of the movie, the movie is about OPPENHEIMER, not the project alone. I never felt lost throughout the movie and while I can agree that there’s some parts that are a bit padded out, the movie as a whole painted the picture it set out to paint. And what a masterful picture it was.

I actually felt that Nolan did it right, all the way to end. The movie is about Oppenheimer, not the Trinity test or the Manhattan Project. His early college life prior to the Manhattan Project was necessary to understand the part of his life post Manhattan Project. The last part of the movie detailed how the government treated Oppenheimer during the anti-Communism era, especially given his relationships with known Communists during his early years. It showed what the government is capable of when it wants to railroad a citizen (hint, hint). I did feel that the nude and sex scenes could have been eliminated without detracting from the storyline or his love for Kitty and Jean. Cillian did a masterful job of playing Oppenheimer showing a range of emotion.

Fun Fact: For Oppenheimer, in order for the Black & White sections of the movie to be shot in the same quality as the rest of the film, Kodak developed the first ever B&W film stock for Imax.

That one gary oldman scene was impeccable, the haunting seriousness with which he told oppenheimer that nobody cared who built the bomb, only who dropped it was chilling. Also cillian murphy, man. What an actor

I actually loved the last hour of the movie, it was gripping and exciting, and it was deeply satisfying to see Strauss having his comeuppance.

I've worked in various scientific labs for 23 years now and they definitely nailed how different/weird scientists can be. Brilliant but troubled, awkward, hard to connect to people. I was hoping for a little more about the building of the bomb and processing of the materials, but people have a good point that the movie isn't about the bomb.....it's about the man.

The movie is called "Oppenheimer", not "Manhattan Project" or "Los Alamos" or "The Atomic Bomb" or whatever. The story understandably focuses on his life, his politics, his personal relationships, his interests, and yes, the falling out with the American government. The Manhattan project was undoubtedly a huge and defining part of his life, but it's not the only one. In the end, the movie is not just about pondering the consequences of the creation of the atomic bomb. It is about how people like Oppenheimer fall from grace by ambitious political adversaries for simply having unconventional political opinions and practices. The last hour is absolutely crucial in truly understanding who Oppenheimer was, and why his story is so tragic. It is also a critical examination of Cold War politics and the past sins of the US with regards to nuclear policy. Oppenheimer stands as a martyr figure (like the characters in the movie prominently claim) for those who stood for nuclear disarmament, but were bulldozed by the war hawks in Washington. As for the non-linear storytelling, while it's easy to dismiss as a "Christopher Nolan thing", it serves an important purpose imo. The life story of Oppenheimer runs on 3 axes: 1) Oppenheimer's political past 2) The Manhattan project 3) The security clearance hearings These function virtually independently, and focus on different aspects of what made Oppenheimer's life interesting. It would therefore indeed feel like a boring slog to examine these linearly like an encyclopedia. Nolan chose a more dynamic approach of engaging all 3 of those things at the same time, with each one's conclusion "clicking" with the right moment somewhere along on the other axes of the story. It works very well if you ask me, and it is a huge reason why some scenes work as well as they do (for example the ending). It might not be the main reason (I could even be misinterpreting Nolan's intentions), but that's how I perceived it, and it honestly made the experience that much better for me. As someone who knew Oppenheimer's life story before going into the theatre, the movie's approach was better than anything I could muster to tackle such a big and complicated topic.

I have to disagree with the drinker on this one, I feel with biopics it’s hard to pace them correctly because you are fitting a man’s whole life into three hours and with a man like him 3 hours is nothing. I never found myself bored and I thought with the amount of characters that HAVE to be introduced they were fleshed out enough for me to care

What resonated with me the most was the score... Such beautifully intense music, telling the story almost as well as the actors and storyline. Definitely made to watch in theaters to appreciate the gravity of each scene. The drumming tolls of feet on stadium seats, the relentless momentum of train noises backed by frantic violin. It was most strikingly beautiful the whole 3 hours.

Oppenheimer is one of those movies that shouldn’t have warmth. The audience needed to feel the pressure, dread, guilt, awe, and heaviness to truly grasp the seriousness of the subject and the potential consequences. Nolan and the cast did a fantastic job in delivering all of those emotions while making the science and political backstabbing easy for the audience to follow 9.5/10

So glad Oppenheimer came out the same time as Barbie. It shows the stark contrast in the quality of films

Just saw this last night and was beyond impressed. The Drinker is correct -- this is a complicated movie and requires the audience to pay attention and think. This is decidedly not a green screen, CGI, everything watered down so that even a child can follow story. We are introduced to a cast of intellectual giants in atomic physics: Bohr, Heisenberg, Teller, Feynman, Gödel, and so forth and not once -- not ONCE is the historical significance of these people discussed. Why? Because, for example, when Niels Bohr developed what every chemistry student now learns as the Bohr model of the atom, or Heisenberg postulated the "Heisenberg uncertainty principle", at that time it was all still very theoretical. Everyone will know Einstein and his role is remarkably small given that he gave birth to the entire field. Nor, do we see these giants explaining to each other principles that they would clear already understand (and not need to explain) for the sake of the audience to follow. A simpler movie would have had someone explain all of this as if to a child. ("...well, says Oppenhemir to Bohr, you know how a neutron which is the uncharged part of the nucleus will leave the atom and hit another uranium atom... I bet that could make a chain reaction for a bomb"... never happens in this film thank God) In another small scene Oppenheimer hears that the Germans are focused on using heavy water as a neutron moderator vs. graphite which the US was using at the Fermi lab which will clearly put them further behind. Again -- this is not even remotely explained in the typical Hollywood style of pandering to its audience. The impact of the German's decision is clear and a relatively small number of the audience will really understand its significance. The Trinity explosion was one of the most powerful movie scenes I may haver seen. There was no CGI. We see the bright flash and explosion first and then have to patiently wait... the tension building as we know that the blast wave must arrive at some point. And, when it does the full IMAX experience shakes you to your core. it is true there is a lot of exposition. But every time I thought maybe it was going a bit long there was a change of scene or new build up of tension to pull me back in. This film I Nolan's Magnum Opus. It is a movie that stays with you long after you have left the theatre. It is art and science and creativity and action that pull you in and requires you to become engaged with the story in a way that I don't believe I have ever, or perhaps will ever, see again.

While I agree that the movie demands your undivided attention, and that this quality can be considered a flaw, I think that we desperately needed movies like that, where you are rewarded for paying attention, not because of a plot twist that was slightly hinted at throughout the movie so you can go "ah yeah that was a hint", but because the more you pay attention, the more this movie has to offer.

Christopher Nolan is to movies what Hideo Kojima is to gaming, in both the best and the worst way possible.

As much as people feel the last hour of the film drags I think we can all agree the conversation between Albert Einstein and Oppenheimer was brilliant. And the last line to end the film was genuinely brilliant that cuts extremely deep

Honestly, the more I hear how "cold and clinical" was the character portrayal in this movie, the more I feel like I belong to a completely different race of a human being. To me the movie was exactly the opposite - full of character depth derived from context, from small details, and also from the "nolanesque" script structure itself, allowing the viewer to ponder on a scene, on a piece of dialogue from a new angle by linking it to something often seemingly unconnected. It helps you change your original understanding of a scene, just like Oppenheimer's understanding of the consequences of his project had to be verified with time.

As a physicist, I’ve read a lot about Oppenheimer and his collaborators. The portrayal of Oppenheimer as a distant, cold and difficult to read, enigmatic character looks quite precise. He was well known as a very complex, arrogant and distant character, well aware of his brilliancy (his students used to call him “god”, and that was before the Manhattan project). So, I think the portrait designed by Christopher Nolan nailed it and very precisely let us, viewers, after a 3-hour exhibition, still quite perplexed with this character. Oppenheimer was a man full of contradictions, suffering a lot with them. And that’s something the movie shows us perfectly.

The film is not called The Manhattan Project, it is not about the atomic bomb. It is called Oppenheimer for a reason. Some people can’t seem to understand this. His story does not end with the Trinity test, nor the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The last hour of the film is still very well paced, tying up all the threads set up in the hours preceding in the most Nolan-esque way possible and delivering one of the most existentially chilling and thought provoking endings of any film I have seen.

Having read the book this is based on, I think the characterisation of Oppenheimer was spot on. He seemingly was a distinctly odd and emotionally distant person, and even his closest friends were kept at a distance. I think he would have come across as someone trying to intellectually understand how to be human. He was astonishingly naive in his association with folks on the fringes of American communism, mixed with a degree of intellectual arrogance I think.

After 3 hours of watching the movie I was like... wait, is it already over? I couldn't get enough. One of the best movies I've watched.

It’s a testament to Matt Damon’s likeability and acting skills that his hard nosed, driven, no nonsense military man is the most human of all the characters.

It's good to see Robert Downey Jr back in a serious role. He's bloody talented and it's because of his unbelievable performance in Iron Man (2008) that the entire MCU has been built. That's not only by chance.

RDJ better get that Oscar for supporting actor. He was brilliant.

I'm so glad we have movie makers like Nolan. He is not afraid to mke a complex movie devoid of fluff and stupid CGI. Not every try is going to be perfect, and not every film will be for everybody, but this is how great cinema is made.

Having been around brilliant scientists, engineers and philosophers, I can say that the emotionally distant and almost impenetrable nature of the characters is absolutely spot on.

I don't see how being "overly intellectual" and having no "warmth or levity" is a bad thing. It's about Robert Oppenheimer.

I absolutely loved the film. The three hours flew by and I disagree that an audience will struggle with the complexity of it. In fact, I appreciate that Nolan respects the audience enough that he expects us to be able to follow the story without help. That's very rare right now, with most writers/directors feeling like they need to spoon-feed their audience everything. Edit: By the way, I love that people are actually putting their own takes of the film in the comment section and discussing why they disagree with some of Drinker's takes. It is so easy to create an echo chamber of 'Yes, we all agree with this content creator's every opinion' and I'm so happy that there's a community here that isn't that. Really great to see.

I think what Oppenheimer as a movie really portrays well, is the reality of events not being independent moments in time, but their context and consequences linger forever. Oppenheimer didn't just face the moral dilemma of coming to terms with his own creation. He had to face the fact that life moves on, new struggles will always come and take the spotlight regardless of what came before - and the fact that once things are set in motion, you can't hold on to what used to be the only thing of importance, even if it truly was that important to you. This is why I love the first and last thirds of the movie just as much as the climactic centerpiece of the actual production and usage of the a bomb program from testing to real life consequences. I like the fact that Nolan shows how even the most disturbing and thought provoking situations will ultimately be nothing more than temporary. Society moves on at an unfathomably disturbing pace, as do ideologies and ambition. I am so thankful that he actually covered the reality of Oppenheimer's legacy being more than just a moment in time. It was a foundation for everything that future ambition and fear would use as fuel. It showed how quickly life moves on, and I found myself enjoying the vast but always intellectual dialogue just as much as the spectacle and drama of the main center piece of Oppenheimer's creation and moral dilemmas. As with any Nolan movie, not all aspects are for everyone. But I will always regard my utmost respect for people like him who seek to make something magnificent that few of us absolutely love, rather than those who make something mediocre that a magnificent amount of people casually enjoy.

Drinker, this film is a deep character study with a strong script, which recent Nolan films have been criticized for lacking. The third act is just as important than the first two because it’s the rise and fall of the a genius who became so consumed with guilt for vaporizing hundreds of thousands of people, he allowed the public and government to shame him as a punishment for his gifted genius. Keeping quiet instead of being more publicly outspoken. Remember, in the beginning he was a more upbeat scholar who spoke with positivity and charm, by the end he had been beaten down by so many around him, he found it slightly difficult to speak-up. Which was clearly Nolan’s driving factor with his film. To voice/bring Oppenheimer’s brilliance, faults, and unwarranted discrediting silence to light. Without the third act…it would be less about understanding the man and the impacting outlook it had on him post-WWII, and would be more about his achievement…which audiences have common sense about. Nolan made it apparent to show a celebration of WWII victory to most, while to Oppenheimer it was far more conflicting and would result in decades of controversy. Even before the testing we see scientists meet, questioning the real and unforeseen outcome of their work. Important reminders that through all of this, and despite the need for WWII victory, the long term aftermath might be at stake. As for the nude scenes…the first barely has nudity, until last two which is about them being fully exposed to their core.

But Drinker, you indefatigable antropocentric connoisseur... "Two highly intelligent androids doing their best approximation of human behaviour"... is the BEST depiction of real life scientists couples there is. Nolan just nailed it.

I really think it was a deliberate choice of Nolans that you did not really know how Oppenheimer felt about certain things at the end, because it's referenced several times throughout the movie that people got angry with Oppenheimer because he didnt state a clear opinion on what he believed in. Near the end of the hearing the interrigator totally goes off on Oppenheimer, wanting to know if he thought the making of the atomic bomb was morally justified. You clearly see Oppenheimer in distress and i think it's pretty clear Nolan wanted to depict Oppenheimer as morally grey and also to make the audience question what they themselves think about the making of the bomb.

I'd agree that yes, the first 2/3 of the movies mostly doesn't keep you emotionally ingested, except for Cillian's scene. That man can show hopelessness and desolation from his eyes alone. But i liked that, cause the first 2/3 was supposed to be analytical, you were supposed to look at it from that point of view. Once the bomb test occurs, you see the movie gradually shifting into an emotional nightmare as did Oppenheimer life after the explosions. And the last parts where Cillian cries...damn!!

I think the best scene for me in this movie had to be the end where we see Oppenheimer talk to Albert Einstein about their old theory about the atomic bomb could potentially destroy the world and seeing Oppenheimer come to the conclusion that their theory came true after all. The imagery of all those nuclear warheads being fired in the sky and seeing the atmosphere light up to the point you see the Earth beginning to burn was one hell of a sight to see. It had me in awe.

My dad & I came out of the cinema last night and both said "I've never had a cinematic experience like that before." It's an absolutely incredible film.

Oppenheimer is one of the best character studies ever. It totally made up for it’s 3 hour playtime. What a fantastic movie.

Watched this in the cinema today with my dad. I was enthralled throughout as I had barely researched Oppenheimer beforehand. I loved the constant shift in chronology, and the performances of the actors involved was amazing. I think the tone and lack of jokes common in modern film was appropriate to the tone and reality of the story. Oppenheimer was a deeply conflicted man, and the movie does a great job of showing that.

I was amazed when the movie finished it had gripped me totally from start to finish, three hours flying by. I feel the non sequencial form of storytelling was the main factor in that effect on me. Interesting you mentioned you did quite connect with the main character, for me that was the point, he was a very closed off man who struggled to relate to the world around him. The scene with him and Jean Tatlock just sitting naked talking to each other, set in that context is probably the most revealing (pun not intended) scene. Jean Tatlock was the only person he felt he could be totally honest and open with, the only human being he fully connected with, even more than Kitty his wife.

It was magnificent. No one wants pointless bathos and Oppenheimer was oddly aloof in every interview you watch. He was a messed up genius and that’s what we got. He had a life - an important one - after the Trinity Test and it was important to carry that through. “They need us…” “What happens when they don’t?”

As a former naval nuclear engineer who had a crusty old master chief who served in the Cold War, I found this movie remarkable. And as someone who has been on the receiving end of the govt's abuses, I'd say many people are missing what they should take away from the last hour. It's a blatant and haunting reminder of the tactics the govt is using RIGHT now. Intentional or not, it's a wake up call. Reminds me of Oliver Stone and films like Platoon and JFK.

I found it surprisingly easy to watch. Yes, all of the Nolanistic overcomplications are still there, but it's so tightly and beautifully shot that there's never a dull moment. Despite the 3 hour runtime, you don't really have time to distance yourself from what you're seeing and try to understand every plot point and sequence of events - that comes after.

I guess nobody every truly understood Oppenheimer so in that sense , him being aloof and distant is very much how the rest of the world saw him probably. He was a genius but confused, a womanizer but cold and distant, highly praised by all scientists around him but never got a Nobelprize. An enigma.

The movie is called Oppenheimer, not first atomic bomb or Manhattan project. The movie is about him and it is brilliantly built. It is demanding but if you pay attention, you can follow it pretty easily.

This movie is overwhelming and excellent. It is harrowing and "political" without being divisive or playing the identity politics game. The last time I left a theater that was as silent as this afterwards was American Sniper. This movie jumps to the top of the list of essential viewing for 21st century cinema, nuclear annihilation has been threatening our existence for decades and we as a society have fallen too silent to both this fact and the fact that these weapons are in the hands of vindictive and evil people. Nolan has outdone himself

3 hours flew by because Christopher Nolan only films excellent scripts and he has such amazing attention to detail.

I loved every minute of it, especially as I saw it in Imax. The cinematography is Hoyte van Hoytema at his very best. It seems to me that Nolan intentionally kept Oppenheimer an enigma, very few people ever got close enough to know him to a certain degree, so neither should the audience. As I left the theater I overheard some people complaining about the length, but that they 'really liked the explosion'. As they mixed in with the pink dressed crowd leaving the Barbie film next door, I realized again how ballsy it is for Nolan to give us over 3 hours of real cinema.

The explosion scene where it goes off in silence, just wow...I thought it was brilliant to have it in complete silence, watching the fire of destruction without grandiose fanfare...and then the shockwave hit and I nearly shit myself and remembered that the shockwave would take a few seconds to reach the characters. So whether it was artistic or just plain scientific, loved it eiher way

I just got back an hour ago from seeing it w/ my 19 yo daughter. I felt it was a powerful film that, while long, firmly held my attention. My daughter felt it was long and was overwhelmed by the number of characters and complexity of events. She enjoyed it if for nothing else than the fantastic performances of the cast-she particularly enjoyed RDJ as “the villain”-but said it was a movie she was satisfied with seeing once. I am a hard core history nerd and a WWII buff so was familiar with the majority of the scientists, the history of the Manhattan Project, and the various contexts, politics, and policy debates. While all of Drinker’s points of criticisms are wholly valid, I either didn’t notice at the time or they didn’t bother me.

I saw it three days ago and I'm thinking about it whenever I'm day dreaming. It sticks with me still. Only great movies do that to me. My 14 years old daughter caught me offguard today when she told me while walking in the street, out of nowhere, "woah, that Oppenheimer movie was really good, dad !". When we exited the theater we heard some stupids say that they fell asleep at half the movie...

I went to go see Oppenheimer last night, and it was honestly pretty good. That last hour definitely makes the movie drag on for a lot longer than it needed to be, but I can see its value in that Nolan didn't want to forgo/glance over Oppenheimer's troubles post-Trinity & post-Nagasaki & Hiroshima. Not gonna lie though - I legit felt my heart racing in the moments leading up to the Gadget's detonation... and the explosion itself was nothing short of beautiful.

I sincerely loved the last hour of the film. The whole movie is told from Oppenheimer’s point of view and the last hour of the film accurately conveyed the pain of having your life picked apart by strangers. Shockingly, that experience feels like a slog. The 2 hour version of the film would have been called The Manhattan Project. The last hour was critical for this to truly be a biopic.

Having seen it, I think the drinker slightly misses the mark. It’s not about the bomb. It’s about the person and how he deals with the aftermath of his creation. Overall an absolutely fantastic movie and the runtime and the negative slant towards the latter half shouldn’t put anyone off seeing this absolutely fantastic movie.

Explosive indeed, This movie really was a bombshell, and went absolutely nuclear at the box office, it really went out with a bang near the end. Such a blast to watch I really hope we get more movies that blow us away this year.

I totally agree on the Trinity detonation scene. It has to be one of my favorite scenes in a movie ever. My heart was racing throughout.

I think it was a deliberate choice. Teller called Openheimer an "American Sphinx". By the end of the film we know almost every intimate detail about Openheimer and his work but are no closer to understanding the man. Absolutely pitch perfect in my mind. Also if they humanized these characters too much critics would likely attack the film for "glorifying" mass murder.

It's truly a testament to Christopher Nolan's immense directing talent that he created a three hour film mostly composed of dialogue, and managed to make it compelling throughout. I'm happy that I got to experience it on the big screen.

My husband, Arch Crawford, met Dr. Oppenheimer when he was a physics student at the Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC in 1961 and visiting speaker, Dr. O., spoke with a hand-full of students standing in front of the physics building for 20-30 minutes in the afternoon. That evening he spoke with a couple of hundred, including the public and the press.

I love that everyone is thin, gaunt, malnourished. A movie of ghosts about ghosts.

I understand the criticism of the film, and I would certainly have found a two-hour version more enjoyable, but the character development and the fall from prestige in the last hour of the movie provided us with a fuller narrative. I feel like this is on of the best of Nolan films we will ever get, and he is one of the few directors with the clout to deliver this bold vision, while most other films are pandering to our lowest version.

A bit disappointed you didn't mention the score by Ludwig Göransson. That was one of the key elements that elevated the movie for me. It's so haunting and beautiful that when I listened to it isolated after watching the movie it pretty much amplified all the emotions I got while watching. The score basically puts you inside the head of Oppenheimer depicting all his passion, regret and pain in an elegant and heartfelt manner.

Seeing how "colorful" scenes were a representation of Oppenheimer's subjective experience - it makes sense that his relationships with women weren't relatable to an average human. He is a scientist after all, therefore, one could only imagine how different his social interactions were with other people, especially relationships with women. Emily Blunt's role as his wife was a perfect example of this. How she saw through RDJ's characters deception and plots against Oppenheimer. Yet, he couldn't see them. I don't mind that extra hour, I actually think it was essential to show us how Oppenheimer struggled, how others berated him and tried to discredit his integrity, all because of power and politics. And he just sat there and took it, because of the guilt he felt after the bombing. He felt like he deserved all the bad that came after it. The movie is just phenomenal and probably one of the best experiences I had in a cinema in a long, long time. 10/10

Overall this movie just had a fantastic cast . There’s so many good actors in this movie with so many good performances it’s worth seeing just on that premise alone . The run time could of been shortened up for sure as drinker already explained either way I was fully invested the entire time

As a bit of a history buff- this scratched an itch- but I understand how it could be tough for someone who didn’t have a decent understanding of the background could find it hard to follow- but you know what? I’m glad this movie was for me because I certainly appreciated this masterpiece for what it was.

Honestly the last hour of the film was one of my favorite parts. If the film only featured the Manhattan project section if would’ve come off so empty and left us with so few questions besides the consequences of our actions. Parts 1 and 3 (before/after Manhattan) show the political dynamics that surrounded his life and make you reflect on so many additional things besides just winning a war or inventing a weapon.

Nolan and Cillian did JRO right. He was aloof, he wasn't really known by anyone outside of the subset of super-stars sciencentists (Einstein, Fermi, Fuchs, & Faynmen) (Bohr didn't really know him but knew of him and his work in theoretical physics.

I do think the final hour of the movie is what brings it all together, what propels it from "cool historical drama" to "must see commentary on life". The interactions with a monolithic system that uses Oppenheimer and then spits him back out, as commented on by Einstein in the movie, really solidifies the intractability of the US government, and how people are rarely as important as the institutions they are a part of. Finally, it marked the end of "scientists as prophets" period of American policy that I think helped propel it into superpower status in the first place

I think Cillian Murphy steals the show but overall everyone did a fantastic job! I'm thrilled I saw this on the big screen! Love your content it gives me a reason to live!

This might not be a perfect film, but I'm so happy that it stays true to history and doesn't race swap characters for a mOdErN aUdIeNcE

Went into the cinema not knowing much at all about the history side of things but i was engaged and interested throughout. Got a bit confused with the black and white part so even though i just saw it, i already want to see it again to really have the film in its entirety. Brilliant performances by all the cast and i left the cinema deep in thought.

Tenent of Christopher Nolan came in mid-covid and still earned more than other movies of that time. I think Christopher Nolans popularity has surpassed anyone in Hollywood today, he is the biggest filmmaker and celebrity on whose name people can fill the theatres. Imagin a 3 hour long historical drama made on a budget of 100 million earns 900 million from the box office without any superhero, or big franchise remake. It's just extraordinary, no race swaping, no feminist bullshit, no identity politics, just plain beautiful piece of art. In India Oppenhimer easily surpassed Barbie and became one of the most successful film of Hollywood released.

That movie left me completely speechless. In some parts of the movie, it really felt like a horror movie, especially that cheering scene near the end. But truly, Cillian Murphy and the rest of the actors, the scoring, and the writing really made the movie tangibly intense.

It's refreshing to see Nolan continue to push his own form of cinema instead of dumbing it down for the current viewers. His films will be in high regard for decades to come.

Although nearly three hours too long, "Oppenheimer" is one of Hollywoods BEST! It's right up there with "The Three Stooges Go Around the World in a Daze"!!

I think the Drinker partook in one too many shots of toilet duck before watching this one.

The very fact that a film like Barbie is somehow being positioned and marketed as going up against a film like Oppenheimer says an awful lot about how broken the state of our society has become.

Got this movie on 4K and watched for the second time. Enjoyed it much more than the first time. Similar to how I felt with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, this is a densely layereyed masterpiece that will only grow in subsequent viewings for me. Best film of the year and easily Nolan’s best film since the Dark Knight.

The drinker is the only person in the world who I would watch any movie he recommends without any hesitation, he just gets it...

As Emily Blunt described it: "It's more than a movie. It's an experience." By Jove, she's right!

Christopher Nolan is one of those last few directors that when he makes a film it often gets treated like a holiday is coming like Christmas came early... Each film he makes is a gift to movie lovers.

I appreciate the facts stated: that it's a long movie and it might be somewhat clinical in its storytelling. That being said...I was always on the edge of my seat and the non-linear story-telling as well as the editing always made it feel that something bigger was coming next. I never felt those hours, it was a rush from start to finish. The actors gave it their best, and I wish we had more Nolans. This is the kind of cinematic excess that we need some more of.

I didn't even finish it. I lasted maybe 5 min after the bomb dropped in Hiroshima, then I was out. There are elements of this film that worked, but even with all the characters it felt lifeless and cold. Matt Damon had the most warmth, and Gustaf Skarsgard (when he was on screen) had a humanity and depth that would have benefitted the film if he hadn't been relegated to a third-tier supporting character. In fact, the film would have benefitted greatly with half the cast size. Oppenheimer himself was 'sterile' to use your term, even though the description dump we get referring to his character was full of interesting traits; few of which we get to see. He's referred to as theatrical and a womanizer, but he's not charming or warm, and he's so subdued and lacking expressive passion that when these traits were claimed it felt false. His love interests also felt pointless, and Florence Pugh's character was the most pointless of all. Especially the highly gratuitous sex scenes. They just felt contrived and awkward. Florence is a good actress, but her character was a blip here and a blip there, and then she commits suicide and we're supposed to feel something, but I just didn't. Their relationship was nonsensical and jarring. Visually, this film had some great moments, but the characters and their dynamics just sucked all the enjoyment out of watching this.

Having a legend like Gary Oldman playing Harry S Truman was incredible. I was shocked (in a good way). To see him.

I can definitely see Drinker’s critique, but I personally really enjoyed the last act of the film and think that it did actually add a lot to the story, mainly because it showed just how Oppenheimer lost all control of everything in his personal life and now that the soviets had the bomb, there was nothing that Oppenheimer could do to reverse what he did, as now more people knew how to create the bomb. For me, the last act was weirdly one of my favorite parts of the movie, if you’re willing to sit through it. And also the acting in the final act was great, especially Robert downy Jr, who nailed his part flawlessly. I have nothing against the drinker, this is actually I think the first time that I really disagree with him

Having just seen the movie, the only thing I can say is "I'm thrilled!". To me it was an amazing movie, and NOTHING less

you had me at complex , intelligent , disjointed , only a few of us understand and appreciate his madness that we see as true expression that most knuckle draggers balk at.

FINALLY !!! A serious intellectual movie. So tired of the horseshite that Hollywood is farting out.