Movie Review: Oppenheimer
Rating: 3 and 1/2 Stars
I’m starting to wonder if the current crop of legendary directors of our age are rebelling against the notion that all Hollywood has the capacity for these days is superheroes and marketable franchises that can’t possibly fail (yet still occasionally do).
In May of 2019, Quentin Tarantino tackled early Hollywood lifestyles and philosophies in his epic ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’. Later that year Martin Scorcese said, “Hold my Guinness,” and dropped ‘The Irishman’ which clocked in just short of 3 and 1/2 hours. Christopher Nolan was busy with ‘Tenet’ at this time. But I’d levy a personal theory that Nolan considered his need to produce an epic historical film dripping with societal and interpersonal themes based on the lives of middle-aged men.
It also helps when there’s an assumedly riveting book to base your screenplay on.
This should be noted to its credit, but Oppenheimer was one of the rare occasions where I watched a movie and was immediately concerned with where to find the reading material the film was based on. After a couple of mandatory post-movie Wikipedia searches, indubitably.
While I appreciate the great efforts and lengths that our foremost filmmakers go to in their quest to fashion their piece de resistance, there’s a threshold films like Oppenheimer cross where I find myself falling into a malaise. Lest we forget the need to go the bathroom halfway through because of the soda I need to wash down the popcorn. (I need a separate post to advocate the need for a mid-movie intermission for any film longer than two and a half hours…)
So yes, Oppenheimer is too long for my liking. It’s still bloody excellent in nearly every facet of filmmaking. I was treated to a 70mm showing where I could hear the movie reel playing from above my reclined position. It was a beautifully nostalgic sound.
The breathtaking visuals, the distinctly dry but lively color palette, and Ludwig Gorannson’s droning soundtrack hit the screen immediately.
You could get lost on IMDB for hours researching the careers of the actors that populate Oppenheimer. The stalwart names of Matt Damon and Roberty Downey Jr. run rampant in masterful supporting roles. Cillian Murphy holds down the central role of J. Robert Oppenheimer himself. The makeup staff was just as up to the challenge as Murphy transforming his look through different periods of Oppenheimer’s life.
Florence Pugh also continues her strong run as she plays one of Oppenheimer’s love interests, Jean Tatlock. Pugh has a presence any time she takes to the screen which I predict will lead to more prominent roles in her near future.
Josh from ‘Drake and Josh’ has a role if you’re someone who grew up with that in your life. Gary Oldman has a jarring scene as President Truman. Matthew Modine of Full Metal Jacket fame is still doin the thing. OH! And Rami Malek stampedes in for two scenes to be an absolute boss.
In brief, Oppenheimer is well-acted. I’d go out on a limb and say it was Robert Downey Jr.’s performance as Lewis Strauss that was the most riveting. This is not to discredit Murphy who carries the weight of the film on his performance and is more than up to the task.
RDJ’s performance was a fresh reminder that he excels in roles that require complicated nuance. Similar could be said of Damon who excels in his role that requires a balance of sarcasm, moral complexities, and instances of rage.
The depth of the film and the amount of ground it needed to cover made it difficult for Emily Blunt to find a proper footing. I found her character development as Kitty Oppenheimer, Oppenheimer’s wife, to be distracted and disjointed. While the film makes attempts to consider Oppenheimer’s personal life, there were tonal shifts between sympathy and indifference.
I’ll admit that the pure density of the film certainly led some information and/or dialogue to float over my head. In some cases, the score reverberated during dialogue and I wasn’t sure if the soundtrack drowning out dialogue was intentional or not. It’s also possible like I mentioned earlier that the density of the material is better captured with further context that can be captured in the written form. Even a three-hour film has to leave miles of context on the cutting room floor.
When Oppenheimer is at its best when Nolan distorts the reality of Oppenheimer’s personal moral confines. There’s an unmistakable power in bringing someone’s subconscious to life, especially when it is as particularly explosive as Oppenheimer’s.
The film’s pivotal scene that involves the Trinity test, the testing of an atomic bomb, lives up to its billing.
Nolan’s script spends a lot of time dealing with the political climate of the time as it plays a central role in the film’s final crescendo. The Red Scare, America’s petrified fear of communism, played a significant role in the life and legacy of Oppenheimer. Even with the significant amount of time that’s spent on the subject, there’s simply too much to unpack. The film has many names, allegiances, and motivations to consider.
I’d give Oppenheimer a second watch, if only to enable subtitles to catch what I may have missed. The replay value for pure entertainment’s sake though didn’t resonate with me after my theater viewing.
But if this is an Oscar that Nolan wants, this would likely be the Oscar that Nolan gets. Nolan has nominations for Dunkirk and Inception, but is yet to win. I’d stake a claim and say Oppenheimer is likely his Academy Award presentation.
