I’ll begin at the end. When I left the theatre, after having watched Oppenheimer — Christopher Nolan’s latest film — I felt as though I had a lot to say, but wasn’t able to. Mostly because of an overwhelming need to recover. At the time of writing this, I still don’t know whether I have.
Watching Oppenheimer is no walk in the park. If you are expecting a fun and relaxing time at the movies, to unwind after a long week, I warn you, you may find yourself being disappointed.
The movie feels heavy, and is dense with dialogue. I think Nolan may have surpassed Tarantino on this one — as far as dialogue per minute of running time goes. Having said that, I believe the density of the movie is appropriate for the subject matter.
In case you aren’t familiar with the name of Oppenheimer — or Oppie, as known to his friends — let me enlighten you. J. Robert Oppenheimer is considered “the father of the atomic bomb”. The film chronicles the development of the bomb, culminating at the point of its detonation during the Trinity test — although the film doesn’t end there.
The story is told from both Oppenheimer’s subjective point of view, as well as from an objective point of view. To distinguish between the two views, look out for the objective black and white scenes.
In usual Nolan fashion, the film constantly jumps forwards and backwards in time, and although at this very moment I cannot pinpoint exactly why, the black and white scenes helped me keep track of what was going on more effectively. However, I went into the movie already knowing what the black and white scenes were meant to represent. Taking that fact into consideration, I would be curious to know how these scenes would have been received by someone without that knowledge. Would they have caused more clarity, or more confusion?
The film features a star-studded cast, and a series of amazing performances, most notably by Cillian Murphy (Oppenheimer), Emily Blunt (Kitty Oppenheimer), Robert Downey Jr. (Lewis Strauss), Florence Pugh (Jean Tatlock), and Matt Damon (Leslie Groves).
The film also features a magnificent, and otherworldly score by Ludwig Göransson. It is possibly, one of the best movie scores I have ever heard, and it plays a huge role in creating a visceral experience for the audience.
In recent interviews, Nolan has said that he never feels like he wastes his time when watching a movie, especially if he feels that the filmmaker who made the movie has had a good time making it. If I am to adopt that same philosophy, I was definitely not disappointed by Oppenheimer, and would urge anyone to go see it. This film is a showcase of masterful storytelling and technical ability — not only on Nolan’s part, but also on Hoyte Van Hoytema's (cinematographer) and Jennifer Lame’s (editor) part.
Furthermore, one will surely benefit from having an interest in history and physics. At different points throughout the film, we see some legendary scientists — played by actors of course — and that is definitely one my favourite aspects of the film. In my opinion, Nolan has used those names to create an effect, not just for the sake of using them.
There are also a few moments of humour, which I really appreciated. Some were subtle, and some not so subtle.
It has been said that the film has divided audiences. I can understand why; It is not an easy film to digest, and the experience of watching it is taxing on the body.
Oppenheimer stimulates the emotions and the mind, making it one of the most visceral films I have ever watched. Ironically enough, this film has created a fission reaction within me, and has divided me in many pieces. What is clear to me though, is that Oppenheimer is not a film which lets go of you once you leave the theatre.