I have to admit, that while I was very much looking forward to this movie since the trailers appeared, the movie didn't blow me away. I love Christopher Nolan movies, most of them anyway. But I really wished it had been a more straightforward retelling of Oppenheimer's life rather than using different timelines that just ended up being confusing. You're so right that the middle part was the best, and the shockwave from the explosion was quite something. But I was very perplexed as the 3rd half begun as the pacing and tone were completely different, robbing it of the energy and celebration that came before it, and I kept wondering when the trial would end. I agree that the movie felt bloated, and in my opinion the trial could have been condensed without losing much and still give viewers the general gist.

I loved Oppenheimer! I think every scene was essential in the movie. I think the first third of the movie which focuses on his earlier life was superb and was absolutely needed to tell us who this man is and what he's brilliant at.

I agree with Chris, and the reason why the length is a problem is the content: it's just too superficial. They try to cram in a lot of stuff, yet the film does not manage to explore its big themes in a profound way. They waste too much time on the political intrigue between Oppenheimer and Strauss, which is meaningless compared to big ethical questions like the morale of building and dropping an atomic bomb. Or at least they could have executed this plot in a better way. The sideplot about Oppenheimer's lover vs wife does nothing to humanise Oppenheimer, since all the characters are more like cameos, the viewer does not bond with any of them. I wish they had shown us at least more of the technical part of building the bomb and the physics behind it.

I wish it was longer.

This was a spectacular film! Pacing was perfect and it was the quickest 3 hours I’ve spent in a movie in ages. The film was gripping, intense, and nerve racking with phenomenal performances. I welcome a film like this during this time of year as it’s a break from all the commercial diarrhea that we’ve been fed for the past two months. Also, I think audiences are pretty well adapted to longer running times for films and if they’re as well made and engaging as this one, what’s the problem?

I saw it in 70mm IMAX at downtown Hollywood. There were no issues with the film projection and is actually 3 hours even. It is a dense film but it felt well-paced for the story that it told. Is it perfect? No. But there are more justifications for 3 hours than not. To me, I think this movie came at a great time with all the fluff and failed blockbusters this summer. People are tired of bad, cop-out films and want substance. I do think Barbie will win out box offices first because of its shorter run time and PG-13 rating, but Oppenheimer will catch up down the line via word of mouth. I will say you have to watch it a second time to really appreciate the story. This is a film aficionado's dream. It's not for people who want disposable entertainment. I personally think there will be multiple Oscars nods for this one, especially with Nolan, Cillian, and Robert Downey Jr.

Audiences : Great Visuals, Gripping Story, Best Score, Best Acting, Best Cinematography !!! Critics : It's too long...

The difference between a director who is just a hot name in Hollywood versus a talented FILMMAKER such as Nolan is cosmically vast.

I'd like to add Oppenheimer is very heavy revisionist of his past. He had no issues building and when the first bomb was detonated. If anything, he attitudes changed more for public opinion and appeasement rather than anything based on real moral belief. I don't believe he regretted what he did. The Joint Chief of Staff knew how horrible the casualty lists were in the Philippines, Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Japan had millions of troops stationed overseas. Hiroshima was the home of an army HQ, division and one of the most important navy fleet ports. I mean, at least 20,000 soldiers and sailors died when the bomb was dropped. It was not a secret.

The reason Kyoto did not get the bomb dropped on was because of Secretary of War Henry Stimson constantly rejecting. It is because of Stimson, not some dumb movie retelling.

It wasn't too long. There was a lot to tell and that's why it was a 3 hour movie. Some reviewers also said that the movie loses its steam after the atomic bomb test took place it was actually a movie about Oppenheimer (the making of the A bomb was part of the movie, but the main story is his life including his downfall when he was accused of communism). The movie tied itself together by the quote given by Einstein at the end and that made Oppenheimer's life tragic even though he finnaly got the accolade near the end of his life

A lot of movies have messages to tell us, even comedies, no matter how shallow the message is. People think only the serious ones have messages to tell us. It is called the theme of the story. In the past Greek comedies were used for social commentaries in satire form.

the main problem I had with a large section of the film is how reductive it is showing the justification to use the bomb. It uses a very modern and revisionist history of Japan during WWII, and I think it oversimplifies our decision. Which is really a byproduct of how the Countries aligned after the War. Japan aligned with the US and China aligned communist. and as such Japan quickly became an ally in the cold war. And most of the realities of Japan, the atrocities they committed, and what an actual land invasion would have actually meant. even in later interviews Oppenheim was way more nuanced than this movie would have you think in regards to if the bomb was necessary.

When Nolan tested a 2 hour version the courtroom drama scenes were not boring enough and audience members were waking up before the 2 hour edit was finished. So to maximize the critical boring mass a 3 hour 15 minute cut allowed for almost 2 hours of sleep inducing courtroom drama, and most of the audience was unconscious during the courtroom scenes.

I saw this in IMAX on opening Friday, 3pm showing, sold out house. The crowd applauded at the end (as did I) and sat still for a few moments to take it in. I believe it is a masterpiece, and on my short list (In the Mood for Love, Zodiac, Tree of Life) for best film of the last 23 years. The only theatre experiences I can compare it to, where the audience was collectively overwhelmed, were my original viewing of Apocalypse Now in 1980, and a 70mm showing of restored Lawrence of Arabia in 1988. Maybe a handful of others but that is it. I am hoping two things: This film becomes a blockbuster to show people are ready for challenging artistic films like the old days of 2001 and The Godfather when art and commerce mingled; and that filmmakers working today are ready to step up to the challenge.

I really don't understand Gore's stance on long movies. He says you have to earn it, which I totally agree with. He says epics like Lord of the Rings earn it, which I also agree with. But then he takes issue with Oppenheimer because it's 3 hours. Does he not think it earned it? What fills the criteria of "earning it" if not this amazing film? I feel that he incorrectly assumed the climax of the film would be the actual use of the bomb, but there's so much more to the story than that. Remember the movie is called Oppenheimer not Atomic Bomb, It's about the guy who lead the development of the A bomb, not the A bomb itself. I feel like without that last hour the movie would have been thematically hollow. The end really nails the "why" of the movie to me.

OMG!! The best part was when Oppenheimer jumped that motorcycle off the cliff!!!!

Honestly, I am tapping out of Nolan's latest efforts. Oppenheimer needlessly repeats narrative beats we already know and God, we needed an interval. That's why films of the 80s/90s had that sweet spot of 90 mins or just above.

While there were scenes in the first half of the movie which I found very good, post the bomb test the movie went downhill for me. Maybe I missed something others saw, but I just didn't care enough about the character of Oppenheimer and the attempts to discredit him to be interested in his travails. He didnt really question the morality of making the bomb until after they were dropped on Japan and I thought he was kind of an arsehole, not to mention sociopath, right? I mean he did try to murder one of his University lecturers. I guess, naively, I thought the movie would be more conceptually interesting, being a Nolan fan. Instead what we got was Nolans take on the biopic. The film very much centred on the character of Oppenheimer (the clue was in the title right?) and it didn't work for me. Because of this I also found it way too long. I found myself wishing Nolan had hired Scorcese's editor as I think it wouldve benefitted from some snappy edits to tell the story in a more concise and entertaining way. Definitely my least favourite Nolan film.

Now that I know how to describe it, the lack of ADR prevents me from watching it in the theater. My wife and I will need to wait for it to come to VOD and watch it with the subtitles turned on. Thanks for the review Chris. Cheers.

I loved every minute of it.

I have to disagree, Chris. I went in wondering how Nolan was gonna pull off this story for 3 hours or even made it interesting enough. Loved every minute of it on IMAX. Its our generation's Lawrence of Arabia. The personal story and trials bookends the epic middle act. This is a story as a science nerd i know very well and still i was hooked. and having all those guys on screen together - Fermi, Bohr, Einstein, Oppie, Heisenberg, Feynman together made me giddy the way i felt when the Avengers assembled. Dude, the theatre I was in just now in Kuala Lumpur was packed for a 5pm showing.

The problem with film critics is they watch too many movies. Most critiques I have seen from the film critic contingent is that it’s too long. Commentary from the fans is that it’s almost not long enough.

_Oppenheimer_ was sold out last night, so I saw _Mission Impossible_ instead. Awesome movie.

Ok, so they need to reshow The Dark Knight in Imax. It would blow away anything currently being showin in cinemas. I would for sure see it again.

I can’t wait to see it 3 more times in the theaters

I read somewhere that if they didn’t use the bomb, there would have been a lot more casualties from soldiers and civilians due to invasion of Japan. The bomb saved lives.

Watched this after seeing Barbie. Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, and Robert Downey Jr should all get nominations. Rami Malek shines in the third act. This is the most dialogue dense of Nolans films so some people might be turned off by it, that and the run time. My state happens to have a 1570 IMAX Auditorium so im seeing it again Wednesday.

Yes it did!!!

Newsflash….epics are usually long.

I saw it in Manchester UK and there was indeed "Hair in the gate" and it was glorious! It was real!

Strongly disagree with Chris' opinion that it should have opened in November. But I'm old school. It didn't hurt UNFORGIVEN, THELMA AND LOUISE, THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, FORREST GUMP, PULP FICTION, etc., etc. I think there is a huge audience that is hungry for more substantial movies during the summer. This was confirmed by the incredible weekend box office for OPPENHEIMER.

I’d argue the film is too _short._ The pacing is perfectly handled, but it _is_ breakneck, and I personally can’t shake the feeling there could be more story worth telling that was trimmed or omitted. They were absolutely pushing up against the physical limits of the IMAX format here; the film is so physically large they had to extend the platters used to hold the film in the projection booth to within a few millimetres of the carriage assembly. They literally could not make this film longer, or else they’d have to overhaul every projector booth on the planet.

SOF is a great example of why you don't have to make movies in Hollywood with big names anymore.

Film projection issue happened to me yesterday also. Fixed it in 30seconds thank God but yeah, screen went blank and silent.

Grade A cinemascore on both this and Barbie with both films lifting each other up well beyond their projections possibly leading to the second or third biggest domestic box office weekend of all times as great WOM grows for both. Now mix that in with no real serious competition for the rest of the summer and it’s absolutely wild Chris thinking that Oppenheimer should’ve released at a different time (or isn’t commercially viable at 3 hours when we just had avatar 2 make 2.3 billion at 3+ hours). I’d contend that without Barbenheimer I think this thing opens way lower in the fall and the fall is honestly even busier atm. You want Oppenheimer competing imax wise with Dune part 2? P.S. Lot of pink shirts at my Oppenheimer premiere on Thursday.

I was completely uninterested in the Strauss confirmation story line. And I was mildly uninterested in the story line involving Oppenheimer trying to get his security clearance back. I wish the entire movie was just about the atom bomb development.

This movie reminded me of Titantic where about an hour in and I'm screaming, "Just sink the effing boat for Christ's sakes!!!"

Could have been another hour longer. TBF, give it an intermission. But honestly, the 3 hour run didn’t really bother me. Also, I’m hearing reports of lots of issues with 70MM film, since actual film projection is a dying skill. Also, something that I think Chris misses is that people are very willing to participate in longer form content ( podcasts are an example, Joe Rogan’s can run for hours) The key is that the content must not be a fluff piece, or basic summer “blockbuster” Oppenheimer is an experience for sure, one that is well worth it

I can't wait for the extended director's cut.

If a movie is great I dont care if its 4 hours long. I have no problem watching 3+ hour long movies in 1 sitting like Once Upon a Time in America, Magnolia, The Irishman, Das Boot, Godfather 2, Casino.......And Im sure I will be glued to my seat watching Oppenheimer as well. Actually I want more 3 hour long epics.

My Dad wants to see this in IMax but when I told him how long it is, he said, "Um, maybe later" 🤣At least our theater has reclinder seats

What surprised me most was finding out that Gary Oldman played Truman

I am in the UK in the NorthWest trying to get tickets for IMAX 70mm and the closest cinema to me is in Manchester and the earliest available tickets I can find is for August the 9th. There are other showings in 2D but from what I have heard this has to be seen in IMAX 70mm. Im probably goona watch the new Turtles film before I get to see Oppenhiemer.

I saw it yesterday and tomorrow I will be reading to understand more about who is who and what is what and in a few weeks time I will go and see the film again

Gore nailed it. I saw Oppenheimer and felt the same way he did. It’s an 1 hour and 30 minute good film within a 3 hour and 15 minute bad film.

Wow! Again this opener needs to be a short somewhere guys! " A 'hair' in the gate-I am old so I know what Chris is talking about;but it has been so long that I ever thought about that it is not a thing for like 10-15 years???

Actually glad Nolan doesn’t cut corners to make a more commercial film. He has a vision and he sticks to it. 3 hours? That’s nothing if the movie is good. The idea that 3 hours turns people off I don’t think carries the weight it did back in the day. I’m stoked (seeing it in 70 mm tomorrow).

I heard a shortened version of this critique on FNT and watched the movie after and I have to say I don't agree. I was expecting to just grin and bear the first hour but the way that Nolan works with the time cuts, the surreal representation of the atom theory in Oppenheimer's mind, and the historical context all made for an interesting first third. The final third is where the real impact of the movie is and has a sobering critique of the people who got the keys to our mutual destruction. My wife even loved the movie and she is definitely not the target for this film.

My problem with Matt Damon is that seeing him immediately takes me out of the movie, it feels like I'm watching a parody or comedy. I have no clue why this is the case since I couldn't name a single other movie hes in to save my life.

It’s a magnificent film Bravo 👏 👏👏👏👏👏 Amazing cast of actors

Loved it. Loved the Length.

"I won't talk spoilers". Then proceeds to describe every act in laborious detail.

I watched it in IMAX 70mm Film; only issues were some dust occasionally, and a few vertical lines, along with projector noise during the few quiet parts of the movie.

The teacher in me wants to see a Director’s 4-he cut. You better Oppen believe it!

I didn't feel that it was too long, and neither did my girlfriend. The pacing was near flawless, and the narrative structure gripping and engrossing.

Excellent Vlog Have not seen the movie yet. There is a Movie from 1988 called Fatman and Little Boy or The Shadow Makers depending on we’re your from in the world. I loved it stars Paul Newman and I just hope they have not just made a modern day remake of it. From the trailers I have watched there is so much similarities to the 88 movie. Yes they are going on historical facts so there is going to be similarities. Excellent work keep it up 👍👍👍

Strongly disagree with recent criticism of movie length on yhis channel as of late. Films need to earn the right to be as long as some are... but that doesnt always mean it needs to be action heavy or a part of some trilogy to earn it. If there is something specific being worked towards and it takes X amount of time to show it, I am perfectly okay with that.

I have a simple request because I’m a simple man trying to make my way in the universe. Can we make intermissions great again?! Please?! I don’t want to sit there for 3 hours or even 2 1/2. I’ve no problem if I can have a break.

Loved every minute of it and it was clearly paced in a very specific way in relation to the Fission and/or Fusion process itself.

I thought it was too short.

I had no problem with its length. It was Oppenheimer’s story, not the story of the bomb.

I used to be in love with Hollywood. I don’t know what I was thinking. If they would have not been Nazis about the mask thing, that would have earned my undying support. My dead friend was a Union projectionist. I have no feelings for theaters or Hollywood anymore.

Why can't he release a longer version on demand? His longer films have pacing issues.

Some old movie palaces were almost the only air-conditioned places in their towns, for years! Three hours on a hot day, before most residences had cooling: very welcome. Williamsburg, Virginia had, maybe still has one that used to be chilled using ammonia as a refrigerant. That worked very well unless there was a leak!

Chris you just reminded me of Amadeus. Are you saying Oppenheimer has too many notes?

Love all of your shirts. Especially the batman logo.

I loved it!

Only Christopher Nolan could make this film as solid as it was. Brilliant acting. Great editing.

Oppenheimer sounds like the best Star Trek to come out in years.

I'm with you on the run time, although that might change on the rewatch. The first and second part could have had 10 minutes taken out of it. Still, it was great and the acting was top notch.

Nolanhiemer his confession porn of a dud - I am Becometh tinsel.

It’s a really good thriller when it’s makes my palms sweaty.

I’ll wait for the DVD directors cuts

Loved _Oppenheimer,_ but yeah...the length is one of the reasons why the film is my textbook definition of a 9/10.

Gonna Pass on this one. The trailer just didn't sell me

I dont wana hear chris gore complain about it being to long. This man has been whining for the last 5 years that we need more original films.

There was a good movie about builing the bomb already with Paul Newman. Still, gonna give this a watch.

An excellent film that was hindered in parts due to the run time.

Was interesting, liked it, very cerebral. Cons: too long, bomb not theatrical, too many court scenes.

Just saw Oppenheimer. Run time was not a factor here. Interstellar felt long by comparison. I believe people expect a Christopher Nolan movie to be three hours at this point. Present-day David Lean, in that respect.

It's not 3 hours and 15 minutes. It's 3 hours even. They could maybe shorten the first hour a little, but that's it. The last hour, after the Trinity test, is great.

Yes, it did

Oppenheimer should have been released on July 16. 😎

I hate that stupid excuse where they say it's too long, like we just had Avatar: The Way of Water and Babylon (which are two movies i actually like).

The title of the movie is 'Oppenheimer' not 'The Making of the A Bomb' and that's why we're told the story of what happened to him

Because you’re anticipating the build up to the bomb, I felt the 3 hours went very fast.

I don’t understand why so many people bitch about long movies. For some movies 15 minutes is too long and for some movies 3 hours isn’t long enough

"A particular set of skills."

Does the movie mention the estimates that invading Japan would've cost millions of American and Japanese deaths?

What’s worse is Nolan fans acting like he’s the only director that makes original movies and anyone with just a minor critique of his film must only watch Marvel movies.

Just saw it and spot on. Plus I really think they should have done the Japanese bombs differently by **spoiler** showing them. It was a bit anticlimactic. Still could have done it tastefully with the same message. Agree last act could have been shorter. And that was interesting to find out about the dialogue. Personally I found it hard to hear which for a movie with a complex plot and names was hard to follow. Cinematography though. Wow 💥

Saw it in 70mm and IMAX Laser…hardly any FX to justify needing to see it that way. Just lots of acting and closeups…and yes, it was film, you could see the edges on top screen

That's what my Mrs said

"THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID!"

I'm a big proponent of good old fashioned 24fps gold standard lensing onto chemical film negative whever possible at all because the result is automatically a more authentically visceral yet artfully comprised cinematically purposeful aesthetic in complete composition. More intimately tactile for poignant prestige yet poetically precious in a permeating paramnesia (look it up, lol). Like wistfully looking through a window into memory, dream, myth and reality at once. More than the sum of its parts - all the nuts and bolts essentially seducing a subtle psychology of symbiotic synesthesia that just feels more truthfully vital and involving. There's an achingly indelible alchemy imposed upon each uniquely burnt frame that evokes rapturous life - and can perhaps even allude to existence as an inevitably ephemeral surrender to satiate a sovereign source which sirens our search to survive into its sacredness... if one is sensitive to such signatures. At any rate, Digital is just inherently inferior no matter how close it achieves its filmic mimicry. There's usually a faint yet nagging residue of oppressively bleak clinical sterility about digital's dim waxy dullness like the movie is in an anesthetized state of not quite being present in full perceptive sentience that can contextualize its spacial moment in time with dimensional cognition for being encompassed by an orienting derivation and destination to denote the immediacy of the now. Digital has to be finessed in fine tuned filtering in a sort of summoned séance for finally impressioning a kind of necromancy as opposed to the necrophilia it otherwise actually is. Too often unnervingly uncanny, there's some intangible lack about digital as if suffocated in a lingering limbo of nearly nauseous agnosia - particularly when juxtaposed with a savvy acclimation toward the indelibly mystical attributes of real film. But physical film reel projection doesn't make sense to me. Digital projection insures the integrity of original intent remains consistently prestine. Maybe I could be convinced however that it does in deed also hold that certain spark of magic in its flicker too.

theatres in my town are ass unfortunately. last nolan movie i saw in my local town pissed me off with audio mixing too. my fondest movies that i watched on theatres here was the prestige, inception and interstellar .. movies after that seem to have too much exposition and horrible audio mixing. there is some lacking since Jonathan Nolan and him stopped working together.

I was bored after 1 hour. I like the most Nolan movies but the last 2.....not mine

...as the actress said to the bishop

A bit long but I enjoyed the performances. It is a glad diversion from all the Disney/DC/Marvel/Lucasfilm crap that has lowered the cinematic standard in Hollywood