The mixing on that scream was so impressive to me, it managed to be both present and understated in a way that shook me. This is one of those movies that you just know will sweep all the technical categories.

Yes! the scream really stuck with me. My favourite scene in the movie

That scene made it an instant 5/5 for me. It is one of the most powerful scenes of not the most powerful scene I’ve seen from a film.

I never thought much about the moral implications of the bomb since it was always gonna get made eventually but this movie asked so many relevant questions it really got me to consider it more. I still have the same opinion but Oppie made me examine it for the first time

that actually left me shaking in my seat fr

Bro had like three scenes total and absolutely killed it

Wait until you watch literally anything else with him in it and you'll see what a waste he was in this movie.

He's the only one who could have nailed that testimony

​@@hardnewstakenharderhe doesnt need that many scenes, it only took him three

@CandidBanter Mr Robot might be the best show I’ve ever watched. Such a mindfuck at times but I was always immersed.

Subconsciously realised that but only put it together after seeing this

yes I thought the same

I found the soundtrack a little annoying. I wish there would have been more scenes in the movie without music. Sometimes less is more. He made the same mistake in the movie Dunkirk. It can be painful to sit for 3 hours watching a movie when the soundtrack is so loud.

@@nerychristian after 20min into the movie, I looked at my bf next to me so annoyed about the soundtrack because it was such an auditory overstimulating thing for me. It was extremely exhausting feeling like I was watching a trailer for almost 3h straight, especially with the fast editing at times

@@PinkBerryPhie Yeah, it was kind of weird. Sometimes the music didn't match the scenes. If you closed your eyes and listened to the soundtrack, you would think that there was a lot of action going on. But most of the movie was just scenes of people talking to each other. I don't know why the music was constantly blaring. Maybe the director thought the audience would get bored if there wasn't constant music playing. The movie Tenet also had similar issue. Where the music was so loud that it would often times make it hard to hear the dialogue.

I'm like that with every piece of media

Trust me, watch it again if you can and the way the dots will connect will leave you astounded. Even more so knowing this was a real story (yes somethings were changed fir dramatic effect though haha)

it almost feels to me as if the film assumes a familiarity with the subject matter the viewer might not necessarily have. it's a trend i've noticed with some modern biopics ever since that zac efron ted bundy one a few years back. there's a lot less handholding than there tended to be with older biopics.

yeah you can tell they tried to mitigate that because every time they mention someone you havent seen in a while or havent heard their name much they cut to an image of them. didnt help me a lot had no idea who that guy who died in the middle was.

I thought I was the only one I kept forgetting names there was so many scientists involved

Definitely one of the scenes in the history of cinema

My fave

I am become plastic, it’s fantastic.

Yours should be top comment!

I am Become Barbie, destroyer of butch.

ikr it may be hard to understand for some people but i understood it and loved every second of it

This sort of weird but after I watched Oppenheimer last four days ago and today I currently watch Hayao Miyazaki’s Film Wind Rises. The both films are polar opposite of course, however these both has in common, the Protagonist’s creations. I will start Jiro in Wind Rises, his dreamed is to make planes because they are art and wanted travel much faster other than trains. but when he made his iconic airplane which is Zero Figher, the Japanese government used his creations for war and cost millions of lives. All he ever wanted make planes because they are art and beautiful, he never wanted use it as a weapon. Same goes to Robert Oppenheimer who created atomic bomb was used as a weapon even though his true intentions are made it a deterrent,push the limits of physics and used it a warning to end WW2, not to use it Either way are both masterpieces of cinema Oppenheimer has best Cinematography ever while Wind Rises best 2D animations

I think this holds true for the last third but I personally found the first two A.hard to follow and B.Boring

Movie was boring not because it has too much dialogues and less action because screenplay was not the best. There were lot of random short scenes bundle together with no real meaningful conversations.

its edited in an insane way just barely misses sensory overload

It was a fantastic metaphor that I've never thought of before. I'd heard the story about the uncontrolled chain reaction and learned before watching the film that it wasn't nearly the threat the Internet makes it out to be, but they did a great job of making it relevant again in the narrative.

I do have a question, i found the movie really interesting but I was taught all this cold war and the consequences in class and also that they ‘downgraded’ all of the atomic bombs to prevent atomic war to breakout under reagan and gorbatchow and therefore know most of the stuff that should be basic ‘war’ knowledge and therefore find this movie only as good as how knowledgeable you are, meaning it’s only a documentation in my opinion since I know everything that prevails in the movie, so I wanted to ask you if you are from america or other countries where you learned less about war, no discrimination or anything like that only interested, and therefore find this movie good because of unexpected turnaround like not knowing the results of bombing hiroshima or nagasaki etc. did this impact your view of the movie and give it a good rating? I would give this movie a beautiful rating 7/10 but it’s not a 11/10 since it’s all actual reality which most people did not learn about, i come from Luxembourg and I learned a lot about ww1 and ww2 and cold war thus the score for me is equal to a documentation

It was so damn loud in the cinema I could barely hear myself think

@@smolapex Lol yes I studied the cold war in school and I've even read American Prometheus, which is the book the movie Oppenheimer was based upon. Knowing what will ensue didn't diminish the movie going experience for me in any way. "this movie only as good as how knowledgeable you are" is not true in my opinion at all as there have been many amazing films based on real, well documented events. Prior knowledge going into a movie doesn't ruin the film for me as I'm there to be entertained by good film-making and acting, not to learn.

@@Tribal_Sky75 My feelings exactly! It was horrible. The worst music video called a movie ever!

The testing scene did not work for me at all there was absolutely zero tension imo we know it's going to work it's real life 🤷Plus all this hype about no CGI explosion well yeah because it just looked like any normal explosion lol. Ending scene was for sure the best tho

can you please explain to me what was good about the ending? im truly trying to understand why people praise this movie so much

@@fashvr9961it’s reflective of our real world, how he says the chain reaction never stopped and the world did destroy itself with war and nuclear weapons. the threat is real and constant. just stick with more than others that the fear of nuclear war is still prominent.

​@@fashvr9961the ending was so cliche and predictable. People are overhyping this movie because its Nolan. The movie sucks but Cillian did a solid job regardless.

@@btafbm I’m sure it just varies by person. In the moment, I of course knew it was going to work, but it still felt intense and climatic. The explosion itself was whatever. I think the build up was more than the payoff, but it’s still a feeling I’ve never gotten from a movie.

Now i am become deaf but it was worth it.

I still like his Black Panther score the most

Been the god since he produced Because of the Internet

​@@rajatgupta000lmao, damn right haha

Soundtrack was awful

Yeap! I actually enjoyed it so much more the second time and noticed things that were literally in plain sight like Jack Quaid played Richard Feynman lmaoo

Same, I struggled to keep up, but i understood the basic story. Definitely going to rewatch to understand better

@@junaidmohammad5664- Maybe I’ll see it again. I found it to be way too long (especially the last hour), and the editing was disjointed. Maybe another watching will help.

Tbf that’s mainly cause of how unclean the audio and dialogue always is in cinemas, they really need to start either adding subtitles or making their audio be more clean cause I can barely understand the shit that they’re saying half the time

Tbf it you know a bit more then basic fysics you wil be fine

@@Wonka59stop generalising, I adore most of Nolan films but this one, it felt like Nolan tried to do a what Fincher did 13 years ago, make a dialogue heavy movie about a famous person. I think we both can agree that as good as this movie is, its not even close to The Social Network.

​@@Wonka59It's boring if you watch it w/o knowing it's just gonna be 90% hearings about communism and only 10% bomb and you watch it expecting it'll focus on developing the bomb. I don't like long ass political documentaries. I watched it as I love nukes and got nothing out of the movie

@@Wonka59 It didn't focus on the development of the bomb. It focused on the life of Oppenheimer and even then it was heavily focused on his politics so even saying it was about his life is a bit too broad of a definition. The bomb just happened to be a part of it, kinda like that step son you never really bothered with yet had to deal with coz you wanted to be with his mom. A movie titled "Oppenheimer" could've focused more on his role in the creation of the nuclear bomb but that's not what they did and thus my expectations weren't met, ignore the fireball in the posters, watch it being prepared for a political drama.

@@Wonka59 Nah, I've got proper nuke documentaries & all the released test footage to watch instead to forget about this movie's existance.

@@Wonka59 You know that a movie is subjective right? And just because you don't like a certain movie doesn't make you stupid? I love movies that this movie is being compared to like TSN, The Irishman and so on but I don't like this one in particular. This movie doesn't feel as big as it should have felt, I mean I get it, it was based on the man not the big project, something was just missing. You liked it? Great, I wish I did too. And that is fine. And you seriously think Zuck isn't influential? Look around you! Everybody's life today is somehow affected someway or the other by him. The thing you are accusing the very people who didn't like this movie, 'ticktockers', Zuckerberg started this Social Media addiction. He prolly knows more about you than yourself. TSN was also not abt the company but the man, the friendships, the betrayals. Oppenheimer was also based on the man but didn't feel that personal tbh.

The last hour....snooze fest. (1st 2, engrossing)

The trolls trying their hardest to sell this movie until the final minute knowing there is no payoff😅😂

@@ThroughMyEyes2020 tiktok trolls trying to discredit masterpieces because their attention span can't take an hour without bombs exploding 🤡

@@marklewen9384 if you think the last hour is a “snooze fest” then good movies just aren’t your thing dude

@@jacobsmith7054 no, over rated movies aren't my thing. The whole last hour they made it about the mccarthy witch hunt, but they did nothing to build that up during movie. Heck, the guy who turned out to be the spy at los alamos had ONE line they entire movie(" I was a german until hitler made me not one"). No interaction with oppenheimer whatsoever. Did oppenheimer let him spy? Was oppenheimer disloyal? We as the audience CANT know that as movie did horrible job on that. People often confuse an average movie because it covers an important topic...

The only other ones I can think of currently is either James Gunn or Jordan Peele

@@yammerrryeet511put wes anderson on the list

He's one of the few left in Hollywood who are clearly unique, original and innovative in their craft.

@@CasualKrieger His last effort sucked, but I agree ^_^

@@DarkAngelEU Yeah, despite Grand Budapest being one of my favourite films of all time, I'm starting to not look forward to Wes' newer releases anymore

I think that scene would have been much better in complete silence. They were testing the world’s first atomic bomb. I think the tension of the situation could have spoken for itself. Didn’t need the score constantly insisting how I should feel. But if you are a baby and need to be told what’s happened if and how to feel about it all the time then that’s cool I guess

@@KyeussAre you hating on music💀

@@liammitchell1310 lol the application of music

​@@Kyeussthat scene is supposed to help us understand how everyone involved in the project felt. they were excited, they were scared, they were curious, they were concerned. the kind of tension they felt wasn't supposed to be silent. i think the score amplified all of those emotions and even complemented them greatly, so that when reality sets in and they realise that the bomb did go off, that's when silence is needed. but not for them, that's for us. because they don't know yet the scale of the monster they actually created

@@Kyeuss Did you read my full comment and/or watch the movie? Around the time of the test itself there is no sound. It’s complete silence. Until you’re rocked by the ‘impact’ of the bomb.

Honestly I felt like the film was lacking a bit in the “character study” aspect, which I think was caused by two things. First the film is definitely focused on fitting a lot of plot and detail into the movie about the happenings and the story itself, which I think held back the possibility of having some more intimate moments or insights into Oppenheimer’s mind or understanding his character, his motivations, his morals, etc. it just felt like it was constant plot full speed ahead, not much time to sit with the character. But the second (more important thing imo) was the constant score, I felt like it was either so loud or overbearing that it distracted from the dialogue and acting, or it was too insistent on the emotion of the scene instead of just letting the scene and the dialogue and the acting speak for itself. I think the score itself is great and there are moments where it’s used very well, but I do feel like it was overused. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that some of the best scenes or sequences of the film have either no score or a very subtle score, and the focus is on the acting itself, those scenes actually felt more intense and impactful, and gave more insights to the characters, it didn’t need dramatic music. Just to name a few scenes, the trinity test, Oppenheimer having visions in that auditorium place after the test, discussing the dropping of the bombs on Japan, all far more gripping and impactful to me because they allowed the focus to be on the subtle and excellent acting, impressive effects and well written dialogue which communicated so much about the characters and their state of mind. The film needed more of that if it wanted to really be about the character, it needed subtle moments, it needed quiet moments spent with the character, focusing on the subtle facial acting and body language, trying to understand what’s going on in their head, that’s what the film would need if it was focused on being a character study, but as it is presented it’s far more about the fast paced plot and moral/ethical questions than it is about the character study.

@@jpeg204you like cliches. Because this movie was full of character moments but they just didn't do the quiet moment. So you rely on common narration themes to comprehend and feel comfortable with a story. What happened to appreciating a challenge?

​@@jpeg204The moment near the beginning where Oppenheimer nearly poison/kills his professor and the sudden guilt/remorse he had tells you everything about him in the simplest and most scale-down manner. The film beyond that explores and expands on that in the proceeding events and incidents.

Plus you get to see Florence Pugh naked several times yeah!!!!

​@@jpeg204you just don't understand the film nor Oppenheimer as a person.

You are not a nuclear physicist

@@Omni_Editz_-sn4fi tf lol

totally agreed! great comment!

You encapsulated exactly what I’ve experienced watching this movie. We seem to have had the exact same experience, maybe I should see it a second time as well

Yes exactly my feelings, great way to express!

I found it hard to follow as well. I thought maybe it was just me….too many scientists to keep track of too, who was supportive, who wasn’t? They all started to blend together. I thought that maybe it was just me. I notice whenever I watch a mafia type movie/show I have a hard time following all the secondary guys…..that all just start looking alike to me, lol. Also, all the time jumping made you constantly have to recalibrate…..where are we time wise, etc. Is there a reason it couldn’t have been chronological?

true, there's a tragic scene of one of the character and i literally felt nothing

2008 and 2023 are testimonial times in movie history. Keep it up with the comments.

The Dark Knight released the same weekend that the Avatar The Last Airbender series finale premiered. A GOAT week in media history.

'The Dark Mamma' how _convenient_ for online 'people'.

san ka nanood haha

ik u didn't want to miss anything lmao

What Lmfaooo are you low on testosterone???

Eyyyy where did you watch man? Ako rin I can't go out and pee because I would miss some of the scenes

someone during the intermission said "i wish they'd drop the bomb on this theater, the ac is too cold" 💀

especially the way the first half hour of the movie was edited together, it genuinely felt like i was watching a trailer (in a good way tho)

@@stewyyishimYeah I noticed that as well in the first half hour but then it sorta went away. Didn’t really like that style

@@Top_Hat_Walrus i wasnt crazy abt it initially, but it kinda grew on me the more i think abt it

No joke, when I first watched it I was worried I had the wrong screen and was watching a preview lmao

Almost like a Michael Bay movie 😂

Ive read about most of the scientists in this movie and I still couldnt keep up 100% at least they cast actors who looked distinct and were easy to identify

I think a lot of people are used to knowing every character, so it provokes anxiety when they watch a movie where the characters names basically don’t matter. Nolan doesn’t care, they basically could have had no names.

So many characters. I could never keep track of them and remember the connection to Oppenheimer. And such a confusing storytelling. My head is spinning. 😔

I respect Nolan’s decision to go for historical accuracy; he doesn’t go for composite characters, he shows just how large the community and team was in Los Alamos that needed to ensure the Manhattan Project’s success. Casting and direction did a good job with trying to make the characters as distinct as possible with little screentime.

@@caleblim6890 I also think everyone knows of them, just not their names. Like, the names aren’t very important in the film, but if you are someone that gets anxious about not knowing the names for some reason, then it will be distracting. I think Nolan frequently has unnamed characters in his films, because sometimes it’s kind of part of it to not know everyone and have good dialogue. Many of the scientists were legit unnamed in the script, but that’s on purpose. Their notion, their image, their words and impression was more important than their name, and naming characters like that would just be distracting itself

Yep, just as July 18th 2008 was the year of the "Dark Mamma", and with a Christopher Nolan Film to boot!

The meme will be talked about for sure, but as for the actual films... Oppenheimer will by far and away be remembered more and have a bigger impact on society.

@@israelp348 not quite sure, both movies deal with weapons of mass destruction, one destroys cities, the other masculinity...

This sort of weird but after I watched Oppenheimer last four days ago and today I currently watch Hayao Miyazaki’s Film Wind Rises. The both films are polar opposite of course, however these both has in common, the Protagonist’s creations. I will start Jiro in Wind Rises, his dreamed is to make planes because they are art and wanted travel much faster other than trains. but when he made his iconic airplane which is Zero Figher, the Japanese government used his creations for war and cost millions of lives. All he ever wanted make planes because they are art and beautiful, he never wanted use it as a weapon. Same goes to Robert Oppenheimer who created atomic bomb was used as a weapon even though his true intentions are made it a deterrent,push the limits of physics and used it a warning to end WW2, not to use it Either way are both masterpieces of cinema Oppenheimer has best Cinematography ever while Wind Rises best 2D animations

in what context? i could see it being studied in marketing classes but film history doesn’t usually go all into “box office weekends” and stuff like that. while oppenheimer is an important film for this point in history and where we all are culturally, im not sure if its important in quite that way.

That was a fantastic little bit! I’ve seen some people saying that the movie was too sympathetic towards Oppenheimer and it was “American militaristic propaganda” or some shit, but that little bit alone proves it wrong, I think. There’s an underlying immense horror to it that clearly comes across.

The way everything goes silent and Oppenheimer envisions the crowd get incinerated in the Hiroshima blast just before the cheering cuts back in. Fucking terrifying.

Don’t start none, won’t be none.

Facts. I watched it in 70mm, and I felt like I was actually in the movie. It was insane.

Of course he made the monster look like a hero.

@@alexstar5182 He's not a monster dude. War just makes people desperate, and careless sometimes.

​@@alexstar5182He didn't make him look like a "hero". He still showed his negative side like being unfaithful to his partner etc.

100% agree. This masterwork needs at least two watches. We did 3!

The scene where Oppenheimer'd all over the girl's chest is funny af....instant classic

Oppen gangnam style 😔

I was tearing up… nolan is a genius

watch old footage of Oppenheimer and he almost captured him...chilling

Definitely!! Super surreal experience! It feels super uncomfortable and that camera shake in the background of Oppenheimer slowly getting more intense is crazy!

oh no u spoiled hiroshima and nagasaki for mee broooo :/

@@Blakalomy” everyone else “

@@Blakalomystop spreading lies. How would you even make a sequel to this

Say that again, I couldn’t hear what you said. !

Literally revealed nothing new about nukes but I guess it makes ignorant people slightly more educated.

​@jokuihmehyyppa no need for that. I think he means the magnitude and scale and damage of his findings is so much more daunting and apparent

@@kadeerkhan9802 If someone says this shitty movie made them more scared of nukes it can only mean that they have been absolutely ignorant about the topic before. Which is absurd especially when we are yet again living through a time when an all out nuclear war is closer than ever.

@@jokuihmehyyppaAs a reformed Nuclear Engineering student this movie was The Bomb

@@noelvalenzarro Yet it revealed nothing new about nukes and thus my original response still stands.

That was my biggest concern, and I’ve seen it twice. Maybe it was because Oppenheimer was portrayed as lacking or hiding his own emotions, (except for when Jean did the thing), but I was upset that I wasn’t more upset while watching it. (And I cried twice watching Barbie.)

This 100% I knew everything technically wise was good and the story is interesting as hell, but I came out feeling empty lol Like I missed something

Yeah I wish I went in knowing just how much of a thriller this movie is. I was kind of expecting a dedicated biopic, when really it's just a thriller following Oppenheimer's life. With how much of a jerk Oppenheimer was, I wish this movie emphasized his brilliance more. I wish this movie emphasized the science more. Maybe a second watch will temper my expectations better.

@@plato8427 what?

I felt the same, I enjoyed it but wasn't thrilled

You should care because it’s literally the world you live in

@jetuwu8960 That doesn't mean I should care about the movie. I don't like films that don't connect me to a character or a story or a message or a concept. I didn't feel like this did enough to invest me, and it wasn't saying anything new or unique that I don't already know or feel living in the world that J. Robert Oppenheimer ushered in. This is not a problem unique to this film. I've always had trouble with Nolan's characters, particularly in the past 5-10 years. He's a technical master and has made some of my favorite films (The Prestige being my #1), but I feel like ever since Inception (another one of my favorites), he's been trying to one up himself in structural and conceptual complexity, at the expense of the emotional complexity of his characters. In my opinion, Oppenheimer is the biggest victim of that. It's so dense and so chock full of so many great things, but it ultimately amounts to less than the sum of its parts. It's spread too thin, and the emotional lynchpins that would connect me to the story, aren't given enough time to breathe and develop. I personally never felt like I could connect to Oppy in any way. I couldn't name one character trait about him or anyone else in the film, because they didn't feel like human characters, they felt like deliverers of information. All of the actors did an excellent job with their characters and did as much as they could to elevate the material, but I found the dialogue to be clunky and unconvincing. A lot of the film felt written and edited like a trailer. It was full of one-liners and audience-gasp moments. It felt so self-serious that I couldn't help but find a lot of it unintentionally funny. Particularly Florence Pugh's comically cliche introduction, followed less than a minute later by her sitting on Oppy's dick having him read "I am become Death..." off her tits. I just found that to be distasteful and indicative of the film's priorities. In my opinion, Oppenheimer is a shallow movie that wants to be cool and poignant at the same time. And while it is very cool, it ultimately fails to be poignant. At least to me

@@jcmurie have to agree

@@jcmurie​​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠The movie is a character study of Oppenheimer’s decision making in the project and the personal consequences he went through from it. The movie is intentionally unbiased and unprejudiced about his legacy and his beliefs. We get to understand how grey his decision making in the project really was in this film.

@petermj1098 you're not gonna convince me to connect to a movie I didn't connect with. I watched the film in 70mm, I understand what it's attempting to do, I read about the production and the filmmaker's intent before and after I saw it, I actively engaged with the film and tried to connect to something, and I still came out feeling the same way I do about half of Nolan's films. It's a technical achievement, with a lot of incredible aspects, that doesn't come together to make something compelling to me. Also, just a note, but Christopher Nolan is the only filmmaker who, when I criticize him on the internet, people jump into the comments to try to convince me to love it. That's not how art or art discussion works. I'd love to hear what you liked about it, but please don't try to convince me to like it by telling me how amazing it is. That just makes me like it less

😂😂😂😂

I think his Barry Lyndon is TENET.

@@mahbubulhaque735Interesting take, how so? Barry Lyndon is intensely intimate, empathic & human - TENET is deliberately cold

@@mahbubulhaque735 No, OP is right. Kubrick pushed the limits of the medium with Barry Lyndon (a new lens had to be developed to film in such low light). Nolan pushed the limits of the medium with Oppenheimer (kodak had to create new film for B&W exposure). Both are character portraits, both have memorable and intrusive soundtracks.

@@VicLabsAnd both use diverse spaces, tight rooms and spacious valleys.

Wow, that's such an accurate description

Karsten must have read your mind! 😁😉

@@trinaq he must’ve!!!

Yes!! I felt like I understood everything so much better on the 2nd viewing

I was a bit let down by the Trinity test, not because it was amateurish though, but I could see where that person is coming from. I had the surreal sequence of The Return, Part 8 with Penderecki playing in mind, and imo that is superior, albeit very different. It also made the Oppenheimer score feel amateurish to me, since the word is used, especially when thinking of Penderecki. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking and I wanted my favorite living soundtrack composer, Jonny Greenwood, who is Penderecki’s disciple, to score the film. Granted, the explosion of the implosion bomb sequence was without music iirc, but overall I felt that way. I did like some elements of the score that reminded me of some Sakamoto + Alva Noto solo albums, and it was way better than a predictable Zimmer score.

​@@pizzarsvideobut this isn't zimmer, it's ludwig goransson

@@thelastunicorn99 I know, that’s why I said [the Oppenheimer score] is better than a predictable Zimmer score. Sorry if it wasn’t clear enough.

I can see where he's coming from: the fireball is clearly a gasoline explosion and not accurately resembling the actual Trinity blast. Personally for me, not a really deal-breaker since Nolan still blew up a real bomb.

as someone else has mentioned quite simply and succinctly, it was a fireball. A glorified fireball. For a scene that was so hyped by everyone, especially the director himself, it does the hype very little justice. Also i might be in the minority here, but i would rather have had the explosion and the ear deafening sound happen simulatenously, instead of being a minute apart. TYhe build to the climax inexplicably brilliant, it had the core tenets of a perfect countdown. It truly did feel like horror. Then all the air was let loose quite flacidly when they didnt add the sound along with the visual for the first 30 seconds.

Thank you, looking around at the other comments here, its clear people have drunk the Nolan kool-aid again. It's like people no the name of one modern director and have latched onto him like everything he does is magic. There was no need for the editing and sound choices in this film. I just wanted to see a good movie about a complex man that told his story. The writing and acting should have been enough to carry the film, without the directorial tricks. PEople here talking about how terrified and trembling they were whilst watching it, lol what the hell.

Man, you put everything I've trying to say about this movie but I couldn't

First honest comment Ive seen here.

I have become Barbenheimer, destroyer of parents’ wallets

Let's face it, at this point we already knew what are the weak points, because it's a Nolan film, and also I don't think anyone (not even Nolan himself) cares about the nuances, because we got we wanted: an insanely epic piece with incredible performances and top notch technical features (and a clunky story obviously, just like in every other Nolan film)

​@@szatid2645I think for me the reason I feel this way is because Nolan *has* done exceptional character work before. My favourite film of his is The Prestige which combines magnificent filmmaking with intriguing, fleshed out characters. Insomnia & The Dark Knight are the same. Hell, even Inception has Cobb as a main character who is probably one of the most flawed but we'll written characters in Nolan canon.

It's a fair take to have. I went into the film not knowing what exactly to expect. I was happy with what the film was, but somebody I knew was disappointed with the film because they were hoping for a greater emphasis on the process of the Bomb's construction, and had expected the members team Oppenheimer worked with to have greater roles (and I did too, admittedly). I think the movie should be recognized and judged as a character study of Oppenheimer before a historical dramatization of the Manhattan project. Not everyone preferred that. If I do have one issue with the film, it's sort of how Karsten says he wished the movie looked at Oppenheimer's psyche more. As a character study, it does a great job showing all the conflicting emotions Oppenheimer feels, but the way feelings are shown to impact his personal ideas and beliefs aren't touched on as much.

Completely agree

I honestly don't know how you sat through nine hours of oppenheimer

it was a blast

I think, despite how Nolan described it in an interview, Strauss's sections didn't have necessarily a "objective" view of the world but literally a black and white view of the world. Strauss thinks so stringently of things with no nuance, he can't even consider other options to anything than his base initial reaction. Oppenheimer's view of the world was much more nuanced which is why it was in color.

Nolan is always for the theatrical experience. So I don't he would want to remix his sound mix for home systems. It's always going to be 5.1 surround. And he has the clout to keep it that way.

@@CharlieA24 I am from the same school of theatrical thinking and I completely understand the drive to makr the movie theater experience the best one, but it simply isn't realistic for a film's long term life. People are gonna watch this in 5, 10+ years, on laptops and phones and home screens

@@ileutur6863 Why wouldn't it be good for long-term life? If multiple versions of the movie were floating around it'll become harder down the line to find a copy with the original audio. The theatre mix can always be downmixed, but you can't upmix a stereo track to 5.1