Oppenheimer [4K Ultra HD] [2023] [Region Free]

For a few decades there has been an area of study called "epigenetics". The experiences and environment of one generation alter the way their genes are expressed in the next generation, and in the next after that. This includes some parts of affect, psychology. A woman exposed to trauma can transmit persistent neurochemical differences in her children and grandchildren a sort of generational inheritance of PTSD.Something like this seems to operate in Hollywood. The McCarthy era and red scare of the early cold war has left a PTSD in film-makers so that almost any story about the era evokes a cringe reaction and flashback to memories that aren't even the film-maker's own memories. I can understand how people like Lee Grant and Dalton Trumbo were changed by their own experiences. I guess people who weren't even born like Aaron Sorkin and Christopher Nolan are affected by some transmitted PTSD. This is one of just three serious criticisms of a otherwise very good film. The second problem is the reliance on flashing back and forward in time, an overused conceit. Lastly, the film just runs toooo longgg, a defect which arises because of the first two problems.Other than that, though the casting and performances are exceptional. Cillian Murphy has become one of the most powerful actors of his generation and is superb, Matt Damon up to his usual high standard. There is one performance which knocked me right out - Josh Hartnett as E.O. Lawrence is simply amazing; Hollywood creates archetypes over time, Hartnett has become the reincarnation of Gregory Peck in this film. Casey Affleck gives a very fine turn, too. What strikes me about all four performances is the writing is not gabby, not busy with dialog, these four, under Nolan's direction all give performances in which the silences are the "negative space" of the picture they paint.As to creating a whole person of Oppenheimer and as to accuracy - the script is not above criticism but the performances are so compelling and the chosen theme so far from the man himself taht one must take this fine film for what it is.

Oppenheimer is a cinematic masterpiece. Christopher Nolan delivers a powerful and thought-provoking film that dives deep into the mind of J. Robert Oppenheimer and the moral complexities behind the creation of the atomic bomb. The performances are outstanding — Cillian Murphy absolutely transforms into the role, and the supporting cast is just as strong. The score, visuals, and nonlinear storytelling all come together in such a compelling way. It’s not just a history lesson, it’s an emotional and intellectual journey.

With close to 35k reviews up for Oppenheimer on Amazon, I am sure it's a terrific use of my time and a great benefit to Amazon's worldwide customer base that I add another.Director and writer and coproducer Christopher Nolan definitely wanted to make a Big Important Film here. This baby is 3 hours with a huge cast of many top stars. And it's a complex story. Nolan wants to give us a good taste of the broader military and political backdrop while showing us into Oppenheimer's inner mind and heart.Obviously the movie was well received, earning something like a billion at the box office and netting 7 Oscar awards in 2024, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Cillian Murphy), and Best Supporting Actor (Robert Downey Jr.). I found it gripping and well done, certainly worth my time. One way of looking at this is as two stories, one about Oppenheimer leading the Manhattan Project through World War 2, together with an attempt to explore the massive stresses on him and his family and fellow scientists because of that work. Then the second story is associated with investigations in the 1950s of whether Oppenheimer's security clearance should be revoked because of his one-time former Communist leanings and his own reservations about the development of the hydrogen bomb (massively more dangerous than the atomic bombs dropped on Japan). This latter thread should be familiar to us in the age of cancellation. A thought attributed to a supporting character in the film provides a central thesis for the film--a reflection on how Oppenheimer became the most important man in the world for a time, then was torn down, and then eventually was redeemed (though the movie does not go into the last).In historical films there has to be some device for feeding us all the background facts we need. Nolan uses two judicial proceedings, if you will, for this purpose. One is a security clearance hearing for Oppenheimer being done under the auspices of the Atomic Energy Commission (I think) in the 1950s. The other is a Cabinet-level confirmation hearing for the self-important government official played by Robert Downey Jr. The hearing requires that he revisit his attitudes and actions toward Oppenheimer in earlier years. If I am not mistaken, all the scenes with Downey are done in black and white. I think it's fair to say looking at Oppenheimer through the lens of these legalistic proceedings adds a lot of complexity to the film and I'm not sure the payoff is worth it. I mean, the movie must have us in hearings for an hour minimum.Murphy is brilliant, and it's hard to imagine anyone else having done better at portraying the father of the atomic bomb. Oppenheimer had to be politician as much as scientist. Emily Blunt is excellent in essentially representing the brutal stresses Oppenheimer and those in his inner circle dealt with. I think those two and Downey are the three essential actors for the film, though I could also have imagined the film without the Downey role at all. Personally I was not convinced by Matt Damon's portrayal of an American general who supervised the bomb project--he just doesn't strike me as genuinely military. Maybe I am still having bad memories of him in Monuments Men, though he's one of my favorite actors in general. Did we need Florence Pugh as a troubled love interest, Rami Malek as one of numerous scientists, Kenneth Branagh as some other scientist, and all kinds of other big names and recognizable faces? I doubt it. I might have also appreciated seeing anyone smile a happy smile one time in the film. None of them smiled for 15 years? Anyway, I am dinging this worthy and solid film one star for feeling overly decadent and smacking of self-importance with the huge cast, the film length, and the higher level of complexity than needed.In my reading the movie is not asking so much whether the US should have developed the bomb or used it or not in Japan. It's rather a fairly heroic look at the types of genius it took one man to lead the bomb-building project and what he was willing or required to suffer as a result. Unfortunately I think we still come away wishing we actually knew more about what Oppenheimer was really like or how the bomb actually worked.

Pure cinema!! Tremendous performances from the entire cast. Beautifully shot and directed. A smidge long but worth every second. I recommend watching more than once to absorb all the small details.