The Silver Screen Oasis

“Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” -- The Bhagavad Gita

Oppenheimer (2023)

I saw Oppenheimer today. Unlike Dunkirk, Christopher Nolan's 2017 World War II epic which sacrificed characterization to convey the scope of battle, Oppenheimer is all about character. It's a gargantuan three-hour opus, an amazing portrait of a man, the era in which he flourished, and the larger-than-life personages he worked and played with. It gives us a sense of the man, his background, his politics, his genius, his love life, his family, and how this utterly complex character struggled with how his genius collided, and ultimately synthesized with, his aesthetics and his morals. A brilliant film.

I'll write more about this soon, there's a lot to think about.

Swithin wrote: ↑July 25th, 2023, 8:42 pm “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” -- The Bhagavad Gita

Oppenheimer (2023)

I saw Oppenheimer today. Unlike Dunkirk, Christopher Nolan's 2017 World War II epic which sacrificed characterization to convey the scope of battle, Oppenheimer is all about character. It's a gargantuan three-hour opus, an amazing portrait of a man, the era in which he flourished, and the larger-than-life personages he worked and played with. It gives us a sense of the man, his background, his politics, his genius, his love life, his family, and how this utterly complex character struggled with how his genius collided, and ultimately synthesized with, his aesthetics and his morals. A brilliant film.

I'll write more about this soon, there's a lot to think about.

It's on my list to see. I worked in Los Alamos temporarily, installing and testing a large supercomputer at the lab there. Lived on Oppenheimer Street, in fact. Unique town.

Just saw it this afternoon as well.

Very well done, although I think about 10-15 minutes could've been trimmed from some of the early A-bomb development scenes and which I don't think the movie would've been the less for.

(...and you heard it here first...Robert Downey Jr. will win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar next February)

Dargo wrote: ↑July 25th, 2023, 11:24 pm Just saw it this afternoon as well.

Very well done, although I think about 10-15 minutes could've been trimmed from some of the early A-bomb development scenes and which I don't think the movie would've been the less for.

(...and you heard it here first...Robert Downey Jr. will win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar next February)

Downey was indeed magnificent, in his mostly black-and-white scenes.

Oppenheimer grew up on the UWS, at 155 Riverside Drive, about a mile north of where I live. He went to school at Ethical Culture on Central Park West, about 1/2 mile east of where I live. Strauss was from the South but became a New Yorker, living for a time on Central Park West, then on the UES. Strauss is the villain of some of the film but actually had a fascinating career, with many achievements.

I can't wait not to see it.

laffite wrote: ↑July 26th, 2023, 11:53 am I can't wait not to see it.

Yeah, I noticed your latest little byline down there last week, laffite. And so would you care to explain your reticence in this regard here?

You wouldn't happen to be related to Lewis Strauss, would ya?! (...just jokin' here, of course)

And even though you say you won't be seeing this film, you still might enjoy reading the following article on Time Magazine's online site. It's an interview with Oppenheimer's grandson Charles about what he liked and didn't like and would have changed about Nolan's film:

https://time.com/6297743/oppenheimer-gr ... interview/

Dargo, thanks for that fascinating article!

I hadn't noticed Lafitte's byline. I didn't find the film to be hagiographic but rather a well-rounded portrayal of a complex individual.

Swithin wrote: ↑July 26th, 2023, 5:50 pm Dargo, thanks for that fascinating article!

I hadn't noticed Lafitte's byline. I didn't find the film to be haliographic but rather a well-rounded portrayal of a complex individual.

You're welcome, Swithin.

Yes, I suppose there might be a bit of whitewashing going on in the film, but considering the scene in which...

***POSSIBLE SPOIL ALERT HERE***



...Gen. Leslie Groves first meets Oppenheimer and during which Groves bluntly informs him of what unflattering things he had read about him in his government dossier, I thought this helped lessened the idea of this film being a total exercise in haliography.

And in fact and speaking of Groves and how Matt Damon played him, by the time the film ended, I actually felt if any character in this film might've been the receipient any sort of haliographic effect in it, it was Groves, and because of how he was portrayed by Damon as being an extremely fair/clear-minded, insightful and loyal man almost to a fault.

(...not that I'm implying that Leslie Groves might not have been such a man in real life here you understand, but I still got the impression that Nolan wanted to press this particular point in his film)

There have been numerous dramatizations of Oppenheimer's life and work. In the Matter of J. Robert Oppenheimer, which played on Broadway in 1969, was one. I never saw it, but I did see the Royal Shakespeare Company's production in London, of another play: Oppenheimer in 2015. I thought it was thrilling, moving, almost mystical in intent. At first, I thought Nolan's film was an adaptation of it, but no. Here's a review of the play and some information from the RSC website.

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2015/ ... rton-smith

https://www.rsc.org.uk/oppenheimer

Dargo wrote: ↑July 26th, 2023, 6:33 pm I thought this helped lessened the idea of this film being a total exercise in haliography.
I actually felt if any character in this film might've been the receipient any sort of haliographic effect in it,

So I was stumped over the word "halio" graphic so I looked it up. After some confusion it's apparently "hagio" graphic which I had never heard used in a sentence before.
How did you get past Otto? You used it twice but it kept changing my inquiry spelling (here too, hence the quotes)

As for Lafitte, he's just trying to get attention. I've noticed a few here use signatures in attempt to provoke others.

Hagiographic is a fairly common word. It has often been used in relation to one of my favorite biopics: Wilson (1944). Much as I love that film, I do have to admit it is hagiographic. But I don't find Oppenheimer to be hagiographic at all.

Looking forward to seeing this one. A lot of local filming in Los Alamos, where I worked for more than 10 years. Apparently a lot of the exteriors were filmed on a set at Ghost Ranch in Abiquiu (think George O'Keefe).

TikiSoo wrote: ↑July 27th, 2023, 5:50 am

Dargo wrote: ↑July 26th, 2023, 6:33 pm I thought this helped lessened the idea of this film being a total exercise in haliography.
I actually felt if any character in this film might've been the receipient any sort of haliographic effect in it,

So I was stumped over the word "halio" graphic so I looked it up. After some confusion it's apparently "hagio" graphic which I had never heard used in a sentence before.
How did you get past Otto? You used it twice but it kept changing my inquiry spelling (here too, hence the quotes)

As for Lafitte, he's just trying to get attention. I've noticed a few here use signatures in attempt to provoke others.

Although I knew the word and its meaning that Swithin used earlier Tiki, that was a mistake on my part in the spelling of its prefix. Good catch.

Sorry for the confusion here. Mia kulpa.

(...ahem..I mean mea culpa)