When I saw the first trailer for Oppenheimer I thought it was about a man in a suit killing zombies or something in a fiery post-apocalyptic hellscape. Unfortunately, it is about Robert Oppenheimer, father of the nuclear bomb. I also recall hearing that Christopher Nolan was going to drop a real nuke for the movie, but that was sadly just a joke. People were really losing their minds over the fact that the movie uses mostly practical effects. I think that’s not so crazy though because it’s a movie about a real person that spends most of his time thinking. I’m not sure why that would call for any crazy CGI except for the nuke part.
I haven’t seen most of Nolan’s movies, but I do think this movie is most similar to Dunkirk, which is also based on a real event and keeps a nonstop pace. For a movie about all this boring science stuff, it goes very fast and never lingers on a single scene for more than a few minutes. In a way, it’s like watching a collage of memories from Oppenheimer’s life. I guess it would be pretty boring if it did slow down since the topic isn’t exactly action-packed, but I’d still like a chance for the viewer to breathe every once in a while. Even Dunkirk had its rare moments of calm where the viewer can fully digest everything that was happening. However, Oppenheimer is still three hours long despite its rapid-fire pacing, so I imagine any slowed down sections would increase the movie’s length to an unwatchable amount.
Oppenheimer does assume that the viewer already has at least a vague idea of the atomic bomb and everything that happened in the mid twentieth century. Of course, some things are just common knowledge, like World War 2 and the anti-communist sentiment in the United States, so the film doesn’t even bother spelling these things out. But there are things I think could have been elaborated on a bit more. For example, I knew there was a civil war in Spain, though couldn’t remember over what, and I was especially unsure of how the war in Spain tied into Oppenheimer potentially being a communist. Another thing I wasn’t aware of was Strauss’ confirmation hearing over his nomination as Secretary of Commerce, and so I ended up mistaking those scenes as part of Oppenheimer’s trial until near the end. But it’s entirely possible that the film straight up said “This is Strauss’ confirmation hearing,” and I just missed it, so I won’t say too much on that. On the flip side, the movie’s biggest plot twist is spoiled if you know too much about history. So, there’s that.
Regardless, it’s a pretty good movie. Nolan does a good job of putting the audience in Oppenheimer’s shoes, giving insight into how a genius understands the world through a completely different lens than everyone else. The awe and horror of the nuke is captured through these silent close up shots, one of the few times the movie is ever quiet. Then it blasts your eardrums as the explosion gets to the amazed spectators, as if the astonishment is fading away and the harsh reality sets in that humanity as just harnessed the power of a god. For a biographical film, it is very interesting. I give it a 2/10.