A divided epic of awe and horror, fission and fusion. It’s simultaneously a unified portrait of a conflicted man and a singular achievement for Hollywood’s reigning blockbuster auteur.
Large swathes of the film play out as political thriller, the fuel in its engine being Downey Jr’s titanic colouring of Strauss, all boorishness and manipulative charm.
Oppenheimer joins the ranks of Christopher Nolan’s best work not for preserving some essential inexplicability of nuclear physics but by undermining the idea of science’s objectivity.
A masterfully constructed character study from a great director operating on a whole new level. A film that you don’t merely watch, but must reckon with.
Cillian Murphy turns in a haunting career-best performance as theoretical physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, and Robert Downey Jr. astounds in a way we haven’t seen in quite some time.
Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer is a kinetic thing of dark, imposing beauty that quakes with the disquieting tremors of a forever rupture in the course of human history.
Oppenheimer is a tour de force. An unmatched director at the top of his game throwing off the shackles of science fiction and superheroes to tell the raw story of one man’s transformation into something both more and less than a human being.
Cillian Murphy, with a thousand-yard beam, the half-smile of an intellectual rake, and a way of keeping everything close to the vest, gives a phenomenal performance as Oppenheimer, making him fascinating and multi-layered.
Its scope comes from Murphy’s haunted performance, and the way that the movie (with help from Ludwig Göransson’s panic attack of a score) submerges you in the mindset of its protagonist as though it can create a psychic connection to the past.
Oppenheimer is a mainstream offering of uncommon resonance, sending the viewer out of the theater head-spun and itchy-eyed, ears ringing from all its sophisticated, voluble explosion.
This is a big, ballsy, serious-minded cinematic event of a type now virtually extinct from the studios. It fully embraces the contradictions of an intellectual giant who was also a deeply flawed ma
A divided epic of awe and horror, fission and fusion. It’s simultaneously a unified portrait of a conflicted man and a singular achievement for Hollywood’s reigning blockbuster auteur.
Nolan taps the full sensory potential of moviemaking, pushing picture and sound to meet the scale of the story: clever lines dot the script; the whole project is admirably willing to wrestle with matters of great weight through cinema.
“Oppenheimer” is a great achievement in formal and conceptual terms, and fully absorbing, but Nolan’s filmmaking is, crucially, in service to the history that it relates.
[Nolan] has brought to life not just J. Robert Oppenheimer, but the still-crucial arguments he both started and tried to end. Oppenheimer boldly posits that those arguments are still worth having, in a film of magnitude, profundity and dazzling artistry.
Nolan demonstrates his usual prowess for impeccable visuals and stunning craftsmanship within a deeply despairing portrait of an arrogant genius who, too late, realised the impact of his monstrous creation.
Oppenheimer is a movie with power, texture and grace. By the end, we begin to understand its subject, even if we remain baffled by a genius who somehow divorced himself from the damage his theoretical project would do.
Simultaneously a biography, a mystery, a polemic, and a dense character study, Oppenheimer feels like the film Christopher Nolan has been preparing to make his entire career, and it may very well be his best work.
That rare summer movie with ideas as big as its ambition and budget...But "Oppenheimer" isn't a movie that is dependent on special effects for its power. In a film aimed squarely at adults, Nolan keeps the focus as much on the man as the magic.
One of the many satisfactions of Oppenheimer, Nolan’s intellectually thrilling and morally despairing new film, is that it succeeds in locating some of those conventions within another of his ingeniously constructed narrative labyrinths.
Any filmmaker can create a cinematic universe. (Many have. Too many, some might say.) Very few can show you how a genius perceives the building blocks of our universe, right before that same person imagines something that threatens our existence in it.
The filmmaker’s technique generally counterpoints any caveats and script imperfections. The ensemble cast is starry and strong. ... “Brilliance makes up for a lot,” Murphy’s Oppenheimer tells us. It sure does.
Magnificent. Christopher Nolan’s three-hour historical biopic Oppenheimer is a gorgeously photographed, brilliantly acted, masterfully edited and thoroughly engrossing epic that instantly takes its place among the finest films of this decade.
It’s at once a speeding roller-coaster and a skin-tingling spiritual portrait; an often classically minded period piece that only Nolan could have made, and only now, after a quarter-century’s run-up.
It’s more impressive for how the director has made such a personal narrative feel epic, not just in visual breadth but in dramatic sweep, presenting a story from the past that feels knotted to so many present anxieties about nuclear annihilation.
Christopher Nolan has done it again. He’s taken a historical story we know a bit about and turned it into an edge-of-the-seat, heart-in-the-mouth drama.
[An] often laborious yet genuinely strange and gripping movie -- a grand spectacle inspired by some of the grimmest events in human history, and itself an invention meant to blow us all aw
Its best moments stand out as some of the most original and exciting filmmaking of the year, highs that do a lot to counterbalance the sequences which dive back into bureaucracy and comparatively petty rivalries.
Murphy’s eerily handsome face, made up of angles and shadows and eyes that always seem to be telling a story that’s different from the one he’s speaking, is the film’s foundation, and his layered performance is its anchor.
For all we learn about the creation and execution of the atomic bomb and its aftermath, the story could and should be told in a more digestible form. Instead, we have an overlong narrative that isn’t revelatory or surprising.
Though they may seem disparate, the many elements of Oppenheimer refract and reflect each other, like a bunch of atoms creating a chain reaction or a group of scientists building off each other's ideas to forge something new.
The movie is so vigorously directed, not only in terms of sight but also sound, that probably the best a critic can do is point you toward the experience and say, “It’s that.”
Despite being overlong and unevenly paced, Oppenheimer contains moments of greatness and features one of the most compelling lead performances (by Cillian Murphy) in recent memory.
If Hollywood is ending as we know it – and all signs on that question point to a strong “maybe” – then Oppenheimer is the ideal movie to finish us all.
... or sometimes the actors simply mumble. The latter is soooo annoying!
As someone with hearing loss I second this. Reading lips often helps but when an actor mumbles, their lips barely moving, I lose almost all of what's said ... then must rewatch the clip 5 or 6 times to understand what's being stated.
I do use subtitles but streaming doesn't always have the sub file available either.
I did a Mission Impossible review thread previously and was using the same template I made, Please refresh. I believe I fixed this now. Sorry about that! One guy doing this by hand
EDIT: Realizing how different instances might update at different times. Will try to be more careful about this in the future. Definitely a learning experience
Seeing it in 70mm on Monday at the science museum in city. Glad I realised as there is a "fake" IMAX (just a big odeon screen) that I nearly went to that was same price as science museum.
Just a counter point I saw in analogue 70mm IMAX and found the frame rate caused flicker on my peripheral on some of the very white black and white scenes. So in some places the screen is bright white right to the edges and you catch a flicker. I wonder if digital would be the same or not.
That said both some of the effects and seeing the faces in larger than life close up.made it an amazing experiences. Also.the sound is as important as visual and the theatre I went to had amazing sound from shake your heart base to surround to great central speaker for dialog.