“As a scientist, Oppenheimer is able to separate the science from the moral qualms he has regarding the product he’s created. He can thus view Trinity (the code name for the Los Alamos experiment) and its aftermath in Japan as a technical success but also see it paradoxically as a moral disaster, especially as he becomes increasingly disillusioned by the U.S. government.”
Thank you for this succinct summary that 100% makes sense to me more than the entire three hour movie did. Oppenheimer didn’t need to be three hours, nor did it need to be so convoluted. at least an hour of it could be summed up in a montage.
I agree with Steve in that I don’t like Christopher Nolan’s style, either.
Thanks Jen! I found myself wanting to learn more about the nuclear attacks and repercussions in Japan (Hiroshima) in the years following true devastation brought on by Trinity.
Apparently there’s a documentary called “The Day After Trinity” that’s worth looking into if you’re interested. Although I can fully embrace being done with this story!
From NY Times article:
“One place “The Day After Trinity” goes that “Oppenheimer” does not is Hiroshima. In the documentary, Manhattan Project physicists recount wandering the wrecked Japanese city. The narrator explains that the Allies had not bombed it beforehand to preserve a place to demonstrate the new weapon.”
Great piece, Beth. I saw Oppenheimer on opening weekend in 70 mm. I really did not like it much at all. Granted, I knew next to nothing about the actual story and did not read the source material. I think I’m just the kind of person that does not like the phone making style of Christopher Nolan. Bombastic, needlessly jumbled, tone, deaf where it comes to character development, and every film at its core is about a tortured genius man, reckoning with his lot in life. Boring.
Can I restack this? Bombastic, needlessly jumbled, tone, deaf where it comes to character development, and every film at its core is about a tortured genius man, reckoning with his lot in life.
Sure! But can you fix my typos? I tried to do that but the "edit" button wasn't there. It should be "tone-deaf." Probably a dash between tortured-genius. And no comma after man.
I mean you aren’t wrong. I think I gravitate to these bits of historical artifact. I just love to do the google doom scrolls and find myself hours later learning about some obscure fact about a dead president from 80 years ago. This might color my interpretation of the art and its merit
“As a scientist, Oppenheimer is able to separate the science from the moral qualms he has regarding the product he’s created. He can thus view Trinity (the code name for the Los Alamos experiment) and its aftermath in Japan as a technical success but also see it paradoxically as a moral disaster, especially as he becomes increasingly disillusioned by the U.S. government.”
Thank you for this succinct summary that 100% makes sense to me more than the entire three hour movie did. Oppenheimer didn’t need to be three hours, nor did it need to be so convoluted. at least an hour of it could be summed up in a montage.
I agree with Steve in that I don’t like Christopher Nolan’s style, either.
Thanks Jen! I found myself wanting to learn more about the nuclear attacks and repercussions in Japan (Hiroshima) in the years following true devastation brought on by Trinity.
Apparently there’s a documentary called “The Day After Trinity” that’s worth looking into if you’re interested. Although I can fully embrace being done with this story!
From NY Times article:
“One place “The Day After Trinity” goes that “Oppenheimer” does not is Hiroshima. In the documentary, Manhattan Project physicists recount wandering the wrecked Japanese city. The narrator explains that the Allies had not bombed it beforehand to preserve a place to demonstrate the new weapon.”
Great piece, Beth. I saw Oppenheimer on opening weekend in 70 mm. I really did not like it much at all. Granted, I knew next to nothing about the actual story and did not read the source material. I think I’m just the kind of person that does not like the phone making style of Christopher Nolan. Bombastic, needlessly jumbled, tone, deaf where it comes to character development, and every film at its core is about a tortured genius man, reckoning with his lot in life. Boring.
Can I restack this? Bombastic, needlessly jumbled, tone, deaf where it comes to character development, and every film at its core is about a tortured genius man, reckoning with his lot in life.
Sure! But can you fix my typos? I tried to do that but the "edit" button wasn't there. It should be "tone-deaf." Probably a dash between tortured-genius. And no comma after man.
I love the phrase but I don’t think I can restack a comment. Can you?
What do you mean? It won’t let you restack my comment?
It’s frustrating that comments can only be edited on the desktop version!
Agreed!!
Oh! That’s what it is! I just thought I was a Luddite.
Yeah, if I need to edit a comment and I’m not near my laptop, I open it up in a browser on my phone.
You can simply re-stack your own peace and copy and paste what I wrote as the text
Film making - not phone making. That was a strange auto correct my iPhone made!
I mean you aren’t wrong. I think I gravitate to these bits of historical artifact. I just love to do the google doom scrolls and find myself hours later learning about some obscure fact about a dead president from 80 years ago. This might color my interpretation of the art and its merit