Film What did you watch last night???

[Nadam]

42 minutes ago, hansreinhardt said:

 

Had the pleasure of watching David Lynch's Dune in theaters last night. Wasn't a real busy showing, but it was cool seeing this with other fans. Hearing Toto's epic score blasting, and seeing all the wonderful production design and costumes on the big screen was a treat. Freddie Francis' cinematography is beautiful.

 

The HD DVD was a blind-buy for me back in the mid-2000's. It put me to sleep every time I tried to watch it, but I kept coming back to it for some reason. Now, I've come to appreciate it, and it's one of those movies where I notice something new every time I see it. 

 

It's too bad Lynch wasn't given the creative control he needed to round out the story, the narrative falls apart about three-quarters through (IMHO). This theatrical experience gave me some fresh hype to revisit Villeneuve's version prior to Part 2 in a couple weeks.

 

 

 

 

Even though it was a bit of a mess, I always enjoyed it. 

[Heywoodmoutaw]

3 hours ago, deckard99 said:

 

I've always loved Lynch's Dune, even with it's flaws. I have the new Viavision blu-ray on pre-order since it includes the extended TV cut which isn't on the Arrow 4k release. 

 

Seconding the thanks for mentioning this, I didn’t even know there was an extended cut becoming available.

 

Complete agreement @hansreinhardt about where the movie falls apart.  The ending is far too rushed and it causes the story to fall apart.  Can’t wait to see what Villaneuve does with it.  
 

Jealous of your opportunity to see it on the big screen, it’s such a beautiful movie.  The production design is so odd, distinctive and detailed.

[Veum]

 

 

 

🥤📺🎬💽  🍿🧋watched 

 

 

 

Tue Feb 20 ‘24 

 

 *The Continental (2023) S1 E1-3 ⭐️  ⭐️  ⭐️ 

 

S1 E1 Brothers in Arms

Winston Scott is about to become a London businessman. But he is dragged back by his estranged brother's attack on a hotel. Winston sets out to find his brother and sets up an escape plan with the help of allies.

 

S1 E2 Loyalty to the Master

Winston seeks justice for his brother Frankie, recruiting a team to help overthrow Cormac and The Continental. As they navigate the treacherous underworld of The High Table, they also evade an NYPD detective.

 

S1 E3 Theater of Pain

In the final action-packed night, Winston's all-out revenge plan is revealed as he looks to take over the NYC crime operation with plans to transform the Continental from outdated safe house into the upscale destination of John Wick fame.

 

 

Edited February 21 by Veum

[LeadFarmer]

I am definitely interested in seeing what the new highlander will offer with Cavill but in the mean time I revisited the original 

[Nadam]

I haven't seen this film since it was on Netflix, and then I always watched it again when Criterion released the Blu-Ray. So, I thought I would watch it nearly 4 years later and re-visit this masterpiece. Marriage Story connects with me in a very personal way, as my parents went through a bad divorce while I was young, and I have also experienced the process of divorce myself (thankfully, without greedy lawyers involved). The brilliant story, and masterclass acting from everyone involved brings this story to life, and hits pretty close to home. Noah truly made a work of art with this, as it beautifully covers the complexities and enormous difficulties in a divorce. The entire process is hell, and I feel Adam and Scarlett brought their A-game when it comes to evoking many emotions from the viewer to give them a taste of the state of chaos that is typically attributed to a divorce. The court system and legal process can change people for the worst, and I feel this movie illustrates that perfectly. 

 

All in all, this movie is, as I stated above, a masterpiece. Rarely has acting been on this level where every ounce of emotion -- even in the tiniest of facial expressions and gestures, been conveyed so expertly. If you have not seen this film, please do yourself a favor and watch it. You'll be thankful you did. 

 

[LeadFarmer]

Samurai Reincarnation. One of my favorite Sonny Chiba films

[Veum]

 

 

 

🥤📺🎬💽  🍿🧋watched 

 

 

 

Fri Feb 23 ‘24 

 

 *Retribution (2023) ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ 1/2

 

A bank executive receives a bomb threat while driving his children to school that his car will explode if they stop and get out. A remake of the 2015 Spanish film "El Desconocido"

 

Not the greatest from my man Lian but it does have some edge-of-seat thrilling 🤷‍♂️ 

 

 

 

[BreakBeatDJ]

Finally watched Oppenheimer.

Oh man is this film overrated. Not terrible, just overrated.   If it were made by any other filmmaker it would be panned as a three hour montage about security clearance . . . with an  explosion.  

 

I'm sure some will say, I didn't "get it" . . . I got it, I got it, there wasn't that much to get.  It felt like a not so smart film masquerading as a smart film with technique, and effects metaphors, with little character depth: literally anyone could have played the lead role, it required a very narrow range.   The movie star cameos/casting felt forced: character arcs compromised to accommodate celebrity casting is not unusual, but here it genuinely got in the way.

 

This was Atlas's first film with Nolan, I wonder what their future will be.

 

If Nolan would have gone full poetry, I'd have been down for that.   But the analepsis kept a narrative stamp on the edit, which pulled the poetry out of it for me.  Don't flirt with poetic non-narrative, either do it or don't.

 

We didn't need two separate, non-linear, hearings/interrogations: the "he was a commie" theme was played out by hour 2.  The transformational science and the way it pushed/pulled him in his relationship to reality and influenced his relationships was interesting; how the reality of the Nazi bomb race forced him to confront his self-indulgent political/theorist self, those were compelling character themes (along with others).  But, re-visiting every questionable anti-American interaction he ever had dulled his character development.  He became passive in the narrative way too much, constantly giving vague and weak responses to questions with genuine jeopardy (not to mention watching others give the same type of answers to the same questions in different scenes).  Even in his relationships, I never once believed any of them (whether they were real, fake, utilitarian, narcissistic, ambiguous, loving, etc., it just never read).

 

I'd love to see a shooting script, I wonder how far this edit is from the shooting script.  It felt very much re-structured in post.  I don't know if the book tells the story linearly. 

 

Now, I didn't hate it, but it is not even close to Nolan's best film.   Oh, also, usually continuity issues don't bother me at all, I'm a filmmaker by trade and it just doesn't bother me typically.  But my god there were so many continuity issues, and not even on the hard-to-shoot scenes, sometimes just in conversations, shot matching was often poor: coverage / singles should be super easy, not sure what happened to the script-y on this one.  The lensing for effect was way too obvious, as well, and not effective.  The music was fantastic, and sound design, though

 

I know it's not a popular take, but it did not meet expectations.

 

 

Edited February 24 by BreakBeatDJ

[Chief_lookout]

12 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

Finally watched Oppenheimer.

Oh man is this film overrated. Not terrible, just overrated.   If it were made by any other filmmaker it would be panned as a three hour montage about security clearance . . . with an  explosion.  

 

I'm sure some will say, I didn't "get it" . . . I got it, I got it, there wasn't that much to get.  It felt like a not so smart film masquerading as a smart film with technique, and effects metaphors, with little character depth: literally anyone could have played the lead role, it required a very narrow range.   The movie star cameos/casting felt forced: character arcs compromised to accommodate celebrity casting is not unusual, but here it genuinely got in the way.

 

This was Atlas's first film with Nolan, I wonder what their future will be.

 

If Nolan would have gone full poetry, I'd have been down for that.   But the analepsis kept a narrative stamp on the edit, which pulled the poetry out of it for me.  Don't flirt with poetic non-narrative, either do it or don't.

 

We didn't need two separate, non-linear, hearings/interrogations: the "he was a commie" theme was played out by hour 2.  The transformational science and the way it pushed/pulled him in his relationship to reality and influenced his relationships was interesting; how the reality of the Nazi bomb race forced him to confront his self-indulgent political/theorist self, those were compelling character themes (along with others).  But, re-visiting every questionable anti-American interaction he ever had dulled his character development.  He became passive in the narrative way too much, constantly giving vague and weak responses to questions with genuine jeopardy (not to mention watching others give the same type of answers to the same questions in different scenes).  Even in his relationships, I never once believed any of them (whether they were real, fake, utilitarian, narcissistic, ambiguous, loving, etc., it just never read).

 

I'd love to see a shooting script, I wonder how far this edit is from the shooting script.  It felt very much re-structured in post.  I don't know if the book tells the story linearly. 

 

Now, I didn't hate it, but it is not even close to Nolan's best film.   Oh, also, usually continuity issues don't bother me at all, I'm a filmmaker by trade and it just doesn't bother me typically.  But my god there were so many continuity issues, and not even on the hard-to-shoot scenes, sometimes just in conversations, shot matching was often poor: coverage / singles should be super easy, not sure what happened to the script-y on this one.  The lensing for effect was way too obvious, as well, and not effective.  The music was fantastic, and sound design, though

 

I know it's not a popular take, but it did not meet expectations.

 

 

Yeah, but Florence Pugh, though...

[LeadFarmer]

There's a level of simplicity this movie has that I've come to appreciate almost immediately since the first time watching it. It's slower paced with no over the top action or cgi special effects. Just that philosophical local level hitman/enforcer who reflects a lot on his inner thoughts and what's going on around him with that particular vibe 90's films had not to mention a really cool soundtrack. I downloaded it many years ago with bitorrent not knowing what to expect and ended up walking away not only liking but never forgetting it. I then came across it again in a Barnes and Nobles criterion sale and snatched it up. Now having the 4K steelbook and finally a new TV this was one of the first 4k movies I reached for to sit down and put through its paces. I know it's not for everyone but I still think it's worth a watch. 

 

Edited February 24 by LeadFarmer

[hansreinhardt]

14 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

Finally watched Oppenheimer.

Oh man is this film overrated. Not terrible, just overrated.   If it were made by any other filmmaker it would be panned as a three hour montage about security clearance . . . with an  explosion.  

 

I'm sure some will say, I didn't "get it" . . . I got it, I got it, there wasn't that much to get.  It felt like a not so smart film masquerading as a smart film with technique, and effects metaphors, with little character depth: literally anyone could have played the lead role, it required a very narrow range.   The movie star cameos/casting felt forced: character arcs compromised to accommodate celebrity casting is not unusual, but here it genuinely got in the way.

 

This was Atlas's first film with Nolan, I wonder what their future will be.

 

If Nolan would have gone full poetry, I'd have been down for that.   But the analepsis kept a narrative stamp on the edit, which pulled the poetry out of it for me.  Don't flirt with poetic non-narrative, either do it or don't.

 

We didn't need two separate, non-linear, hearings/interrogations: the "he was a commie" theme was played out by hour 2.  The transformational science and the way it pushed/pulled him in his relationship to reality and influenced his relationships was interesting; how the reality of the Nazi bomb race forced him to confront his self-indulgent political/theorist self, those were compelling character themes (along with others).  But, re-visiting every questionable anti-American interaction he ever had dulled his character development.  He became passive in the narrative way too much, constantly giving vague and weak responses to questions with genuine jeopardy (not to mention watching others give the same type of answers to the same questions in different scenes).  Even in his relationships, I never once believed any of them (whether they were real, fake, utilitarian, narcissistic, ambiguous, loving, etc., it just never read).

 

I'd love to see a shooting script, I wonder how far this edit is from the shooting script.  It felt very much re-structured in post.  I don't know if the book tells the story linearly. 

 

Now, I didn't hate it, but it is not even close to Nolan's best film.   Oh, also, usually continuity issues don't bother me at all, I'm a filmmaker by trade and it just doesn't bother me typically.  But my god there were so many continuity issues, and not even on the hard-to-shoot scenes, sometimes just in conversations, shot matching was often poor: coverage / singles should be super easy, not sure what happened to the script-y on this one.  The lensing for effect was way too obvious, as well, and not effective.  The music was fantastic, and sound design, though

 

I know it's not a popular take, but it did not meet expectations.

 

 

Was just talking with a friend of mine last weekend about this, he had all the same thoughts you did. I appreciate this take on the film and I think you’ve raised a lot of valid points. It’s not nearly the masterpiece it’s being hailed as, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. 

 

My only real criticisms are that it’s an hour too long, and the editing/story-structure is needlessly convoluted. 

[Heywoodmoutaw]

1 hour ago, LeadFarmer said:

There's a level of simplicity this movie has that I've come to appreciate almost immediately since the first time watching it. It's slower paced with no over the top action or cgi special effects. Just that philosophical local level hitman/enforcer who reflects a lot on his inner thoughts and what's going on around him with that particular vibe 90's films had not to mention a really cool soundtrack. I downloaded it many years ago with bitorrent not knowing what to expect and ended up walking away not only liking but never forgetting it. I then came across it again in a Barnes and Nobles criterion sale and snatched it up. Now having the 4K steelbook and finally a new TV this was one of the first 4k movies I reached for to sit down and put through its paces. I know it's not for everyone but I still think it's worth a watch. 

 

 I don’t know anyone who’s seen this who didn’t enjoy it.  Of course, says some things about my friends who would watch this movie as much as it says things about the film but still.  The vibe is as important as the narrative, and it’s a cool vibe.

[hansreinhardt]

6 minutes ago, Heywoodmoutaw said:

 I don’t know anyone who’s seen this who didn’t enjoy it.  Of course, says some things about my friends who would watch this movie as much as it says things about the film but still.  The vibe is as important as the narrative, and it’s a cool vibe.

Never heard of this one, will have to check it out! 

[Hollywood E Rock]

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

Finally watched Oppenheimer.

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

Oh man is this film overrated. Not terrible, just overrated.   If it were made by any other filmmaker it would be panned as a three hour montage about security clearance . . . with an  explosion.  

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

I'm sure some will say, I didn't "get it" . . . I got it, I got it, there wasn't that much to get.  It felt like a not so smart film masquerading as a smart film with technique, and effects metaphors, with little character depth: literally anyone could have played the lead role, it required a very narrow range.   The movie star cameos/casting felt forced: character arcs compromised to accommodate celebrity casting is not unusual, but here it genuinely got in the way.

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

This was Atlas's first film with Nolan, I wonder what their future will be.

 

If Nolan would have gone full poetry, I'd have been down for that.   But the analepsis kept a narrative stamp on the edit, which pulled the poetry out of it for me.  Don't flirt with poetic non-narrative, either do it or don't.

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

We didn't need two separate, non-linear, hearings/interrogations: the "he was a commie" theme was played out by hour 2.  The transformational science and the way it pushed/pulled him in his relationship to reality and influenced his relationships was interesting; how the reality of the Nazi bomb race forced him to confront his self-indulgent political/theorist self, those were compelling character themes (along with others).  But, re-visiting every questionable anti-American interaction he ever had dulled his character development.  He became passive in the narrative way too much, constantly giving vague and weak responses to questions with genuine jeopardy (not to mention watching others give the same type of answers to the same questions in different scenes).  Even in his relationships, I never once believed any of them (whether they were real, fake, utilitarian, narcissistic, ambiguous, loving, etc., it just never read).

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

I'd love to see a shooting script, I wonder how far this edit is from the shooting script.  It felt very much re-structured in post.  I don't know if the book tells the story linearly. 

 

Now, I didn't hate it, but it is not even close to Nolan's best film.   Oh, also, usually continuity issues don't bother me at all, I'm a filmmaker by trade and it just doesn't bother me typically.  But my god there were so many continuity issues, and not even on the hard-to-shoot scenes, sometimes just in conversations, shot matching was often poor: coverage / singles should be super easy, not sure what happened to the script-y on this one.  The lensing for effect was way too obvious, as well, and not effective.  The music was fantastic, and sound design, though

 

 

 

15 hours ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

I know it's not a popular take, but it did not meet expectations.

 

 

 

 

😂😂😂 I'm just kidding 

[Veum]

11 minutes ago, Hollywood E Rock said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

😂😂😂 I'm just kidding 

 

But, But @Hollywood E Rock Edward is it as good as TENET (“Is it a good movie”? 🤔 😂 😆 😝)! 😜

Edited February 24 by Veum

[Heywoodmoutaw]

36 minutes ago, Veum said:

 

But, But @Hollywood E Rock Edward is it as good as TENET (“Is it a good movie”? 🤔 😂 😆 😝)! 😜

People who love Tenet seem to *really, really* love Tenet:

 

https://www.rogerebert.com/features/tenet-rerelease

 

It’s lower tier Nolan for me but I do wonder how it would be in IMAX.  I saw Oppenheimer in 70mm IMAX, and I’ve seen it on a very nice setup at home, and it makes a difference.  You can tell it was made with the format in mind.

[Veum]

2 hours ago, Heywoodmoutaw said:

People who love Tenet seem to *really, really* love Tenet:

 

https://www.rogerebert.com/features/tenet-rerelease

 

It’s lower tier Nolan for me but I do wonder how it would be in IMAX.  I saw Oppenheimer in 70mm IMAX, and I’ve seen it on a very nice setup at home, and it makes a difference.  You can tell it was made with the format in mind.

 

Was intended as a long-standing joke among some members awhile ago as they made fun of me for not watching Tenet and later not understanding it! 😂 😆 😝 

[Hollywood E Rock]

2 hours ago, Veum said:

 

But, But @Hollywood E Rock Edward is it as good as TENET (“Is it a good movie”? 🤔 😂 😆 😝)! 😜

 

 

Here you go playing again.

 

 

And watch TENET

 

 

Followed by Oppenheimer

 

 

 

And then you better report back here sharing how much you loved them both or else

 

 

[Basil]

36 minutes ago, Hollywood E Rock said:

 

 

Here you go playing again.

 

 

And watch TENET

 

 

Followed by Oppenheimer

 

 

 

And then you better report back here sharing how much you loved them both or else

 

 

 

You don't mean like ask for recommendations then watch none of them 🤣🤣🤣

 

Wonder who would do that 🤣🤣👍

 

And answers to the name of

 

Basil 🤣🤣🤣

[Nadam]

Finally got to sit down and experience these two films for the first time. 

 

 

 

Ok, so this movie was so much fun to watch! My Wife & I definitely laughed at some scenes that weren't supposed to be laughed at (like the awkward intro titles with "James Stewart" randomly showing up in front of a pair of lips, some weird timing to James's lines, and the random Nun that creeped out of the shadows near the end). Outside of the laughing, this movie was fantastic, and easily has become my favorite Hitchcock film so far (I still have yet to see Rear Window or North by Northwest, so that could change).

 

 

 

I loved every second of this film! It is incredibly cheesy (in a good way), and downright fun. I can now see why it is a cult classic, and really appreciate the quirky (and often perverted) one-line jokes. It's a tremendously fun movie to watch when you don't want anything serious. 

[BreakBeatDJ]

4 hours ago, Hollywood E Rock said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

😂😂😂 I'm just kidding 

 

Well, thank god somebody made fun of me!!  

 

I want to like this movie, I have so many friends whose opinions I respect, who think it's great.  But, so far no one has convinced me!

 

I could go on and on with more critique.  One thing I'll say, as @hansreinhardt noted, the film is too long, and becomes Strauss's story for the last 35 minutes.  Oppenheimer becomes a bystander, sitting in a chair in the last hour listening/watching everyone else carry the story of the film with his name on it?   I don't think history will view this film with the same acclaim it is enjoying now.

 

 

 

 

[Nadam]

10 minutes ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

Well, thank god somebody made fun of me!!  

 

I want to like this movie, I have so many friends whose opinions I respect, who think it's great.  But, so far no one has convinced me!

 

I could go on and on with more critique.  One thing I'll say, as @hansreinhardt noted, the film is too long, and becomes Strauss's story for the last 35 minutes.  Oppenheimer becomes a bystander, sitting in a chair in the last hour listening/watching everyone else carry the story of the film with his name on it?   I don't think history will view this film with the same acclaim it is enjoying now.

 

 

 

 

 

I totally respect this viewpoint, as not everyone is going to enjoy it the same way. Personally, I really love Oppenheimer, and feel it is easily Nolan's best after Dunkirk. It doesn't feel like a long movie to me, and flows beautifully. The acting, soundtrack, and cinematography (that 70mm black & white film goes HARD) really bring this movie together so well for me. 

[BreakBeatDJ]

Just now, Nadam said:

 

I totally respect this viewpoint, as not everyone is going to enjoy it the same way. Personally, I really love Oppenheimer, and feel it is easily Nolan's best after Dunkirk. It doesn't feel like a long movie to me, and flows beautifully. The acting, soundtrack, and cinematography (that 70mm black & white film goes HARD) really bring this movie together so well for me. 

 

I'm curious . . . what is this movie about for you?

[Nadam]

1 minute ago, BreakBeatDJ said:

 

I'm curious . . . what is this movie about for you?

 

An interesting question! First, I am a diehard science guy in life, and this movie from a scientific standpoint is something I am glad to see documented. Secondly, the story of Oppenheimer is incredibly sad, and I am so glad that he and Strauss were both having their perspectives shared. Oppenheimer was done dirty, and I felt this movie was a great redemption story long after he passed to give people nowadays a look into the hell that one of the greatest scientists went through after he created this monstrous weapon, yet only to be betrayed afterwards by the American Government. Third, I love the discussion of the Atomic Bomb, as I feel it is a weapon that humanity should have never created. Humanity got out-of-control with building bigger and bigger bombs until they no longer made any sense (Tsar Bomba, the biggest bomb ever created, was too heavy for the Russians to drop in on an enemy from a distance, so it was practically illogical). For me, I love a topic that is still relevant today (nuclear war) to be at the forefront so that it sparked more public conversation. Finally, it is a movie about the chaos shrouded in secrecy that led to the creation of this weapon. It is one of the greatest scientific achievements in human history (good and bad), and as a dramatized historical piece I love that people understand it a bit more. Taking the worlds greatest scientific minds and putting them on this one project is so incredible (kind of like a movie with the greatest cast you can imagine), so it was exciting for me going into this film to see that story told. 

 

Hopefully that in-depth response gave you an answer you were looking for, but I thoroughly love this film, but don't think it is one of the greatest in a decade like some may believe. Though, it is a work of art in my eyes. 

[BreakBeatDJ]

58 minutes ago, Nadam said:

 

An interesting question! First, I am a diehard science guy in life, and this movie from a scientific standpoint is something I am glad to see documented. Secondly, the story of Oppenheimer is incredibly sad, and I am so glad that he and Strauss were both having their perspectives shared. Oppenheimer was done dirty, and I felt this movie was a great redemption story long after he passed to give people nowadays a look into the hell that one of the greatest scientists went through after he created this monstrous weapon, yet only to be betrayed afterwards by the American Government. Third, I love the discussion of the Atomic Bomb, as I feel it is a weapon that humanity should have never created. Humanity got out-of-control with building bigger and bigger bombs until they no longer made any sense (Tsar Bomba, the biggest bomb ever created, was too heavy for the Russians to drop in on an enemy from a distance, so it was practically illogical). For me, I love a topic that is still relevant today (nuclear war) to be at the forefront so that it sparked more public conversation. Finally, it is a movie about the chaos shrouded in secrecy that led to the creation of this weapon. It is one of the greatest scientific achievements in human history (good and bad), and as a dramatized historical piece I love that people understand it a bit more. Taking the worlds greatest scientific minds and putting them on this one project is so incredible (kind of like a movie with the greatest cast you can imagine), so it was exciting for me going into this film to see that story told. 

 

Hopefully that in-depth response gave you an answer you were looking for, but I thoroughly love this film, but don't think it is one of the greatest in a decade like some may believe. Though, it is a work of art in my eyes. 

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response.  Your point about the parallel stories of Strauss and Oppenheimer is well made.

 

I understand your POV about everything above, but the science part.  I would respectfully disagree. In fact, this film made an overt attempt to keep the science out of it.  If you look at other films with difficult to conceive scientific concepts, they find ways to involve the viewer in the STEM discovery (Moneyball is a math and sports movie, that educates the viewer on the math concepts that drive the narrative).  

 

In Oppenheimer, when we reach the goal (the explosion) we don't know enough causation science (other than chain reaction) to be included in their triumph.  Instead all we can do is simply view them enjoying their triumph with no real idea of how they did it.  And more than that, no real sense of Oppenheimer's genius of having overcome scientific hurdles to do it.

 

I agree that the topic is important, interesting, etc.  And like you, I love a good movie about discovery, especially a STEM one.  But here, the viewer was not taken on the journey of scientific discovery, we are put in a position to accept that the project was going forward, but were never included on the ride, the scientific ups and downs.  What scientific hurdle did we actually see overcome?   The only thing was the accumulation of marbles in a bowl.  That's how we knew they were ready to go, not because of any moment of discovery that included the viewer, and showed Oppenheimer's genius.  The ride we were taken on was a personal/political one, in which security clearances, fractured relationships based on politics and fear, geo-political competition, competition between scientists, those were the hurdles we saw, not scientific ones.

 

STEM films are few and far between and this feels like a real missed opportunity to include scientific concepts coming to life.  Dramatizing a daunting problem in an esoteric field was barely attempted in this movie.  Blurry calculations in the background, a wide-eyed oppenhiemer viewing fission for the first time, Einstein and Oppi discussing their discoveries . . . but we were never told what concept made fission possible, what was the core craft of discovery, what were Einstein and Oppi's scientific discoveries that they should be held accountable for?  . . . that is where the magic of a STEM film is imo.

 

Do we ever see Oppenheimer's genius in the field of physics being active?  We see he's a genius because he can learn Dutch in 6 weeks, and can read Sanskrit, but he can't explain to the viewer what his "breakthrough" was.  He throws stemware in the corner and watches it break, but what did he see in the breaking?  We are invited to accept his genius based on others evaluation, without any active manifestation of that genius in the core scientific concept of what the film is about.

 

It's clear to me early on, that Nolan had no interest in making the science part of the story, but rather wanted to focus on Oppenheimer himself.  In fact, the bomb itself was not the story at all, it was the backdrop to Oppenheimer's journey.  Nolan is clever enough to have included the science if he chose to, but that was not the film he wanted to make.  The fact that the film went on for an hour after the explosion, tells us the arc is not a scientific one, but an Oppenheimer one.

 

Did you see the Showtime series Manhattan?  So good, and so bummed it was cancelled.  After watching that, I did a deep dive in to the Manhattan project, so fascinating the dynamics of Los Alamos and the way that community functioned.

 

Anyway, if you made it this far, thanks for reading bud, I appreciate the conversation.  

Edited February 25 by BreakBeatDJ