>It's an everyone is pretending to like a mediocre movie because of the subject matter and director episode
>It's an everyone is pretending to like a mediocre movie because of the subject matter and director episode
>It's an everyone is pretending to like a mediocre movie because of the subject matter and director episode
>It's a Cinemaphile pretends to hate a good movie because they think it promotes communism because they didn't actually watch it episode
I went to see it in IMAX and it was a huge disappointment, I wanted to leave halfway in because it was such a let down
It was good cause acting dialog and cinematography
I wanted it to be longer
the movie did feel directionless at some points. I can imagine that you may have found it boring but overall for many who knew what they were getting themselves into it was a 10/10.
On the contrary Nolan's decisions toned down the reality.
Truman's quote wasn't "what a wimp"
It was "Never let that fricking cretin in here again. He didn't drop the bomb, I did. That kind of weepiness makes me sick."
Also the Truman actor was horrible. Didn't look act or sound enough like him.
It's a good film, but it's a movie that didn't need to be in IMAX and didn't need to have the bomb scene overhyped beyond imagination.
The bomb scene is literally the least important scene in the movie.
I have never seen such a mainstream Hollywood film with so much sympathy for Communists.
>t. man who has seen 20 films
Tell me 5 major Hollywood movies this sympathetic to communists.
Bridge of Spies?
>Reds
Cinemaphile has no taste.
I'm a Nolan fan and don't like it. His films are getting extremely presentational, they're like a grand summation which anchors the story around specific repeated beats. It's a bit too poetic and detracts from the quality of the stories. I'm not convinced by his efforts that diving in an out of various time periods is a good way to tell a historical narrative, it kind of assumes you already know what's going on, and the majority of the audience probably doesn't.
it actually just promotes israelites in a general kind of way
it does promote communism but that's not why
>shot with with IMAX cameras*
Somebody should make a full IMAX movie just to snag the record from Nolan's stupid dual format autism and mog him forever.
Someone did, his name is Zack Snyder
Which one?
His Justice League movie. That's why it was all in 4:3.
That was 35mm film, not IMAX. IMAX is a film stock, not an aspect ratio.
>it's an everyone pretends to love a saccharin romance that's little more than an art house Hallmark movie because the director was a woman of color
Teo Yoo acts circles around the other two leads in this and his character's also 100x more interesting than either of them
really overrated movie
totally agree
>zoomshitter seethes because technical aspects can elevate a film
Maybe you should try it for your shit films
>dude, explosion. Lmao
Do you also watch explosion compilation videos on YouTube and clap your hands in glee?
>technical aspect is solely for pyrotechnics
Sit down zoomshitter you’re embarassing yourself
Its good, and it made $950 million, you're just being contrary now. people like you are why Cinemaphile has no credibility.
>I-It was good because it made money
Nolan is a classic example of the IQ bell curve. Idiots love him because he makes them feel smart. Midwits hate him because they think they are so cultured and see through the artificial media frenzy. High IQ's will recognize his films as above average blockbusters with broad appeal and appreciate them for what they are. If y'all want to talk about the true biggest overrated hack director, it's James Cameron.
Wrong. Avatar 2 is unabridled kino. Correct on nolan being goated tho
>hack
neither of them are hacks, neither of them are trying to make "high art".
James Cameron's box office success is evidence that he knows exactly how to appeal to the audiences he's intending to appeal to, which makes him a non-hack by definition
That's like saying Nicholas Sparks is the greatest writer of the 21st century because his books sell. That's always the discussion point with Cameron. It's never about the content of his films or any specific style he uses, it's always about how much he pulls at the box office.
I didn't say that James Cameron was a good filmmaker, I'm saying that he knows precisely how to appeal the widest sensibilities possible. That's something that takes an enormous amount of talent, otherwise everyone else would be doing it.
Hating James Cameron because Avatar is goyslop for normie imbeciles is unfair. He's cashing out and fricking around with the technology at the same time.
If you "cash out" "take the deal" "sell your soul" "take the 40 pieces of silver" etc, under any circumstances - at any point in your life, you are a bad person. That's just how it is.
it's not like you if you work 50 years in the bank, on your 51st you are allowed to rob it guilt free, it's still bank robbery.
Cameron sold out, he's a sack of shit, stop trying to simp for him.
Filtered plain and simple
Why do so many women get wet for this guy?
because hes hot? are you stupid?
I got to say I tried to watch this movie yesterday but the pacing is so clunky I couldn't get into it. that and the fact that he's an unlikeable communist israelite didn't help at all. I had to stop watching it at around 1/4 of it.
Basically the same for me but I have a thing about finishing movies and games and stuff. Too much of the movie was filled with boring scenes of emptiness or melodramatic staring with new age 'textures' instead of music. what the frick.
There's nothing but social proof carrying the movie to all it's accolades.
This movie sounds unappealing on every level and I will never watch it. It's incredible it actually made any money at all. There's no way anyone actually cares about some 3 hour long biopic about some weepy homosexual to the tune of 1 billion dollars. What happened here?
>What happened here?
Everyone went in expecting to see a kino shot of a nuclear explosion in IMAX from Nolan and got some wikipedia slop instead and then pretended to like it because sunk cost fallacy
You’re a loser if they’re the only reason you went to see the movie. There is actual footage of Trinity. What a CGI replica going to give you? Why Nolan under played it. Not a Nolan fan either.
nolan is shit he was never good, not a single fricking time even though he always has a top tier cast and access to the best of the best
what a hack
what a homosexual
I watched Oppenheimer with my folks when I was back home over the holidays.
How the frick is an average movie goer supposed to know what exactly is going in chronologically when the movie constantly bounces to different time periods with little to no indication as too what year or location it is?
I probably had to pause the movie a dozen times to explain when and where the current scene was to my folks, and they are both pretty bright with college degrees.
Would it really have fricking killed Nolan's "directorial vision" to have slipped in an occasional
>1938
>1948
>1942
>Chicago Pile-1
etc. I understood what was going on because i'm a history nerd, but there's no way a normal movie goer would have any idea with a lot of the transitions.
I'm no history nerd but I understood it just fine once I realized the black and white scenes were the Strauss story and the color was Oppenheimer. There's moments that might be confusing at first but by the end I understood everything.
It was a really well-made movie, and you didn't feel the 3-hour runtime hardly at all. The performances are great, the subject is interesting. I could have done without the Florence Pugh nude scene, just the hallucination of her fricking Oppy in the hearing in front of the wife was plenty to get the point across. I think they could have done a few more takes of the Truman scene, it didn't seem as impactful as it could have been.
I don't see anyone talking about the visible gloved hand you can see in the scene where Florence Pugh reportedly "commits suicide". Did nobody else see that but me?
It's just portraying multiple theories of her death.
Watching Oppenheimer made me realize that I sincerely didn't give a frick about the man leading the project, I wanted a movie about the manhattan project. Same thing with The Imitation Game, I wanted much more focus on the work done than an obnoxious character study.
>I wanted much more focus on the work done than an obnoxious character study.
There are countless movies on the Manhattan project. Why this movie is called Oppenheimer and not the Manhattan Project. It’s on you man
Yeah but that's not fair considering the promotional material and the movie itself. Every bit it shows with the gadget and the trinity test is like the reward, the peak scenes, and you have to sit through the oppie bits to get to them. A plot strictly about the Manhattan project wouldn't necessarily be a wordless documentary, just focus the dialogue amongst the people at los alamos. Show the fights and feuds between the scientists instead of sex and indian theology. You'd still have Opp present and giving lines, but the camera doesn't stay on him when he leaves the compound.
I thought the aspect of Oppenheimer being perhaps the one person who could've wrangled all those people together to be pretty interesting. It's annoying that Strauss is such a big part of the film. He's not even in the trailer, though I'm not of the opinion that marketing matters that much unless they deliberately include footage that doesn't appear in the film like PTA does.
If you make the movie about discovering bullet points on the technology behind a fission bomb it would probably be as useful as reading a wikipedia article. I'm disappointed the Los Alamos set was just a dinky little facade and didn't give much of a slice of life there though.
Until you actually watch a movie that has heavy plot focus that neglects the characters and find yourself not caring at all about the cardboard cutouts and thus have no motivation to keep watching. You can read the wikipedia article to find out all the who's and how's, and it's boring af. You need the personality and motivations to stay invested in the story.
What character study? We got absolutely no insight into the man except that he was a neurotic arrogant kvetching israelite that was le tormented but also thought himself to be a god among men. 2 minutes on wikipedia could have delivered that
The Trinity test was actually the largest of the three explosions
>Trinity
25 KT
>Fat man
21 KT
>Little Boy
15 KT
And yet Nolan's Trinity explosion was less impressive than some of my shits. I don't know what hack he hired to run his pyrotechnic department, but they should be taken out, and maimed.
>Upshot-Knothole Annie
fyi upshot annie is 16kt, much smaller trinity. And far more impressive than Nolans shitshow. If you go back and watch comparative bomb size vids Nolan's explosion quickly losses it's illusion of being an atomic detonation.
>And far more impressive than Nolans shitshow
I won't defend his poor explosion but that's a really dumb thing to say. Of course real nukes look impressive.
Nolan wants to purport himself as the messiah of practical effects, and this was his magnum opus supposedly, he bet big and it fell flat. Nukes have been rendered by cgi for years rather easily and well, so the pressure was on Nolan in this showdown between CGI vs. practical effects, he chose to have this fight, he fricked it up by ultimately delivering an underwhelming explosion.
I'm not satisfied with the CGI ones either.
well neither am I, but until someone makes my dreams come and gives me the real thing the CGI is the best visually looking substitute we have atm.
Soundtrack was kino.
Even if everything else was flawed, this one thing is enough to redeem it for a ton of people.
>the score is the best part of the film
>nolan opts for nonstop score and makes it louder than the dialogue
bravo
this movie was even worse than tenet. nolan has become a legit hack since he switched up his crew
It was 1 hour too long and literally every single piece of dialogue felt like a very poorly presented and overdramatized documentary that was meant to beat the message and info over the audiences head
>We will measure this bomb in many tons of explosives
>Surely it will be more than tons
>Okiedokie, then I guess it will be KILOtons
Then the guy with the frickass accent chimes in with
>If you do the hydrogen bomb it will be MEGAtons
And of course the JFK namedrop at the end like a fricking marvel teaser. Nolan has always been a complete fricking literal hack. Dunkirk is one of the worst most boring movies Ive ever seen and this is pretty much the same except the subject matter and actors at least made it bearable
>Dunkirk is one of the worst most boring movies Ive ever seen
It's a movie...with no talking!!!
The entire plotline with RDJ's character was pointless and ought to have been cut.
it's surprisingly passable
They made the movie about the wrong guy
I got a lot of respect for Truman, especially for tossing that whimpering homosexual Oppenheimer out on his ass.
OP = your average/tv posting contrarian, how dear you like said good film. b***h please, Oppenheimer is a good film. Just because your attention span doesn't allow you to focus for 3 hours doesn't mean it's mediocre.
Godzilla Minus One should have won best Drama if Oppenheimer managed to take it
I dare any of you Nolan dickriders to defend the scene where Oppie repeats the "I am le deatherinio" reddit quote WHILE he's having sex with Florence Pugh.
Is the audio in this film as shit as it is in Nolan's other films?
it's actually very good. I was surprised. Same with the music. It's not standard zimmer crap but legitimately kino
>On the way to turning pop cinema into a weapon of mass destruction, Christopher Nolan specialized in narratives about amoral excitation — Memento, and his Batman Begins / The Dark Knight / The Dark Knight Rises trilogy. These bad productions changed movie culture by appealing to the terrors of naïve film nerds the same way Stanley Kubrick corrupted adolescent pop-culture devotees — through technological preening that made geeks feel smart.
>“Now I am become Death, destroyer of worlds.” It came from the Bhagavad Gita, a Sanskrit epic that polymath Oppenheimer knew, but the proclamation now teases pop-culture nihilists — and that’s the purpose behind Nolan’s Oppenheimer.
>Kipphardt’s twist on the word “matter” addressed the ethics of creating a weapon of death through nuclear fission, but Nolan distracts from this by going into the weeds of Oppenheimer’s biography, using the political downfall to avoid moral scrutiny. It’s a bizarre extension of Heath Ledger’s grandstanding as the Joker in The Dark Knight — a carny trick given cinematic gloss. Film nerds may be impressed, but it’s simply more of Nolan’s ethical confusion, proof of the sheer moral idiocy he has inculcated in the Millennial audience.
>Nolan’s insistence on 70mm IMAX presentation literalizes Serious Subject Importance (as in his insipid Dunkirk). His abstract bomb imagery is fake “art,” less powerful, less poetic, and less meaningful than the atomic bomb Spielberg envisioned in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. But because Nolan’s politics are always obscure, it’s good that his filmmaking is so slick, yet laborious, convoluted, and enervating. Otherwise, a perverse amoral epic like Oppenheimer might be dangerous. It’s another piece of inscrutable pseudo-art to be left on the remainder shelf next to Criterion’s edition of Paul Schrader’s Mishima.
why were people complaining about Safdie's accent? He sounds very similar to the actual guy. Anyway it's kinda trippy to think this is the same guy as Dougie from the Curse like what the frick
Boredomheimer, also style reminded me too much of the style of JFK combined with a lightweight BBC TV science programme featuring Brian Cox.
>2/10 no demon core and nuke effect was shit
>I am become death, destroyer of worlds
>immediately sticks penis into a goblin israeliteess
What did Nolan mean by this?