Oppenheimer

[an anarchist]

Is anyone planning to watch this movie in theaters? I haven't been to a movie theater in a few years, and this movie could end up breaking that streak.

I was looking at an IMAX theater's ticket availability to see when I could go, and the theater is basically maxed out for the first few days of screening. Many people love Christopher Nolan's movies where I live.

Watched this movie yesterday.

Christopher Nolan is my favorite director who is current. If you happen to be a fan of some of his other work I would say definitely do not miss this. This is easily one of his most expertly directed films to date.

It is not my favorite film by Nolan, simply because he has done some more intriguing work.

In a historical biopic, there are only so many creative liberties and directorial decisions you can make to enhance the telling of the story of a historical figure. I believe Nolan and the cast presented the story of Oppenheimer as expertly and intriguingly as possible.

Definitely a film that I have to spend time on reflecting.

 

[Rival]

My boyfriend saw it today. He really liked it. Well worth a watch, it seems.

@exchemist @Debater Slayer

 

[Debater Slayer]

Watched this movie yesterday.

Christopher Nolan is my favorite director who is current. If you happen to be a fan of some of his other work I would say definitely do not miss this. This is easily one of his most expertly directed films to date.

It is not my favorite film by Nolan, simply because he has done some more intriguing work.

In a historical biopic, there are only so many creative liberties and directorial decisions you can make to enhance the telling of the story of a historical figure. I believe Nolan and the cast presented the story of Oppenheimer as expertly and intriguingly as possible.

Definitely a film that I have to spend time on reflecting.

My boyfriend saw it today. He really liked it. Well worth a watch, it seems.

@exchemist @Debater Slayer

My friends want to see it next week and have invited me to go (I wanted to wait a bit more and see it with family), so I may see it sooner than I was planning to!

Edit: The sex scenes are edited out of the version being screened in my country, in case you wonder how a family would watch that movie together.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Doesn't sound like my thing so I won't be watching it.

 

[Estro Felino]

That was bound to happen with or without the Manhattan Project. All the major powers were working on atomic weapons. It was just a matter of time. So I find blaming the Manhattan Project for that a bit disingenuous. That does not mean that the problems were not real. They definitely existed. It seems every year in my state that Hanford is in the news in some way. I do not blame the MP for that. It was a result of the inevitable arms race.

It turns out there were scientists who were studying nuclear fission to create power. Not for evil purposes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It turns out there were scientists who were studying nuclear fission to create power. Not for evil purposes.

Yes, controlled fission is far easier than a bomb.

 

[anna.]

Is anyone planning to watch this movie in theaters? I haven't been to a movie theater in a few years, and this movie could end up breaking that streak.

I was looking at an IMAX theater's ticket availability to see when I could go, and the theater is basically maxed out for the first few days of screening. Many people love Christopher Nolan's movies where I live.

Definitely planning on seeing it in a theater. I won’t be able to see it in an IMAX unfortunately.

 

[Nimos]

Is anyone planning to watch this movie in theaters? I haven't been to a movie theater in a few years, and this movie could end up breaking that streak.

I was looking at an IMAX theater's ticket availability to see when I could go, and the theater is basically maxed out for the first few days of screening. Many people love Christopher Nolan's movies where I live.

I just saw it today and I usually like the stuff he makes. But I actually think it was pretty boring, poorly phased and poorly focused. And it is way too long with way too much pointless fluff going on.

But to me, the focus and phasing were the worse part for me, there are way too many uninteresting side stories going on and honestly, this movie could just as well have been taking place in the 1960 or '70 and you probably wouldn't have been able to tell the difference, that it is during WW2 is barely mentioned or even visible in the movie.

I think it could have benefitted from being more like "The imitation game" about the enigma machine. Also, I didn't like the end at all, that was kind of done as if it was a JFK movie and it doesn't really work here at all I think, and comes off more like just a waste of time.

But those I watched it with enjoyed it a lot, so guess it depends on what one enjoys or expects. But to me, way too long, unfocused and slightly boring.

 

[Estro Felino]

I just saw it today and I usually like the stuff he makes. But I actually think it was pretty boring, poorly phased and poorly focused. And it is way too long with way too much pointless fluff going on.

But to me, the focus and phasing were the worse part for me, there are way too many uninteresting side stories going on and honestly, this movie could just as well have been taking place in the 1960 or '70 and you probably wouldn't have been able to tell the difference, that it is during WW2 is barely mentioned or even visible in the movie.

I think it could have benefitted from being more like "The imitation game" about the enigma machine. Also, I didn't like the end at all, that was kind of done as if it was a JFK movie and it doesn't really work here at all I think, and comes off more like just a waste of time.

But those I watched it with enjoyed it a lot, so guess it depends on what one enjoys or expects. But to me, way too long, unfocused and slightly boring.

I think the entire movie revolves around "the end justifies the means" repeated over and over again.
It's a mantra that echoes during every instant.

I will never believe in such a horrific phrase.

 

[metis]

I want to see it, but my sciatica would really be torturous sitting for 3 hours straight.

 

[Nimos]

I think the entire movie revolves around "the end justifies the means" repeated over and over again.
It's a mantra that echoes during every instant.

I will never believe in such a horrific phrase.

I don't know, it depends how one looks at it.

Had the allies needed to invade Japan, it would have killed a lot more people including civilians. And it was just a matter of time before someone would have created the atomic bomb anyway.

I think there are for and against. But it depends on how one counts the casualties. If you look at the Japanese during WW2, they were extremely fanatic to the point where they were willing to get into a plane and just crash them into ships. So invading Japan would probably have been a bloodbath when you have that many civilians, we kind of got a taste of that in Berlin when that was taken and they just equipped people with all kinds of weapons to keep fighting, but my guess is that it would have been a lot worse in Japan.

 

[Nimos]

I want to see it, but my sciatica would really be torturous sitting for 3 hours straight.

Yeah, 3 hours are very long to be honest, especially when you feel that they could have cut at least 1 hour off it without it having made any difference

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't know, it depends how one looks at it.

Had the allies needed to invade Japan, it would have killed a lot more people including civilians. And it was just a matter of time before someone would have created the atomic bomb anyway.

I think there are for and against. But it depends on how one counts the casualties. If you look at the Japanese during WW2, they were extremely fanatic to the point where they were willing to get into a plane and just crash them into ships. So invading Japan would probably have been a bloodbath when you have that many civilians, we kind of got a taste of that in Berlin when that was taken and they just equipped people with all kinds of weapons to keep fighting, but my guess is that it would have been a lot worse in Japan.

Did the Japanese offer to surrender before Hiroshima? (Part 1)

Did the Japanese offer to surrender before Hiroshima? Short answer: no. Long answer: also no, but it's a bit complicated.

blog.nuclearsecrecy.com

It was a test.

 

[Nimos]

Did the Japanese offer to surrender before Hiroshima? (Part 1)

Did the Japanese offer to surrender before Hiroshima? Short answer: no. Long answer: also no, but it's a bit complicated.

blog.nuclearsecrecy.com

It was a test.

Maybe to some degree, but you also have to keep in mind that the US had just lost a whole lot of soldiers attacking some of the small islands and knew that it would cost a lot of lives trying to invade Japan. If you take Iwo Jima it is 21km in size, so it's a fairly small island:

Approximately 70,000 U.S. Marines and 18,000 Japanese soldiers took part in the battle. In thirty-six days of fighting on the island, nearly 7,000 U.S. Marines were killed. Another 20,000 were wounded. Marines captured 216 Japanese soldiers; the rest were killed in action.

Then you can look at Okinawa which is slightly bigger at 49km:
The battle was the bloodiest in the Pacific, with around 50,000 Allied and 84,166–117,000 Japanese casualties, including Okinawans conscripted into the Japanese Army. According to local authorities, at least 149,425 Okinawan people were killed, died by coerced suicide or went missing.

Compare that to D-day:
The exact number of people who died on D-Day is uncertain, but estimates suggest that around 4,400 Allied soldiers and 6,000 German soldiers lost their lives.

Obviously, D-day was a shorter battle, but still 21km and 49km!! and the casualties on both sides are insane, including the civilians.

The US government still had to face the American people and send young people there to invade Japan, the number of casualties could have been crazy high, not only to think about the whole operation requiring to land that many people on the coast with tanks and supplies etc.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Was actually planning to see this today, but when my partner found out it was three hours long she went cold on the idea. Might have to watch it on my own, or find someone else to see it with.

 

[Yerda]

Might talk the other half into it. I'm afraid the price will be seeing the Barbie movie, though.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

My wife and I saw Oppenheimer earlier this week. Perhaps because I likely know more about the period and the context than most of the intended audience, I found the movie to be surprisingly shallow and inarticulate and the acting to be uninspired. (Even the nude scenes managed to be inane.)

Still, in all fairness, the popcorn was reasonably good.

Truth be told, I've been hoping that the industry might someday come out with a couple of movies, one about the Almanac Singers / Weavers, and the other about Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. On second thought ...

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've seen it. It is interesting and entertaining at times. But waaaay too long. They could have made it much shorter and still accomplished what they needed to, in my opinion.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I just saw it today and I usually like the stuff he makes. But I actually think it was pretty boring, poorly phased and poorly focused. And it is way too long with way too much pointless fluff going on.

But to me, the focus and phasing were the worse part for me, there are way too many uninteresting side stories going on and honestly, this movie could just as well have been taking place in the 1960 or '70 and you probably wouldn't have been able to tell the difference, that it is during WW2 is barely mentioned or even visible in the movie.

I think it could have benefitted from being more like "The imitation game" about the enigma machine. Also, I didn't like the end at all, that was kind of done as if it was a JFK movie and it doesn't really work here at all I think, and comes off more like just a waste of time.

But those I watched it with enjoyed it a lot, so guess it depends on what one enjoys or expects. But to me, way too long, unfocused and slightly boring.

Agreed all the way.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I watched it today and found it to be magnificent despite some shortcomings, mainly its length and slightly disjointed pacing. I love how it depicts the US' blind, bellicose pursuit of hegemony, its undiscerningly ardent and fearmongering anti-communist and anti-socialist hyperbole, and its willingness to toss aside all morals and principles in pursuit of its foreign policy. I especially appreciate how timely it is now that the US is trying to pose as a benevolent protector of freedom using recent crises while engaging in a second Cold War.

Not a movie to be used as a source of historical education by any means, but I think it's excellent for what it is.