#oppenheimer analysis

New update for 'Minimal Cult' Playlist.

My only idea is that the black and white scenes are showing when the person the scene is focused on has a black and white moral view of a situation.

This was a movie that was simultaneously horror-inducing and not horrifying enough in my mind. I cried at about three points during the movie (with the majority of that being for around 10 to 15 minutes straight during the Trinity sequence) for a couple of reasons.

I'm not going to make this a long post so I'll break it down into two short paragraphs of what I liked and disliked about the movie

Like: I actually enjoyed this movie much more than I thought I would? I didn't have super duper high hopes going into it because Oppenheimer isn't really the kind of movie I'd typically watch or enjoy from what I'd seen of the promo beforehand (I was honestly worried I'd bored) but I'd say that mainly wasn't the case. I'd say that the Trinity test sequence was utterly chilling and really technically done so well, I loved that they showed the light so intensely and had it go almost silent for a good few minutes (honestly between 3-5) before shocking the audience with the noise of the blast. I also think the monstrosity of everyone involved was done in a very realistic and human (and therefore terrifying) way. Like the scenes where the people on base at Los Alamos were cheering and celebrating and lifting Oppenheimer up before the American flag after the test were just so deeply chilling and just disturbing to me. I think I whispered 'you motherfucker' under my breath at least 30 times to 10 different characters while watching this movie

Dislike: My main dislike here is really that I couldn't tell how much of the racism present in this movie was actually intentional on the part of Nolan and the writing team. Like I think with many things the answer is likely somewhere in between the two extremes, but this movie is one that for me is really difficult to pin down where I think it stands on that issue. I really wish I was still in my film study class because I'd honestly like to know what my peers and teacher would think about it. Because I feel like the shying away from actually showing the affects of the bomb (not a SINGLE Japanese person is ever heard or seen in this movie) and tests (Native Americans are mentioned twice but their reactions to the Manhattan Project or the repercussions of the tests on the natives and other nearby communities are never/barely addressed) is an effective and powerful way to show the reality of the racism of Oppenheimer and his contemporaries but the way it is presented in the movie makes it almost impossible to distinguish where the line lays behind Oppenheimer's bigotry in text and where the biases of Nolan and Hollywood come into play. And even IF Nolan's exclusion of Japanese, Native, Hispanic, and other perspectives was entirely intentional (to showcase Oppenheimer's biases and story in his own eyes) it STILL raises the question of what stories Hollywood finds worth telling. Like the story of this kind of human monstrosity in the face of curiosity is one that I believe has worth to tell, but is it worth telling at the exclusion of other perspectives of this event and the sheer human suffering it caused? And what does it say about our culture that this is the perspective of the event Hollywood decided to put millions of dollars and thousands of hours behind? These are just some of the questions this movie makes me want to ask.

The previous paragraph was supposed to be about all my dislikes of the movie and instead just covered the majority of what I have to say over the main one, which for me was my central conflict as I watched this movie. However some other more minor gripes are as follows:

1) I didn't like they had like 30 to 45 minutes worth of the senate confirmation/security clearance trial stuff after the Trinity test sequence. I found this part of the movie unpleasant to sit through as I couldn't really find it in myself to care or have any sort of empathy or compassion for Oppenheimer after watching him build test and hand over bombs that killed hundreds of thousands of people. Like I was not remotely interested in his problems after that to be real with you all.

2) didn't appreciate the Florence Pugh sex scenes to be honest. Like I guess I get that they were a part of the story and Oppenheimer's relationship with her character and their affair is important to his story but to be honest. I was 100% perfectly content NOT having to see her boobs and 3 times was definitely a little much for me

3) why were the parts with Robert Downey Jr in black and white they literally happened after the colored parts. Also I just really didn't like these parts of the movie to be honest. They weren't the parts I was there for and to be honest I didn't care too much about what happened to him

4) this isn't fully a dislike but I have complicated thoughts on the prometheus analogy in that I both like it and think it doesn't work for oppenheimer especially in the way they tried to apply it. Idk I won't get into it because I'd like this post to end sooner rather than later and my thoughts aren't the most organized on this matter

5) I was pissed when they did the cut to the scientists and the scientific community as those who would never forgive oppenheimer with the scene with Einstein by the lake. Like THAT'S what he told him? Screw the scientists what about the world!!!!!!! What about humankind!!!!! This was the last scene of the movie and they made up for it the teensiest bit with the "I think I already have [started a chain reaction that will end the world]" but if ANY TIME is when to talk about the world and the future and repercussions on humanity and oppenheimer's legacy to HUMANITY. it was that scene. Literally smh here

Around my house, it’s sort of a running joke that the best monster in all of classic horror is “the mad scientist.” I'm pretty sure it started out because mad scientists are, you know, not really themselves monsters, and that makes them an ostensibly poor choice for an answer...but the more I’ve pondered it, the more I’ve come to appreciate mad scientists. Mad scientist literature is at least as rich a source of inspiration as that of, say, vampires--consider not only Frankenstein but more underrated horror works like The Fly or The Island of Dr. Moreau. And isn’t the mad scientist being the most dreadful creature of all, while also being the most unbearably and inescapably human, the answer whose implications are the most horrifying? On that note, here’s a special theme playlist for my favourite monster.

Happy Halloween from Passionate Reply!

RYUICHI SAKAMOTO & THOMAS DOLBY - “FIELD WORK”

KATE BUSH - “CLOUDBUSTING”

ORCHESTRAL MANOEUVRES IN THE DARK - “GENETIC ENGINEERING”

CHARLOTTE GAINSBOURG - “THE OPERATION”

OPPENHEIMER ANALYSIS - “SCIENCE”

HELDEN - “YOUNG AND SCIENTIFIC”