Oppenheimer (2023) (dir. Christopher Nolan)
Oppenheimer is in some ways, the summation of everything Christopher Nolan has been saying throughout his entire career thus far. A lot of it is conveyed through dialogue - an endless sea of quandary, debate, theory and apprehension. At some points in this film, I was convinced I was watching Nolan’s masterpiece but it’s also hard for me to fully cement that once we get to the very end. Like most experiences I have with movies these days, a second viewing could bump up those moments of awe into a semblance of solidified brilliance. Also like a lot of newer films, I felt exhausted by its running time to where I almost wish there was an intermission. Maybe I should watch this while drinking coffee and taking notes!
One of the reasons I could never imagine myself at a week-long film festival where I have to consume four or five titles in a day, is that I need time to sit and process what I’ve seen. It’s clear that my mind is still racing from what I just watched to the point where I felt inundated with ideas. It reminded me of what I first experienced with Oliver Stone’s JFK and Nixon - two movies I would eventually grow to love over time. Around the years of seeing those two titles, all I could think of was that Duran Duran song, “Too Much Information.” Slow down, let me absorb it all. Oppenheimer is damn-near relentless in a way that is both invigorating and tiring by the end (in a good way).
Inspired by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin’s seminal 2005 biography, American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer, Oppenheimer is an account of the events that led to its eponymous theoretical physicist becoming one of the most lauded, hated, and infamous men in human history for his role in developing the atomic bomb. Cillian Murphy’s eyes are some of the most expressive you’ll ever see, conveying so much to where Oppenheimer often doesn’t need to say anything - it’s all right there despite a layer of quiet stoicism. His portrayal of Oppenheimer is a career best for him, without question but the cast of character actors are also providing ample support.
Oppenheimer's research and innovative organization proposals lead Gen. Groves (Matt Damon) to hire Oppenheimer as director of the Manhattan Project. The government builds the town of Los Alamos to Oppenheimer's specifications. As with so much of Nolan’s prior work, Oppenheimer is chronologically fractured, recounting its tale from two perspectives: that of Oppenheimer, in color, and of Atomic Energy Commission chairman Lewis Strauss (an exceptional Robert Downey, Jr.), in black-and-white.
In accordance with that structure, the film casts its dual strands as flashbacks told by these characters during, respectively, the secret, Red Scare-driven 1954 hearing that cost Oppenheimer his security clearance and the 1959 Senate hearing that denied Strauss the Secretary of Commerce position he coveted. There is also a private meeting of military minds in a sequestered space in which legal counsel attempts to make sense of precisely why they’re questioning Oppenheimer’s past actions - a process that may or may not lead to a renewal of his security clearance. All of this interweaves like clockwork but it takes a while to acclimate.
As a technical marvel, this is a monumental achievement. The editing by Jennifer Lame is rhythmic and beautifully choreographed. The sound design is perfectly pitched punctuation (often in the form of a silent ellipsis or a pulsating exclamation point). The stunning cinematography of Hoyte van Hoytema captures everything from New Mexico to black-and-white Senate hearings in ways that showcase why actual film should be preserved. Sometimes in the confines of a confined room there is a sense of being imprisoned within indecision and uncertainty. Not to mention the accompanying intensity of a relentless score by Ludwig Göransson that makes you feel every beat often sounding like an amalgam of Jóhann Jóhannsson and Hans Zimmer. There’s no denying how powerful the elements are and they come together for the ultimate must-see film-going experience… yes in a theater.
I kept thinking about the idea of Pandora’s Box, a terrible power unleashed in the hands of the impulsive. This is the stuff of gods and men with little control over what happens as a result of their creation. But it’s more than that. What does an invention that ultimately leads to immeasurable casualties do to its creator on a psychological level? One of the more interesting things about Christopher Nolan’s process this time is going outside the box with blasts of energy - both atomic and human. We see Oppenheimer’s perspective including big bright flashes of anxiety especially once he’s come to the realization that he’s responsible for so many deaths.
I’m still not sure if Nolan is capable of writing fully realized female characters despite all of them giving great performances here. Pugh is under-utilized as a mistress that has no aspirations of being tied-down, at least at first. Also undeveloped is briefly showcasing the contributions of Lilli Hornig (Olivia Thirlby). Blunt, as Kitty is consistently great as expected, given a much juicier role but aside from a scene of questioning, feels reduced to a depressed alcoholic with no inner life or backstory - an afterthought which could very well have been the case for Oppenheimer himself. He was addicted to his work. The scenes of him collaborating with a crew of highly intelligent scientists recall Nolan at his best. I never mind when he indulges in exposition and analysis (yes even in Inception). Sometimes I get the feeling we’re both interested in the same things - particularly the moral, ethical and psychological ramifications of doing something both audacious and dangerous. Especially when it could, in turn, lead to the end of humanity.
At every turn, a superb supporting performance lies in wait from Damon, Blunt, Kenneth Branagh, Macon Blair, Rami Malek, Josh Hartnett, Casey Affleck, Matthew Modine, Alden Ehrenreich, and Tom Conti as Albert Einstein. Special mention goes to Robert Downey Jr, given far more to do than playing a tired superhero finally, as well as David Krumholtz as Isidor Isaac Rabi, an Oppenheimer associate whose initial moral qualms about joining the Manhattan Project are eventually shared by Oppenheimer and, in the end, by the film. I’m not sure if the suggestions of a spy subplot involving said side characters was necessary - an afterthought that could’ve been excised for a tighter running time. As the film goes on, we do learn of a conspiracy of sorts that comes together wonderfully.
Some surreal moments convey Oppenheimer's feelings of guilt and remorse, both in matters of his infidelity and facilitating weapons of mass destruction. There’s one in particular that truly does not work (it elicited laughter) involving an imagined Pugh taking “part” in the deposition. Part of me was wondering - is Nolan going to get weird and make the kind of choices that were made like in The Master? But this is mostly just a random choice to get weird that felt out of place. I think what holds it back from being a masterpiece is simply not going all in with the surreality. It was mostly just hinted at here and there. Part of me wants to see Nolan get weird and weirder!
The kind of damage this has done to Oppenheimer psyche is obvious - he is a sensitive person, not just a cog in the military machine programmed to create chaos in the way that the Joker did. It’s clear he genuinely struggles - having too much knowledge and being able to comprehend the world of quantum mechanics effortlessly is bound to have consequences especially when there’s mounting pressure to dominate and beat the Russians at their own game. Nolan’s choice to go in-depth to how this affected him is one of the best components of the film, along with the stellar editing from different points in time that are never confusing but endlessly compelling.
Oppenheimer is a complex, dense film with many layers - most of which I responded to quite strongly. The final moment involving Albert Einstein is something I couldn’t shake. It led me to believe that this film could potentially have a lot to say about man’s tendency to openly adopt the death drive. Death is inevitable for us all and in some ways, war tries to justify its inevitability. It’s as if self-destruction comes with having eyes and ears. Why else would we build a bomb that almost assures an ending of civilization? We may think life is about survival but why are those in power so drawn to the impulse to destroy those who challenge us? Our country will always retaliate and dominate - it’s practically how we were founded, it’s in our DNA. This film really does delve deep and considers the macro-level implication and the effect it has on one fragile, but brilliant mind.
I admit, maybe I shouldn’t have been taken aback by how talky this entire experience was, because the ideas expressed throughout resonate. I also wonder if this is the ultimate Christopher Nolan film even if there’s very little in the way of effects outside of the moment involving the Trinity test. (Keep in mind - all in-camera and practical). Perhaps after the action spectacles of Tenet and Interstellar (still my favorite Nolan film), it was time to go inward and personal again. Nolan is also driven by a love of science and keen intellect, and he respects the audience to almost become the students to these professors and revolutionaries (even if some were mad with power). There’s a lot to lecture about.
To me the overall experience felt akin to reading a great book but that’s not to say it isn’t a visual feat of the highest caliber. See this in a movie theater, in 70mm preferably. Just try to see it with someone who loves to overthink, analyze and possibly be okay with the fact that through what Oppenheimer has achieved, it may in fact lead to our own extinction. It is a profoundly devastating film in a way, but we never get to see the effects it had on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we mainly just feel the impact of what happens when one becomes the destroyer of all worlds.
