Every Critic LIED. Oppenheimer is OVERRATED - Movie Review

Christopher Nolan is one stubborn man. He refuses to address the flaws in his scriptwriting, I presume due to the money his films make, and so we continue to get the same issues everytime. Exposition instead of characterization. Disjointed editing as part of some lame mind game instead of a solidly crafted picture. Good, but shallow performances which are never given time to breathe.
Cillian Murphy and a vast supporting cast all do a good job. But the Nolan-esque approach to this subject matter ultimately holds the film back from being truly great upon careful examination. What went wrong and what went right? Watch and find out more.
Follow me on Twitter: / criticalaussie

[@megatanokyojin1481]

people think that liking oppenheimer makes them smarter

[@shrin210]

No you can hate it. It was politics movie and not a scientific movie. I don't know if watching a political movie means who watches it is smart. But it was not a movie for you. For me it was 10/10 experience

[@shrin210]

@@artandarchitecture6399 I didn't say I was smarter. I saif This was the best political and internal conflict movie made.

[@to6955]

Exactly!!!!!!

[@leob4403]

​@@shrin210no it's not the best political and "inner conflict" (whatever that means) movie ever made

[@shrin210]

@@leob4403 Then what is political movie according to you 😂

[@marygamble9013]

thank god, i feel like the entire world is trying to gaslight me into thinking this was a good movie

[@harryh.r.9082]

Yeah, like, people really looked at me and said "Did you expect an action movie ? "... No, my favorite series is MAD MEN, I was expecting clever dialogue, silent drama and delicate storytelling... That's ALL lacking on the film, dialogue is either bland or too brash, the atomic impact is lacking both visually and emotianally... And the pacing of the movie is all wrong... WTF was the need for mixed timeline and confused editing... Some directors are not the TARANTINO they think they are..

[@ahmedshakib3883]

I agree this , is very over rated , very boring film , sad to see Nolan going in this direction.

[@3brenm]

​​@harryh.r.9082 im not convinced tarantino would make a very good serious biopic either tbh. Tarantino is a genius at a very specific type of film. But i agree with you on pretty much every point.

[@Jupa]

@@3brenm Nolan is a failed child of Tarantino and David Lynch, that has the budget of Spielberg and a following as loyal as Scorsese. But he doesn't have the talent or the creative execution as any of these directors, and shouldn't be enrolled to carry films that these directors would be better suited. He has his own niche that was exemplified in Memento and Dunkirk. He shouldve stayed in that lane.

[@gavinallen5176]

Y'all could not be more sideways. 10/10, fantastic fuckin movie. Go see it in 70mm IMAX and tell me I'm wrong

[@diycreateclub6924]

Entire movie felt like it was trying to be over intellectual

[@no_one161]

yesss

[@shrin210]

It was a personal struggle movie. Not every movie is for everyone is what i understood after this.

[@mr.gamerkabir8142]

@@shrin210 why didnt it include bhagavd gita in oppenheimer life? that book is as important as bible was in newton's life

[@shrin210]

@@mr.gamerkabir8142 Ask directors? Its Westerners insecurites

[@seriousnesstv7902]

I’m disappointed that they thought a sex scene was more worth showing than the actual destruction of the Japanese cities.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Good point! I laughed out loud because you're so very right. What a bizarre choice. More time is spent making us feel sorry for Tatlock's death than a Japanese massacre.

[@dexterliden]

The movie is about Robert Oppenheimer, not the atom bomb…. Hence the name…. “Oppenheimer”……………

[@dexterliden]

@coralice6263 are you implying that you didn’t understand what type of person Oppenheimer was? Or are you saying that his character wasn’t interesting?

[@dexterliden]

@coralice6263 I haven’t seen I Tonya, but I understand your point. However, that opinion is very personal, because for example I actually believe the opposite. What made me love the movie was precisely how the character Oppenheimer was portrayed, and how he interacted with his struggles in life and the people around him. And this is not to mention the best part about the movie, the soundtrack and the atmosphere.

[@pseudonymousbeing987]

​@@TheAussieCritic Oh so you're just stupid. That's ok darling. There's no need to try to understand the point of something you're watching is there sweetie

[@jaysonp9426]

To be honest, I've lost respect for Nolan. The hype for this movie borders on a scam

[@leob4403]

Still the gullible sheep are in majority so there's nothing you can do unfortunately

[@roquefortfiles]

It does indeed. Now they're awarding this over hyped movie. But that's what the industry has turned into. The films are so sub par that the minute anything with a huge budget comes out it is instantly seen as "Important" regardless of how good it is.

[@youtubeviolatedme7123]

Watch the movie _Judgement at Nuremberg_ instead. It handles the tragic nature of people trying to escape the consequences of their actions with so much more class than Christopher Nolan could ever dream of.

[@roquefortfiles]

@@youtubeviolatedme7123 Watch an interview with Oppenheimer. There's one on youtube. Murphy might have looked the part but he behaves and sounds NOTHING like Robert Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer moved slowly. He spoke in a very calm measured way.

[@youtubeviolatedme7123]

@@roquefortfiles I think Cillian Murphy's acting was serviceable in some scenes more than others. Like you said, his voice doesn't match the real Oppenheimer's, and Murphy's body language would be too assertive sometimes. But even when Murphy was doing an okay job (usually in scenes where he didn't have lines of dialogue to deliver), Christopher Nolan's choppy editing, handheld camera movement, and frenetic cinematography just didn't give Murphy's acting the room it needed to breathe. Nolan wasn't making deliberate artistic choices as critics will proclaim, rather it's just the only way Christopher Nolan knows how to make movies, because that's how he directs every single movie he makes. And before Nolan used IMAX, it was even worse. Batman Begins, for example, is visually one of the ugliest movies I've ever seen, and fortunately the excellent script redeems the movie. Seriously, the scene where Bruce's parents die is so poorly shot I nearly threw up.

[@44lucas]

So I wasn't the only one who thought this was a hollow movie? What a relief. The whole story evolves around mathematicians and physicists cracking equations and taking about maths problems, but not a single scene shows that. All the characters were scripted as two-dimensional and there is a total lack of emotions even in the most poignant moments (with one exception in the last minutes of the film). What an overhyped piece of mediocracy.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Exactly right! Nolan isn't known for creating rich characters and it is once again on display here.

[@leob4403]

​@@TheAussieCriticwith exceptions Insomnia and Prestige I would say. Al Pacino had a really interesting suffering cop character, and then Christian Bales character in Prestige was an interesting concept

[@OhHiMark2004]

I've never understood the hype surrounding Christopher Nolan. His films are decent, but not masterpieces. I think it's a huge exaggeration that some people put him on the same level as Kubrick.

[@biohead66]

Tommy Wiseau is a more interesting director than Nolan.

[@benpoke]

To be fair Interstellar is pretty good but yeah I agree most of his other films are average at best.

[@OhHiMark2004]

@@benpoke His films are good to mediocre, none of them are really bad. As an old scifi fan, I also liked Interstellar, but it had its unnecessary lengths and a little more exciting plot would have been good. I have only seen each of his films once or twice, for me they are not cult masterpieces. My personal opinion, which of course everyone can see differently.

[@anonymousanonymous-nt8ls]

Interstellar was almost perfect. Everything else is cringe.

[@IBleedBolts]

How many scenes do you want with slow, suspenseful music? Yes.

[@bcdside]

I cannot believe the monotonous score for this film was nominated for an Academy Award, but the classic scores to films like “Back to the Future,” “Jurassic Park,” and “Edward Scissorhands” weren’t.

[@LowDinksHijinxPickleball]

@@bcdside I had to tap out after 30 minutes, mostly due to the score - constantly screaming at you to be moved to a teary slow clap, regardless of the actual contef the scene. What a mess.

[@djstarsign]

@@LowDinksHijinxPickleballthis was my biggest gripe with the film, aside from the terrible pacing and over-reliance on montage instead of fleshing out characters we become invested in. The music was so loud in the mix, and so incessant. I was bombarded by constantly being reminded that I was watching a production of actors, editors, music composers instead of getting lost in the story itself. I watched The Day After Trinity and I found it ironic that a a low budget documentary about the subject had more heart, emotion, and resonance than the biopic. This movie annoyed me on multiple levels and after the huge disappointment of Tenet, Nolan seems to make cinematic movies where plot and story take a backseat to production, editing, and technique. It felt like a 2hour long movie trailer with a 1 hour courtroom drama about a character I never cared about. The best part of the movie was Emily Blunt in the interrogation scene.

[@LowDinksHijinxPickleball]

@@djstarsign Dude, seriously! I feel like I'm in the twilight zone or some shit....everyone in my family is telling me that "i'm an odd duck" for thinking the movie was heavy handed in it's pacing and score. Fuck this movie for gaslighting me! Nolan's the crazy fuck who mandates a schizophrenic narrative framework whether it serves the spirit of the film of not. I'm crazy? Nonono, Nolan needs to tell me why he thought Oppenheimer would be a great canvas to repurpors the narrative gimmick of Memento. How is it not a totallly unnecessary mental chore? What purpose does it serve - except to hold a few of our neurons hostage? If I'm constantly trying to parce out what exactly happened in a linear historical sense at a low level in the back of my head, then i'm not fully able to become invested in scenes on an emotional level. Let alone enjoy the movie. So what can justify that? What's the payoff? I just couldn't care, and sensed they knew that I didn't care, and that was why they were battering me over the head with the score: "WE KNOW THIS IS GETTING CONFUSING BUT WE NEED YOU BACK AT A 11 OUT OF 10 EMOTIONALLY FOR THIS SCENE FEATURING TWO GUYS TALKING IN AN OFFICE. ACTUALLY WE NEED YOU THERE FOR ALL THE SCENES OKAY JUST STAY WITH US UP HERE AT "NERVOUS BREAKDOWN" C'MON A LITTLE LONGER JUST UNTIL WE SWEEP THE OSCARS. THIS IS CINEMAAAA!" Fuck this movie. Fuck it right up it's stupid ass.

[@twisterwiper]

The emperor has no clothes on. It is an incredibly boring courtroom drama, with a grossly misleading marketing campaign tricking the audience into believing it’s about the development of the bomb. A missed opportunity, imo. What was the big point about filming this dialogue-heavy film in IMAX anyway?

[@ThroughMyEyes2020]

It's all part of a shady marketing campaign called Payola. Notice on the praises how they tell people to watch it its a masterpiece and to watch in 70mm imax. People drove hours to watch a 70mm snoozefest that is only good for treating insomnia.

[@fparnaby8366]

Nicely put. Suspected this would be a pile of pretentious tripe, groaning under the weight of its own self-importance, so good to hear it confirmed.

[@TheReeelBradPitt]

Everyone said you had to see it in imax, but for what? For extra crisp dialogue? A regular theater viewing will do just fine

[@youtubeviolatedme7123]

This movie can be replaced with _Judgement at Nuremberg_ easily. At least that movie lets you know early on that it's a courtroom drama, so you know what you're getting into within the first ten minutes, and you can quickly decide whether you're onboard for the ride or not. But the movie _Oppenheimer_ keeps dumping exposition with the constant promise that something interesting will happen, and then nothing ever does. Even the fact that Oppenheimer is shot in IMAX promises that the full screen will be used to offer more information, because the visual stimuli cannot be contained to 35mm or whatever, but instead the 70mm was mostly used for extra negative space to emphasize what you can already see on the screen with an 16:9 or 1.85:1 aspect ratio on your TV screen at home.

[@purdysanchez]

I can make this movie 10x better simply by deleting every scene shot in black and white. Nolan tried to combine two completely different movies and one of them sucked.

[@the-boy-who-lived]

Well, just because few did not like it, does not mean it sucked. Many likes this Nolan's complicated storytelling

[@purdysanchez]

@@the-boy-who-lived, most of the technical aspects were great during the "C-SPAN bureaucrat" plot line. However, the writing, editing, and subject matter were not. It's essentially an hour and a half of people reading transcripts of extremely repetitive depositions with taiko drum, car chase music.

[@the-boy-who-lived]

@@purdysanchez I appreciate your opinion. But it is always a subjective matter

[@purdysanchez]

@@the-boy-who-lived, obviously. You can say Taylor Swift plays brilliant songs, and musicians are free to say her music is juvenile. You can say Frank Zappa is the best and successful producers are free to say his music is too weird.

[@meandme3423]

I remember the scene where tatlock made him read sanscrit while riding him made me laugh. It felt like it was written by a teenager. Like we need to show that they are just quirky and smart like that. Reading ancient religious text turns them on.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Agreed! It was a terrible idea and it destroyed any power the "I am death" line had during the trinity blast for me.

[@Jupa]

@@TheAussieCritic Now I am become death, the destroyer of that ass

[@finger2365]

Bro i took my sister to see it and im hindu and when jean was holding geeta which is religious text while having sex was so embarissing they wasted that lin

[@TheAussieCritic]

Absolutely! Oppenheimer had such high regard for the Hindu texts, so I don't know how they thought it was a good idea to be so uncouth. @finger2365

[@diycreateclub6924]

What a disrespectful way to handle this religious book

[@OC3707]

In my opinion, it was one of the worst films I've ever seen in my life of fifty plus years. The explosion looked horrible also.

[@TheReeelBradPitt]

I think Nolan just recorded himself throwing lighter fluid on a campfire, put it in slowmo, and called it a day

[@leotardbanshee]

They could have colorized some old atomic bomb test footage and it would have been better

[@SolarJakee]

I uniroincally agree. I feel like the whole world was hypnotised into believing it was a masterpiece because it had all the hallmarks of one, but the execution was a disaster.

[@anthonytimpson4975]

the Nolan editing kills me. Just follow a frigging normal sequence of time for once. Also shame on Nolan for not using actual footage of trinity. his explosion looked like a gasoline explosion at the completely wrong scale.

[@lensw0rld633]

It's the rare occasion I actually would have preferred CGI over practical effects. The camera has to be placed close and it messes the effect up

[@AllegedlySpiffy]

This is accurate. If you look at old footage of nuclear detonation tests, what we saw in the film was nowhere near that.

[@codedlogic]

Chris and his brother Jonathan write their stories out of sequence to try and mask their weak writing and inability to focus a proper narrative. Nolan may be a brilliant film maker but he doesn't seem to understand the most basic and essential tenant of writing - narrative completion.

[@gothelvis3541]

All the best bits were in the trailer and I realised half way through, oh crap this isn't gonna get any better

[@TheAussieCritic]

Very true

[@JustinTaylormade]

The movie was a three hour trailer

[@xxsilentreatmentxx]

​@JustinTaylormade yes it had no actual scenes to really draw you in. Just constant music played over quick endless cuts. And when you say you don't like it people claim you're stupid and wanted more action. Uh no if anything I wanted it to be a lot slower

[@wmsstuff271]

"When the man himself is boring and uninteresting, focus on his deeds" - Me. They should have told the story more of the bomb, the war, it's construction and the conseqences and how Oppenheimer tied into all that. Focusing on shit like his security clearance for most of the movie bored me to tears.

[@babs420th9]

You read my mind. Thank you, sir! 🌷

[@mra2316]

@@babs420th9the movie is called “Oppenheimer” not “the bomb”

[@dexterliden]

“Should have”? No, they shouldn’t have. Just because you want another action movie, on top of the thousands we already have, doesn’t make Christopher Nolan required to make one😂 If you want to learn about the Second World War and the atom bomb and it’s consequences, literally go and watch the hundreds of different documentaries of that. Hopefully you hear how stupid your comment sounds…

[@bcdside]

This is why I prefer “Fat Man and Little Boy”.

[@anrick1362]

@@dexterlidenwhat makes you think he wanted another action movie? He just thinks the movie focused too heavily on uninteresting topics. I swear, the people who defend this movie act so damn pretentious and are so quick to talk down to anyone who didn’t like it.

[@amy_yoshikawa]

One thing you really forgot to mention and that's the word 'Pretentious' This movie was a very pretentious historical drama. Else i have nothing to say about it since you had mentioned most of it and i agreed with Majority of the comments here. Happy to see I wasn't the only one.

[@getyaboogieon]

It's like every other Nolan film. Visually and aurally stunning, artificially tense throughout, edited by, and for, overstimulated adhd brains, and filled with NPC's that relate in a completely unconvincing way.

[@dexterliden]

Edited for overstimulated adhd brains… hmmm… last time I checked, the main argument against Oppenheimer being a good movie was that it was “boring” and “too long”. Doesn’t that entail that the critics of the movie have the “overstimulated adhd brains”? Such as yourself?

[@leob4403]

No, he did some very interesting movies, insomnia, prestige and Inception. But he made even more pretentious overhyped drivel, I think his last movie that held up was Inception 14 years ago. Interstellar had some interesting elements but ultimately didn't work as a story

[@tinaleigh70]

You articulated perfectly the frustration I felt watching this. Thank you…thank you…thank you.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Glad to hear!

[@dexterliden]

Frustration?😂 Are you… angry… at a movie?

[@leob4403]

​@@dexterlidenit's not just a movie though is it, this and Barbie were some pretty major cultural events, that people talk about to this day

[@dexterliden]

@@leob4403 well no it quite literally is just a movie. Sure it had a big impact on society and is to this day discussed. I just thought it’s funny how you can get frustrated at a movie

[@leob4403]

@@dexterliden that doesn't make any sense. You know the Bible is just a book? Why do we talk about inanimate objects? Can inanimate objects tell us something about humanity maybe?

[@6Churches]

'Pure cinema' in Nolan's hands becomes a film that is imperceptibly different from a three-hour long trailer for an actual movie.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Exactly right. All pure cinema is like this IMO. I don't think it's bad to have movies which eschew conventional storytelling, but I don't think it works for a biopic.

[@fparnaby8366]

Brilliantly put!

[@Foxymusea]

Great review, I was searching for a critical point of view with more knowledge then myself that could put into words the frustration that this movie left me with. Oppenheimer was supposed to be the main focus here, but we are left with so little info about: why he wanted so badly do build this bomb, when so many of his colleagues refused to, his personal struggles with this duality before, during and after the construction, it's so unclear. How he felt about his family, he abandoned his child at some point, it's not clear to whom, for how long and how that affected him. When his lover died he was suffering?!?? that was surprising, nothing in the movie let us know that she was important to him. The process, he needed clearance? For what, what that implies, why he cares? Why we should sympathise with him if he does not have it? And I have another serious question for anyone, especially for those who thinks this movie is a masterpiece. If those bombs would have fallen on your hometown during that period, would you be happy on how this story was portrayed? Would you think that the ethical and moral part was sufficiently explored and addressed?

[@clangsison]

i didn't like the editing.

[@swegatron2859]

It was so unnecessary, a linear storyline would’ve made it so much better

[@Grimm91]

It’s a boring movie about mass murderers.

[@brovawinston]

The Editing to me was the Worst Ive seen in Years and Im a Videographer and Like Nolan for the most part. It felt like a Music video the way it cut over and over. I rarely rate a film while watching it but this was so bad to me I ended leaving more than halfway thru it. I forgive Nolans mistakes a lot but this time all his mistakes were so in your face I just had enough. That's not mentioning nudity that pops out of nowhere simply to make the film more risque. My least favorite Nolan film

[@TheAussieCritic]

Very true! I think if you took most scenes and edited them linearly then you'd immediately improve the story. Not every film needs to play with time.

[@brovawinston]

@TheAussieCritic right, they had good elements, good casting, it just was not put together right at all to me. I was supposed to take someone and they couldn't make it and I was Glad they didn't come. I felt like I was watching a Trailer that never ended instead of a full film. Its so much bouncing around I couldn't care less about the woman who died he used to date, nothing. I have defended Nolan for years but this had me like I can see what yall talkin about here

[@TheAussieCritic]

😂 Yeah, the death of the girlfriend didn't hit me either!@@brovawinston

[@3brenm]

​@TheAussieCritic the death of his ex was just a blessing as it was one less robot character to keep track of.

[@vengeance4566]

Take your meds, this movie was edited to perfection with past, future and black n white scenes perfectly organized. you probably didn't even catch that lmao

[@gernermale4612]

it feels like i watched a 3 hour long trailer instead of a movie

[@brandonperlow9091]

Thats what my brother said too. Totally on point.

[@amy_yoshikawa]

Exactly! That's what I really felt too. Waiting for character development and already 3 hours pass by and Really? That's what I got.

[@ThroughMyEyes2020]

Oppenheimer was so bad i liked the Barbie movie lol

[@marklewen9384]

Downey's performance was AVERAGE and forgettable..

[@swegatron2859]

Yea the constant jump cuts broke the immersion in every scene, there was rarely more than a minute straight in a single scene

[@alapandas6398]

Oppenheimer is a very good movie, but this sweeping awards at the Oscars over better movies seems so unreal to me.

[@robotpanda77]

I came to this review expecting all the comments to be calling you out for not liking it but instead they seem in agreement. Nice to see that some of us still have our heads on straight and arent caught up in the group mindswamp. Thank you for also not mentioning the barbie movie.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Glad you liked it and thanks for commenting!

[@Boobalopbop]

Yeah… Its one of those things where you’re almost not allowed to not like Nolan films. Maybe I am old school, but I need a movie to be entertaining. I am not a film student who is really going to sit there and get off on beautiful cinematography alone. If I am sitting for 3 hours, I need it to be great. And its like they knew it was boring so they made it ear splittingly LOUD at some parts for long periods of time to make sure we don’t doze off.

[@FerallHog]

Lot of Hollywood film promotion bots 🤖 out there. It’s obvious when you read someone gushing about this crappy film. It was Awful. Bore fest.

[@3brenm]

It is odd how people get so defensive about this film. I just don't think it was particularly deep, interesting or well written. Cinematography and acting was good, that's about all i can compliment though.

[@FerallHog]

@@3brenm I think it’s a lot of Hollywood bots 🤖 paid to promote it on social media and then some pseudo intellectuals. The film sucked. Friend I was with got up and left 90 minutes in because it was so monotonous.

[@Skanking-Corpse]

Oppenheimer is like a bad action movie where everyone talks instead of punching each other. The constant short cuts jumping between time and characters is a cheap gimmick that artificially creates tension and drama instead of relying on good dialogue and acting. I'm glad some people can see this movie for the overhyped oscar bait that it is.

[@davidmathewson1088]

It is not overrated, that is being too nice. It is a bad movie (4 out of 10 bad). The reviews and positive publicity ARE a scam (on a Goebbels level). It is way too long, boring, at times confusing, staccato acting, no care or concern for either protagonists or antagonists, choppy editing, distracting and weird script choices (nudity, how Einstein was used, etc).

[@TheAussieCritic]

Lol! Maybe you're right. I need to be more ruthless! I agree with you, though, the praise does feel coordinated.

[@cowofthemonth]

Gotta wonder how many people who loved it will stream it and quietly realise that that don't want to continue

[@dookjade3238]

Middenheimer

[@kathleenohanlon6127]

Surely cinematic sound recording and editing in 2023 allows for much clearer and louder dialog over the sound effects that nearly blow audiences out of their seats?

[@TheAussieCritic]

Very true!

[@richardthomas7002]

"nearly blow audiences out of their seats" LMAO there were literally a couple of moments in this movie, where the friend I went to watch it with literally jump in her seat because some unnecessary booming sound on the soundtrack. The film literally had audio jump scares in it, who needs that in a biopic Nolan?

[@nyxawesome9409]

I'll go one level more.. This is a rubbish movie. Dry bland. How Nolan managed complex ideas like inception and interstellar was amazing and on the other hand dunkirk and oppenheimer were underwhelming. The most powerful invention and it's aftermath deserved more. Also, the most awesome lines of philosophy said by Oppenheimer "And Now I am become Death, Destroyer of Worlds!!" (an ardent and open student of Hindu / Indian philosophy) during a tear-jerker interview in real life were unnecessarily hidden behind boobs and raunchy scenes. Oppenheimer's knowledge of mysticism and spirituality and Sanskrit and Hindu philosophy and the reason for an important part of his thinking and decisions was not done justice with, for this crime towards truth and art, we will never forgive nolan.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Completely argee re the I am death scene.

[@mr.gamerkabir8142]

inception idea was a clear cut inspiration from satoshi kon's paprika. Heck even some scenes were downright copied from paprika. Interstellar was a garbage film only attracting those elementary going children interested in science. Had the most shallow characters possible and the idea of relativity and black holes were already 100 yr old and not newer idea that nolan made a movie on that. A father daughter separated by relativity of time isn't a "genius" idea...

[@fabpern]

I let myself be influenced by all those unanimous positive critics and so I had high expectations of it. Now, this scam indeed has to stop and the general dick-sucking chain about it must be broken. All this acclaim is incomprehensible to me. That was sincerely the most awful and painful cinematographic experience of my life and I've seen tons of films! I lost 3 hours of my existence on this overly long, boring, convoluted, chaotic and confusing crap, with its complicated dialogues spit out at lightning speed, thousands of characters whose names and roles you can't remember (and quite frankly don't have the time to give a shit about), way too loud sound effects (I had to cover my ear multiple times), crazy misleading editing and constant jumps around time to the point where you don't know what is when. Furthermore, some scientific principles that were per se not so difficult to understand were explained in an unnecessarily overcomplex way. I thought I was going to die of a brain seizure. And those stupid sex scenes... Moreover, the script in itself is nonsense with stakes you have a hard time relating to, other than the one with the bomb - I mean, who the hell gives a flying f*** about that f***ing guy's security clearance or whether he was a communist or not? Was that worth an hour of runtime? First time in my life that I had to take acetaminophen during a screening (I'm not kidding) and I'd rather have sit on a plank full on nails than watch this 3 hour-long piece of turd. I was checking my watch all the time and I didn't walk just because I don't like to leave a cinema before the end of a movie and because I was hoping it got better but it didn't. The people with me also hated it and from the comments and sighs of relief I overheard from the audience in the theater after it was finally over, it seems the majority disliked it. It's a terribly bloated and overrated flick with an absolutely outrageous propaganda around it. Besides, the actors were not that great either, with for instance Cillian Murphy showing only one facial expression for the entire movie. Emily Blunt was good though. Plus that whole "it's not for everybody"-BS statement that I keep seeing everywhere upsets me even more - it's just a way of saying that this movie is for intelligent people only. There's a near 100% positive consensus about this atrocious film and there are not 100% of intelligent people among movie-goers. It's just that it's trendy to say how great it is and that it makes people "feel" smart. And there's also this other retarded recurring statement which says that if you don't like it, that's because you like Marvel movies. How ignorant must one be to say that? There are other options that these 2. I'm 49, my wife is 39 and my son nearly 19. We're all full grown intelligent adults not caring for Marvel and we didn't go there hoping to see a cartoon. We knew it was supposed to be a serious film and those insane dithyrambic ratings made us expect a real masterpiece and we got something that I wouldn't even call decent. Like another honest reviewer said, it's a good 2-hour movie buried in a 3-hour mediocre one. Lost time can't be given back and feeling physically sick for the wrong reasons plus risking hearing damage because of a movie is not normal. I am never seeing this thing again.

[@GS-ky5ts]

Sigh of relief from my side too. That you covered everything I was feeling after the movie. I felt like I was robbed and cheated on. I felt stupid thinking if I missed something. I wondered why the hell this was an Imax movie and why I wasted so much money on something that I could have seen at home, while sipping tea, that could have helped me stay awake through it.

[@DavePaddy]

Thanks for summarizing up my feelings and thoughts. I've seen it yesterday and in the cinema I was really looking forward for it to end, especially during the utterly boring Strauss sub-plot.

[@fabpern]

@@DavePaddy You're welcome. I'm glad other people sharing these feelings dare to speak up. Because I never thought for a second that this general positive consensus was real. And yeah, that part with Strauss was probably one of the most "who gives a fuck" subjects in the history of cinema.

[@fabpern]

@@GS-ky5ts You didn't miss anything and you had no reason to feel stupid. The film is what it is... Like I said, on top of the wasted money, the time lost on this thing can't be given back unfortunately. Let this be a lesson for all of us! :D

[@MrJJNath]

You Sir just spoke what I exactly wanted to say. Oppenheimer is an overrated bloated 3 hr long piece of turd. Lost 3 hrs of my life that I am never gonna get back. Forget about the bucks that I shelled out to watch this pretentious crap. Cilian Murphy, RDJ, Matt Damon all looked wrongly cast and their performance sucked mammoth balls. The whole film seems to be a sham and we all fell for it cuz of the director who is living on his laurels. I was bored to death, looking at my watch every 10-15 min cursing at myself hoping when this ordeal is gonna end 🤬🙏🤦‍♂️

[@Ragnadave]

When I left the theatre and had a moment to ponder the film...I felt like it didn't leave me anything, it didn't teach me anything. I could've gone along with my life not knowing that a movie like oppenheimer existed.

[@DarkJak]

"This is a masterpiece to those who have seen less than a 100 films" I laughed my ass off, but this should have said "...in the last 10 years" Because this movie brought in a lot of people who rarely make an event of a movie. In fact, if Killers of the Flower Moon swapped marketing tactics, it would go down as best of the decade.

[@rafiahmedsyed8683]

As an Audience, it is not my responsibility to enjoy a movie, PERIOD, I hate that people are being told that this the most epic movie ever and they are buying it like sheep!!!

[@jackgraham3]

Yeah! They should be the type of sheep that buys YOUR half baked shit NOT theirs! Waaaaaa!

[@leob4403]

It is your responsibility to stuff yourself with overpriced candy and pay ridiculous money for tickets to the next blockbuster, if the hype machine says the movie is a masterpiece that's just a fact you have to accept

[@jackgraham3]

@@leob4403 Or… and hear me out. Ignore all that. Go watch a movie, or don’t, and leave it at that. You act like there’s a mysterious evil movie maker clan that sits in dark ritualistic chambers, smoking cigars and wondering how they can fill you with candy and movies made to rot your brain so that they can take over world. Darrrr.

[@hujinom]

I personally believe doesn’t deserve that high score in rotten tomatoes nor to be called a masterpiece, the first part of the movie feels super heavy and dense they wanted to pack so much information in the first hour, the Manhattan project which is the middle it’s really good and the ending feels again heavy the guy uses too many closeups or medium shots and doesn’t allow the movie to le it breathe there’s outstanding things but it also has too many cheesy lines there’s better Christopher Nolan movies than this one, the movie that runs for 3hr feels heavy and dense most of the time which tells me there’s a problem with editing, the good side is that Cillian Murphy’s performance it’s amazing and the score is outstanding as well, having said that you should still see it anyways and judge for yourself ps: I feel that Nolan works better when his brother helps him to write the scripts rather than him writing them.

[@TheAussieCritic]

I think you're right. He needs someone to curb his excesses. As I said, I think it's overrated because it's an average-to-good film being pushed as a masterpiece. But, would a masterpiece violate basic writing rules like "show, don't tell"? Thanks for commenting!

[@robertdouble559]

Disjointed pile of floggery with the most annoying soundtrack since aussie masterchef.

[@itzkhronical]

Waste of oxygen 🥱

[@christopherm6725]

The soundtrack deserves the highest praise. It moved the movie along so well and drove emotions all over the place.

[@luckymark571]

One question, how many movies about the WW2 or the Holocaust do we need? I feel like 10 are released every year 😂

[@the_tax_consultant]

I feel like it said a lot without saying much at all... And it was longer than it had any right to be. The last hour could have been cut off, the story could have left off right where the atomic bombs were dropped, and it wouldn't have made a difference to the overall story. Also, the stakes at the "prosecution" were not high enough to warrant the dramatisation it received lol.

[@chrisjfox8715]

Hard disagree on this one. The last hour was the best and most important part as far as I'm concerned. That's when it truly started to dig into its themes even more

[@harryhughes6124]

I partly disagree. I would probably knock off 30 mins, but the most tragic part of this man is that he built this weapon and then was struck off the record. He tried to prevent the H-Bomb but it was too late bc it was him who inspired the idea of nuclear weapons. Plus to see Kitty stand up for him in the trial was a superb scene. It would have been a crime if this film did not discuss the consequences of the project.

[@Chuckfinlee432]

​@@chrisjfox8715really cause I fell asleep

[@richardthomas7002]

lol exactly. Why was RDJ's character even in the film? Completely unnessary. Instead of going into depth about what OPP did after the bombs dropped and how he lived out his later life, we have this trail regarding a character we have no investment in, other than he is played by a popular actor.

[@stinkystu1]

I had to force myself several times to stay in my seat. This is a very bad movie.

[@Nico-Cruz]

I watched it on the big screen for free and still felt it was a waste of my time. The movie doesn't commit to one main theme or message, it juggles with three simultaneously and thereby fails to deliver. I was honestly excited about the internal conflict a person would feel while making the first atomic bomb and then witnessing the destructive power of such weapon. I ended up watching a 3 hour long story about how a politician was mad at a guy that spent most of his time being petulant, unlikable, and straight up dishonest. And as much as the movie tries to portray him as a man with remorse and qualms, I can't feel sorry for him after knowing what those two bombs did to innocent people, in fact, I wanted the movie to show the effects of what was built towards the end, to bring more awereness to the audience, about how bad things can get when science is not paired with ethics. Everyone that hears me criticize this movie treats me like some sort of heretic...

[@TheAussieCritic]

You're safe here fellow heretic!

[@recetasfaciles2816]

A mí me encantó la película, pero está bien que opines distinto. Nadie debería cancelar a nadie. Por ejemplo yo está agonizando mientras veía Barbie. Me pareció horrible. Era tan poco divertida, como superficial y con una de las tramas más flojas que he visto. Obvio te imaginaras casi nadie está de acuerdo conmigo y quieren llenarla de Oscars. En fin. Te comprendo.

[@TheAussieCritic]

@@recetasfaciles2816 Yo respeto tu opinion.

[@malachilining2730]

What are the 3 themes you think it was trying to juggle?

[@chrisjfox8715]

I don't see you as a heretic but I disagree with you. There wasn't a lack of commitment to themes, the themes were quite literally conflicted. That was the point

[@akashbart2765]

Inception was great, at least to me - but after that, none of his movies really stood out. Not Interstellar, not Dunkir, not Tenet, and now not Oppenheimer. Dark Knight Rises was good - but then again, Batman is a whole different thing than a standalone movie like the others I have mentioned here. Kind of makes me wonder if the praises he receives surpasses his actual work. I cared about Alan Turing in The Imitation Game - I did not care at all about Oppenheimer. Cillian Murphy is a great actor, no complaint about acting, but the movie overall was less interesting than a Tom & Jerry episode.

[@leob4403]

Dark Knight Rises was a story mess though, it had holes all over, I agree Inception was his last movie that fully worked

[@jonahn1841]

I saw it today and I was underwhelmed. Just as you stated it was bleak “JFK” that couldn’t find its core. Probably Nolands weakest film so far

[@nordeltina]

Great review mate, you’re not the only one who left the cinema feeling sorta scammed. I was expecting for a Masterpiece but left with an above average biopic

[@User-sb6er]

Then you dont know true filmmaking

[@christopherm6725]

It was an absolute masterpiece.

[@UseQPixinDune]

@@User-sb6er If a bombastic soundtrack and 3 hours of a guy staring into the distance is filmmaking, then I'm Stanley Kubrick

[@Dale_Blackburn]

It wasn't even average. It sucks bigtime.

[@jaschowdhari3463]

You really want to see biopics , then go watch A beautiful mind, Aviator, The theory of everything , The man who knew infinity , Hidden figures , First man etc.

[@00oa4]

The constant cutting made me want to walk out of the theatre early

[@DrSininsinity]

Nolan is a brilliant scammer, he tricks a lot of people to believe a pedestrian propaganda bro courtdramma is some kind of masterpiece. Kind of amazing. This I

[@leob4403]

He doesn't need to do anything actually. He has a huge film studio and marketing team behind him, and the mass medias and critics are paid off aswell, it's a no brainer this movie will make huge money with marketing like that

[@FantasyYeet]

You know whats absolutely crazy.....had this movie been just marketed as "A Film By M. Night Shaymalan" It would have been ripped to shreds and all the flaws would be analyzed. But nope. Its Nolan, it cant be touched by all the Nolan fanboys. People saying 10/10 or "Masterpiece" are delusional. 6 at best. There are so many movies that I will rewatch many more times than Oppen. This was Nolans worse film next to Interstellar and Dunkirk, and Tenet. Dude has not made anything above a 6 in decades. I can not believe the hype this movie got. I watched it 2 times. Then 1 more to see what I was missing, and still nothing.

[@64kernel]

When "critics" call him the greates filmmaker of our era gives me a grasp of the current state of cinema in Hollywood. Pathetic.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Agreed!

[@eliteworldstudio]

Might I ask you, who is a great filmmaker for you? Don’t see my comment as a way of harassing or trying to blame you, not at all, just a curiosity

[@TheAussieCritic]

Of course! Besides all the obvious ones (Kubrick, Welles, etc) I would say, working today, great filmmakers would include Shinichiro Watanabe, Paul Thomas Anderson, Lynne Ramsay. There are many who have great films but then have average-to-good ones in the mix, but those three have been consistent IMO.@@eliteworldstudio

[@leob4403]

​@@TheAussieCriticcan't agree there, The Master and Inherent Vice were not good movies

[@TheMrfoxguy]

nolan is such a overrated director hasnt made anything decent since the dark knight trilogy Oppenheimer feels more like a oliver stone film than a nolan film

[@joaquinbowen7122]

Steal like an artist, something Nolan has mastered thru his career. The same can be applied to Tarantino, no idea is original.

[@JohnMartin-oh6bf]

Definitely Tarantino.

[@vengeance4566]

Ofc, no ideas are original, there are nothing original anymore, we just doing our take on it.

[@thomasmcshane2438]

The bitterness in your tone is brilliant. You must be a damn true original with creativity coming out of every pore. These directors popularity are driven from the popularity of their movies yet you bash them like their success is a personal attack against you when it’s the people who watch are the ones your mad at

[@joaquinbowen7122]

@@thomasmcshane2438 nope, the video thesis is that Nolan stole some style. Something that’s nothing new in movies, everything that you can think of has been made.

[@leob4403]

​@@joaquinbowen7122with the same logic all music has been redundant since the stone age or whatever, as soon as all 12 notes were discovered, there was nothing else to say musically

[@Chris-hr2uj]

The point at 4:05, is spot on. I agree with every point raised in this video. He's made good movies, but he is by no means extraordinary.

[@TheReeelBradPitt]

The only movie of his that really made an impact on me was interstellar, which is very flawed also, but the soundtrack, visuals, and Mathew sold me

[@brandonperlow9091]

I really agree with so much you said. However I feel he failed in the exposition as well. I was watching the movie at the TCL Imax in Hollywood, and I found the sound mixing very distracting as it drowned out many scenes of dialogue. I had no idea what was said in very important scenes. I actually think we needed to have text with the names and explanations of many of the people since it was hard to keep track of. I think also the switching to black and white with RDJ's character was kind of annoying and jarring. I know why Nolan did it, but it didnt work for me. It felt MTV-Film School-ish. My brother aptly said this film was so jumpy edited, it felt like a 3 hr trailer for a 10 hr series. The nuke was nothing special. It really needed CG enhancement. Also there were over 120 CG artists who didnt get credits for this movie. Maybe they did invisible fx work and set extensions. I think Nolan was trying to push this was a "traditionally" made film too far. As someone in VFX I find this to be very low of him and the other producers to do. I think Nolan is great with artifice, and he can sell it enough to most people as art. As good as Cillian Murphy was, he felt like Tommy Shelby a bit in this one. I wanted more nuance, from the performance, and I think a better script and edit would have helped. I think this movie would be better as a 6-9 hour miniseries with a better cut. I certainly will rewatch it on streaming next year just so I can have captions and actually understand all the dialogue. This movie was a 7/10 for the reasons I feel. Maybe a 8/10 with captions.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Well said!

[@masterroshi690]

Ditto!! The Nuke test was the worst part, all that build up for such a underwhelming reveal. Heck, the bomb that Trump detonated on Taliban was more thrilling to watch than this generic Hollywood gobbdy goo. The real test was so strong that for a moment the sky lit up as if it suddenly became Mid day. Heck, read the reports about people 100s of Miles away who all felt the attack. Nolan is high on his own farts and he can never join the rank of Kubrick, Lumet, Scorsese et al.

[@waveland]

I didn’t even find the sound design compelling, and at least in the 70mm IMAX print I saw, color correction was poor with skin tones fluctuating from face to face in the same scene. The most gripping moments came from Emily Blunt’s two wordless stares, and I would have loved to see more of her dismantling the committee towards the end. And does anyone really care about a pissing contest with Strauss? Not I, and not a top 100 film in my book.

[@danheuser5148]

What an unnecessarily convoluted movie for an otherwise straightforward story. I don't know much about the man (Oppenheimer), so for most of the movie I was thinking he was being tried for treason or some other serious crime, but in reality half the story is just about whether or not he's going to keep his job. Why focus so much on this plot point? Seems like Nolan was just trying to do things differently for the sake of being different. I found the same thing with "Maestro". It focused on a plot point that wasn't that interesting.

[@lacasa3514]

When you mentioned Soy Cuba, I was like "this is my kind of guy." I kept waiting for the movie to delve into the richness, complexity, and nuances of this story. It never did, instead it provided an extremely shallow representation of the man and his story, using references that anyone with only cursory knowledge of Oppenheimer would know. It was like an exposition of Easter eggs for morons. "Ooooh, he mentioned wanting to work in New Mexico some day!! Oooh, I know about that.!! Ooooh, some greasy communist girl mentioned the 'I am become death' quote. Ooooh, I know about that!!!" This was basically 3 hours of uninspired cosplay. Admittedly, I never finished the movie. There was a point at which I realized he's doing a worse job of telling this story than the one already in my head. And I agree, Malcolm X is proof that this kind of film can work, and is much more worth watching than this tableau of "look at the shallow facts you already kind of know".

[@lacasa3514]

To be fair, the 1 or 2 minute scene in the train at the beginning of the movie isn't bad.

[@Resident579]

Nolan always try to make complicated movies while he forget that half of people are not that expert in science and they do not understand science concept which usually boring in school ? Why they would watch it in movie ? People want fun bruh

[@TheKingWhoWins]

Making a film about genocide In war isn't supposed to be fun. I hope the lead in your water doesn't kill you

[@plo617]

I just got back from seeing it. While I didn't dislike it, I didn't think it was anywhere near as good as the hype suggests it is. Also, the movie could've been cut down a bit.

[@starking1187]

The hype misled the public thinking that it is an exciting action packed thriller with many war scenes. People go into the theater with this expectation only to find out it's a 3 hour talking film. So I'm not surprised many are disappointed with it.

[@plo617]

@@starking1187 I wasn't expecting an action packed film. I was expecting a character piece. Even going in knowing what to expect, I was still disappointed by the film though. Though there were some good performances, the film felt bloated and a bit uneven.

[@starking1187]

@@plo617 exactly, people like you going in knowing what to expect felt disappointed. Imagine how those who went it with a different expectation felt?

[@81179venky]

To me it was the most boring Nolan film. I can’t believe he made this. I’ve been disappointed by his last 3 - 4 films but this was the worst. Interstellar, Tenet and now this. Dunkirk was decent. Batman Trilogy his last best. Prior to that all his movies were excellent.

[@6Churches]

@@starking1187 The talking didn't help though. Because Nolan chooses a doubled trial-like-sequence in both the two hearings - it requires the audience to be deprived of a clearer view of Oppie or else our sympathies would be too stacked in his favour. So he largely comes off as opaque and poorly established while the trial scene attempt to paint his life by numbers. It's not satisfying. He sits at the back of the room, mute on the couch for so much of it - seemingly a agency-less mannequin.

[@Overlorddz]

Like every Nolan movie - massively overrated!! Massively bombastic. Because of that, sure it looks nice, purely photographically its a good movie. But it's not even made to spark your attention. Contrary, it's a 3 hour tiktok scroll of a film. The focus shifts all the time. The soundscapes go wild over nothing. And the main character is trying to sound like Daniel-Day Lewis. People call Napoleon a flop but thats because a French story should not sound that US oriented. Oppenheimer makes countless of flaws, some of them just in the photography/editing realm that should not be the concern of criticism even. Nolan makes cartoon for grown-ups, that has been my stance since 2008, even though it looks allright, it's actually just... shite...

[@witchy.business]

I hated the editing so much. All the scenes were sooooo short. Nothing felt cohesive, just constant whiplash.

[@hardnewstakenharder]

I feel like saying you didn't like this movie gets you cancelled.

[@pirocan1]

you're confusing this movie with barbie then

[@itzkhronical]

It really doesn't. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I haven't seen a single person get cancelled because of this. I believe the film was amazing due to my familiarity with the history of Oppenheimer, it added a lot more onto it. They never try to emotionally attach you to Oppenheimer, they only try and show you his existential dread and guilt he faced for creating the weapon. It's a history film, history films aren't for everyone.

[@swegatron2859]

I’ve seen people unironically say people who didn’t like the movie must not understand nuclear physics enough to understand it. The iamverysmart crowd are really clinging onto this movie

[@itzkhronical]

@@swegatron2859 I mean the nuclear physics was very simplified

[@3brenm]

I don't care, i will never watch this again. It has nothing of value except the acting. They didn't even give as any scene with good dialogue about science or ethics.

[@bobcobb3654]

Watched it in the theater, then just recently watched it on Blu Ray. I thought my first impression might have been that I was tired and missed something, but nope. The test sequence and the score were good, but this is a self indulgent chore of a movie that seems to be fixated on filling the screen with as many sociopaths as possible. The closest you get to any emotion is “guy spends 3 years hell bent on making a nuclear bomb, makes it, finds out it was used to kill people, and feels kinda bad about it…maybe?” And then we get a a whole hour of a security clearance hearing that we are told from the start has no real consequences for the protagonist. I get folks fawned over “Barbenheimer,” likely the younger siblings of the people that thought “Bennifer” was clever, but at least Barbie offered up some narrative ideas beyond “Nuclear weapons are bad.”

[@arielmorandy8189]

You bought it…who does that today… 😂

[@arkajyotipathak-md8ml]

When I came out from the hall... I was more anxious about the groceries that was required for the night🥲

[@jrddoubleu514]

There were many content creators/'critics' riding the trend, claiming it was a 'masterpiece'. Gladiator was/is a masterpiece. Pit the two against oneanother and Oppenheimer would be forgotten if watched first, and switched off if watched second.

[@nebulous6660]

I feel like the same can be said for the Dune movies. People who love them call them masterpieces but it has the same monotone stares & underdeveloped characters with a soundtrack that’s far less impressive than Oppenheimer’s. But at least Oppenheimer is about real history & the dumb masses could use a little history.

[@erom1970]

I loved it, but agree it could have been cut down by at least 30 minutes if not more.

[@harryhughes6124]

Yeah agreed

[@shrin210]

Nope

[@dolcevita713]

I agree. Save your money and don’t watch this BORING movie! Worst three hours of my life this year…people walked out of the theater…it was awful one explosion and not even inspirational or thought provoking. Do not expect an action movie they just talk and question this guy for hours….AWFUL!!!!

[@TheAussieCritic]

And the dialogue didn't have the style of a Mamet or Sorkin script. I think this is what hurt those court scenes.

[@nex_ialist06]

Bro probably expected a movie where oppenheimer gets superpowers because of the radiation of the bomb and killed nazis with explosions and linkin park in the background

[@TheAussieCritic]

I clearly explained otherwise in the video.@@nex_ialist06

[@no_one161]

@@nex_ialist06 it's cinema not a book lol... nobody expected superpowers... oversmart people think they like the movie and they are the most intellectual in this world.. a documentary on youtube regarding oppenheimer is better than this movie,.. toooooo boring... courtroom bs

[@nex_ialist06]

@@no_one161 i don't think of myself as more intellectual than anybody else just cause i liked a movie, i just enjoyed that's it

[@seismixx]

imagine if this movie was never filmed in imax

[@TheAussieCritic]

Good point!

[@a1971h]

# Rotten Tomatoes: 93% Official Reviewers 91% Audience Reviewers # Meta Critic: 88% Official Reviewers 8.9/10 Audience Reviewers #Cinema Score "A" grade: on an “A+ to F” scale #Post Trak 93% # Chicago Sun-Times Four out of four stars They cannot ALL be wrong or just complimenting!!! Enough Saying ,,,

[@jaysonp9426]

They're all wrong

[@a1971h]

@@jaysonp9426 😅😅😅 Ok, we shall wait for the Golden Globe and Oscar nominations and wins to join the wrong list... 😂😂😂

[@jaysonp9426]

@@a1971h lol so your idea of right is what everyone else thinks...got it

[@user-wo8wu1yj3f]

They are Masses are Asses Most people are liking it to look like intellectuals some haven't seen enough I dont like oppenheimer

[@user-wo8wu1yj3f]

@@a1971h even nazi made up 80 percent of germany Were they right

[@lonelystranger7114]

I have good memories of watching some of Nolan's movies like Memento, Inception and The Dark Knight. I don't want to revisit them any time soon now that his flaws as a director and story teller have become so obvious now. For fears of ruining them. I still eagerly want to know what Nolan is working next on though. I liked him a lot in my younger years.

[@davidm.9026]

Maestro is a far superior film. Bradley Cooper should have been nominated for Best Director and win for Best Actor.

[@norm-bb3bb]

I don't like Bradley Cooper that much but i think he was better than Cillian, he won the Oscar because this mid movie made more than 900 millions at the BO.

[@brucesekliar5824]

thanks mate..!! i feel relieved and u pinned down almost exact words. I too have seen many movies, all nolan movies . I wasn't expecting anything particular from Opp bcoz i knew it is Nolan movie- his unexpected storyline,non-linear presentation, not expecting bomb-dropping scene or even Japan scene bcoz i know it is not a war movie or atom-bomb movie but a biopic. And even i was not hoping to "undertand" at first watch also. But truely, it is unnecessarily an hour extra movie, bad editing, very high discontinuities(aah Nolan's non-linear storytelling they call which was really not necessary or could be reduced), a lot of talking - a lot; besides Nolan failed to develop a character and even audience couldn't connect with any character - At least in Dunkirk we could connect to the those 3 soldiers and Tom and even that boy in ship. The pianist, A beautiful mind, Imitation game, Genius Enstein Nat Geo(though it is a series) are really good to WATCH THAN Oppen. The First man (Damien-Ryan) had really good character development and connection with the character -Neil Armstrong. But yeah - soundtrack is really good but used at wrong timings, some 2 or 3 scenes are really new and only Nolan could think/create those(Speech scene) also almost all actors were fabulous. not near to zero but an absolute zero need to go to IMAX ;)

[@Sandy23sd]

I think I may have just wasted 3 hours of my life

[@TheAussieCritic]

I know the feeling. It definitely wasn't satisfying for me.

[@SpinoMedia]

I respect your opinion but I must say, this movie took a sec to click for me, but when it did… I quite enjoyed it

[@SpinoMedia]

I also should add, I came into it expecting it to be mostly men talking in rooms.

[@no_one161]

@@SpinoMedia boring af... only few scenes where they created any emotions... otherwise they were mostly talking in the court room... too long

[@roquefortfiles]

OMG what a boring film. Nolan should have just set up his cameras in the senate chambers and side offices because that is all this film is. It could have been a very interesting story about how the bomb was put together. There was absolutely no reason for this to be shot on Imax film. The entire film could have been an HBO documentary. Nolan has entered "Emperor with no Pants" classification on this one. If you've seen the trailer you've seen the film. It is all about the shots that make Murphy resemble Oppie. There's nothing else. And the bomb was a dud.

[@The_Reality_Filter]

I tried watching Oppenheimer but as I was at home and not in the cinema I did fall asleep. Never went back to finish it off because I simply didn't care and still don't. Haven't seen the pink film either.

[@cryptodrummer3430]

boring along the way. Einstein is like a little dwarf coming out from nowhere every 5 minutes. when i saw the explosion of the bomb, my thought was " why they are using CGI from the 90?", not scary at all. and there i understood Nolan failed the movie

[@leob4403]

Einstein appearing randomly was some of the most embarrassing "nerd/geek" fan service since Star Wars sequels and Marvel

[@KIBICKE94]

I wore out after 30 minutes, my wife lasted 1 hour and my 16 year old son agreed to stop the film after 90 minutes. We were exhausted! The editing is horrendous, short clips of mostly uninteresting conversations (the hearings, especially) stacked on each other. Nothing justifies the leaps in time, nor the black and white. It's just trying to show off as intellectual, but it's straight stupid. The characters are just sketches, even Oppenheimer's is dead flat. Do we see any of his struggles, the huge drama that might have played out inside him? No. Actors are ok, although I rarely ever seen a movie where I was conscious about looking at an actor and not the character he is playing. Robert Downey Jr. in black and white with his wig or whatever felt particularly false. Other super interesting characters - Einstein, Gödel, "excusez de peu" - are straight out jokes. But the worst for me was the use of music. It was omnipresent, repeating without pause over the dialogs (without pause either). No rhythm changes, no pauses. Very fatiguing. After 90 minutes I felt like having watched a trailer the whole time. 7 Oscars? It's a joke.

[@dhanushka_liyanage]

I'm trying to get my hear around the idea of cinematic masterpiece. Probably, this isn't the one. This is basically you pay and also waste your three hours for absolute piece of junk.

[@Sharri2008]

I agree with almost everything you said. It's a good film. Maybe one of the best of the year....but not this Century like so many are trying to say. For me, it's one of my least favorite Nolan films.

[@androidmarshmallowahh5035]

The Oscars chose them over better films out there, and one person even ratio me for having an opinion. 🙄

[@TheGoodfella2012]

I'm 15 seconds in and 100% in agreement with you. Nolan is the most overrated director on planet earth. The marketing department for this movies and his PR must be gods from another planet.

[@KIBICKE94]

The first 5 seconds were actually nice, raindrops on the surface of water. I thought it might actually be a good movie. Then at 15 seconds it already went awry 😂

[@colinshaw4592]

Interstellar > Oppenheimer Oppy was a colossal bore. Still, though, it's refreshing to see cinema that isn't the ubiquitous superhero dreck we're inundated with.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Very true! Perhaps this is why it's inspired such zealous support. Everyone is starved of adult drama and are willing to overlook flaws.

[@starking1187]

At the end of the day this is a drama genre film. It's expected to BORING with majority of the film being dialogue heavy so it's kind of reasonable. I do not dislike the film. I just hate how it's so hyped up. Saying that the film is the best film of 2023 and one of Nolan's best work just misleads many thinking thats its an action packed thriller with a lot of bombings and shooting scenes when in actual fact there's not a single war scene and the actual bombing scene only lasted about 2 minutes in a 3 hour long film. The posters of the film is also super baiting with the background being a nuclear explosion catastrophe when the film at the end of the day isnt mainly about the atomic bomb but the life of Oppenheimer.

[@menergy3267]

There are a lot of drama films that are not boring.. this film was boring especially for it rythm that was actually so fast you never get the chance to connect with any of it's characters... Drama's like The Painted Veil for example are more slow and still more entertaining and enyoyable to watch than Oppenheimer.

[@chrisjfox8715]

​@@menergy3267that's just it tho, Oppenheimer wasn't boring at all for many of us. Maybe not you, but I'd be willing to bet money that a majority of the people that call this boring went into it expecting a much less dialogue-heavy film with more "stuff" going on. Me personally, it was pretty much exactly what I wanted and then some - the last hour was my favorite part - and I enjoyed it quite a bit. Not at all boring to me but to each his own

[@BigZ-19]

It’s awful

[@mkultrakill1385]

The cringe intro, blasting music and the regurgitated black sheep / misunderstood student scene told me to not bother. (7 mins watch time total)

[@TheAussieCritic]

Lol! Brutal review. You're living up to your username.

[@nick14730]

Nice review. I was also disappointed by the lack of explanation in theory and visually, as to how they came up with the shape and technical workings of the bomb. All you get are some quick sketches, 2 test of heavy firecrackers and some snap shots of the assembly of the bomb's core. Just like the detonation itself, you can clearly see, Nolan struggles with re-creating the enormous blast, he was lucky they did it at night, so you don't get any visual references from the scene to compare the fire-ball to. But still you feel it some how won't come close to the real thing. And there fore it makes no impact. And if it was to difficult to create such a blast, the shock wave the sand and debris that would be pulled in by the explosion and violently spit out would have made for some awesome slow-motion shots. I think it's sad we now know every little detail from his personal life, but almost nothing of his biggest achievement. (if one can call it that)

[@anthonytimpson4975]

you see bits flying away from the explosion that completely ruins the scale.. it's fucking awful, looks like a gasoline explosion and completely missed the mark as to what the trinity explosion looked like.. we have it on film for shit sake, why didnt he just dress up the actual footage?

[@GS-ky5ts]

Your last line is so on point. I was left so disappointed as I wished they had shown more about the main event - Trinity -- and how everything led up to it from scientific and operational perspective.

[@chrisjfox8715]

​@@GS-ky5tsthat was never going to happen in a mainstream film

[@GS-ky5ts]

@@chrisjfox8715 But what they ended up depicting in the movie -- was also not entirely engaging from a mainstream film POV, no ?

[@chrisjfox8715]

@@GS-ky5ts i essentially agree that this type of movie to begin with isn't mainstream in the Marvel or John Wick sense of the word, but it's also the case that anything Nolan isn't going to be anywhere near high brow in the Atonement sense of the word either. Men in suits discussing politics in smoke-filled rooms isn't a mainstream endeavor yet Nolan is definitely a mainstream director that's going to aim to give anything he does a mainstream flair to pull wider audiences in. In fact, I'm pretty sure that in his mind the very reason he has a tendency across most of his movies to explain the same thing multiple times is that he recognizes the complexity of his topics hence tries to make things as clear as possible for mainstream audiences...perhaps to the point of overdoing it sometimes. I say that to say that he doesn't trust audiences to understand delving too deep into the complexities of science - much like how Spielberg didn't dwell but so long on the genetic science of dinosaurs - especially after the criticisms Nolan likely took to heart regarding Tenet (which I loved btw). And yes I recognize that Jurassic Park is a more playful film. My point is that mainstream directors do their best to keep things digestible. It's a balancing act. As much as I wouldve *loved* a more science-rich experience from Oppenheimer, politics has its complexities too yet is far more based on human nature..which people can relate to. They struck the kind of balance I expected tbh. His personal life and the political machine's efforts to destroy/be suspicious of him WAS THE POINT of the film, not as much the bomb. It's called Oppenheimer, not The Manhattan Project, for a reason.

[@prestely]

thank you so much for this video! I'm glad someone brought the comparison with The Social Network and the womanizer reference aberration. Ever since the movie came out, I was feeling pretty alone in believing this is everything 101 screenwriting tells you not to do.

[@TheAussieCritic]

You're definitely not alone! I think people are overlooking its weaknesses because it made a lot of money.

[@kentuckyfriedcommunist9496]

Personally disagree cause I loved it but everyone is entitled to their opinions

[@no_one161]

Personally disagree, I very rarely dislike films... but this one was boring af...but everyone is entitled to their opinions

[@shrin210]

10/10 movie

[@Ruby-xk8kn]

Its an emperor has no clothes situation where people dont want to admit how bad it was because of all the nolan fan boys are all like "you need a very high iq to understand this snoozefest" . Also bots pushing fake good reviews.

[@3brenm]

Its not hard to understand, its just bad.

[@chrisjfox8715]

​@@3brenmthen why do I disagree with you?

[@utmch2003]

This is probably Nolan's worst movie, least entertaining to say the least

[@ebuzone218]

Fatman and Little Boy the 1989 film about The Manhattan Project, starring Paul Newman, Dwight Shultz and John Cusack is more superior than this latest Christopher Nolan film.

[@TheAussieCritic]

I'll have to check it out, thanks!

[@ebuzone218]

@@TheAussieCritic If it's not to much trouble, please let me know your thoughts on the film once you've watched it. Most appreciated.

[@Account-kx5vr]

Absolutely. I really disliked it. One of the most unenjoyable movies I've ever seen in the theater.

[@schnekec]

For me, it was okay, but the last hour+ of the movie made me wanna dip out of the theater. Also I don't really see the point of the movie or what message it's trying to convey to the viewer. All in all not bad, but also far from where people hyped it.

[@2buckgeo843]

@@schnekec Barbie was even worse too

[@juliabp6057]

@@2buckgeo843yeah. I didn’t like any of those movies, but Barbie is way worse. None of those are “the movie of the year” in my opinion. I don’t doubt the FNAF movie will end up being better.

[@2buckgeo843]

@@juliabp6057 twisted metal show was better than both

[@XYZ-ol6pc]

Even the explosion wasn't that great.

[@angelinashen7813]

The most overrated mediocre director of our time. The last one was Spielberg.

[@-Down-D-Stairs-]

This movie didn't feel like a complete narrative but rather a stream of consciousness on film. Like it was just scene after scene with no through line. It acts like it has something profound to say but ends up saying nothing.

[@TheAussieCritic]

Highly agree!

[@BryanTorresdey]

Once again Scorses proves to be the king of bio-pics. Oppenheimer was never likeable and totally over hyped

[@leob4403]

The Aviator works in all the ways Oppenheimer doesn't. I think Nolan needs to study Scorsese far more before he makes another movie (which he won't do since all the rave, hype and box office has him convinced his feces don't stink)

[@patrickquimmel7032]

this movie will make you angry, and after watching it you want revenge to the poeple that keep telling this is a great movie

[@dexterliden]

Sounds like you are delusional

[@davidmathewson1088]

Yep, I left the movie angry also. Angry that I fell for this "Get Rich" scam. The whole movie industry appears to be in on it, with the unknowing assistance of Nolan's loyal to a fault fans.

[@Jupa]

this film is a masterpiece that will be forgotten about in 2-4 years.

[@juliabp6057]

Just like the Barbie movie.

[@Jupa]

@@juliabp6057 that's cute you should bring that up, as i made no mention of it. i respect the unabashed copium, very courageous. not smart but courageous, like a Nolan film.

[@bigboicheese7365]

bro who hurt you dawg? lmao you got your pussy in a knot you might wanna chill and untangle it, the guy was just saying the barbie movie is overrated too haha@@Jupa

[@e.w3935]

I would say 2-4 months.. Absolutely forgettable

[@harryh.r.9082]

Assuming people will watch it next month ... which is not likelly since its bland/long and confusing..

[@chrisobrien6254]

It was Boring.

[@itzkhronical]

Pay attention next time, because you clearly didn't pay attention to the fact that it's a film about the life of Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb.

[@chrisobrien6254]

@@itzkhronical I did pay attention. It took all my strength

[@itzkhronical]

@@chrisobrien6254 Ah okay, well fair enough. The film just isn't for you then. We all have our opinions and preferences.

[@starking1187]

@@itzkhronical Of course a 3 hour long dialogue heavy talking film is going to be boring. There is no climax moments in the film other than the 2 minutes atomic bomb release out of a 3 hour film. I'm not surprised people found this film to be boring. Maybe next time the media can stop overhyping stuff, calling this film the best film of 2023 & Nolan's best work, giving many people the wrong expectation to what the film actually is, then perhaps people will not feel so disappointed.

[@itzkhronical]

@@starking1187 I never called it boring, people just don't have attention spans for this, or they don't find it interesting. Y'all have gotten comfortable with the action films and everything. I don't even like it because of Nolan bro, I'm not that big into movies, I just think it's a good movie. The trailers accurately shows what the film was but others didn't pay attention.

[@tombraider2500]

I’ve said previously that we have an interesting, important intriguing history turned into a tedious, boring slog. Thank you for your analysis helping me to understand the flaws that contributed to my disappointment.

[@harryhughes6124]

It was probably 30-45 mins longer than it should have been, but you have to realise this film made about $720 million despite it not being an action, superhero or legacy film. It is meant to make you think about the future of our world, not sit back and watch the action and people shooting lasers at each other.

[@tombraider2500]

@@harryhughes6124 Doesn’t change the fact that the story overlooked a lot of the actually interesting science and history. I wasn’t looking for gratuitous violence and don’t need a movie to tell me what to think. What I do wonder is what they spent the hundreds of millions of dollars on.

[@harryhughes6124]

@@tombraider2500 what elements of science and history did the film miss then?

[@no_one161]

@@tombraider2500 It was boring af.... won't see it again

[@TheReeelBradPitt]

⁠@@harryhughes6124doesn’t matter what the message is, it’s not very well written, I’m happy it did so well tho, because at least there’s lots of time and effort put into it, it at least inspires mainstream audiences to watch something that actually has a mature message, without turning them off by dressing it in cool visuals