Oppenheimer

Barbenheimer, part 2. I wouldn't be afraid to compare Nolan's Oppenheimer to Dominik's Blonde. Both films are adaptations of biographical novels, dealing with generally known topics, bringing back the same stories, the same settings, the same personalities and asking the same questions. Perhaps both films are more formally ambitious, but they don't bring anything new or surprising to the table. Perhaps only the new acting challenges of dealing with images of characters that are culturally rooted and defined. And Nolan of course has the most attractive cast of today, there is no doubt about that. (26/07/2023)

I was expecting another new world adventure and instead got a wildly edited, plodding three-hour procedural with elements of an inside job at the end. All to the sound of monstrously thumping music and artsy black and white flashbacks. I'm not disputing the dense premise, or the decent performances, but the film only has two sparks in 180 minutes. One when the bomb goes off and the other when the camera is trained on Florence Pugh – with or without clothes on, it doesn't matter, both work. (26/11/2023)

I went to the cinema thinking that Christopher Nolan wouldn't make just a biopic. Well, it's basically a biopic for at least the first hour and a half. A bit more playful in terms of working with time planes, but above all, it's audiovisually imaginative and engaging in a way that all those academy-praised films like The Theory of Everything have little chance of capturing my attention anymore. Moreover, Nolan switches gears a little bit in the middle and starts to play a lot more with individual plot lines as well as genres, so that after the more daringly conceived biopic (which looks great in IMAX), Oppenheimer turns into a horror film at times, a psychological drama at others, and isn't afraid to be a courtroom thriller that even Aaron Sorkin would applaud. It's a bit of a shame that Nolan doesn't have more faith in his audience and always ends regurgitating what might seem a bit complex for the unfocused into a few sentences. I'd certainly have liked it if he'd pushed the line about the responsibility of scientists more and generally gone more in depth with the main character himself, but those are just small things. I was entertained by Oppenheimer for the entire three hours, whether Nolan was playing with image, sound, pacing and genres, or sticking to more traditional storytelling techniques, and just spicing them heavily with his audiovisual mastery. (19/07/2023)

Christopher Nolan has made an excellent 3-hour period drama about the making of the atomic bomb with a perfect cast, breathtaking visuals, great dialogue and decently dosed tension, but it's also a very exhausting and challenging film, and I'm not sure I want to go through it again – we all know Nolan makes films that need to be seen multiple times to fully understand them and pick up all the details, but here I just don't know if it will be too tedious a second time around, or if it won't be at the cinema again. I like the fact that Nolan wrote the script himself and got the best of the best for the rest: cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoyte, whose cinematography is simply unique, the music this time is not by Hans Zimmer but by the skillful Ludwig Göransson, who is also a safe bet; and he was lucky in the choice of actors. Cillian Murphy gives probably the performance of his life, which should be awarded an Oscar. It was also nice to see Matt Damon and Robert Downey Jr. (the rest of the famous actors really had minimal space and are rather cameos). The first hour is a little quieter and a little too much scientific for my taste, which I'm not that interested in, but it's simply part of the fabric, just not something I'm downright fond of. With the arrival of Damon and the preparation of the nuke – the explosion is one of the best sequences of the film (unexpectedly) – the tension was palpable, the atmosphere thickened and the whole thing is really very nicely executed. I enjoyed the final “trial”, it was pretty heated, although I expected to be even more blown away, as I love these verbal shootouts, but something was missing. All in all, I am satisfied, it couldn't have been done better, audiovisually it is a masterpiece of the genre, it's just not really my genre and unless I have the need to visit the cinema again immediately, I can't give it a full score. 8/10. (31/07/2023)

Nolan is the Dr. Manhattan of contemporary Hollywood. And perhaps will be for another two decades at least. At the peak of his creative powers, he can afford a three-hour conversation colossus, which subjectively lasts a third less, because the level of precision of all creative components is on an absolute level. Actually, even the most coveted gold-plated statue is completely understandable. And yet something is missing. Perhaps a bit of personal passion in front of and behind the camera. Without hesitation, however, this is the only film by the director that I know I will probably never watch again. PS: Sex in the interrogation room is probably the biggest cringe moment in Nolan's filmography. No debate about it. (24/03/2024)