Film Review Oppenheimer – An Explosive Story

Director Christopher Nolan doesn’t make conventional films – every one of his films is a cultural event, whether it’s more “mass” spectacle like Batman or Inception, more sophisticated titles like Dunkirk, or seemingly minimalist detective stories. such as “Insomnia”. Nolan has a recognizable handwriting that has been dominated over the years by excellent use of the IMAX format, casting the best actors, or perhaps imaginative playing with time plans. His latest film about the inventor of the atomic bomb is most easily compared to the aforementioned Dunkirk. Compared to the director’s previous war film, however, Oppenheimer seems somewhat more relaxed.

The main reason is that while Dunkirk throws us right into the battlefield of World War II from the first second, much of the action of the new film takes place in classrooms or makeshift courtrooms. Given the theme of the film (the creation of the atomic bomb), of course, there will be a passage that, on the other hand, surpasses everything in both mentioned films in its intensity, but if you are going to see Oppenheimer, expect smart, chilling, touching .. … but also at a slow pace, where the vast majority of the three-hour (actually 180 minutes) frames of the film are dialogues, conversations between scientists, soldiers and politicians.

• Premiere: 20.07.2023
• Director: Christopher Nolan
• Scenario: Christopher Nolan, Kai Bird, Martin Sherwin
• Camera: Hoyt Van Hoytema
• Music: Ludwig Göransson
• They are playing: Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Florence Pugh, Robert Downey Jr., Gary Oldman, Kenneth Branagh, Rami Malek
• Footage: 180 min
• Format: 2D DCP, 35mm, IMAX 70mm, 5.1 sound
• Language version: English with Czech subtitles
• Distribution in the Czech Republic: KinoArt

The theme is definitely strong, and I personally admit that I had a little hope for a repetition of that bewitching miracle created by Craig Mazin in the HBO series Chernobyl: there, from the first to the last minute, he managed to fully squeeze out the unimaginable power and horror of atomic energy, demonstrated to the viewer by a stream of terrible shots , and above all, a completely brilliant explanation of a scientist to the layman – while Legasov semipathically explains the consequences and power of a nuclear accident to uneducated bureaucrats, he actually translates them perfectly for the average viewer. Even those political scenes were very tense and showed the unpreparedness of human civilization (or at least the Soviet Union at that time) for the responsibility that nuclear energy brings with it. Unfortunately, Oppenheimer isn’t quite as good in comparison to this series, partly because of the greater focus on the protagonist’s private life, but mainly because of the somewhat incomplete ideas of individual political lines – their points are rarely as striking as one would like.

Much of the film takes place in classrooms or courtrooms.

But make no mistake: Nolan very effectively makes up for some of the film’s aimlessness and lengthiness with a brilliant production. While it’s hard to get too much energy out of dialogue scenes in interiors, whenever Oppenheimer steps out to clear his head in the vast and beautiful New Mexico landscape, you realize just how huge the difference is between an IMAX theater and other formats. In addition to beautiful images, of course, the film works very carefully with sound, where I repeatedly thought that in the Prague IMAX cinema hall a wind blew or a pressure wave passed. Given the volume and sound vibrations, it probably was. Nolan’s favorite accomplice, Swedish composer Ludwig Göransson, wrote the music again. Unfortunately, again, his music is very impressive in sound and perfectly maintains the pace of denser passages, but it lacks the grace and grandeur of Hans Zimmer’s melodies (although his work is clearly inspired).

It occurred to me that there was a pressure wave going through the Prague IMAX cinema hall.

More astute viewers will definitely be captivated by the portrayal of key characters in the story. Cillian Murphy as Oppenheimer does a great job of showing both ordinary human frailties and moments of disarmingly sharp intelligence – as you’d expect, genius is often paired with madness, and Oppenheimer’s obsession with quantum physics or cosmic energies is very well represented here, supported by both acting and strong audiovisual effects. His film wife, played by Emily Blunt, also made a splash: her reincarnations, disappointments and tears are absolutely convincing in every scene. Florence Pugh doesn’t have much space in the film, but her erotic scene can’t get out of your head (and she adds a useful dose of humanity to the film). Robert Downey Jr. he plays a somewhat thankless role, but like Matt Damon, he is utterly convincing and natural in every scene. While there are many other lead actors in the film, I felt they didn’t develop their relationships enough to get stuck in your head as effectively as the ones listed above.

Oppenheimer is what movie theaters are for. It’s a hackneyed phrase, but it fits perfectly with how few films are so ambitious in terms of content, artistically and technically extraordinary, and generally valuable and unique. Although I found the film to be unnecessarily long and the theme underused (see the comparison with Chernobyl), for the entire three hours I had the impression that I was sitting in a temple of modern art and observing something quite extraordinary. Of course, it helped a lot that I saw the film in Prague IMAX, which, by the way, Christopher Nolan greeted before the film in a addressed greeting with a comment about how grateful he was for the technological sophistication of this Prague cinema. Depending on how interested you are in history, politics, science, or even psychology, it’s entirely possible that you’ll be fascinated by the film even more than I am. But you should definitely give it a try at the technically best cinema in your area.