It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
No way. Indy and MI were both far more enjoyable to watch.
They were both very enjoyable. But Oppenheimer is filmmaking at its very best. It's an extraordinary accomplishment.
I'm a big fan of Nolan, but I don't think this film is. There are 2 decent scenes in the entire 3 hours. The first is the Trinity test, and the second is when Murphy delivers his speech and starts to imagine the blast.
Nolan copped out on the most important message of the film (the devastation and aftermath of the blast), and instead chose to focus on some pointless BS for the last 45 minutes which felt absolutely meaningless in comparison, between Murphy and Downey. Totally irresponsible as a filmmaker.
I actually think this is one of his worst movies, along with Tenet. By his track record recently, he is slowly going downhill.
Might as well debate over whether THE GODFATHER PART II or THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN was the better film of 1974.
Whoops, sorry, I got your point @MakeshiftPython.
Oppenheimer, a 3 hour, very dense and deeply intelligent drama (with an amazing script, stunning filmmaking on all levels, and an "A" list cast, all working at the top of their games,) has drawn huge audiences (far above the estimates) and also a very high Rotten Tomatoes score, while making over $100 million in the US alone in 5 days. This is a good day for original and intelligent filmmaking.
You may or may not get Oppenheimer or appreciate the filmmaking craft or the brilliant acting, or even understand Nolan's film and its themes, but audiences worldwide (possibly bored by the endless superficial stories we are being fed, while our world is in serious crisis) are showing up for the film, a film which is not an established franchise and bravely deals with very serious issues. Sorry if it's not "enjoyable " enough for some of you, but, guess what, courageous filmmaking pushes the envelope and makes us think, even if we don't want to think.
Perhaps Oppenheimer requires a bit of hard work and some focus. Every film or story is not just about "fun" entertainment.
Indy 5 and MI7 are, IMO, great entertainment. Oppenheimer is something else entirely.
Nolan is a working at a very high level and he's in another league to most filmmakers.
Both are equally great films, in their own right.
Unfortunately Oppenheimer isn't a great film as an adult drama.
Well, Oppenheimer's brilliant box office (way above the estimates) and the audience and critic reactions do suggest you are on the outside. Hey, you simply just get it. That's okay.
Unfortunately this film delivered on none of this. Nolan ducked out of `pushing the envelope' and focused on a stupid meaningless aftermath story about whether Opp was a commie or not, instead of the horrific one which is Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In the last 45 minutes of the film, Nolan spectacularly loses his audience.
To me, he failed as a responsible filmmaker (and when I say filmmaker, I am putting him in the same bracket as someone like Stanley Kubrick or Alan Parker, and not some popcorn director like John Woo).
Did he?
You are missing the point. It's all about the aftermath. And where we are now.
A 9.0 metacritic user score suggests he, in fact did not. User scores typically drop with weak third act movies, as your most recent memory of the movie is a bad one if the third act is bad. So Oppenheimer must be a satisfying conclusion (I haven't seen it) or at least hold the line with the rest of the film.
I got his point. I just don't think it was a strong enough one.
It wasn't an effective aftermath to terrify the audience, and it didn't deliver any message about where we are now either.
This film should have had the effect of scaring the hell out of every living person who sees it (including politicians) to ensure we never hit nuclear warfare. It needed a few shocking, sickening images to strike the message home, and a few captions at the end too before the closing credits.
Nolan has captured a global audience, and so he should have used it effectively and responsibly, instead of sending the audience to sleep for the last act of the movie, by indulging in something that only he was interested in seeing.
Chill out. You didn't understand the film. That's not a problem. Most audiences are engaged with this story. You are not. Big deal. Live with it. And chill out.
I probably sound more bothered than I really am. I guess it’s disappointment more than anything, as I had such high hopes for this film as I’m a huge Nolan fan.
And no, I wasn’t disappointed because there wasn’t enough action or spectacular effects. With this type of subject matter I expected more from such a genius filmmaker
This is a very valid point. We see no archive footage or photos of the aftermath of the Hiroshima or the Nagasaki bombings. Not even the blast. And like the Trinity test, I was missing the sense of scale and havoc. Yes, most adult people are in the know about all this, but if you want to send a powerful message Nolan should have gone with number one rule of filmmaking: show, don't tell.
This.
It makes the failure of Indy 5 all the more embarrassing for Disney.
I'm just rambling but you get my gist.
Or one can simply say: I understand these are greatly loved films, but it just wasn't for me.
Ee gahds! I'm sorry. I have absolutely no idea how I did that. I edited it.
Ah no problem, I thought you were responding to me. It's probably because of that bug where the forum software saves all of the drafts, even to stuff you've already posted - I'm always having to edit out stuff I quoted previously! :)
And I certainly won't spend extra money for a metal box ("steelbook") or that kind of nonsense. I don't care how the disc is packaged as long as it is protected, and it sits in my shelf without having anyone looking at it until taken out for a view, and so the usual plastic casing is fine.
Another thing I'm not going to do is subscribe to a streaming service. I like physical media so far.