Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

uujm said:

---

I just got my god damned car washed and it rained on it and I was bored watching this movie.

---

Do you typically like Nolan movies or other dramas like this?

---

DUNKIRK is one of my fave movies of all times

have seen it four times and still awesome

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

It's fantastic.

---

You see it in town, Bunk? If so where if you don't mind disclosing. Looking at options between Cinemark, Premiere, and Star Cinema (I assume the latter would be the weakest but it's also highly convenient for me). Just want the best experience.

---

Premiere imax. Was great.

TCTTS said:

---

If this happens in our showing I might just lose it…

Our screening was interrupted by protestors 🤷‍♂️ at the Chinese Theater pic.twitter.com/Lu6cxkJ2k0

— Save Arclight Cinemas (@SaveArclight) July 21, 2023

---

I would go all George Costanza on idiots like that.

Saw it last night. Truly amazing and need to watch again. I think I missed so much.

I can't tell what they're saying and can't really read their sign. I assume it's climate change people?

Belton Ag said:

---

I can't tell what they're saying and can't really read their sign. I assume it's climate change people?

---

It is this system
Not humanity
That needs to become extinct

According to the Twitter account they claim the movie is promoting nuclear war. So... I'm guessing they didn't actually pay attention to the previous 3 hours and just waited for their moment.

They should try that in Jason Aldean's hometown

Ah, thanks for clarifying.

Belton Ag said:

---

I can't tell what they're saying and can't really read their sign. I assume it's climate change people?

---

Yeah, I couldn't make out what they were hollering about either, but given the subject of the movie, I figure it was an old friend of theirs, screaming about nuclear weapons and how just completely awful we were for even developing them, let alone using them.

Just read that Nolan said Oppenheimer was easier to make because he'd already worked on a similar project around Howard Hughes but The Aviator beat him to the punch. What I found absolutely incredible was that he had Jim Carrey set to play Hughes and said it was the role he was born to play.

I just couldn't see Carrey doing it. The personalities are just wildly different, and I can't see Carrey in anything beyond the outlandish characters he's kind of known for. I know he's done more serious roles, but I just can't see him playing Hughes. I think it would have been either terrible or incredible, but nothing in between.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Just read that Nolan said Oppenheimer was easier to make because he'd already worked on a similar project around Howard Hughes but The Aviator beat him to the punch. What I found absolutely incredible was that he had Jim Carrey set to play Hughes and said it was the role he was born to play.

I just couldn't see Carrey doing it. The personalities are just wildly different, and I can't see Carrey in anything beyond the outlandish characters he's kind of known for. I know he's done more serious roles, but I just can't see him playing Hughes. I think it would have been either terrible or incredible, but nothing in between.

---

Jim Carrey is an excellent actor and I have no doubt he would have played Hughes very well. I know its not an apples for apples comparison, but Jim Carrey portrayed Andy Kaufman very well in Man on the Moon. He became Andy Kaufman for that role and the lengths he went to for that movie are crazy. Theres a Netflix documentary about it. I have no doubt he would have done the same for Hughes.

ea1060 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Just read that Nolan said Oppenheimer was easier to make because he'd already worked on a similar project around Howard Hughes but The Aviator beat him to the punch. What I found absolutely incredible was that he had Jim Carrey set to play Hughes and said it was the role he was born to play.

I just couldn't see Carrey doing it. The personalities are just wildly different, and I can't see Carrey in anything beyond the outlandish characters he's kind of known for. I know he's done more serious roles, but I just can't see him playing Hughes. I think it would have been either terrible or incredible, but nothing in between.

---

Jim Carrey is an excellent actor and I have no doubt he would have played Hughes very well. I know its not an apples for apples comparison, but Jim Carrey portrayed Andy Kaufman very well in Man on the Moon. He became Andy Kaufman for that role and the lengths he went to for that movie are crazy. Theres a Netflix documentary about it. I have no doubt he would have done the same for Hughes.

---

Only need to see Eternal Sunshine to know Jim Carrey has acting chops for the role

moved to spoiler

PatAg said:

---

ea1060 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Just read that Nolan said Oppenheimer was easier to make because he'd already worked on a similar project around Howard Hughes but The Aviator beat him to the punch. What I found absolutely incredible was that he had Jim Carrey set to play Hughes and said it was the role he was born to play.

I just couldn't see Carrey doing it. The personalities are just wildly different, and I can't see Carrey in anything beyond the outlandish characters he's kind of known for. I know he's done more serious roles, but I just can't see him playing Hughes. I think it would have been either terrible or incredible, but nothing in between.

---

Jim Carrey is an excellent actor and I have no doubt he would have played Hughes very well. I know its not an apples for apples comparison, but Jim Carrey portrayed Andy Kaufman very well in Man on the Moon. He became Andy Kaufman for that role and the lengths he went to for that movie are crazy. Theres a Netflix documentary about it. I have no doubt he would have done the same for Hughes.

---

Only need to see Eternal Sunshine to know Jim Carrey has acting chops for the role

---

I admittedly have not seen Eternal Sunshine, but I have seen Man on the Moon. I feel like he's much closer to Andy Kaufman then Hughes as Kaufman was also an entertainer and comedian (though he didn't like the title).

I'm not saying he's a bad actor, he's just not someone I would have ever thought of when it comes to Howard Hughes. Hughes was like the Elon Musk of the 20's through the 50's. Big dreamer, analytical, entrepreneurial... Lots of things that Carrey has never come off as to me or ever played AFAIK. If you asked me who I'd pick to play Hughes, he's not someone I would have ever picked. I just find it really interesting that he's the guy Nolan would have gone with

I don't know if Carrey just doesn't want to do more serious roles or what, but I sure wish he'd have done (will do?) more of them. Thought he was brilliant in Eternal Sunshine.

PatAg said:

---

ea1060 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Just read that Nolan said Oppenheimer was easier to make because he'd already worked on a similar project around Howard Hughes but The Aviator beat him to the punch. What I found absolutely incredible was that he had Jim Carrey set to play Hughes and said it was the role he was born to play.

I just couldn't see Carrey doing it. The personalities are just wildly different, and I can't see Carrey in anything beyond the outlandish characters he's kind of known for. I know he's done more serious roles, but I just can't see him playing Hughes. I think it would have been either terrible or incredible, but nothing in between.

---

Jim Carrey is an excellent actor and I have no doubt he would have played Hughes very well. I know its not an apples for apples comparison, but Jim Carrey portrayed Andy Kaufman very well in Man on the Moon. He became Andy Kaufman for that role and the lengths he went to for that movie are crazy. Theres a Netflix documentary about it. I have no doubt he would have done the same for Hughes.

---

Only need to see Eternal Sunshine to know Jim Carrey has acting chops for the role

---

The Truman Show

"Talladega Nights, I'm never gonna be able to switch that up" 🎙️@richeisenshow pic.twitter.com/ME1T4CkhxS

— Culture Crave 🍿 (@CultureCrave) July 22, 2023

Dude I can’t get an IMAX ticket for Oppenheimer. This is the 6:30pm IMAX 70mm showing for the film… for August 6th… pic.twitter.com/2wtN1tfWDX

— kevin l. lee (@Klee_FilmReview) July 23, 2023

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Oh please. Indy will outgross it with its eyes closed.

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Oh please. Indy will outgross it with its eyes closed.

---

---

Barbie has already made more in a weekend than Indy has done total, both domestic and international.

So how confusing or tough to follow is Oppenheimer?

Taking my wife. She is what I like to call "movie challenged", where twists and confusing story lines tend to fly over her head. She is not a history buff either...probably doesn't even know who Oppenheimer is. But, to her credit, she loved Chernobyl and recently liked Band of Brothers so its not like she can't be entertained by history if the story is intriguing.

I read, without trying to spoil myself too much, that there are different timelines going on and the color/BW was based on perspective and not time. Would knowing something like that going in help? Is the dialogue reasonably easy to follow? Trailers seem pretty straightforward but figured they were edited to be that way.

For a 3 hour movie, it does move fast and depending on your theater can be hard to understand 100% of the dialogue. My wife and I watched the documentary on Peacock a few days before and that helped give a lot of context to what was happening in the movie. Obviously doing so does take some of the "surprises" out of the movie but does help give background information, especially if you say your wife is "movie challenged".

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Oh please. Indy will outgross it with its eyes closed.

---

LOL. Man, it is fun to find these old takes.