Hope that's how it's handled.

I'll add that Cillian Murphy gives the performance of his career (up to this point), ensnaring you on the hellish descent of the American Prometheus. But the whole cast is superb with Robert Downey Jr. providing a refreshingly restrained and underplayed portrait of Lewis Strauss.

— David Crow (@DCrowsNest) July 11, 2023

This is so good, and so damn impressive...

Anyone see the sneak peek yet

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Yeah, I'm hoping it's mostly just an engrossing look at what happened and how it happened and not stretching the truth of how it was perceived at the moment. Modern people with a lack of historical background on Japan's ideology and many horrific crimes give them far too much sympathy.

---

I have been looking forward to this movie but I have the same fear about it that you do, and I appreciate you sharing your concern.

My uncle and my grandfather both fought in the Pacific Theater against Japan. My uncle was taken prisoner on Corregidor and eventually died in Japan as a POW.

He was an Aggie and his name is included on the MSC and the plaque recognizing the American defenders of Bataan and Corregidor.

The Japanese, with the complicity of the American Left, have been extraordinarily successful at deflecting the blame from themselves for their role in WWII, so any time some new treatment of the war emerges, I worry how truthful that treatment will be.

The story of the Manhattan Project is fascinating, of course, so I had been pretty successful in ignoring those fears until a few days ago when I happened to see part of an MSNBC documentary on Oppenheimer and the bomb. The documentary was clearly designed to take advantage of the buildup to the new film.

To my dismay, the documentary portrayed the dropping of the bomb using the tired cliches of American "progressives". Japan was trying to surrender. Hiroshima was filled with children, playing in the streets, going to school, dancing together happily (Color of footage of these children. Lots of color footage.). Did I mention that Japan was trying to surrender?

(Some elements in Japan were indeed sending feelers suggesting Japan might surrender on its own terms to a country that it was not at war with--the USSR--and that had no authority to deal with any sort of surrender.)

And then most worryingly of all, there was an interview with the authors of the book Nolan is said to have used as much of his source material.

One of the authors is Kai Bird, who has built a career on arguing that America was wrong to drop the bombs.

I stopped watching because I am very familiar with Bird's one-sided interpretation of the bombings.

I will continue to hope that Nolan's film is not the propaganda that Bird propagates each time he addresses the issue.

Absolutely blown away by #Oppenheimer - my new film of the year. Extraordinary. Just extraordinary. I’m still reeling. pic.twitter.com/uiAlYVNsEn

— Emily Murray (@EmilyVMurray) July 12, 2023

OldArmy71 said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Yeah, I'm hoping it's mostly just an engrossing look at what happened and how it happened and not stretching the truth of how it was perceived at the moment. Modern people with a lack of historical background on Japan's ideology and many horrific crimes give them far too much sympathy.

---

I have been looking forward to this movie but I have the same fear about it that you do, and I appreciate you sharing your concern.

My uncle and my grandfather both fought in the Pacific Theater against Japan. My uncle was taken prisoner on Corregidor and eventually died in Japan as a POW.

He was an Aggie and his name is included on the MSC and the plaque recognizing the American defenders of Bataan and Corregidor.

The Japanese, with the complicity of the American Left, have been extraordinarily successful at deflecting the blame from themselves for their role in WWII, so any time some new treatment of the war emerges, I worry how truthful that treatment will be.

The story of the Manhattan Project is fascinating, of course, so I had been pretty successful in ignoring those fears until a few days ago when I happened to see part of an MSNBC documentary on Oppenheimer and the bomb. The documentary was clearly designed to take advantage of the buildup to the new film.

To my dismay, the documentary portrayed the dropping of the bomb using the tired cliches of American "progressives". Japan was trying to surrender. Hiroshima was filled with children, playing in the streets, going to school, dancing together happily (Color of footage of these children. Lots of color footage.). Did I mention that Japan was trying to surrender?

(Some elements in Japan were indeed sending feelers suggesting Japan might surrender on its own terms to a country that it was not at war with--the USSR--and that had no authority to deal with any sort of surrender.)

And then most worryingly of all, there was an interview with the authors of the book Nolan is said to have used as much of his source material.

One of the authors is Kai Bird, who has built a career on arguing that America was wrong to drop the bombs.

I stopped watching because I am very familiar with Bird's one-sided interpretation of the bombings.

I will continue to hope that Nolan's film is not the propaganda that Bird propagates each time he addresses the issue.

---

Ugh, that's unfortunate to know. I've been hoping it's avoiding preaching on the issue from the progressive left angle (America Bad), but seeing all of these gushing reviews leads me to believe it likely does what is expected in Hollywood and de-emphasizes Japan's ferocity and presents us in a poor light. The irony is lost upon most in Hollywood that the conservatism they despise in their family members and old classmates doesn't even come close to the ultra-conservative fascism that had to be toppled in Japan before the world could move on. Average Hollywood libs can very easily see half our nation as legitimate enemies but can't read enough source material to understand why fascist Japan had to be brought to its knees in the way it was.

That being said, obviously the strategic bombings of both Japan and Germany shouldn't be depicted in some shallow, casual way. I think there is a way to show that it was both brutal and sad but that it was necessary to end a total war against a fanatical society. Two things can be true at the same time.

Quote:

---

there is a way to show that it was both brutal and sad but that it was necessary to end a total war against a fanatical society. Two things can be true at the same time.

---

Exactly so. I agree completely.

I have a feeling this is where the movie will land. I'm reading the book right now and although I'm only halfway through, it seems like the focus is less about the morality of using the bomb in WWII (everyone seems to think ending fascism is good) and more on the "what is this going to unleash on the world after we do it?" question. And from the trailers that seems to be the focus of the movie as far as I can tell as well.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Yeah, I'm hoping it's mostly just an engrossing look at what happened and how it happened and not stretching the truth of how it was perceived at the moment. Modern people with a lack of historical background on Japan's ideology and many horrific crimes give them far too much sympathy.

---

I have been looking forward to this movie but I have the same fear about it that you do, and I appreciate you sharing your concern.

My uncle and my grandfather both fought in the Pacific Theater against Japan. My uncle was taken prisoner on Corregidor and eventually died in Japan as a POW.

He was an Aggie and his name is included on the MSC and the plaque recognizing the American defenders of Bataan and Corregidor.

The Japanese, with the complicity of the American Left, have been extraordinarily successful at deflecting the blame from themselves for their role in WWII, so any time some new treatment of the war emerges, I worry how truthful that treatment will be.

The story of the Manhattan Project is fascinating, of course, so I had been pretty successful in ignoring those fears until a few days ago when I happened to see part of an MSNBC documentary on Oppenheimer and the bomb. The documentary was clearly designed to take advantage of the buildup to the new film.

To my dismay, the documentary portrayed the dropping of the bomb using the tired cliches of American "progressives". Japan was trying to surrender. Hiroshima was filled with children, playing in the streets, going to school, dancing together happily (Color of footage of these children. Lots of color footage.). Did I mention that Japan was trying to surrender?

(Some elements in Japan were indeed sending feelers suggesting Japan might surrender on its own terms to a country that it was not at war with--the USSR--and that had no authority to deal with any sort of surrender.)

And then most worryingly of all, there was an interview with the authors of the book Nolan is said to have used as much of his source material.

One of the authors is Kai Bird, who has built a career on arguing that America was wrong to drop the bombs.

I stopped watching because I am very familiar with Bird's one-sided interpretation of the bombings.

I will continue to hope that Nolan's film is not the propaganda that Bird propagates each time he addresses the issue.

---

Ugh, that's unfortunate to know. I've been hoping it's avoiding preaching on the issue from the progressive left angle (America Bad), but seeing all of these gushing reviews leads me to believe it likely does what is expected in Hollywood and de-emphasizes Japan's ferocity and presents us in a poor light. The irony is lost upon most in Hollywood that the conservatism they despise in their family members and old classmates doesn't even come close to the ultra-conservative fascism that had to be toppled in Japan before the world could move on. Average Hollywood libs can very easily see half our nation as legitimate enemies but can't read enough source material to understand why fascist Japan had to be brought to its knees in the way it was.

That being said, obviously the strategic bombings of both Japan and Germany shouldn't be depicted in some shallow, casual way. I think there is a way to show that it was both brutal and sad but that it was necessary to end a total war against a fanatical society. Two things can be true at the same time.

---

Dude, come on.

You're laying the moral panic on thick and heavy now.

When has Christopher Nolan ever "preached" in one of his movies, or shown any bent toward anything even remotely resembling a progressive left agenda? If anything, extreme left weirdos get onto him for Batman's Bush-era "pro-surveillance" methods in TDK and the perceived "anti-Occupy Wall Street" elements in TDKR. In fact, a number of leftists are convinced Nolan is conservative. Yet, a week before the movie is even out, I'm now reading on TexAgs that he's likely gone all "Hollywood," that Japan will be portrayed empathetically, etc, based on nothing more than a hunch and some reactions that don't at all hint at that angle?

I'm glad you're reading the book. If you get a chance after you finish, say something about it over on the History Board.

He's pretty clearly just laying out his hopes and fears for the movie. And he's not stating any of it as fact. And he's done it politely and respectfully. I think the Sound of Freedom thread has you way too spun up. A deep breath would be good.

Uh oh, I don't want to provoke the TC condescending lecture of the day.

I have have nothing against Nolan and fully expect this movie to be awesome in many ways. This is just a sensitive topic to depict. There is a great middle of the road approach which I hope he takes, but it could very easily pander to Hollywood libs who want every narrative to present America as the villain. I don't necessarily think Nolan would be personally driven to do that, but with Hollywood's climate he'd be risking a lot not to appease that crowd. And you know that.

I guess I just don't see Nolan giving two sh*ts what others think in that regard, since he never really has, so I can't imagine him bowing to that pressure at this point in his career. I could of course end up being wrong, but up until now, at least, he's said and done exactly what he wants, often to the consternation of the left.

Right, but has he handled a topic like this? Not that I can think of. This is one where nuts on the right think we should have dropped 10 more of them and nuts on the left don't understand Japan's regime and think it could have ended more gently.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

Right, but has he handled a topic like this? Not that I can think of. This is one where nuts on the right think we should have dropped 10 more of them and nuts on the left don't understand Japan's regime and think it could have ended more gently.

---

Nolan isn't a nut on the left. The fog of war is not black and white. I think TC can sometimes go a little far in defense of his industry on here, though I totally get it too because it's his passion and livelihood. That said I agree with him that some of yall seem way too premature in this angst.

I also think some of yall are spending too much time fretting, expecting, and maybe subconsciously hoping Nolan goes off the rails just so your concerns can be validated.

While I ultimately agree with the decision to do it after japan refused to surrender when we killed hundreds of thousands and decimated Tokyo + 40 other cities beforehand, it's not an undisputed fact that dropping them was the 100% right thing to do. That's the beauty of history, specifically military history. So many complex elements, both sides are steely in their resolve, one of 1000 things could have changed the course of any conflict.

My suggestion is let the movie play out and don't enter into it with some 100% stubborn position of your opinion of right or wrong because then you'll be hunting for 1 thing to piss you off instead of enjoying the movie. Nolan is the best director of the last 30 years. I'm betting we get a masterpiece.

All I know is that Nolan wrote the script in the first person, from Oppenheimer's point of view. Which is extremely unusual, considering scripts are always written in the third person. It's so odd for a script that I honestly can't even imagine how it reads. My point is, though, more than anything, it sounds like a deeply personal character study, rather than something that even lands on a side at all. I think we're going to be so caught up in Oppenheimer's psychology, and how *he* felt about all of this, that the rest is just going to feel like ancillary noise.

Very well said.

So, like, don't discuss thoughts about an upcoming movie on a message board for discussing movies? Huh.

I'm already prepared to go enjoy this movie one way or another. Even if he goes the predictable Hollywood route, there will still be a lot about it to appreciate. I wouldn't be shocked either way.

There's a difference between "discussion" and preemptively claiming this movie will "likely do what is expected in Hollywood and de-emphasizes Japan's ferocity and presents us in a poor light," followed by finger-wagging at the "libs" as if your assumption is true.

I don't mean to harp, but someone did this *exact* same thing in the Napoleon thread yesterday, automatically assuming it's going to be "woke," and it's just exhausting, that's all. Especially in light of the Sound of Freedom thread and that whole sh*tshow.

You'd be better off if you'd just learn this is a message board that you're not in charge of and people have a wide range of opinions. This is a movie I'm hyped for. I love Nolan's other work, I love historical movies, I'm just worried on this one that the temptation to pander could tarnish an otherwise amazing movie. Hope I'm wrong.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

You'd be better off if you'd just learn this is a message board that you're not in charge of and people have a wide range of opinions. This is a movie I'm hyped for. I love Nolan's other work, I love historical movies, I'm just worried on this one that the temptation to pander could tarnish an otherwise amazing movie. Hope I'm wrong.

---

Seems like you're hyper obsessed with the premise that TC thinks he's in charge of the board. You know there's the possibility that premise is not right?

Pot meet kettle with how you're framing your own posts on this thread.

The difference between myself and TC, actually most users and TC, is that we engage in discussion/debate/chitchat but don't really try to steer conversations, tell people to "read the room", police discussions, etc. I frankly don't care one way or another that TC & Friends don't like certain things being brought up, but it doesn't stop anyone from expressing their thoughts.

Clearly I have not seen the movie yet, so anything I say would be conjecture.

Yes, I do believe that Hollywood is full of leftists. In recent years they have painted pictures of America as a place of hatred - for example, some of the mini-series The Pacific, as well as some Tom Hanks comments, went down that road.

But go back many years and you will find a Hollywood that produced many classic war movies that were oozing with American patriotism. Often these movies were not particularly accurate in depictions of US military forces. That is the other side of the coin that I want Hollywood to avoid. What I prefer is how Spielberg handled this in Saving Private Ryan. He shows American soldiers killing surrendering Axis troops, but other than a disgusted look on Hanks' face, was not preachy about it.

Back to Oppenheimer. I have not read the book upon which it is based, but do find it concerning that its author has such an anti-American bent to his writing (referencing an earlier post about this). However, I have never seen any overt political stuff in any of Nolan's movies. There may have been some subtle political undertones, such as the Dark Knight movies that TC mentioned. In Dunkirk, I thought Nolan played it evenly. There was not any overt posturing that the RAF were the good guys, or that the Nazis were the bad guys. He didn't even show any Germans other than as shadowy figures coming to take the pilot prisoner. All he did was to tell the story of Dunkirk, although he did perhaps get a little too cute with his time views in that one.

I expect that Nolan has taken a similar in Oppenheimer, in that he is telling a story of the development of the A-Bomb as seen through the eyes of the man tasked with building it. Of course there should be concerns expressed about the bomb, as there certainly were, but less so regarding our use of it and more so to the thought of the Soviets having such a bomb. At least that seems to be implied in previews with Iron Man's character.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

The difference between myself and TC, actually most users and TC, is that we engage in discussion/debate/chitchat but don't really try to steer conversations, tell people to "read the room", police discussions, etc. I frankly don't care one way or another that TC & Friends don't like certain things being brought up, but it doesn't stop anyone from expressing their thoughts.

---

You said you think this movie will likely do [X].

I said I think this movie will likely do [Y].

You stated your opinion.

I stated mine.

That's a huge part of what a discussion is.

It just so happens that when my opinion disagrees with yours (and others), I get accused of "policing" the board or thinking I'm "in charge." When, in reality, you just don't like your opinion being challenged, and especially by me.

Except I'm not trying to snuff out your opinion, nor do I think my opinion overrules yours.

It's just my opinion. One I'm stating on a message board. Same as you.

As for the "read the room" comment, there's obviously a history there. I just don't go around telling people to "read the room" whenever I feel like it.

Your tone is just routinely very abrasive and condescending, needlessly. That's your MO. I'm totally ok with anyone on here disagreeing with any opinion I express. Even I claimed that I could be wrong and hope I am. It's ok just to enter into a discussion and simply state why you disagree with no need to be condescending about it. I'm not sure if you recognize that about yourself or know any different.

Good god can y'all not ruin every thread on this forum

This board can be equal parts a delight and equal parts insufferable. July 21st can't come soon enough.

Curious if there's any reference of Klaus Fuchs / Soviet espionage woven into this movie.

Wow I haven't checked on this thread in weeks and didn't expect this.

Let me guess, the bomb is gay? The DP tweeted about Hunter Biden? Nolan isn't vaccinated? What is it now, ya bozos?

So only place in Texas to see this as intended is

AMC Rivercenter 11 & IMAX San Antonio, TX

Cinemark 17 & IMAX Dallas, TX

Houston sucks once again!

Man, Im really excited to see this. Corpus IMAX or Bob Bullock....

Marqe shut down?