BCG Disciple said:
Groves - A Nobel prize for making a bomb?
Oppenheimer - Alfred Nobel invented dynamite.
I lol'd.
A good line...but there is no way Groves would not have known that already. They should have given the line to someone else.
*** OPPENHEIMER *** (Spoiler Thread)
65,108 Views |
551 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by The Collective
A good line...but there is no way Groves would not have known that already. They should have given the line to someone else.
It's a hallmark of Nolan's movies, Tenet was especially badHellbent said:
Good movie. Wish I could have understood more than about 50% of the dialogue. I presume that the sucky sound was the fault of the theater in which I saw the movie, but if not, the film's sound engineer should have been fired.
#Barbie might have got into trouble in #Japan.
— Luiz Fernando (@Luiz_Fernando_J) July 31, 2023
After official Barbie US social media account reacted to & interacted with #Barbenheimer content on Twitter, outrage took over social media in #Japan, where many locals are calling for a boycott! A note’s being added over memes!
1/3 pic.twitter.com/7actVyX0I8
Brian Earl Spilner said:#Barbie might have got into trouble in #Japan.
— Luiz Fernando (@Luiz_Fernando_J) July 31, 2023
After official Barbie US social media account reacted to & interacted with #Barbenheimer content on Twitter, outrage took over social media in #Japan, where many locals are calling for a boycott! A note’s being added over memes!
1/3 pic.twitter.com/7actVyX0I8
Meh. Barbie Movie twitter should've said "This summer's gonna be a blast" or "look like things are really gonna blow up".
SbisaVictim95 said:It's a hallmark of Nolan's movies, Tenet was especially badHellbent said:
Good movie. Wish I could have understood more than about 50% of the dialogue. I presume that the sucky sound was the fault of the theater in which I saw the movie, but if not, the film's sound engineer should have been fired.
Definitely depends on the theater. Saw Tenet in IMAX and had no issues with dialogue. Watched it streaming a few months back and the sound definitely was an issue. I have to imagine it's how it's mixed, the compression, and sound system in use.
Ol_Ag_02 said:Brian Earl Spilner said:#Barbie might have got into trouble in #Japan.
— Luiz Fernando (@Luiz_Fernando_J) July 31, 2023
After official Barbie US social media account reacted to & interacted with #Barbenheimer content on Twitter, outrage took over social media in #Japan, where many locals are calling for a boycott! A note’s being added over memes!
1/3 pic.twitter.com/7actVyX0I8
Meh. Barbie Movie twitter should've said "This summer's gonna be a blast" or "look like things are really gonna blow up".
They should've responded with, "That Kenough, Japan."
Well I finally got to see this today, in 70mm IMAX which was just great, visually and audibly.
You guys have hit on pretty much everything great about the movie. One little thing I enjoyed was how contemptuous Han Solo becomes of Strauss once he realizes what he's doing and then makes absolutely no effort to disguise that contempt.
You guys have hit on pretty much everything great about the movie. One little thing I enjoyed was how contemptuous Han Solo becomes of Strauss once he realizes what he's doing and then makes absolutely no effort to disguise that contempt.
His character was basically the audience.
Wait, Pash wasn't the audience for everyone else?
straight up god tier improv, one of the most chilling lines in the movie https://t.co/YnahxOQLeP
— coffee: yu ishigami fan (@theLordeEnjoyer) August 3, 2023
Alex Wellerstein, an historian, has tried to find the source of the notion that Stimson "honeymooned" in Kyoto and has not been able to. He has written an interesting article about Stimson's role in the decision but goes on to say that he has not finished a longer review of the movie and a more in-depth analysis of Stimson's participation in the decision.
One point that Wellerstein does make is that the movie misrepresents Stimson's attitude toward the use of atomic weapons:
One point that Wellerstein does make is that the movie misrepresents Stimson's attitude toward the use of atomic weapons:
Quote:
the movie does Stimson dirty here, in turning him into a dummy stand-in representing "the powers that be" and how much their interests could diverge from Oppenheimer's. In reality, Oppenheimer's positions were pretty well-represented "at the top" for quite some time; making him into an "outsider" here, I think, obscures the reality quite a bit.
I saw Oppenheimer at the Regal Westgate theater in Austin, and I enjoyed it. Christopher Nolan, Charles Roven, and Emma Thomas produced an excellent movie that weaved science, politics, freedom of speech, and communism in 3 hours.
OldArmy71 said:
Alex Wellerstein, an historian, has tried to find the source of the notion that Stimson "honeymooned" in Kyoto and has not been able to. He has written an interesting article about Stimson's role in the decision but goes on to say that he has not finished a longer review of the movie and a more in-depth analysis of Stimson's participation in the decision.
One point that Wellerstein does make is that the movie misrepresents Stimson's attitude toward the use of atomic weapons:Quote:
the movie does Stimson dirty here, in turning him into a dummy stand-in representing "the powers that be" and how much their interests could diverge from Oppenheimer's. In reality, Oppenheimer's positions were pretty well-represented "at the top" for quite some time; making him into an "outsider" here, I think, obscures the reality quite a bit.
I believe they were pretty unfair to Truman, as well. I don't believe he was the kind of man depicted in that one brief scene.
I thought the movie was meh.
Like typical Nolan, hard as hell to hear the dialog. From now on, I'm not going to watch any of his movies in the theater. I'll just wait until I can stream it with subtitles. It's a waste of money otherwise.
The nuke explosion was underwhelming. The brief one they showed during one of the dream sequences was better. I thought they were setting us up for a mind blowing one later, but nope.
The nudity was totally unnecessary. If they are going to do that, at least make the woman hot to make it worthwhile.
Other than characters claiming it, the movie failed to show how Oppenheimer was the only guy who could lead the Manhattan project. In fact, it sorta made the case that he was incompetent with security. If that was the intent, then good job I guess?
It was totally legit to strip his clearances. Making that out like a McCarthy moment was ridiculous. Especially in light that modern hollywood is far worse than the McCarthy era ever was.
The last scene was eye rolling.
Like typical Nolan, hard as hell to hear the dialog. From now on, I'm not going to watch any of his movies in the theater. I'll just wait until I can stream it with subtitles. It's a waste of money otherwise.
The nuke explosion was underwhelming. The brief one they showed during one of the dream sequences was better. I thought they were setting us up for a mind blowing one later, but nope.
The nudity was totally unnecessary. If they are going to do that, at least make the woman hot to make it worthwhile.
Other than characters claiming it, the movie failed to show how Oppenheimer was the only guy who could lead the Manhattan project. In fact, it sorta made the case that he was incompetent with security. If that was the intent, then good job I guess?
It was totally legit to strip his clearances. Making that out like a McCarthy moment was ridiculous. Especially in light that modern hollywood is far worse than the McCarthy era ever was.
The last scene was eye rolling.
I didn't find anything troubling about the portrayal of Truman.
First of all, Truman had a reputation as being a straight shooter: blunt, to the point, etc.
Secondly, I agree with his POV concerning Oppenheimer, so maybe that's why the scene doesn't disturb me.
First of all, Truman had a reputation as being a straight shooter: blunt, to the point, etc.
Secondly, I agree with his POV concerning Oppenheimer, so maybe that's why the scene doesn't disturb me.
OldArmy71 said:
First of all, Truman had a reputation as being a straight shooter: blunt, to the point, etc
Sure - but the character on screen was closer to Colonel Sanders. Truman wasn't known for being forgetful or simple-minded like he was portrayed.
The entire Oval Office scene is just there to lay the groundwork for the "crybaby" line, which isn't even historically accurate.
I always expect some dramatization in film. I remember Max Baer's family being devastated at how he was portrayed in Cinderella Man. In reality, Baer was emotionally tortured by the fact that he'd killed two men in the ring.
BassCowboy33 said:
I always expect some dramatization in film. I remember Max Baer's family being devastated at how he was portrayed in Cinderella Man. In reality, Baer was emotionally tortured by the fact that he'd killed two men in the ring.
Well, and I think Norman Dyke got a bit too…um…"dramatically licensed" in Band of Brothers, too.
I hate it when it happens to real people with real, living relatives.
aTmAg said:
I thought the movie was meh.
Like typical Nolan, hard as hell to hear the dialog. From now on, I'm not going to watch any of his movies in the theater. I'll just wait until I can stream it with subtitles. It's a waste of money otherwise.
The nuke explosion was underwhelming. The brief one they showed during one of the dream sequences was better. I thought they were setting us up for a mind blowing one later, but nope.
The nudity was totally unnecessary. If they are going to do that, at least make the woman hot to make it worthwhile.
Other than characters claiming it, the movie failed to show how Oppenheimer was the only guy who could lead the Manhattan project. In fact, it sorta made the case that he was incompetent with security. If that was the intent, then good job I guess?
It was totally legit to strip his clearances. Making that out like a McCarthy moment was ridiculous. Especially in light that modern hollywood is far worse than the McCarthy era ever was.
The last scene was eye rolling.
Perhaps 'Meg 2: The Trench' will be more to your liking.
OldArmy71 said:
I didn't find anything troubling about the portrayal of Truman.
First of all, Truman had a reputation as being a straight shooter: blunt, to the point, etc.
Secondly, I agree with his POV concerning Oppenheimer, so maybe that's why the scene doesn't disturb me.
That wasn't a depiction of him being blunt and to the point. It was a depiction of him being ignorant, arrogant, and dismissive. Not saying he was a flawless man, but I don't think he was the kind of man that scene presented him as.
This movie tried to imply that everybody other than the scientists were unsophisticated knuckle draggers. When in actuality, the scientists were naive as hell in every field other than their specialty.Cliff.Booth said:That wasn't a depiction of him being blunt and to the point. It was a depiction of him being ignorant, arrogant, and dismissive. Not saying he was a flawless man, but I don't think he was the kind of man that scene presented him as.OldArmy71 said:
I didn't find anything troubling about the portrayal of Truman.
First of all, Truman had a reputation as being a straight shooter: blunt, to the point, etc.
Secondly, I agree with his POV concerning Oppenheimer, so maybe that's why the scene doesn't disturb me.
I tend to agree, although I loved the movie overall. Nolan is a storyteller, not an historian, so to him it is more important for the themes of the story to remain strong than to depict historical people in an accurate way. His concern was a story where a brilliant scientist understands and struggles with the destructive power of his hallmark achievement and realizes that governments will use his weapon with no regard for its destructive nature. That made for a cool movie, but the reality is that many of the military and political leaders in Oppneheimer's orbit were also extremely intelligent and may have reached different conclusions than he did based upon their own background and information they were privy to. It doesn't mean they were all completely cavalier about its use. Nor did the "chain reaction" Oppenheimer keeps obsessing over actually take place, in fact it has led to deterrence and the most peaceful period of human history to date. Cool movie, but the Oppenheimer is a sensitive genius and all politicians and military men are ruthless *******s thing was just way over the top to be historically valid.
Finally had to chance to see it this morning and loved it. Great movie all around.
If anyone likes the Los Almos part of it, I'd recommend the show Manhattan. It's a few years old and only 2 season but it's based on Los Almos and some scientists there creating the bomb.
If anyone likes the Los Almos part of it, I'd recommend the show Manhattan. It's a few years old and only 2 season but it's based on Los Almos and some scientists there creating the bomb.
I think I only watched season one, but a friend of mine who finished both seasons of Manhattan swears this actor played the spy in Manhattan *and* Oppenheimer. The same actor is certainly in both, definitely played the spy in Oppenheimer, and I vaguely remember him from Manhattan, but he's listed as two different characters in each. Can anyone confirm one way or another?
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1706832/
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1706832/
I recognized him too when I saw it and looked it up right when the movie was over. I'm not sure I remember that actor in anything else.
I just looked it up and he does in fact play a fictional character who was a Soviet spy. Pretty crazy that he is the spy in the show and movie. I found this snippet from a vanity fair article.
"Finally, Christopher Denham, who who played the duplicitous fictional spy Jim Meeks in Manhattan now appears in Nolan's Oppenheimeras real-life spy Klaus Fuchs"
I just looked it up and he does in fact play a fictional character who was a Soviet spy. Pretty crazy that he is the spy in the show and movie. I found this snippet from a vanity fair article.
"Finally, Christopher Denham, who who played the duplicitous fictional spy Jim Meeks in Manhattan now appears in Nolan's Oppenheimeras real-life spy Klaus Fuchs"
Loved it myself, but wife thought Chris Nolan tried too hard. Only real suggestion I would have made is to add a caption on each of the 3 different timeliness the first time we see them (during Manhattan Peoject, Afterwards when he's teaching, and during the hearing). I could follow, but those that didn't know the history would likely be wondering wtf is going on.
Loved the symbolism (water ripples, supernova, chain reaction of nukes). Loved how when Oppenheimer admitted to affair, you see Florence Pugh naked looking at Kitty. RDJ killed it in the 2nd half.
Loved the symbolism (water ripples, supernova, chain reaction of nukes). Loved how when Oppenheimer admitted to affair, you see Florence Pugh naked looking at Kitty. RDJ killed it in the 2nd half.
TexAg2001 said:
Saw it last night in IMAX at First Colony Mall in Sugar Land. The ticket person told us when we arrived that the AC just went out in the theater and wasn't expected to come back on. We were given the option to either get a refund or watch it with no AC. We checked out the theater and it fairly comfortable so we decide to stay. I didn't think about how hot it may get over the course of a 3 hour movie. I think most people decided to get a refund because there were maybe 30 other people watching it with us.
I got so enthralled by the movie that I completely forgot about the AC being broken. I only remembered it wasn't working when I felt the air kick on in the last 10 minutes of the showing.
Incredible movie with great acting. I was worried about the 3 hour runtime, knowing it was mostly dialogue, but the pacing of each scene really kept it moving and made it feel much shorter than that. The time hopping kept me mentally engaged trying to figure out if the scene was before or after the bomb. I felt like I was on the "edge of my seat" for most of the movie.
The use of sound is what really made this movie....thundering crescendos followed by absolute silence, for example. I'm going to encourage others to view it in theaters primarily for the sound. I think the visuals will translate fine to home viewing, but the audio won't unless you have a great setup.
They just wanted you to sweat like everyone else in the film. The exact same thing happened to us today in Pearland so we got a refund and caught it and the next theater down the road.
Took my eyes a second to adjust to the 90 mm film speed during the opening but I didn't have a problem after a few minutes. Not sure if it was me or the projector.
Anytime you are dealing with history and politics there will be a few things to nitpick. However I found it to be a very enjoyable movie. I wish Hollywood could produce more cinema moments like that.
Anytime you are dealing with history and politics there will be a few things to nitpick. However I found it to be a very enjoyable movie. I wish Hollywood could produce more cinema moments like that.
Going to see this today. Seems appropriate.
Most people focus their home video budget heavily on video and then just buy a cheap soundbar. Should be 50/50 if not more heavily spent on audio. They are equally important.
Jack Thauer said:
Most people focus their home video budget heavily on video and then just buy a cheap soundbar. Should be 50/50 if not more heavily spent on audio. They are equally important.
Yeah. I'm about $2500 (at the time I bought it) on video, and about $6k on audio over here.
Just got back from the movie - this was really good! Good to great, even! Very long story, but it kinda had to be in order to adequately chew everything it bit off.
aTmAg said:
I thought the movie was meh.
Like typical Nolan, hard as hell to hear the dialog. From now on, I'm not going to watch any of his movies in the theater. I'll just wait until I can stream it with subtitles. It's a waste of money otherwise.
The nuke explosion was underwhelming. The brief one they showed during one of the dream sequences was better. I thought they were setting us up for a mind blowing one later, but nope.
The nudity was totally unnecessary. If they are going to do that, at least make the woman hot to make it worthwhile.
Other than characters claiming it, the movie failed to show how Oppenheimer was the only guy who could lead the Manhattan project. In fact, it sorta made the case that he was incompetent with security. If that was the intent, then good job I guess?
It was totally legit to strip his clearances. Making that out like a McCarthy moment was ridiculous. Especially in light that modern hollywood is far worse than the McCarthy era ever was.
The last scene was eye rolling.
When is nudity ever necessary, if we're being honest
I really, really enjoyed this movie. It did not feel like three hours at all. The bomb explosion scene paid off for me big time and was waiting for the "BOOM" and everyone in my theater got startled when it hit.
I think it's Nolan's best work (although not my favorite- if that makes sense) and is dripping in awards nominations. Murphy and RDJ were remarkable. Damon crushed it. Safdie putting on the sunscreen and asking if it was "rubbed in" made me LOL. Eventually, I stopped caring to memorize scientist names and just started to remember faces. Seemed like the whole movie was a real "who's who" of Hollywood. Crazy names in that cast. I really liked how the black-and-white and color timelines came together at the end. Nolan is so damn good at that kind of stuff.
Fun fact: I saw this with my SO, who studied at the same University Oppenheimer did in Germany (Göttingen), and when it was mentioned she nudged me. But then they showed "Göttingen" and she busted out laughing cause it's not that pretty in real life. They definitely just picked a typical Bavarian town, hit it with an overhead shot, and went with it.
I think it's Nolan's best work (although not my favorite- if that makes sense) and is dripping in awards nominations. Murphy and RDJ were remarkable. Damon crushed it. Safdie putting on the sunscreen and asking if it was "rubbed in" made me LOL. Eventually, I stopped caring to memorize scientist names and just started to remember faces. Seemed like the whole movie was a real "who's who" of Hollywood. Crazy names in that cast. I really liked how the black-and-white and color timelines came together at the end. Nolan is so damn good at that kind of stuff.
Fun fact: I saw this with my SO, who studied at the same University Oppenheimer did in Germany (Göttingen), and when it was mentioned she nudged me. But then they showed "Göttingen" and she busted out laughing cause it's not that pretty in real life. They definitely just picked a typical Bavarian town, hit it with an overhead shot, and went with it.
Featured Stories
See All
Waiting since 1939: Texas A&M faithful's hope to someday win it all
by Olin Buchanan
21:43
1h ago
621
39:09
5h ago
1.1k
Reed Report: B.J. Holmes reminisces on four 'special' years in Aggieland
by Luke Evangelist
A&M's winning formula built on offensive boards, FT attempts and defense
by Luke Evangelist
Obaseki's massive MOment lifts A&M to a Quad 1A win at Ole Miss
by Olin Buchanan
Cerdock
Anyone else down on our baskeball team after listening to Nuno all morning?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
119