Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan, July 21, 2023) Movie • Page 59

I will probably watch that at some point. I have like multiple long films Hannah won’t want to watch on my list that I don’t know when I’ll find that time.

 

CGI is the answer; would have communicated the scale and awe of the explosion much more effectively than the small fireball we got in the film.

 

the explosion in the movie didn't look like anything like an atomic bomb going off and was extremely underwhelming after so much buildup, but it's also fine if that's what Nolan wanted and it wasn't really the point.

it looked about as impressive as that time that he slowly rolled a real jumbo jet into the side of a real airport at like 2 real miles per hour.

the movie was still very good though.

 

I guess I understand why people are debating the explosion sequence, but it seems like such a stupid thing to get hung up on.

 

forgoing a major filmmaking tool and insisting on making something practical even when it doesn't work very well is also a silly thing to get hung up on

it was still a great movie

 

i saw this thread bumped and curiosity unfortunately got the better of me

hilarious stuff

 

It's just personal preference. I was just underwhelmed by the explosion when I saw it because it looks like any other movie explosion and I just thought for something as big as the first nuke explosion ever we would have gotten something more epic or chilling.

 

Personal preference is fine even if I strongly disagree. Going through the trouble of creating a YouTube video and titling it “I fixed this” is disrespectful to the crew that made this movie and anti-art

 

none of us here made that YouTube video

he is one of our best living filmmakers and he makes incredible movies, it is okay to say that sometimes even he makes odd decisions, like burying dialogue in the sound mix, or insisting on shooting something practical even if it looks like a turd

 

nobody is disputing this, its just an incredibly dumb video that didn't need to be posted.

 

calling it anti-art just seems a bit strong or overdramatic to me though - the movie made a billion dollars at the box office and was near-universally acclaimed. I don't think Christopher Nolan gives one single flying fuck what some dweeb on YouTube thinks of his movie, or how that person would have done it "better"

 

it's the same thing of people making playlists like "here is how I fixed this album"

you just simply don't know better than Christopher Nolan about making a setpiece in a massive blockbuster lol. stop getting high off your own supply.

 

ugh man i'm trying not to argue but i also really don't think The Bomb is The Point of the movie

 

yeah I suppose a better response than making a YouTube video about how you could/would have done his movie better would be to go out and make your own movie. it's not about that one shot. the dude made an incredible movie full of fantastic performances out of that massive dry tome of a book.

just for me personally, I know it sticks out to me when Nolan fumbles (to my mind) one element like that because his movies are so good. I would call him a master filmmaker. there's a scene a little while before the explosion where the bomb is just sitting there on that wooden platform tower thing that just absolutely oozes dread and is so powerful and frightening and almost nothing is even happening on screen

 

None of you were there when the first nuclear bomb went off so you don’t know what it looked like. Check mate.

 

It's just a video, damn "didn't need to be posted" what?

 

I don’t even care about whether or not the video “should” be posted. But, if it’s posted, and especially if it has “fixed” in the title and 2-3 users are arguing that it’s clearly an improvement or whatever, that’s gonna lead to conversation. Which includes criticism of the premise, lol.

Also. How is it “silly” for a filmmaker to set creative parameters for the project they’re making, so that it has a specific individual approach/vision? More filmmakers making strong choices (and being allowed to do so) would clearly be a net positive, right?

 

I only think it is silly because it came out looking so bad and it undercuts the message of the movie. I was expecting something terrifying and awe-inspiring that drives home just how cosmically powerful and horrifying and destructive these insane weapons are, and I definitely do not think what is in the movie is anything even remotely like that at all. Not even close. That's fine if that's what Nolan wanted, and I am huge fan of his, but I'm not gonna pretend it wasn't disappointing or say that I don't think it looked like crap just because other people love the guy and apparently think he is somehow beyond reproach.

 

Is this the movie you wanted? Oppenheimer the movie is about Oppenheimer the man. That’s why we see scenes take place before and after the bomb.

 

but the explosion is shown in the movie, and built up to pretty intensely actually

 

think you're just putting emphasis on the wrong part of the movie, man

 

you're probably right.

it is a really good movie though - I've watched it 3 times, on back-to-back days for the first two to boot

 

But Nolan was not trying to glorify the spectacle of the bomb with this film. If anything, he was purposely undercutting it. It was an intentional decision to place more emphasis onscreen to Oppenheimer’s own visions than the bomb itself. If you want to see more destruction, or perhaps a more artistic expression of the explosion, that’s not what this movie is about—maybe check out episode 8 of Twin Peaks season three, there’s a dope sequence there.

 

It’s a film based on a book called American Prometheus, directly calling on the ancient story of man who stole fire from the Gods, and the film’s use of real practical fire in that moment goes a long way thematically/visually, calling to the Prometheus myth in a way that something made with CGI or closer to what we’re used to seeing in depictions of atom bomb explosions wouldn’t have. What are you looking for out of a CGI or more “realistic” explosion? Is there any way that a sense of subverting an audience’s expectations for that moment says something that aligns with the film’s overall messaging about expectations in our pursuit of something vs the real, actual consequences?

 

ppl wanna see cool bomb go big boom like in marvel