Oppenheimer (Movie Review & "The Odyssey" Prelude)

Luke and Jackson review the 2023 film "Oppenheimer", written and directed by Christopher Nolan and starring Cillian Murphy. Stay for the end for a special prelude for the upcoming release of Nolan's next film, "The Odyssey", starring Matt Damon.

Transcript

SPEAKER_04 0:14

Hey guys, welcome back to the Motion Picture Podcast. My name's Jackson, and I'm here with my friend Luke. And today we are talking about the 2023 film Oppenheimer, directed and written by Christopher Nolan.

SPEAKER_00 0:28

The one and only.

SPEAKER_04 0:30

The one and only.

SPEAKER_00 0:31

The one and Nolan. The one. Mr. Odyssey himself. And speaking of the Odyssey, uh, come listen to our review of the Odyssey on July 20th. Unfortunately, we don't get special access to early screenings, uh, but keep supporting us, and someday maybe we will.

SPEAKER_04 0:49

And maybe we can not work a full-time corporate job and then record the podcast instead. So with your support, maybe it will happen for us.

SPEAKER_00 1:00

Yeah. Every view counts.

SPEAKER_04 1:02

Every rating counts. Five stars. I want everyone five stars right now.

SPEAKER_00 1:07

Five stars.

SPEAKER_04 1:08

Anyway, going back to Oppenheimer, I don't know if you knew this, Luke, but it's actually adapted from a book called American Prometheus. Okay. Which won the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for biography. Oh, really? Yeah, and that's like the highest literary honor you can get. So was it written in 2006? It might have been written before that. I'm not sure.

SPEAKER_00 1:33

Okay. I I should have done my research. So is the quote at the beginning of the movie, and I think you mentioned this earlier, was the quote at the beginning of the movie from that book?

SPEAKER_04 1:42

It's actually a condensed version of a ancient Greek myth and directly references the title of the book. But what Luke is referencing, the opening title card of Oppenheimer is Prometheus stole fire from the gods and gave it to man. For this, he was chained to a rock and tortured for eternity. I think this was an epic intro to this movie, and I think it really set the movie up well for what it was going to be about.

SPEAKER_00 2:11

I definitely agree. It seemed like it was level setting the playing field about how the people in this world felt about the bomb or the mixed emotions. Honestly, like the the solemn tone and the introspective personality Nolan brings to this movie. You know, it it creates a seriousness about the atomic bomb that I don't think a lot of people necessarily get deep into. I mean, people understand that, but it was something that set the tone for the movie.

SPEAKER_04 2:42

Absolutely. Yeah, going into this movie, I didn't quite know what to expect. This was definitely Nolan's most serious film, probably along with Dunkirk, I'd say. Yeah. But his other films carry this, I don't want to say Spielberg-like wonder, but they do carry some type of lighter feeling than this movie had. And so this movie was an interesting step in his career to be more serious, almost more in a direction of a director like Stanley Kubrick, something he'd make.

SPEAKER_00 3:15

Yeah, and part of it was because it's based on, you know, a true story. It's based on reality and whether or not things were portrayed. Are you saying Inception wasn't based on a true story? That one has a pass. Hmm. And the Dark Knight. And Interstellar. Yeah. I actually dress up as Batman every night. Doing what? I go to bad guys and get I get the crap beaten out of me.

SPEAKER_04 3:43

Oh. So it's like a reversal. Yeah. You put yourself to shame and just get beat up in a Batman suit. Yeah. There was actually a guy in not to derail the conversation, there's a guy in Mexico or something that goes around and ties up motorcycle thieves and leaves notes on them. What's he called? They're calling him like the Mexican Batman. No one knows what he looks like, but he's going around capturing these motorcycle thieves.

SPEAKER_00 4:13

That's what they call them in him in Mexico. Yeah. They just say the Mexican Batman? Yeah. That's pretty uncreative. Very heroic. Yeah. Oh, yeah, that too. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 4:24

Nacho Libre.

SPEAKER_00 4:26

Well, maybe we can have the Mexican Batman on our show someday.

SPEAKER_04 4:28

That'd be epic.

SPEAKER_00 4:29

Yeah. That'd be epic.

SPEAKER_04 4:31

I'm sure there will be a movie about him at some point.

SPEAKER_00 4:33

Yeah. Maybe we could write one.

SPEAKER_04 4:36

Uh maybe. Is that infringing on IP? Maybe he might have copyrighted his or copywritten. And it's also the Batman name, so it's probably not for sale.

SPEAKER_00 4:48

That's too bad.

SPEAKER_04 4:49

Anyway, going back to Oppenheimer, it stars a bunch of people, including Rod Rick. Josh Peck. I'm just kidding. But they are they are in it. I don't know if you knew that. Yeah. Um Killian Murphy's the star. Matt Damon's in it. Emily Blunt.

SPEAKER_00 5:13

I was like, did you see the movie?

SPEAKER_04 5:19

I did watch the movie. I feel like half of Hollywood's in this movie. Yeah. Um Josh being in it threw me off.

SPEAKER_00 5:25

Josh Peck from the Bible.

SPEAKER_04 5:26

Yeah, he actually drops the bomb too.

SPEAKER_00 5:29

Yeah. He had like one he had one scene in the beginning and where he was joining the squad to build the bomb, and then he dropped the bomb, the test bomb. Trinity. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 5:40

You got RDJ in it. I think this was his best performance by far.

SPEAKER_00 5:45

Yeah, did he win a best supporting actor? He did. Okay. Yeah, it was impressive.

SPEAKER_04 5:50

Florence Pugh was in this. Josh Harnett, Casey Affleck, Ramey Malik, and a whole bunch of other people. Benny Safty was in it. The director of Good Time, Smashing Machine. He played, was it Teller he played? He did play Edward Teller very convincingly. I thought he did a great job in this movie.

SPEAKER_00 6:11

Yeah, he did a great yeah, he had a great accent. Edward Teller. I think Russian, right?

SPEAKER_04 6:17

Okay. Or maybe like a surrounding country. Yeah. Anyway, Killian Murphy, Robert J J. Robert Oppenheimer, excuse me. Definitely stole the show. This was his movie. I thought he did a really good job. I actually read he lost a ton of weight for this role. Yeah. You could really tell on his face. He looked he had a very haunted expression the entire movie, and he definitely deserved the Academy Award for Best Actor.

SPEAKER_00 6:44

Yeah, I wonder if he lost weight throughout the production because you know, early in the beginning, unless they filmed it out of sequence, which they most likely did film it out of sequence. In the beginning, he had, you know, different hairstyle. Yeah. He looked a little healthier in the beginning because it was in his university years. I think he was at Cambridge. Yeah. And he just looked a little different. And I think however they were able to de-age him and then re-age him.

SPEAKER_04 7:10

It was all practical, actually.

SPEAKER_00 7:12

Really?

SPEAKER_04 7:12

Yeah. They did a maybe they filmed that first and then he got unhealthier as he got older.

SPEAKER_01 7:19

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 7:20

Where they put more makeup or less makeup on him. But they did a fantastic job. I didn't really blink an eye at his age throughout the movie. Yeah. I mean, there were parts where I questioned him being a 20-year-old. Yeah, that was but I mean it wasn't distracting.

SPEAKER_00 7:37

20-year-olds back then also didn't look like 20-year-olds do today. Yeah. So it was believable.

SPEAKER_04 7:43

Yeah, we all look like goobers now. Yeah. Anyway, Matt Damon's in this. I probably already said that. Uh apparently Nolan was so impressed with his performance in Oppenheimer, that's why he's Odysseus, which is pretty cool.

SPEAKER_00 7:56

Yeah, I I definitely agree. He d deserves to be Odysseus or deserves to be in um the Odyssey. And I read something, you know, Matt Damon actually treated the Odyssey like it was his last like major blockbuster, just because of his, I think it was because of his age. Yeah. Um going into the Odyssey. Yeah. Which is, you know, nuts. You know, Matt Damon's, of course, a critically acclaimed actor. I think there was a time where he was taking maybe projects that weren't critically acclaimed or probably weren't up to the standard of acting he could get to. There was one about when he actually got shrunken down to downsizing. Downsizing. And that movie is nuts. I really want to watch that actually.

SPEAKER_04 8:41

I heard it's not great.

SPEAKER_00 8:43

No, it has the weirdest ending.

SPEAKER_04 8:45

Oh, yeah. Speaking of ending, this will include spoilers for Oppenheimer if you haven't seen it. I assume most of the population has seen Oppenheimer because it was such a big film upon release, especially with the Barbie matchup. Yeah, Barbenheimer. How'd you feel about that juxtaposition between Oppenheimer and Barbie?

SPEAKER_00 9:06

I think it was a a moment in time that will change history forever because now we have these juxtaposed movie events. This year we have um Avengers Doomsday. It's happening.

SPEAKER_04 9:21

Dune will likely be the better film of those, but yeah.

SPEAKER_00 9:24

But we'll be doing a Dunesday. We will. We'll be doing a three-hour Dunesday episode. Yeah, tune in. After Christmas, of course. Of course. But a Dunesday live. In the live audience. We'll be in the theater doing a live audience. Talking during the movie. Play by play.

SPEAKER_04 9:43

Yeah, I thought the Barbenheimer moment was a great moment for movies and recaptured a lot of interest in returning to the movie theater after COVID.

SPEAKER_00 9:54

Yeah, that's definitely a good point. I think, you know, Barbie, not necessarily all my style. I still think it was a great movie. Um, I think there was funny moments, and I I think both movies did entertain audiences, and to your point, brought people back to the theaters.

SPEAKER_04 10:12

Absolutely. Going back to the movie, I'd argue this is probably Chris Nolan's most experimental movie in a sense that not the timelines differing, but the different VFX shots he offered to visualize what Killian Murphy's character was going through. Yeah. So the particles going through, the different waves he was thinking of, the different effects to highlight the dangerous threat of nuclear fallout and explosions. How'd you feel about that? Do you think it detracted from the movie? Do you think it added to the movie?

SPEAKER_00 10:48

I I think it completely added to the movie. It was one of those things I kept wondering how he filmed those, you know, special effects, how he, you know, built those out and how he came up with them. Because even if he could, even if he could CGI all of it, how do you come up with you know those specific effects? How do you create you know emotional feelings into visual effects and connect that with kind of the broader scope of I think quantum mechanics and nuclear fusion and fission? Definitely an interesting aspect of this. And it it definitely painted the internal turmoil of Oppenheimer pretty significantly, you know, more than I think if he had done it like he had done with the other movies. And I and I think another piece that he did pretty well or very well was part of the movie is filmed in black and white and parts in color. And I think I don't know if I can necessarily interpret the differences, but it seems like you know, there's a flip side to the story when he goes from black and white to color, especially in the end, yeah, where it repaints his interaction with um Albert Einstein as he like picks up his hat in color, and we'd only seen that in you know black and white. And so, but in that moment when it switches color, we gain clarity about what their interaction was really about.

SPEAKER_04 12:06

Yeah. Good points. I think going back to your original point about how Nolan pulled off the particles, I do know that he is very much so an advocate of being practical. And so I know obviously I'm about to reference Interstellar in the black hole, which was done with CGI, but he did consult Kip Thorne, who is an astrophysicist and physicist, a very knowledgeable scientist to create that black hole as accurately, quote unquote, as possible. So I'm wonder if he consulted physician or physicist about the particles and theoretically how he could visually bring those to the screen. Yeah, I bet so. Going back to your point about the black the black and white, I thought he did a great job with that, helping the audience differentiate between the different timelines he kept shifting back and forth to. Um, the black and white was mainly used for the Lewis Strauss scenes and also the courtroom scenes. And so I feel like it helped add that a natural barrier to the audience to where, oh, I can tell where I'm at in this movie.

SPEAKER_00 13:20

That's a good point because it does flip back and forth. And I think it flips back and forth more than any other movie that you know Nolan's made. A lot of other movies kind of go back and forth, some are you know somewhat nonlinear. Memento. Yeah, but you know, in this case, maybe he recognized Nolan recognized, or the editor recognized that you know there had to be some visual cue.

SPEAKER_04 13:42

Yeah. No, I thought it was a genius, and I love black and white. I thought it was really beautiful. And Hoyt Van Hoytema, that's the cinematographer. Okay. Um, he did a great job.

SPEAKER_00 13:53

Um did they film in black and white or did they convert to the city?

SPEAKER_04 13:57

You know, I thought about that in the car this morning or the other day. I'm not sure. He might have shot it on black and white.

SPEAKER_00 14:04

I thought the majority of the movie was filmed on IMAX, right?

SPEAKER_04 14:07

I I don't know. So if you were watching the movie, you could kind of tell when the camera switched because the black bars would go away or come back. And obviously, IMAX is a taller format, and so I'm not sure. He definitely did a lot of establishing shots on IMAX, and I think the Trinity test was likely done on IMAX since he didn't have to use sound for that. Yeah. But did you find anything?

SPEAKER_00 14:35

Yeah, it said roughly half.

SPEAKER_04 14:36

Okay, I could see that.

SPEAKER_00 14:38

Yeah, I could definitely see that. Um is it is it me, or do you also go and look up, you know, historical accuracies of these movies afterwards? Yeah, I definitely do. I felt like which I don't know if he was really a like how big of a communist he really I mean, it doesn't paint him out to be a communist, but I wonder if they actually the US government actually attacked him like they did in this movie.

SPEAKER_04 15:02

Yeah, I do think that a lot of what the movie showed was fact. And I do think that just the paranoia of that era around communism and fascism was at an all-time high, and so I perfectly could believe that the FBI would be monitoring him and hesitant to let him in on the Manhattan Project.

SPEAKER_00 15:26

Yeah. Do you feel like the movie overly dramatized Oppenheimer in his life? Or do you think that Nolan maintained kind of the, you know, his his tie to reality with this movie? Because a lot of his movies he tries to tie it to reality and tries to explain things. And of course, there was nothing that was unexplainable, but do you think it was overly dramatic at all?

SPEAKER_04 15:49

Obviously, a film is gonna be dramatic, but I don't think it was over dramatic. I thought it did a really good job of showing his inner turmoil as he was going through this process. No, I didn't think that the film was trying to capitalize on any extravagant feelings or anything.

SPEAKER_00 16:10

Yeah, I definitely agree because you know, throughout the movie, I think it gives you a good idea or a better idea of you know the complex, you know, workings and opinions he's had throughout his life and that humans have. Because I think from from the outside, like the FBI thought, he should have just naturally always been against atomic bombs or always been for atomic and hydrogen bombs, but throughout his life he had changing, you know, beliefs, he had changing viewpoints, and the the story really paints kind of the natural tendency to change your mind as a human, to you know, go through that progression, you know, maybe be a part of a a specific movement, which was I think communism in his case, which was you know short-sighted in that time, but yeah, and then actually move on and you know, not necessarily before the atomic bomb, but you know, before before getting the US ahead of Germany, and then also changing your mind as you see the effects and how it's used.

SPEAKER_04 17:13

Yeah, that just is also goes to speak to s how interesting that point in history was, because it was kind of a melting point of everything that had happened to that point, kind of came to a crossroads, like the different types of government, fight democracy fighting fascism, fighting for freedom, you know, fighting for their lives, America being attacked and brought into the war, technology being better than it's ever been after the um industrial revolution. And I think just unlocking that nuclear capability accelerated accelerated the world to a point we've never seen before. And look where we are at today. We've accomplished more in the last 70 years than humans have ever accomplished. I think that putting a character in that moment is so fascinating. I think that's why this film works so well, is because we're dealing with a man that's brilliant, but is supporting something that is just theory to him until it's not, and he's supporting things that theoretically could be good, but then he realizes humanity is evil and will take advantage of those things.

SPEAKER_00 18:30

Yeah, and I definitely agree. And Nolan has a subtle, to your point, the theory is a subtle either theme or motif throughout the movie. He he uses it as a you know, a plot device to say, you know, his experiments or his not experiments, his theories um are really only as good as I think the short term, or they don't take him very far, and he really needs reality to take him where he needs to go. And I think throughout the movie, Nolan uses that as you know, a smaller projection of the broader theme, trying to say really his theory about how humanity would use this bomb differs than you know, reality, and his theory only got him so far, and even with the US government and the use of the bomb, and then also on the US government and their friendliness towards him, his theory about how they would treat him as you know, this intellectual, how they would elevate him, how they would allow him to build out this huge project, and then in the end just screw him over. Yeah, and that's kind of you know a broader expansion of that smaller plot device.

SPEAKER_04 19:41

Yeah, absolutely. Um, I mean, Emily Blunt, who plays his wife Kitty, says it best you just let them tar and feather you. And I just think that's why I believe the movie works so well in the way it's laid out in the different timelines. You have him up and coming, them being the hero to this country, and then his downfall for trying to do the right thing. Yeah. Um it's interesting. So I wanted to talk about the Trinity test, which happens about midway through the movie, um, where they test the bomb in New Mexico. Um, what was your reaction to this scene? And how did you feel like that was the end of the movie when you first watched the movie? Or did you know that there'd be that the film would try and deal with the fallout of that test?

SPEAKER_00 20:30

Well, I I'd say given the length of the movie, I I'm sure somebody would think it's the end of the movie.

SPEAKER_04 20:34

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 20:35

Because it is probably like an hour and a half or two hours into the movie that they do the Trinity test. Yeah. Right?

SPEAKER_04 20:41

Or is it almost at the well, I guess there is there's like an hour left after the Trinity test.

SPEAKER_00 20:46

You know, I I think it was a great decision to do it without any noise. Yeah. Up to because I think it it made it so like your heart dropped, waiting for that sound, waiting for the rush of the wind, waiting for you know the explosion. Because you really you wouldn't hear it until it, you know, gets to you the sound wave. So I think it did a great job of you know really painting the quietness of the situation.

SPEAKER_04 21:15

Yeah, you just hear Oppenheimer breathing over the imagery of the flames. Um, another thing I want to point out, one of my favorite parts of this movie is the score. Yeah. I I think it might be one of my favorite scores of all time. I listen to it at work. Yeah. When I'm trying to work, and I just think it's so brilliant, and I think it's the engine of this movie that keeps it going and paces the movie so well.

SPEAKER_00 21:44

Yeah, that's a great point.

SPEAKER_04 21:45

I think what why I brought that up is because during the Trinity test, it's playing these anxious violins as they're like getting everything ready and they're kind of all rushing around, and there's that fear that it's gonna ignite the atmosphere. There's not that full understanding by the community that that's not out of the realm of possibility. Yeah. And so there's that underlying fear, and Matt Damon finds out right before they ignite the bomb. And so he's starting to panic too. And so I think it just played that tension so well. And it helped the actors and their performances. And I don't know. I could just go on and on about the score, but yeah, it's definitely recognizable.

SPEAKER_00 22:29

Um it's one of those scores, although you you're not like, oh yeah, that's Oppenheimer. It I don't think another score could have fit with the movie.

SPEAKER_04 22:38

Yeah, it was brilliant. I it's by Ludwig Gorenson. I'm not sure if I said his name right, but apparently he was at home and his wife was playing the violin, and that's how he got the idea to include her as the main instrument of the score. And so I thought that was kind of a cool story.

SPEAKER_00 22:57

What other films has he done?

SPEAKER_04 22:58

I think recently he did Sinners. He did a lot of work with Donald Glover, childish Gambino. Yeah. Um, which is cool. He's getting a lot of opportunities now. He did the Odyssey, which is about to come out. Oh, okay. Yeah, he did the Mandalorian score. Mandalori Mandalorian. Like the TV show. Oh no. So that's pretty cool. He might have done the movie as well.

SPEAKER_00 23:22

I I will say for all of its woes, Mandalorian does have a good, at least intro sound.

SPEAKER_04 23:28

It does. I think the story of Mando is more promising than the actual movie or the show.

SPEAKER_01 23:35

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 23:36

Anyway, going back to Oppenheimer, I just think the score is really good. Um, and then we kind of deal with after the Trinity test, we go back to the court scene and we kind of see Well, backing up. So after the Trinity test, we see it's successful. Oppenheimer begins to realize he created something that will change humanity forever. And then they take the bombs off to Japan. They say it's a success. And then Oppenheimer kind of spirals the rest of the movie. He's kind of honestly shell-shocked, it's seemingly. He doesn't speak much, he's just kind of there, his presence, his face.

SPEAKER_00 24:19

He's like unable to celebrate, which it's weird how much the other Americans celebrated at uh Los Alamos. Yeah. Like in the big crowd, whenever they actually do kind of like in his mind, the bomb is going off internally.

SPEAKER_04 24:34

Yeah. What did you think of that scene? Whenever they're all stomping on the bleachers, and it he's kind of just in his head, and then it kind of cuts the crowd, and you're kind of anticipating something to happen. What did you think of that scene?

SPEAKER_00 24:48

I think I had a positive and a negative about that scene. The positive is really, you know, I think it did a great job at, you know, blurring out everybody's screams and chants and him really unable to, you know, process the moment. And they visualize that through, you know, the visual and the audio as things kind of faded out. I think the the negative I had was whenever they had the internal bomb going off and everybody was getting like that flash of light. You know, the the close-up of that girl whose like face was being torn apart by the bomb or flesh was getting ripped off. I don't feel like that was a great use of practical effects. I think they should have used CGI.

SPEAKER_04 25:29

Yeah, it kind of looked cheesy.

SPEAKER_00 25:30

Yeah, it looks like paper attached to her face, and that was actually Christopher Nolan's daughter.

SPEAKER_04 25:35

Really? Yeah. Oh wow, I had no idea.

SPEAKER_00 25:37

Yeah, I'm pretty sure. That's cool.

SPEAKER_04 25:39

I will say they redeemed it though, whenever he's walking through the hallway and he steps on the burnt corpse. Do you remember that?

SPEAKER_00 25:47

Yeah, and then his foot goes through.

SPEAKER_04 25:50

That was crazy. And then he kind of as he's walking, he sees people reacting poorly, and Roderick is throwing up outside.

SPEAKER_01 25:57

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 25:58

But after that, he kind of has a 180, and this is where really we get into the conflict with Louis Strauss, Robert Downey Jr., um, who again I think is incredible in this movie. I think that um he was very believable in this movie to have anger towards Oppenheimer for Oppenheimer humiliating him, but also being envious towards Oppenheimer for being such a celebrated man and Strauss wanting that recognition.

SPEAKER_00 26:24

Yeah, it it was weird that they and maybe in reality he was so angry because of the one embarrassment, and maybe there's a broader context to that. But the movie in my head made it seem kind of weird that he had such a grudge about that, but I guess it it makes sense, and I don't think there was any, you know, negative way that it um or it did it I don't think it did it in a poor way by any means. Um, but it was odd that he held such a grudge about scientists and Oppenheimer in that way.

SPEAKER_04 26:55

I think it was more of a envy than anything. I think that Oppenheimer humiliating him didn't help, but I think he was envious of Oppenheimer, and I think that he was frustrated that Oppenheimer was seemingly going back on he didn't want the development of the hydrogen bomb.

SPEAKER_01 27:14

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 27:15

And so I thought that was interesting.

SPEAKER_00 27:17

Okay. Yeah, I thought that whole that that was something that I really enjoyed about the movie was the whole hydrogen bomb, you know, subplot.

SPEAKER_02 27:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 27:27

And really foreshadowing, you know, bringing in Teller who was was he like the father of the hydrogen bomb? You know, having that foreshadowing, making that kind of a an inkling of a conflict, and then really pulling it out as a, you know, that was a main driver of the conflict between Oppenheimer and Strauss.

SPEAKER_02 27:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 27:48

And really it showed you like throughout as the movie progressed, that's where, you know, you know, it was a small piece that Oppenheimer could have controlled in the beginning, or could have maybe even encouraged, but throughout the movie, it you know, exposed how that, you know, festered, you know, amongst the federal government, even amongst the president, as you know, as the possibility for power expanded, he couldn't stop other people's desire for that. And he whether or not it was because he wanted to, you know, be the father of atomic bombs and no other greater weapon could be made, or because he realized the true nature of his creation.

SPEAKER_04 28:28

Yeah. I think he realized and felt the weight of what he unleashed on humanity that people are constantly going to be one-upping that creation and just the threat he's created. Jumping to his conversation with Einstein, I did want to ask a question before I proceeded. What did you think Einstein's significance in this movie was? He definitely popped up in the most pivotal moments of the movie, and we ended with Einstein. What was your take on that?

SPEAKER_00 28:58

I think he was a foundation in an ever-changing story or an ever-changing life of Oppenheimer. I think he was, you know, a constant. He really showed, you know, this is the true ending, you know, where this gets you. You could be the greatest of your time, but in the end, you're just I mean, not to say Einstein wasn't celebrated, but in the end, you will, you know, be tarred and feathered and then celebrated until you know they've had enough. But it, you know, he was a constant throughout the movie. He was but your perspective of him changed throughout the movie. He never changed, like Oppenheimer changed throughout the movie because he grew in his understanding of what he could do and then what he had done. But throughout the movie, Einstein didn't, but our perspective did.

SPEAKER_04 29:48

Yeah. That's definitely fair. What was your take on the final sequence of the movie whenever Oppenheimer says we unleashed the power for humanity to destroy itself, or someone said that, and I think that was kind of the final montage was Earth being annihilated by nuclear weapons?

SPEAKER_00 30:09

Yeah, I felt like that was really a lot more heavy than I expected it, especially because it was all these nukes going up, and that was obviously CGI, and it could have been a little hokey, but it was a lot more heavy than I would have expected it to be.

SPEAKER_04 30:23

Yeah. What do you think that said about the movie as a whole? And how what do you think that says about Oppenheimer?

SPEAKER_00 30:30

I think it changed my perspective in the end. The movie makes you want him to create the bomb. You know, it kind of creates this excitement. He's building this team. And in the end, it creates this solemnness about, you know, what is the true creation of this, and it it makes you think a little more about you know the US's creation of the bomb, and maybe it dramaticized, you know, obviously, we haven't had a nuclear holocaust after that, so that was a little probably a little more dramatic, but you know, it it internalized or it externalized his internal thoughts about it.

SPEAKER_03 31:05

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 31:05

I think in the end, and wanted to ask you about this.

SPEAKER_03 31:08

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 31:08

What did you think about uh Rami Malik's final scene in the end where he exposed Strauss? And do you feel like he was brought out enough in the movie to make him significant enough to do that in the end?

SPEAKER_04 31:23

I thought he was definitely not used as much as someone of his status could have been used. But I did find it interesting that in scenes where he was there, Oppenheimer didn't treat him very well.

SPEAKER_00 31:36

Yeah, that surprised me too.

SPEAKER_04 31:38

Yet he still went to bat for Oppenheimer because he wanted to do the right thing.

SPEAKER_00 31:43

Yeah, and part of it might have been too because of maybe like having common ground as scientists in defending science as a whole.

SPEAKER_04 31:53

Yeah, it was an interesting choice. I mean, that's how it unfolded in real life. So obviously he didn't want to change that. Yeah. But I did think it was an interesting choice for that character, regardless, to go up and testify against Strauss. But I do think that scene was really well done in Strauss's defeat being realized.

SPEAKER_00 32:16

Yeah, I definitely agree. One other character that does a phenomenal job in my mind, in the end, is the uh main interrogator, main prosecutor, not prosecutor, but on the board. Yeah, yeah. He's been in some movies, and he's been in, you know, no, not him. Oh um, the main the main interrogator on the board for uh Oppenheimer's certification. Yeah, he's been on in some off and on projects. I think he was in um one of the Planet of the Apes series, and he was also in uh Pet Cemetery, and I I mean I think this showcased I think his aggressive acting nature and really allowed him to you know showcase a lot of those skills.

SPEAKER_04 32:59

I agree. Yeah, he did a great job. What did you think about the scene in the interrogation where the camera's kind of panning and then it comes out the other side and Oppenheimer's naked?

SPEAKER_00 33:13

Those parts seemed I think I understood what they were doing with the movie. Yeah, it seemed a little unnecessary. Yeah, you know, I think it I understood it was like this turmoil of him feeling exposed in front of his wife.

SPEAKER_02 33:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 33:25

But it felt like in my mind a step beyond like what was necessary to paint that, maybe.

SPEAKER_04 33:31

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 33:31

What about you?

SPEAKER_04 33:32

I don't know. I kind of agree. I thought it was a very bold choice for a Nolan movie. Yeah. I did not expect that at all. That was some art house stuff for sure. And so that was very interesting.

SPEAKER_00 33:44

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 33:45

Okay, I actually have a question for you to kind of wrap up the episode. Is the movie fundamentally about nuclear weapons, or is it about humanity's inability to control consequences of innovation? I think this is a very relevant movie. Today, obviously there's still the threat of nuclear weapons, but with the advent of AI and the fear that that has caused that it will get out of control or it will take over. What are your thoughts?

SPEAKER_00 34:15

I think it I think it successfully paints quite a few themes and maybe you know sub-themes. I think to me, which I think a variety of major themes could be uh made into the primary, but but to me, the biggest theme or what it was trying to tell was I think the rise and fall of power, you know, you know, the true nature of humans, that constant, you know, throughout history, the greatest scientists will eventually be tarred and feathered, you know, the greatest among us will eventually be, you know, pushed to the side, and then maybe they it'll be celebrated later. But I think it created a central truth or it, you know, painted a central truth about society and humanity in general.

SPEAKER_04 35:03

Do you think legacy is determined by actions, or do you think it's determined by the fallout of what your actions caused?

SPEAKER_00 35:11

I think it's, you know, fallout, but I also think it's later uncontrollables. And I think about there was a film called Blade Runner, 1980s, 1984, right? Harrison Ford. Most of you probably know it. Not popular in its time, but now it's a cult classic. And maybe not because of anything it did. I think it was a great movie, but things happen, whether or not it was because of them or maybe in spite of them that chain reaction happened. So minor example, but you know, I think it depends. Yeah. What do you think?

SPEAKER_04 35:45

I think that people are more so remembered and defined for what they did, the actions they took. I think of figures in the past that are remembered more fondly than they probably should have been, especially speaking of presidents. Some of them weren't that great of people, but they're fondly remembered for their accomplishments and achievements. And so I think ultimately history will remember you for what you did, but I think in the moment, the people that exist in that generation will remember that person for the fallout and the consequences of their actions.

SPEAKER_00 36:20

Yeah, that's true. And I think it's a matter of perspective. And the movie probably took some cinematic liberties on how it painted was it Eisenhower or was it Truman? Truman. How it painted Truman and then it painted Kennedy later on.

SPEAKER_03 36:34

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 36:34

It probably took some cinematic liberties on that. I love the JFK name drop.

SPEAKER_04 36:38

Like it was some like superhero being mentioned. That was awesome.

SPEAKER_01 36:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 36:43

Yeah, it was interesting. And I also don't know why Gary Oldman only had like 10 seconds in this movie. Yeah. I mean, he's one of the like the greatest actors of all time, and he was only used for about you know 10 seconds.

SPEAKER_04 36:56

Yeah. Now get that crybaby out of here. Yeah. Yeah. It was interesting. I thought it was awesome Gary Oldman was in there because he is one of the best actors we've ever seen. But I think it's already such a stacked cast, it would have been hard for him to share the limelight with everybody.

SPEAKER_00 37:14

Definitely agree.

SPEAKER_04 37:15

But anyways, awesome Luke. Well, I feel like we've had a good discussion on Oppenheimer. So, Luke, I think that about wraps up our conversation on Oppenheimer. What would you rate the film out of five?

SPEAKER_00 37:28

Four and a half out of five. Okay. You know, one of the greatest movies I've ever seen, but there were I think length was a little too long. I think the pacing was great. It just was probably too long for most audiences.

SPEAKER_03 37:42

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 37:43

Um, and then I mentioned some of the cinematic liberties it took. But other than that, I think, you know, phenomenal. Yeah. What about you?

SPEAKER_04 37:50

I'd actually go five out of five. Okay. It's one of those rare ones for me where I only have one or two qualms with it, which are small things. It's actually a couple of the VFX shots. One of them being when he's talking about atmospheric ignition to Einstein. It's a shot over the pond, and then the sky goes white and the pond kind of erupts into flames. It's a very brief shot, but it really took me out of the movie for a second. Really? Yeah, I just didn't like that shot. Okay. I thought it was kind of cheese. And then there was an that other shot you mentioned of the girl, I guess his daughter. Did you fact check that?

SPEAKER_00 38:32

No. Let me fact check that really quick.

SPEAKER_04 38:34

Okay. I think that that scene, I didn't love the makeup done in that scene. I feel like it would have hit and impacted a lot more if it had fully shown something more graphic.

SPEAKER_00 38:47

Yeah, it does say Flora Nolan in a brief but haunting cameo as Okay.

SPEAKER_04 38:53

And then not to derail how I'm rating the movie, but what did you think about the film not including any images or footage from the aftermath of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Did you think that it would have added to the film if that stuff was included, or do you think it would have distracted from the narrative?

SPEAKER_00 39:12

I don't think the film was about, you know, being kind of a historical documentary. And I know there was pushback about that, but the film did enough to paint the picture. It wasn't there to, you know, give actuals. Yeah. And I understand that. You know, not every historical film has to put. I don't know what all historical films actually put. I mean, the Patriot didn't put Revolutionary War photos after it. What did you think?

SPEAKER_04 39:38

Yeah. I don't I didn't really think anything of it. I mean, they are playing stuff for the characters to see and they're reacting to it. Yeah. I just don't feel like it was needed because it was truly more so about Oppenheimer's inner turmoil. And it kind of left up the horrors to one's imagination. And the things we can think of are honestly probably just as scary as the images that actually occurred.

SPEAKER_00 40:07

Yeah, and I think it it was trying to dance a line around the movie's opinion about you know atomic weapons. And I think it was trying not to take a stance on the weapons, it was trying to, you know, paint the turmoil of Oppenheimer's viewpoint of the weapons, but I don't think it was trying to take a stance. And I think it did did well at doing that. And if it did the like put those pictures in there, it probably would have done so to take a stance.

SPEAKER_02 40:32

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 40:32

Anyway, other than those two things that I'm negative on, I thought the score was great, the cinematography was awesome, I thought the acting was excellent. Pretty much everything in this film worked for me. I thought the riding was great, the pacing was good. I love the interacting timelines. So very high on the scale for me. Really enjoyed it. Probably my favorite Christopher Nolan movie, to be honest.

SPEAKER_00 40:57

Yeah. Yeah. And speaking of Christopher Nolan, we have the, like I mentioned, the Odyssey coming up. But wanted to ask a couple questions in preparation. You know, the first, do you feel, you know, given that Nolan is, you know, often trying to be grounded in reality, do you feel like Nolan is the right director to have made this movie before we've even seen it?

SPEAKER_04 41:20

I'm gonna answer yes, because he's the only filmmaker at this scale right now, other than Denis Velneau, that is able to create these blockbusters that everyone goes to see. And so I think this is such an epic story that he's the perfect filmmaker to tell it. And I in the trailers, it does look like there are mythical creatures. I will say though, in interviews, I have heard him say something that helped him understand the story better was thinking of ancient Greeks lack of knowledge about the way weather patterns work and the way that weather interacts with interacts in nature and attributing those things to gods. And so I think that was an interesting take and not something I'd thought about. Like, for example, lightning. He in his mind, he thinks of it more as they're reacting to a god being angry, and that's a display of his anger.

SPEAKER_00 42:22

That's true, and I guess you know, him being more grounded in reality or at least grounded in cultural tendencies and going to that detail because he is a very detailed director, is gonna be a plus for that film.

SPEAKER_04 42:35

Absolutely. And there's been a ton of backlash already, just about historical inaccuracies and things. I want to remind everyone this is a this is a story from seventh century BC. We don't have any much documentation of that era. Obviously, they found artifacts, but that was so long ago. And I think some historians did some videos where they showed the quote unquote Odyssey accurate armor of that era, and it's like bowl helmets and stuff, and that would be really lame on the big screen, if I'm being honest. So I'm all for the armor that he's displayed in this movie. I don't think it's distracting at all. Historical epics throughout cinema history have taken liberties, they've casted English actors, they've spoken in American accents, it's more accessible to wider audiences that way. Bigger stars are gonna draw more people to the box office. I just think it's honestly stupid criticism. And I think that this is Nolan's Nolan's version of the Odyssey. You don't have to take it as the main version of the Odyssey if you don't like it. Think of it as another translation, but in cinema format.

SPEAKER_00 43:45

Yeah, that's a fair point. I guess we'll see how it goes.

SPEAKER_04 43:48

Yeah. And you know what? The film could be cheeks.

SPEAKER_00 43:51

Yeah. So yeah, I'm interested because I think there's enough controversy. I'm I'm interested to see, you know, if it goes either way, but I'm I'm open-minded. Yeah. Well, you know, go and see the Odyssey. I know there's several initial criticisms, and I know there's initial reactions out there. It'll be interesting to see, you know, how Nolan takes his grounded approach to movies and we'll see how we feel about it. Yeah. But that's it for today. Any closing words, Jackson?

SPEAKER_04 44:19

Um, Oppenheimer is a great movie. You should go watch it if you haven't seen it. Hopefully, you've seen it if you listen to this whole episode because we did spoil most of it. Um, but that pretty much wraps up our coverage of Oppenheimer. We want to thank you all for listening. If you're enjoying the podcast, please tell your friends, tell your family, rate us five stars on Spotify and Apple Music. Spread the word. We really enjoy doing this. Thank you guys for listening.