Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Oppenheimer (I) (2023)
5/10
Misses the Mark...
24 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
The expectations that go into a Nolan film have obviously affected the end product of most of his more recent efforts, so much so that the great potential story of one of the most significant technological events in history becomes poorly told.

From a historical perspective, so many significant events from the development of atomic weapons are left out, such as Heisenberg (Germany) almost killing himself during his own experiments, the exodus of great scientists to the US preceding the Nazi uprising, the Demon Core incidents after the War, and the celebrity status Oppenheimer achieved after the War. Zero historical footage is used in this film, which is worse for it as so much amazing stuff could be repurposed here. We aren't even allowed to feel anything about the atrocities of Germany, Japan, or the USSR at the time. In fact, a key reason Truman wanted to end the war with the bomb quickly was to keep the Soviets from making a mess of post-war Japan by claiming lands by invasion, which would have led to a partly communist Japan to this day.

From a science perspective, little is told about the development of the bombs themselves, including the obstacles the scientists really faced and the achievements they made. No mention of the idea that the technology could also be used to save the world (nuclear power), being reason enough to push forward with the research, aside from keeping it out of Germany's hands, which was a real concern of the government.

As such, this isn't a documentary. Not at all. Any of the aforementioned stuff would have made for a brilliant Nolan film...but I don't see him capable of makes a film with real science and history.

Neither is it a character study, as the biopic title suggests. Rather it's a vehicle for Nolan to edit together trailer-type cuts across changing timelines for 3 hours. I found it tiresome and frenetic. While the acting is good, none of it makes us feel anything for the characters. While there was an opportunity to work on the morality angle for Oppenheimer, which was very much what the real man was about, the film glosses over this to focus only on the politics of the time, where the McCarthy era witch-hunts ended Oppenheimer's career as a quantum physicist. Even then, Nolan misses an opportunity to vilify those actions by the government, making no real statements there.

The result of the 3 hours is the simple message that the genie cannot be put back in the bottle, and in Oppenheimer's mind, would end in our destruction.

That said, all the high grades for this film come from Nolan fanboys, who write pretentious reviews for pretentious films.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Had to see it...have to bash it!
25 July 2007
It's been a while since seeing this the first time, so I watched it again with the second movie in the series. While I realize there is a 3rd movie out that I haven't seen yet, I'll review under the original title...

Just from the standpoint of production value, screen writing, and movie making, this movie fails on many levels, though it succeeds on a few as well. What can you expect from a low-budget, "B" movie? Not much, and it works from the standpoint of production. However, the writing is certainly disjointed, with little in the way of character development...exactly what I'd expect when there is an agenda to a film. I didn't have a problem with the acting...the cast is solid; however, the screenplay in both movies gives the actors little opportunity to really stretch themselves. Because the film is "Christian," this is predictable, as you can't very well portray violent chaos of the "end times" without also breaking some of the ethics which are normally associated with Christianity. In other words, the mistake comes in making this into a G-rated film when the content, even in the most conservative of Bible interpretations, would be R-rated by any measure. So, if the purpose of the movie is to scare people into Christian faith, then the movie should be somewhat scary, right? However, you can't comment on a film adaptation from a book without commenting on the book, or in this case, series of books. There are certainly plenty of Christian materials worthy enough to be made into movies...but not the "Left Behind" series...and these movies ultimately fail because, while being best-sellers, they are poorly written novels based on bad theology.

As a Southern Baptist minister, I confess that the books were a guilty pleasure for me, though I have yet to finish the last two books of the series. I have described them as decent fiction, and if the books would take the point of view that this is one "possibility" or interpretation of the subject of biblical eschatology (study of the "end times), then I could live with that. However, this series is divisive in Christian circles because it promotes the "literalist" interpretation of all Scripture above a more proper hermeneutic. Inevitably, this leads to the "pre-trib, pre-millenial" dispensation point of view, which confines an all-powerful God far too by humanity's world. In other words, as I've always said, God shouldn't need our helicopters and bombs to do his ultimate work. But because many people, particularly unstudied Christians, can't think beyond their own world-views, we are left with a pro-conservative, fundamentalist stance with regard to Bible interpretation, and attempts to push it through as the "only" interpretation.

Thus, the books carry with them an agenda, not so much to get the "lost" to understand their need for Christ, but to state that the fundamentalist point of view is the only valid way to understand the Bible. I recall very clearly reading (several years ago) in the second novel a scene where the characters reference a person who was "left behind" BECAUSE of his non-adherence to this point of view; as if "real" christians worthy to be "raptured" couldn't possibly hold to another eschatology. This is disturbing for several reasons, the least of which is because a "rapture" is only briefly mentioned in Scripture and it's connection to real, end-time prophecy is tenuous at best.

But the real issue with these books is comes in the way they divide the Christian community and how they portray "true" Christian behavior. Ultimately, I feel they harden more people to an otherwise legitimate faith/religion instead of win people towards it. It turns all Christians into caricatures, equally disdained and laughed at by the world despite the fact that there is theological room for a wide diversity of believes within Christian thought and practice. As a Christian body, on the whole, we've done enough of that kind of damage to society over 2000 years of history...and we certainly don't need to promote it by film to thousands, maybe millions of others.

Thus, the "Left Behind" movies fail because the "Left Behind" books aren't worthy to be interpreted into movies.
71 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed