Change Your Image
stocklee
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Oppenheimer (2023)
Superficial pseudo-epic and unwarranted showmanship
When I walked out of the theater after watching 'Oppenheimer' my soul was profoundly shaken, shaken by such a touching theme, such profound characters, and the fact that such a muddy period in history could be portrayed so shallow and contrived by Nolan.
What kind of century was the 20th century? If I were to ask you this question like in a game of 'rapid-fire questions,' what vocabulary would you use? Personally, I might say that the 20th century was a divisive century. Two wars of apocalyptic scale and brutality, numerous new ideologies leading to various actions, the rapid development of new technologies, and the impact of new social movements on each other. Therefore, the 20th century signifies not only physical division but also spiritual division. People were torn apart not only in times of war but also in times of peace.
So how should we describe Oppenheimer who greatly molded the 20th century and was greatly shaped by it? An American? A Jew? A patriot? A sympathizer of the left? A savior? A destroyer? A fanatic? A penitent? A brave man? A coward? A passionate individual? A libertine? He is all of the above, and yet he denies all of the above. Thus, he is the most perfect and painful symbol of his century - a divider. His century further tore apart the already torn him, and vice versa.
Compared to the original biography, Nolan's film completely fails to capture the profound individual psyche of Oppenheimer and the tragic spirit that resonates from the shared history of the 20th century's fatal divisions. There is no denying the fact that this film, in its emotional intensity and narrative structure, lacks the depth and diligence necessary to honor Oppenheimer himself.
In Nolan's work, there is a glaring absence of the director's exploration into Oppenheimer's terrifying paranoia and how his shattered self evolved. The film fails to depict Oppenheimer's multiple identity crises, his peculiar hunger and coldness within intimate relationships. It also fails to portray how this interdisciplinary genius conveyed to the world that mysticism and rational scientific pursuits ultimately converge in both purpose and spiritual experience. Furthermore, the film overlooks Oppenheimer's exhaustion and greatness as a mediator between the military and scientists during the Manhattan Project. It neglects to showcase the hellish frustrations he encountered throughout the atomic bomb development process, and the even more hellish determination belonging to both genius and madness. The film does not reveal how Oppenheimer's soul was fiercely contested by a sense of omnipotence and guilt after the bomb's detonation. It also fails to capture Oppenheimer's fluctuation between immense grief and anger during the McCarthy era, as well as his occasional temptation by a saintly mentality.
If we approach "Oppenheimer" from an epic perspective, it is undoubtedly a completely hollow film. In this movie, the masses are absent, heroes are suspended, men are marionettes, women are blow-up dolls, eras are fashion shows, individuals are mere tourists ticking off their checklist. Everything is superficial and fleeting, barely scratching the surface. The ensemble-style script should have meant that by turning each participant on the historical stage into a single path, a nerve, a dice, viewers would be amazed at the perfect yet cruel interplay of the web of destiny and the brain of God, as well as the infinite possibilities and a series of blind, sober, inevitable, and accidental moments when they observe the unstoppable giant called history. Such an experience would make us feel the same awe as our predecessors did when contemplating quantum mechanics: light is both a wave and a particle, and we exist as individuals and as history. However, "Oppenheimer" is a counterfeit epic. Nolan mistakenly believes that a large number of people can embody the clamor and grandeur of heroism, but unfortunately, it lacks care and profound exploration.
The editing is also a major flaw of this film. It feels so chaotic, lacking emotional and historical logic in its editing, as if I can hear Nolan shouting at me across the big screen, "Look, so many temporal and spatial inter weavings! Is my editing grand enough? Is it epic enough?"