Well they do tend to have to tone down American heroes because most are super flawed.

Thru can't even cover some because it would be difficult to explain the huge gaps where freaky shit happened. Like the founder of jpl Jack Parsons, how would you explain the time he hung out on a boat with Hubbard until Hubbard fucked his gf/fiancee and kicked him off the boat. He doesn't like the next three months "practicing magic" which was mostly writing wishes on slips of paper and masturbating onto them.

Random toilets? Do go on.

I feel a mini-series would work as well: The pacing was well maintained throughout all three hours and there were enough storylines to properly take breaks from each other.

I think the cinematography for Openhimer was deliberately and deceptively simple. Nolan leverages the 70 mm format to capture a lot of textures without being heavy handed.

This film was kind of a big departure from Nolan's typical action oriented style. I do think that some of the performances were mid, and the dialogue was a bit droll at times.

That said, I think he is extremely masterful in his ability to tell a story non linearly, which made the overall story more compelling since they packed a person's whole adult life's story into three hours.

I think the ending conveyed the overall point of the film, and still highlights the complexity of human nature.

Overall, I think the Openhimer tries to use subtleties in an era when "bigger is better".

Disagree.

There's plenty of biopics out there - but this one really has some powerful moments, that benefit from the cinema.

It adds a bit of depth and gravitas.

Got to agree, when you have 75 oled tv with Sonos sound bar + sub and 4k dv releases, it needs to be a real special movie to go to the theater, to watch with loud nasty people who can't put their phone down for 2 hours (and a newly added rent - paying for babysitter lol)

A concert statement

Make sure to find a good concrete block to put your review on afterwards

I mean, it's a biopic. It's REALLY hard to make an entertaining biopic because even the most dramatic parts of real life are like 90% boring as shit.

That said, Oppenheimer is officially the second biopic in history that I'll watch more than once. The character depictions are nuanced and compelling, I learned new things about the political landscape of the era, and the acting alone is entertaining enough to watch. The only other biopic I've ever even liked at all is Damien Chazelle's First Man about Neil Armstrong.

It's hard to turn real life into art

I very much enjoyed the movie. Enough that my wife and I are going to see it in IMAX a second time. I think it’s a really well put together film, it demanded my attention, I thought the structure of the story was fantastic, and the actors delivered excellent performances.

There are always going to be people who don’t like things, and there are always going to be a lot of them on the internet. But don’t let them make you disheartened. 93% on Rotten Tomatoes with a 91% audience score is a good movie.

I went to see it last night in an IMAX theatre. Whether or not you will be disappointed is depending on your expectations. I'll be honest and say, I'm not sure IMAX really adds to it. The Trinity test explosion has been much hyped but the realism of it is debatable IMO.

Having said all that, it is well executed, well paced with a real tension build up. The characters, as much of real world characters are all flawed. Ultimately I think it is a great story told well.

It's incredibly well done. It's just that people don't expect this kind of movie from Nolan. So wrong expectations led to bad experiences.

You probably won't be disappointed if you like Nolan's stuff, particularly Dunkirk.

It's a different genre than a lot of what he's done, but the acting is superb, the sound editing is going to be a guaranteed Oscar, and it's a compelling script.

The pacing is slow, particularly in the second half, but it wasn't a problem for me as the story itself has shifted at that point.

No fighting or bullets or action. And as long as that's not your expectation, you'll probably enjoy it.

And as one of the first directors to commit to shooting on IMAX format, his stuff is always going to look great in the theater, even when it's telling a more encapsulated story.

I don't think it's a film for everyone, and the box office draw his name brings might lead to disappointed audience members.

But for me it's in his top three films alongside Memento and Dark Knight (which remains my favorite, despite generally being looked down upon via an artistry standpoint as a comic book film).

Eh, I'd give it a 7. It's a solid movie. Very cinematic, great audio design, interesting characters. Goes on longer than I would have preferred but I guess they had to tell the whole story. Still, in all fairness, a 6 isn't even a bad movie.

Didn’t really like it, quite underwhelming.

Imo it’s worth watching. Definitely an experience better had in a theatre or Imax.

Edit: never said it’s the best movie I’ve ever seen, just that I personally enjoyed it in a theater lol