A very serious but highly dramatic film that tells a fascinating story of technology and its political implications…
Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon
Running time: 180 minutes
Oppenheimer is the latest in the recent trend in Hollywood for biopics, but it goes well beyond following this memetic formula in its telling of this very powerful and important story of the life and times of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer was a theoretical physicist and is often dubbed the “father of the atomic bomb” and the film traces a swift overview of Oppenheimer’s life, keeping a strong focus on the invention of the bomb itself and the resulting aftermath. Many biopics that come out these days are somewhat unfocused attempts to compress an entire life story into a film with seemingly little point in doing so, apart from the sheer enjoyment of indulging in an entertaining life story, but with this film, director Christopher Nolan keeps a precise focus to the story and the movie plays with an intense dramatic drive that keeps you on the edge of your seat.
The intensity is a result of the time period in which it is set. Most of the film plays out in the wartime years of the 1940s, in the race to beat the axis powers in coming up with an atomic weapon. This would suggest that the film is a war movie, but it is the tension between war and scientific advancement that gives the movie its true tension. Cillian Murphy’s Oppenheimer is a man captivated by the boundless possibilities of science and the movie follows his story, delving into his work in science and his ties with the war and the wider politics of the time.
The movie is a visual delight. Christopher Nolan prefers shooting his films on IMAX 70mm film, rather than the more typical digital shooting of nowadays; despite this seemingly anachronistic choice, the picture has a depth of detail that is stunning. The choice of colour in the film is very interesting too, with many scenes shot in black and white that really adds to the mid 20th century setting. Nolan has claimed that minimal, if any, CGI was used in the making of the film which makes the technical feats accomplished all the more impressive. Being able to marvel and wonder at large scale practical effects feels like the magic of cinema somewhat returning.
There were many ways in which Nolan could have approached the subject of the atomic bomb in this film, and he presents the story in an intriguingly neutral fashion through most of the film, allowing the audience to draw their own conclusions about events. He presents the scientists as eccentric boffins that are far more interested in their science than any policy or wartime implications of it. This builds a tension in the film, with the scientists far more interested in exploring possibilities and theories, while the politicians and military generals want certainties and policies from them.
We see the whole universe unfolding in Oppenheimer’s far-seeing ice-chip eyes and haunted, hollow face as the movie advances
Oppenheimer is one of the most curious figures out of this crowd of eccentrics. While he is in part a somewhat dry, mathematical scientific figure, he is also a man with intense political and philosophical views of his own. He is a leading man in his field and as a result is chosen out to lead the Manhattan Project. There is a demand from the politicians and military leaders that Oppenheimer both be a quasi-politician in thinking through the implications of the scientific project he leads, as well as being just a scientist. This seems to be the source of the tension in the film and Oppenheimer is torn between his own political views and attempting to be just a scientist. The people around him demand he give up his own personal political views while also not just being a scientist. We see the whole universe unfolding in Oppenheimer’s far-seeing ice-chip eyes and haunted, hollow face as the movie advances.
A recurring theme in Christopher Nolan’s films is his use of time. With some films he takes this to surreal extremes and the subject of time is very apparent, but in this film it is used in a far more subtle way. As an audience, everyone knows that at some point the bomb is going to go off and then the consequences of it will unfurl, so the entire film feels like the countdown to the bomb going off. In this way, the film has two parts, the build-up and then the aftermath. Much like the radiation and its consequences, the effects of Oppenheimer’s creation haunt him for the rest of the film.
As a period film, it has a strong sense of the oppressive, bleak wartime feel, shown with stern looking people in cigarette smoke filled offices in black and white scenes discussing administration and security procedures. This is contrasted with the highly colourful and expansive scenes where science is involved, with shots of atoms and particle waves flying through the air and stars exploding. This is the fascinating juxtaposition in the film, where the technology being developed at the time seems to totally transcend the constraints of the time period, and in this way, Nolan also appears to play with time.
The second half of the film is Oppenheimer being subjected to humiliating security clearance hearings that picks over every aspect of his life. The hearings ask Oppenheimer the questions that we as an audience may ask him – is he personally ultimately responsible for unleashing onto the world a weapon that could destroy the world, if so, why did he allow that to happen… or was he unthinking and simply acting as a scientist wanting to do his job and help the government in its war efforts as best he could? Oppenheimer appears to be a man of contradictions who both wanted to play politics and take a moralistic standpoint on the question of atomic weapons, while also wanting to be just do science and have politicians and generals deal with the implications of the scientific developments. This is a hanging question that sees Oppenheimer blackmailed and scapegoated in a fascinating story of morality and science in wartime.
The film leaves the audience with little reassurance in its conclusion; after all, we all still live with the consequences of Oppenheimer’s creation. The film is an open question to us all about how we should live with weapons of mass destruction. Nolan’s films frequently require a couple of viewings to unravel fully, and while it lacks the baffle-factor of Tenet, Oppenheimer is no exception and is well worth a watch.
We have a favour to ask
LeftLion is Nottingham’s meeting point for information about what’s going on in our city, from the established organisations to the grassroots. We want to keep what we do free to all to access, but increasingly we are relying on revenue from our readers to continue. Can you spare a few quid each month to support us?
