All the way back in 2020 there was this idea that Christopher Nolan’s Tenet was going to undo the damage to cinemas that the pandemic had caused. I don’t think it was quite the result people were hoping for, but in what feels like no time at all, Nolan is back with another film. This time it’s Oppenheimer, which like most of Nolan’s other work has been quick to receive praise from both critics and audiences.
I know I really shouldn’t have to say it but Oppenheimer tells the story of theoretical physicist J Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy) as he goes from university student to leading a team of scientists working on a secret project to build a bomb that will help America to win the war. But what some may find a little surprising is, that’s only some of the story. There’s also some delving into his relationships with women such as his wife Katherine (Emily Blunt) as well as his lover Jean Tatlock (Florence Pugh). Then there’s Oppenheimer’s eventual feelings of regret about what he created once he sees its potential; and any efforts to get it under any kind of control are pushed back with a hearing about his security clearance, where his supposed communist sympathies are brought to attention in an attempt to discredit him. This is where Lewis Strauss (Robert Downey Jr) comes in.
Right from the start I think a big talking point of this film was that Cillian Murphy was being put front and centre in the lead role. He’s worked with Nolan before as Scarecrow in The Dark Knight Trilogy as well as having roles in both Inception and Dunkirk. Here I think there are very few scenes where he is not present, He’s certainly interesting to watch, the camera focuses on his eyes a lot which can look intense at times but can just as easily look thoughtful. I think there is a sense of the enthusiasm and passion he has for the field of science that he has given his life to. He’s also got some moments where he is a little awkward at times, which is seemingly true to how the man was in real life. Murphy of course took immersing himself in the character very seriously, slimming down to look like the real man. He may not have perfected the look but I think the effort should be applauded.
Staying with the lead performances, Downey Jr’s Strauss is the closest thing the film has to a villain and if, like me, you haven’t seen much of his work besides Iron Man or anything before that, it’s quite a pleasant surprise to see that not only can he play different parts, but he can also do so effortlessly. I think it works in a similar way to what happened when Hugh Jackman played PT Barnum in The Greatest Showman, in that audiences had become so used to seeing him play Wolverine that just seeing him in something so different felt like a revelation. Strauss is as far from Iron Man as you could possibly get. I don’t think he ever cracks a joke, far less do or say anything to endear him to the audience. Here he is completely of out of what was no doubt his comfort zone from many years and he’s deservedly exceling in it.
I think this might just be Nolan’s biggest film in terms of casting. As well as the people I mentioned above, there are also: Matt Damon, Rami Malek, Josh Hartnett, Casey Affleck, Jason Clarke, Alden Ehrenreich, Matthew Modine, Kenneth Branagh and in a very short scene, Gary Oldman as President Truman. This isn’t even half the people who are part of the cast. But I do believe that a cast this big could be both an asset and a potential problem. On the one hand many of them are talented and it’s interesting to see so many of them together, but the core problem is that it can easily feel too crowded. It’s so big that it would be almost too easy to forget who is in it and even when some people were on screen I think I was occasionally unsure of who they were playing. Most of them are fairly easy to recognise like Branagh, but I think some of the others involved don’t enjoy such luxuries. And yes, this would appear to be the first Nolan film since Insomnia where Michael Caine is not in the cast in any capacity, credited or uncredited.
It wouldn’t be a Nolan film without him writing the script, while using the book American Prometheus as inspiration, but just how far that inspiration went is anyone’s guess as everything unfolds in nonlinear fashion which of course is something Nolan used in his film Memento. Scenes also jump around from being shot in black and white to full colour, with little to no help in determining what part of the story is taking place at a particular moment. Most of what happens after the war is in black and white, but just about anything before or during the war is kept in colour. I think it can be figured out, even if a bit of work is needed to do so.
Something else Oppenheimer has been getting attention for is the three-hour runtime. I think it does drag in some places and probably some people won’t have a desire to watch It again (while the more hardcore fans will no doubt take great pleasure in rewatching it over and over again). Unlike some of Nolan’s other work in recent years, this requires you to pay attention and is mostly made up of a lot of people sitting around and talking, so not much in the way of action it all. But even if it’s not as big as some people may have been expecting, Nolan uses the Trinity test sequence well. After all, it is a big moment in both this narrative and world history, but he does build it up in a way that I think should be thought of as accomplished.
There may not be action but there are moments where Nolan is trying to do something interesting with his visuals, like his use of fireballs and stars. and giving Oppenheimer visions of what he thinks his creation could do to both people and the world. I would say these are impressive, if over a little too quickly for us to really take them in. But I’m still a little unclear about what the droplets of water at the start are all about; I can only assume it’s part of showing how Oppenheimer sees things.
Many Nolan collaborators from previous work have returned. Like Tenet, one notable absence is Hans Zimmer, and like Tenet, his shoes are filled by Ludwig Göransson. I’m sure I actually heard his music for the Trinity test scene on the radio before I saw the film but when it’s used in context I think it works well alongside the characters getting on their knees and covering their eyes as the sound ramps up and up as they all prepare for the explosion.
I know there was coverage about the film featuring pronged frontal nudity and sex but I think both of those were really just made out to be more of a big deal then they really are. They do feature, but only for a few seconds at time. I never thought it was anything worthy of media coverage.
Oppenheimer marks quite a change of pace in the career of its director. It’s much more dramatic, driven by dialogue and with a very serious and mature subject at the heart of its narrative, which rightly gives it a sense of distinction that it wears proudly alongside Nolan’s other work. There isn’t much humour but there are moments of humour, notably the one from Matt Damon that was in all the trailers.
Some of it could have been cut down without losing anything essential, but a man with Nolan’s reputation has the power to do more or less whatever his heart desires. I don’t think I liked it much as other people have, but there’s no denying Nolan’s ability and skill at what he does. In the eyes of those that liked it, maybe this was the cinema saviour they’ve been hoping for. Tenet may have been the film that cinema needed, but Oppenheimer is possibly the film it deserved.
