This is a biopic of sorts, but damn is it not like any biopic you've seen. Good or bad does not apply to this movie, why? It's a technical marvel on every conceivable level. I think some of People will love and some will be bored, I won't lie, about 1.5hrs in(not sure I didn't look at time), I got bogged down in the dialog and wanted it to end. I felt so overwhelmed, but shortly after I was able to get ack into the movie. Honestly, can we please bring intermissions back like they had for long movies up to the 1960's? Still, despite my being a bid overwhelmed and bored in the middle section, this is a breath of fresh air in a wasteland of superhero films and poorly made, quick cash grab movies; this movie and Christopher Nolan are beacons of hope and a reminder that some people still care about making good films and raising the bar. It's not perfect, and it's ambitions are high, but it mostly succeeds, compare this to other recently released films, how can you say it is not very well-made, even if you hate it? The acting is great across the board, especially Cillian Murphy, Robert, Downey Jr, and Emily Blunt.
I don't think it matters how much you know about this film going in, though I always recommend going in blind. This movie is very unique on so many levels. I have personally watched over 10,000 movies, I think at this point, I know a bit. I watch all kinds of movies, read my reviews. I don't care if it cost $5 or $500,000,000, who cares??? If it's entertaining. Given that, this is a movie that uses it's budget well at 100,000,000. The usage of film, as opposed to digital does indeed make it look etter, and gives it an old school feel. While Barbie isn't remotely the same movie, it cost $100,000,000 as well, and was released around the same time, they couldn't be more far apart. Barbie was filled with marxist and feminist nonsense, Oppenheimer indeed had communism in it, but it presented it in a pretty matter of fact way honestly. I was impressed. I am by no means a communist, but it seemed to just be presenting what was going on. As opposed to Barbie which used idiotic Marxist and pop communist ideologies and slogans. I've seen both movies, Barbie may have been made for the same $$$, but Oppenheimer is truly a movie that will stand the rest of time, Barbie will not agree well, at all.
I had some complaints about Oppenheimer, but they are, in my opinion, miniscule. Compare this to Nolan's other films, hell even Interstellar, this is so much better than Interstellar, it makes that movie look like garbage. In terms of complaints, one of them is Matt Damon's performance as a colonel 2 star general, he's too relaxed in his facial expressions. Having spent a lot of time around military people and officers, I can say that longtime military people's eyebrows almost never move, especially high ranking officers, their faces tend to be fairly expressionless. Dane Dehan actually did a phenomenal job of this, he was perfect as a colonel, not at all wooden, though some may see it that way, he actually got the accurate facial expressions and mannerisms of a high ranking officer perfect, he was fantastic. Matt Damon is not a bad actor, and some of his scenes were good, but overall, I was not convinced of him being a colonel or above. Another thing I noticed, in a scene where flags were being waved, those flags were definitely not period accurate, nor were some of the clothes, and I only mention this because this film is so good on the details, to slack on those 2 details, though most people will never notice them, I am something of an expert in vintage stuff. In terms of cinematography, I didn't always understand some of the choices, such as the usage of black and white, it seemed weird, and didn't click why it was used until a day after the movie. I though it was related to timeline, like older events were in black and white, no that is not it at all, by the end of the film it becomes apparent black and white scenes are from someone else' perspective. . This film is not present sequentially, and this also adds to some disorientation and feelings of being overwhelmed, which made me feel like I was bored, but I really wasn't just overwhelmed. It's an interesting choice, which I think in the end does work, so it's not actually a complaint.
This is a weighty dialogue driven film, it presents heavy ideas, and it doesn't treat the audience like it's stupid, unlike Barbie, people who enjoyed Barbie, probably won't like this. Theirs no platitudes, and each person here who has any reasonable amount of screen time isn't "good" or "bad" they just are, I did not think Oppenheimer here was presented as flawless, in fact I felt he was displayed to be a very flawed man who made some awful choices and sometimes treated others like garbage, in other words human. To think that films such as "Parasite" has even remotely the same rating is absurd, this movie is technically far beyond it on every level, every technical aspect is exceptional. The script is very complex, and the movie isn't totally linear, the cinematography is awesome, with fantastic pages of closeups, and zooms, the freaking of each shot is well thought In terms of cinematography, I didn't always understand some of the choices, such as the usage of black and white, it seemed weird, and didn't click why it was used until a day after the movie. The sound design, well, it's pretty insane, IMAX is the best way to see this. It's got a stellar sound design. The acting is amazing across the board. What makes it great isn't when people like Robert Downey Jr get histrionic, no it's the subtle body language, and theirs much of that here. This is what differentiates between a good and great actor. If you can use realistic body language, that's impressive. The makeup is fantastic, the aging effects, the transition of David Krumholtz which was crazy and I couldn't tell he wasn't that fat honestly.
Much of this, people will not notice. I don't say this to be condescending, it means the movie did a great job. As I said it has flaws, but the good hear so arrival outweighs the bad I don't find it worth mentioning. I never say that. Read my other reviews, I nitpick to hell and back.
If you don't have patience, and you don't like to this, avoid this and watch Barbie instead. This movie tackles many tough subjects, especially tournament corruption, the ethics of modern warfare, personal ethics, science and it's practical usages, infidelity, but it rarely presents these in a heavy handed way, it's just a part of the story. If you like being entertained, while still thinking, this is the movie for you.
I don't think it matters how much you know about this film going in, though I always recommend going in blind. This movie is very unique on so many levels. I have personally watched over 10,000 movies, I think at this point, I know a bit. I watch all kinds of movies, read my reviews. I don't care if it cost $5 or $500,000,000, who cares??? If it's entertaining. Given that, this is a movie that uses it's budget well at 100,000,000. The usage of film, as opposed to digital does indeed make it look etter, and gives it an old school feel. While Barbie isn't remotely the same movie, it cost $100,000,000 as well, and was released around the same time, they couldn't be more far apart. Barbie was filled with marxist and feminist nonsense, Oppenheimer indeed had communism in it, but it presented it in a pretty matter of fact way honestly. I was impressed. I am by no means a communist, but it seemed to just be presenting what was going on. As opposed to Barbie which used idiotic Marxist and pop communist ideologies and slogans. I've seen both movies, Barbie may have been made for the same $$$, but Oppenheimer is truly a movie that will stand the rest of time, Barbie will not agree well, at all.
I had some complaints about Oppenheimer, but they are, in my opinion, miniscule. Compare this to Nolan's other films, hell even Interstellar, this is so much better than Interstellar, it makes that movie look like garbage. In terms of complaints, one of them is Matt Damon's performance as a colonel 2 star general, he's too relaxed in his facial expressions. Having spent a lot of time around military people and officers, I can say that longtime military people's eyebrows almost never move, especially high ranking officers, their faces tend to be fairly expressionless. Dane Dehan actually did a phenomenal job of this, he was perfect as a colonel, not at all wooden, though some may see it that way, he actually got the accurate facial expressions and mannerisms of a high ranking officer perfect, he was fantastic. Matt Damon is not a bad actor, and some of his scenes were good, but overall, I was not convinced of him being a colonel or above. Another thing I noticed, in a scene where flags were being waved, those flags were definitely not period accurate, nor were some of the clothes, and I only mention this because this film is so good on the details, to slack on those 2 details, though most people will never notice them, I am something of an expert in vintage stuff. In terms of cinematography, I didn't always understand some of the choices, such as the usage of black and white, it seemed weird, and didn't click why it was used until a day after the movie. I though it was related to timeline, like older events were in black and white, no that is not it at all, by the end of the film it becomes apparent black and white scenes are from someone else' perspective. . This film is not present sequentially, and this also adds to some disorientation and feelings of being overwhelmed, which made me feel like I was bored, but I really wasn't just overwhelmed. It's an interesting choice, which I think in the end does work, so it's not actually a complaint.
This is a weighty dialogue driven film, it presents heavy ideas, and it doesn't treat the audience like it's stupid, unlike Barbie, people who enjoyed Barbie, probably won't like this. Theirs no platitudes, and each person here who has any reasonable amount of screen time isn't "good" or "bad" they just are, I did not think Oppenheimer here was presented as flawless, in fact I felt he was displayed to be a very flawed man who made some awful choices and sometimes treated others like garbage, in other words human. To think that films such as "Parasite" has even remotely the same rating is absurd, this movie is technically far beyond it on every level, every technical aspect is exceptional. The script is very complex, and the movie isn't totally linear, the cinematography is awesome, with fantastic pages of closeups, and zooms, the freaking of each shot is well thought In terms of cinematography, I didn't always understand some of the choices, such as the usage of black and white, it seemed weird, and didn't click why it was used until a day after the movie. The sound design, well, it's pretty insane, IMAX is the best way to see this. It's got a stellar sound design. The acting is amazing across the board. What makes it great isn't when people like Robert Downey Jr get histrionic, no it's the subtle body language, and theirs much of that here. This is what differentiates between a good and great actor. If you can use realistic body language, that's impressive. The makeup is fantastic, the aging effects, the transition of David Krumholtz which was crazy and I couldn't tell he wasn't that fat honestly.
Much of this, people will not notice. I don't say this to be condescending, it means the movie did a great job. As I said it has flaws, but the good hear so arrival outweighs the bad I don't find it worth mentioning. I never say that. Read my other reviews, I nitpick to hell and back.
If you don't have patience, and you don't like to this, avoid this and watch Barbie instead. This movie tackles many tough subjects, especially tournament corruption, the ethics of modern warfare, personal ethics, science and it's practical usages, infidelity, but it rarely presents these in a heavy handed way, it's just a part of the story. If you like being entertained, while still thinking, this is the movie for you.