Tag Archives: Cillian Murphy

Film Reviews

Film Review: Oppenheimer (2023)

STORY

During World War II, US Army general Leslie Groves offered physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer to become the director of the Manhattan Project. Although Oppenheimer accepted and despite leading to a successful mission, his legacy and reputation were at stake when in 1954, during the McCarthy era, he was accused of being a Communist and a Soviet spy.

INTRODUCTION

Oppenheimer is based on J. Robert Oppenheimer’s biography “American Prometheus” written by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin. A special thanks to actor Robert Pattinson who gifted Christopher Nolan a book of Oppenheimer’s speeches. These materials inspired him to direct Oppenheimer.

This three-hour epic biodrama mostly focuses on the 1954 Oppenheimer Security Hearing, his role in the Manhattan Project, the accusations against him, and his sporadic affair with Jean Tatlock.

REVIEW

Oppenheimer, in its entirety, drives you to understand Oppenheimer that perhaps, a big perhaps, he was obsessed in creating a bomb that the Nazis cannot or do not. Being a Jew and observing the Jewish consequences of the war, his immense hatred for Adolf Hitler gave General Groves an idea to hand the world-changing project to a Jew.

The building of Oppenheimer’s character grows smoothly with the screenplay and intensifies in the middle of the story. You can feel yourself in his shoes and feel the heat that sweats him after getting stuck in the ugliest mashup of quantum mechanics, communism, world war, and sex. Nolan smartly executed these four outrageous bombings of Oppenheimer’s personal pie graph and showed us that before America was preparing the new world for which no one was ready, Oppenheimer was already bombed. The film successfully dramatizes the complexity of Oppenheimer’s life.

This film is not a usual path of gathering around and get the candies of the offered. Oppenheimer is a blend of science and politics that is brilliantly transformed in a cinematic format. The film is talkative but fruit for a wise. I do not believe that the viewers will have ever taken keen interest before in advanced physics such as ‘Quantum Mechanics’ as much as in this film. A three-hour non-action historical drama based on a physicist with more than half of the film dramatizing trial and hearing with a worldwide grossing of almost three commas definitely indicates that physics has found its cinematic voice with much excellence in almost every technical aspect.

Observe that most of the scenes of the film that has Robert Downey Jr. as Lewis Strauss is in black and white format. This can be a metaphor of dramatizing the culprit colorless. What is your opinion about keeping a lot of scenes black and white? Share your opinions below.

TECHNICALITIES

Most of the aspects look Oscar-promising. Jennifer Lame‘s editing was visibly challenging as the film adopted a nonlinear narrative. Observe all the interrogation scenes with Oppenheimer and the table conference with Strauss. Nolan recreated the town of Los Alamos, just like Oppenheimer asked Groves to build a town for creating the bomb in secrecy. So for the entire setup, the production designing of Ruth De Jong deserves the credit.

The background score of Ludwig Göransson not really bought me but I will praise his effort to somehow go in through the story and compose some interesting pieces on it. The winning piece of all compositions was that entire tense-building score when the bomb is about to explode, and when attorney Roger Robb pressing Oppenheimer goes very intense. I think without the score, those two scenes may not have fried the viewers.

Once again, Nolan used no CGI in the film at all. The Trinity test was also not real, I mean he didn’t really detonate an atomic bomb but magnesium, gasoline, propane, and aluminum powder were used to recreate the blast. Nolan is so adhere to realism, I feel if he ever makes an animated film based on animals, he may invite the animals to voice over the characters.

Speaking of explosion scene, I think that entire shot of waiting for the explosion was superbly orchestrated that took around five minutes. Oppenheimer addressing the rally and imagining the consequences. Notice the excitement in the rally turning into mourning.

Nolan’s films are known for many great qualities, one of the many that always impresses me are fast exchange of dialogues and many of those lines are hard-hitting and blunt. Always reminds me of Aaron Sorkin‘s style of dialogues exchange. This film also leaves no equation of disapproval. During the process of recruiting for the Manhattan project, Oppenheimer meets one of the listed to whom he pushes that they need us. His reply? “Until they don’t”. OUCH!!! That is the first head-shot to Oppenheimer in this dirty game.

CAST

There are so many well-known actors. To fit them in a 3-hour film needs a powerful screenplay. Otherwise, there is 99% chance for such assembling of actors to be considered ‘dragged’. Oppenheimer, with all that incredible casting, sent a bullet message that the casting was to fill the gap where the script demanded. It is the smart continuity of the screenplay that balanced their longer and shorter appearances. Their weight of appearance never mattered. Each of them was important to the story. The one I missed was definitely Nolan’s favorite, Michael Caine who collaborated with Nolan in eight consecutive films.

Seems like Oppenheimer will not only dominate at the coming Oscars in the technicalities but also for the performances. Cillian Murphy as Oppenheimer and Robert Downey Jr. as Lewis Strauss look pretty clear favorites to actually win the Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor awards. Their nominations look stamped. I will not be surprised if Emily Blunt and Matt Damon also show up in the nominations. Coming fresh building the legendary status of Thomas Shelby, one of the best decisions of Christopher Nolan for the film was selecting the right face for Oppenheimer. Cillian’s facial features are visibly more obstructing. In the transition of the burning struggles to achieve the unforgettable, the weight of pressure of his acting is very dogmatizing. The body language clearly melts once he begins to regret and realize their bigger plans of his brainchild.

And another actor after building the legendary status of Tony Stark, has arrived on stage with his most stunning performance in ages. Notice Robert Downey Jr. going nuts about Oppenheimer after the hearing.

MINUSES

Shocking isn’t it? Well for me, there are minuses in my opinion. There will never be a perfect film so that I ever give 10/10. You know why? Because that will defy nature.

1. Follow-up from the Trinity Test
The continuity from the success of the Trinity test drives towards the consequences to which Oppenheimer mentally suffers and regrets. The trouble is for the viewers spending the remaining last of the three hours in listening to the hearing and interrogation.

2. David Hill’s Findings
One of the Manhattan Project’s scientists David L. Hill played by Rami Malek had an unusual character growth. If I am not wrong, he appeared only thrice. The first two, he was mute and Oppenheimer stopped him from writing and then signing. But then in the last phase of the film, out of nowhere, he showed up in the Strauss’ hearing for the final plot twist and testified against him. So where goes the development of this character? How come he knew all this about Strauss’ dirty game against Oppenheimer? The whole point is missing about what leads him to there?

3. Love, Sex, and Gita
Oppenheimer had a mad affair with Jean Tatlock, that is true. The problem is everything that revolves around the character is either a bad execution or a shocking waste of time. The sex scene where she picks that specific line for Oppenheimer to read her, did she know Sanskrit to pick exactly that line, the loudest one?

There was an outrage in India over this scene because Bhagawad Gita was held by a woman in nudity. Kind of disrespect? In all honesty, the entire scene was unnecessary. If that actually happened, I have no disagreement over this. Because in the book, there is no such mention. But if this never happened, Nolan here wasn’t being artistic in his direction at all, it was plain nonsense. I wanted Oppenheimer to utter those words in Sanskrit as she demanded. I don’t know why didn’t he.

4. Ending
Christopher Nolan is the master of concluding the film. He has moved us with one of the best possible finishers. Oppenheimer doesn’t have a bad ending but not even a WOW ending. Yes, the suspense disclosed about what the two great physicists exchanged. But Nolan must have pushed for a frightening end. In his shoes, I would have pushed the timeline to 1965 on the sets of the NBC News where visibly old and deeply-hurt Oppenheimer regretfully quotes that line from Bhagavad Gita. And with that quote would follow the dramatizing of the atomic bombings on those two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

5. Where are the bombings?
And speaking of bombings. Where are the bombings? I understand the significance of the Manhattan Project but despite the fact that Oppenheimer was not directly involved to the atomic bombings but these are the one of the ugliest chapters of the human race that changed the world forever. This was on the cards and we all were hopeful that the director who crashed the plane in the name of realism in the previous film will show us atomic bombings instead of showing us the explosion of the Trinity test.

HISTORICAL ACCURACIES

FILE – Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission Advisory Council, tells a joint Congressional Atomic Committee that U.S. military establishment to his knowledge had never found it necessary to use exportable type isotopes for the development of new war machines. The hearing continued on charges of mismanagement in AEC. (AP Photo, File)

I was lost when Oppenheimer poisoned an apple but this incident is mentioned in the book. He was near to get expelled before his parents intervened.

Oppenheimer’s theory on black holes’ existence is correct and the news of Poland’s invasion did break the same day.

Oppenheimer did give away his child to his friend but the circumstances were different.

Haakon Chevalier asking Oppenheimer to pass information to George Eltenton was true.

The storm did interfere before the Trinity test.

Oppenheimer’s meeting with President Truman went unpleasant as shown. And Truman, believe it or not, actually called him a crybaby scientist.

Indeed, Klaus Fuchs will always be remembered as the Manhattan Project spy who passed the details to the Soviets.

Mrs Oppenheimer has quite an accurate portrayal. She do was married three times before Oppenheimer. A highly educated but sadly a depressed and an alcoholic woman.

David Hill’s testimony against Strauss was truly the game-changer. He did testify that Strauss had organized the campaign against Oppenheimer as an act of petty vengeance.

CLOSING REMARKS

Christopher Nolan has already completed two trilogies in his legendary career. The Dark Knight Trilogy and the one that still has no official name but I can convincingly call it a time trilogy or in better terms the “Inversion Trilogy” that is Inception, Interstellar, and Tenet. And now looks like Nolan is eager to complete a World War Trilogy. We will see what film will join Dunkirk and Oppenheimer.

Oppenheimer emphasizes on the human wants and breaking the walls to exceed that want for which a human spends energy, time, effort, and sometimes life. A ground-breaking goal that looks to lift a dreamer and his/her legacy either becomes a milestone or a curse. Oppenheimer shows the madness of achieving a goal and turning stupid and blind over not realizing that the people who were shouldering around you were the ones who were always ready to break you in pieces since the first day they met you for a reason. The dirty game was played, a particular division of human race was wiped off, and you were just there assuming that you were fighting your own war against the evil.

Everyone who entered into the world war had his/her hands dirty and soul corrupted. We all have considered the winners and losers from all the battles and wars but the ugliest truth is that no one actually wins these fights. Both the opponents fight against each other and the civilians are the one who outnumber the soldiers in casualties unless the soldiers fight on the battlefield.

In short, the egoes of the global powers raise the flags against each other and dominate by killing. And Oppenheimer superbly shows how a scientist is used for their wants and thrown into the mud when the mission is over.

RATING 8.7/10

SUBSCRIBE TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL AND WATCH MY FILM REVIEW HERE

FOLLOW ‘THE DARK KNAIK’ ON OTHER SOCIAL PLATFORMS

LETTERBOXD https://letterboxd.com/TheDarkKnaik/

FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/thedarkknaik
INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com/thedarkknaik/

TIKTOK

@thedarkknaik

TWITTER

Film Reviews

Film Review: Dunkirk (2017)

400,000 Men Couldn’t Get Home, So Home Came For Them

The message from hell descending from the clouds. The sea waves escorting back the dead bodies. The civilian boats rescuing the freezing fate-less soldiers. Casualties outnumbering the survivors. Hark! the bombers are approaching and releasing your death certificates. Realize! the fuel is getting low! So decide either you drop your plane to the sea or shoot your rival pilot.

There is panic everywhere, there is sonic everywhere. There is no amount of food, there is no hope for good. More than 300 thousand soldiers are trapped on the beaches and harbor of Dunkirk in an uncanny weather. France has fallen to the Germans and their troops are to reach the site anytime. But the Commander is hoping that they all will be back – Home.

Dunkirk is Christopher Nolan‘s latest project, a war film whose storyline and characters are fictional in nature but relies on the rich historical accuracy based on the historic evacuation of the Allied forces during World War II. Nolan has touched the new dimensions of the filmmaking of war films. For ages, the filmmakers have strived in convincing the audience by making ‘lengthy’ war films but Nolan’s warfare drama runs for only 106 minutes and proves that it is just a matter of speaking the story in the most formidable manner. Nolan proves that to make a successful war film, a coherent presentation plays a major part, not the length of the script.

 

 

“I’d rather fight waves than dive-bombers.”

The story is divided into three divergent segments of land, water, and air. There is a stupendous balance in all the three segments with the land story definitely being more of a blood boiler. Thousands of the soldiers standing, sitting, lying in the queue on the sands of the beach await their fate and hope for deliverance. When I say lying on the beach, few are the dead bodies.

War films are acutely loud and noisy. But here there is no massive bullet-firing in the whole film, no earth-shattering blasts or powerful destructions. The grip of the plot is kept at loose ends. Dunkirk’s script is build on intensity. More than killing, the film is about saving the lives and rendering a valuable service for the people stuck in the battle.

Yes, the nature of this war-subject is saving more than killing but like I wrote above that it is the intensity, the incredible screenplay of bringing things into either an argument or a question mark. The sequences and consequences of numerous scenes drop the emotions displaying the significance and tragic life conclusions like a boatman losing his son, a soldier dropping his helmet and walking towards the sea waves, a pilot watching his plane burnt etc.

“He’s shell-shocked, George. He’s not himself. He might never be himself again.”

Angel of death knocks the door everywhere and it is not a matter of bombs but other critical things like an oiled human body trying to wash himself in haste before it catches the fire on the water or a young soldier making an unsuccessful attempt to catch the ladder of the boat before fainting into the water.

Another impressive factor of the film is the target age-group of the troops portrayal. Mostly in the film are extremely young men. The impact is hard but I like the way the young skins are put to test in the biggest scare of their lives. There were two such scenes shot on the boys giving a fascinating look on the labor and patience during the war times. One was when the two young soldiers witness a helpless gashed soldier on the stretcher. Both heed each other’s possible signal and prepare to lift the heavy stretcher miles towards the boat running and staring the other dead bodies on the beach. The other scene is when the German troops shot at the trawler for target practice where the young soldiers are hiding and no one has the courage of volunteering to release from the boat.

The film is blessed with an ensemble cast whose characters are equally divided in all the three segments. The beauty of the screenplay is that there is no main character. All the characters support each other in their segment i.e., the character of the boatman, Mr Dawson, played by Mark Rylance is indeed the lead character on the sea but his sons, Peter and George, have decent onscreen appearance subjected towards the gallantry. Rylance piloted his character boat every day and listened to the audio recordings at the Imperial War Museum. Cillian Murphy plays the rescued soldier who suffers the psychological impact of the war. Being short in the role, his mental acting performance was exceptional. To improve his character, Murphy read about the psychological trauma the soldier endured.

“Men my age dictate this war. Why should we be allowed to send our children to fight it?”

Tom Hardy is the RAF pilot playing the major role flying in the clouds but his fellow RAF pilot, Collins played by Jack Lowden, is not to be considered underrated. On land, Kenneth Branagh is the commander, loosely based on Admiral William Tennant, but also attached to him is James D’Arcy as Colonel Winnant. But the weight of the characters is equal keeping in mind that the former’s character is verbal as compared to the latter’s character being physical.

Among the young soldiers, the character of Tommy played by Fionn Whitehead was impressive than Alex played by Harry Styles. In fact, Fionn’s performance was indeed the most impressive one who surely had the most minutes throughout the film. Fionn’s character Tommy was named after the slang term ‘Tommy‘ which was commonly used for the ordinary British soldiers. When Nolan auditioned Harry Styles, he was not acquainted with his immense popularity.

 Audience pointed Hardy’s contribution to the film as best but he was just a pilot flying the plane in the whole film. It was actually not Hardy’s performance but the character to be counted as the most valuable one.

“How hard is it to find a dead Englishman on Dunkirk beach, for God’s sake?”

Musical department? Hans Zimmer to Nolan is what John Williams to Spielberg. Easily the most powerful director-musician combo after the latter. And here Zimmer has gifted the audience with just another masterpiece in music. The sound of the watch ticking (often played at the start of the trailer) was actually Nolan’s own pocket watch synthesized by Zimmer. Also to his credit is including Edward Elgar‘s most famous variation ‘Nimrod’ from his Enigma Variations in the film’s dramatic theme. Sound mixing is excellent. The roar of a falling enemy aircraft from the sky will haunt you.

Dunkirk is supreme at almost every technical department. Nolan’s screenplay is superbly balanced with Lee Smith‘s editing. The timing of the segments’ stories kept changing ahead and behind to show from other character’s point of view and it is indeed the beauty of editing which makes Dunkirk attract the audience understand the depth of the story from different angles. Hoyte van Hoytema‘s cinematography is sublime. I loved the aerial plane attacking shots.

Christopher Nolan keeps experimenting a new genre and develops his directional methods and ways of telling the stories. His direction is frank, polar and strict to the subject. In first half an hour, the presentation of the film is concentrating on the happenings at the beach, in the air, and at the sea with very remote dialogues. With the help of a phenomenal film editing, Nolan has crafted his Nolanistic method of depicting the heightened realism and giving the viewers a chance to see his artistry like resurrecting for a reason.

Dunkirk is so superior film that in a premiere the Dunkirk veterans wept and expressed if they time traveled back in Dunkirk. The veterans approved the realism and precise presentation of the war. Many critics have declared Dunkirk to be Nolan’s best work to date. It truly is a difficult question with more arguments than announcing the conclusion. Between his Inception, The Dark Knight, Interstellar, and Dunkirk, it seems impossible to pick the best and ignore the rest.

In my opinion, Dunkirk is the greatest war film ever made and will be remembered for ages. The greatest in a sense that the subject has been addressed and crafted in the most excellent form and has to be included in an elite list of the greatest war films like Apocalypse Now and Saving Private Ryan.

Ratings: 9.5/10

“We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets. We shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender. and even if this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”