One of the most anticipated films of the year for many people, myself included, Oppenheimer largely delivers. Much of it's great. I feel like I loved two of its three hours, and liked the other hour.... but it's that fact that stops me from adoring the entire thing. I know with Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, that clicked on a second watch, so maybe Oppenheimer will need one too. That being said, I don't feel the need to rush out and see it again too soon, because it was a long and exhausting film.
But in many ways, I can't deny it was an exceptionally well made one. It looks and sounds as amazing as you'd expect, feeling as though it accurately captures the time period it's set in, and containing amazing sound design and one of the year's best scores so far. Every performance is good to great, but the film belongs to Cillian Murphy, and I feel like he's the lead actor to beat at this stage, if we're talking (early) awards consideration.
The film's at its best when it focuses on being a psychological thriller featuring a famous historical figure, and at one point, it even turns into a psychological horror film. There's one sequence in here involving a speech that's particularly terrifying. It also manages to have some very suspenseful moments, even though its story is commonly known history at this point.
I did really feel the length in the final hour, though, and maybe I wish that final act had been more of an extended epilogue, rather than a whole third of the movie. I currently feel as though I would've loved Oppenheimer more had it been 2.5 hours instead of 3, but nothing about it was bad by any means; just a little patience testing (this is very subjective - I remember feeling like the similarly long Babylon totally justified its runtime, though others didn't feel that way).
I'm left feeling like I watched a film that wasn't a slam dunk, but was incredible for more of its runtime than it wasn't. And that's still worth celebrating, and makes Oppenheimer worth seeing in cinemas for sure.
But in many ways, I can't deny it was an exceptionally well made one. It looks and sounds as amazing as you'd expect, feeling as though it accurately captures the time period it's set in, and containing amazing sound design and one of the year's best scores so far. Every performance is good to great, but the film belongs to Cillian Murphy, and I feel like he's the lead actor to beat at this stage, if we're talking (early) awards consideration.
The film's at its best when it focuses on being a psychological thriller featuring a famous historical figure, and at one point, it even turns into a psychological horror film. There's one sequence in here involving a speech that's particularly terrifying. It also manages to have some very suspenseful moments, even though its story is commonly known history at this point.
I did really feel the length in the final hour, though, and maybe I wish that final act had been more of an extended epilogue, rather than a whole third of the movie. I currently feel as though I would've loved Oppenheimer more had it been 2.5 hours instead of 3, but nothing about it was bad by any means; just a little patience testing (this is very subjective - I remember feeling like the similarly long Babylon totally justified its runtime, though others didn't feel that way).
I'm left feeling like I watched a film that wasn't a slam dunk, but was incredible for more of its runtime than it wasn't. And that's still worth celebrating, and makes Oppenheimer worth seeing in cinemas for sure.