OPPENHEIMER (2023)

July 22, 2023

Greetings again from the darkness. As pupils slouched in our school desks during history class, we easily and naturally disassociated with the many stories of war. World War II was lumped in with WWI, the Civil War, and The Revolutionary War. There were names and dates to memorize for quizzes and final exams, yet even with relatives recounting stories of kin, a personal connection was rare. As we aged and experienced modern-day warfare, the personal connection became all too real. Reality struck that soldiers are human beings with families, and despite their missions and marching orders, most are as innocent as the ‘tragic civilian casualties’ reported on the newswires. Along these lines, an aspect of war that has often remained overlooked is the behind-closed-doors decision-making of politicians and military leaders. Filmmaker-extraordinaire Christopher Nolan takes us behind those doors through the eyes of J Robert Oppenheimer, the Father of the Atomic Bomb. What we see is quite frightening.

Prepare yourself. At a full three hours in length, Nolan’s film is a hefty undertaking for viewers. It demands full focus and attention to details and nuance, as you spend significant time listening to brilliant men talk amongst themselves. Nolan adapted the screenplay from the 2005 biography, “American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J Robert Oppenheimer”, written by Kai Bird and Martin Sherman. The end result is a film centered on complex physics and mathematics, yet presented in a simplified manner such that it’s much more a character study than a science class. The key is what characters say to each other, how they say it, and how they debate and rationalize the morality of the objective … building a bomb designed to kill people.

The morality of The Manhattan Project is under the microscope here, as is the motivation and concern of Oppenheimer. We get some early background establishing him as an upcoming mind in the world of physics from his academic stops around the globe. Some know Cillian Murphy from “Peaky Blinders” or as Scarecrow in Nolan’s Batman movies. I’d also recommend a couple of Murphy’s underrated gems: FREE FIRE (2016) and RED EYE (2005). It’s hard to overstate how spot on Murphy is as Oppenheimer. He lost weight for the role and captures the distinctive movements and speech patterns, as well as the familiar poses and deep-in-thought eyes. We never once question whether this is Oppenheimer, the leader of the science team at the Los Alamos Lab and the Father of the Atomic bomb … the one who “sees beyond the world we live in.”

Once Major Groves (Oscar winner Matt Damon) recruits Oppenheimer to run and assemble the great scientific minds, the obvious question to those involved is … even if we can create this bomb, should we do it? This weighs heavily on Oppenheimer – a man so engulfed by science that his haunting visions are that of atoms and particles and experimental reactions (perhaps a bit too heavy in the first act). Groves is the military leader of the project and the liaison between the scientists, the military, and the government. It’s also clear that while Oppenheimer’s brilliance is recognized and necessary to the project, almost no one outside of the scientists trusts him. This is where antisemitism and fears of communism arise. Oppenheimer was Jewish and, though he never joined the communist party, was associated with many who did. This included his love interest, Psychiatrist Jean Tatlock (the fabulous rising star Florence Pugh), his wife Kitty (Emily Blunt), and his brother Frank (Dylan Arnold).  

The teamwork and stress involved with building the bomb in Los Alamos is conveyed as rooms full of brilliant minds determine the future path of the country and the world. This culminates in the stunning sequence of The Trinity Test near Alamogordo. A blending of complete silence, along with spectacular sound and light, is truly a technical highlight of the film. The initial celebration of success initially overshadows the true meaning … the bomb is now ready for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing two hundred thousand people and essentially ending WWII, less than four years after the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese (never mentioned here).

The bombings are heard via radio news reports, and it’s at this point where the weight of what the scientists have done is fully realized. Oppenheimer became a national hero and his Time Magazine cover proves it. A meeting with President Harry S Truman (Oscar winner Gary Oldman sporting a Missouri accent) doesn’t go well, as Oppenheimer is introduced to political gamesmanship, something he would face even more directly in the near future. Lewis Strauss (Oscar winner Robert Downey Jr) is a key player as chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission, and through him, we witness ego, ambition, and petty behavior that leads to a level of vindictiveness typically only seen at the junior high level.

Multiple timelines are covered. There is the background information on Oppenheimer’s early years, his well-rounded academia, his love life (lives), his building of the Los Alamos lab team, the overseeing of the bomb development, his time as a hero, the later backroom kangaroo court designed to disgrace him, and Strauss’ Senate Confirmation hearing for Secretary of Commerce. All of these tie together, and it’s those final two that make up the last act of the film – giving us a taste of just how nasty politics was 70 years ago (not unlike these days).

Nolan has assembled a deep cast with numerous Oscar winners and a roster of talented actors. Among the familiar faces not already named above are: Oscar winner Kenneth Branagh as Danish Physicist Neils Bohr, Oscar winner Rami Malek as experimental physicist David Hill, Oscar winner Casey Affleck as Military security advisor Boris Pash, Tom Conti as Albert Einstein, Benny Safdie, Dane DeHaan, Jason Clarke, Josh Hartnett, David Krumholtz, Matthew Modine, Alden Ehrenreich, Scott Grimes, Tony Goldwyn, James D’Arcy, James Urbaniak, Olivia Thirlby, James Remar, and (Nolan regular) David Dastmalchian.

The film is a historical biopic and also an unconventional thriller. Is this about unparalleled advancement in science or is it about the moral dilemma of mass destruction and death? Politics, military, ego, power, science, love, revenge, and redemption are all displayed as Oppenheimer struggles with the power he has created and the lack of power in how it’s used. My favorite line in the film is aimed at Oppenheimer when someone informs him that he’s now “not just self-important, but actually important.” The stakes are clear during the test when it’s stated that there is a “near zero” chance of destroying the world.

Cillian Murphy is a shoe-in for a Best Actor nomination, and his performance mesmerizes us. It’s nice to see Robert Downey Jr remind us of his true talent, and he should be rewarded with a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Florence Pugh and Emily Blunt, in the only two substantive women roles, should both receive consideration as well. Pugh’s role is limited but memorable, while Blunt shines in her best scene during the security hearing.

Christopher Nolan has delivered near perfection in technical movie-making, and on top of that, the story and characters are real life, and the performances are top notch. His use of Black & White film for Strauss’ perspective allows the viewer to differentiate the Oppenheimer viewpoint. Impressively, while there are some visual effects, Nolan has stated that no CGI was used in the film, and that’s most evident in the relatively short closing credit roll – where we typically get dozens if not hundreds of technical experts listed. Ludwig Goransson’s (Oscar winner for BLACK PANTHER) score packs an emotional punch, and Jennifer Lame’s editing is excellent and vital. Lastly, cinematographer (and regular Nolan collaborator) Hoyte Van Hoytema drives home the power of smart men in a room, as well as the devastation of the bomb test. This is excellent filmmaking and a reminder that the only thing we love more than lifting new heroes onto the pedestal of worship is tearing down those same heroes with a dose of humility. These types of movies rarely get produced these days, so here’s hoping enough people go back to the theater to see it to inspire more filmmakers to take a shot.

Opened nationally July 21, 2023

WATCH THE TRAILER


WHERE’D YOU GO BERNADETTE (2019)

August 15, 2019

 Greetings again from the darkness. Has she lost her way or lost her mind? The Bernadette Fox we meet is a misanthrope. She doesn’t much like her life. It’s a life with a loving husband, a workaholic tech genius. It’s a life with a crumbling, once majestic mansion that she is remodeling one spot at a time. It’s a life with a smart daughter who admires her mother. It’s a life that expects participation at a level Bernadette is unwilling to commit. And it’s a life that is not the one she envisioned for herself.

Two time Oscar winner Cate Blanchett plays Bernadette, and as with most of her roles, she embodies the character. It’s a role that more resembles that of her character in BLUE JASMINE than in CAROL. Bernadette is not really a likeable person and she clearly feels out of place in suburbia … yet we find her interesting – in a train wreck kind of way. She’s a bit reclusive and seems to best communicate with Manjula, her virtual assistant in India. The daily dictations come across as therapy as much as directives for such vitals as fishing vests.

Bernadette describes herself as a “creative problem solver with good taste” and as the self-proclaimed “Bitch Goddess of Architecture”. A mid-life crisis is pretty easy to recognize (unless it’s your own). It’s rarely about the person you sleep next to, and often about “finding one’s true self”. This syndrome is especially irksome for a parent, and is actually better described as selfish behavior. Bernadette was a rising star in the Los Angeles world of architecture, and when Microsoft bought her husband Elgie’s (Billy Crudup) software, the couple relocated to Seattle where he could continue his high-tech pursuits. Bernadette stopped designing and focused on being a mother to daughter (and the film’s narrator) Bee (Emma Nelson). In fact, it’s Bee’s request for a family trip to Antarctica that pushes Bernadette to the brink.

The supporting cast is brimming with talent. Kristen Wiig is Audrey, the neighbor and private school mom who manages to push every wrong button for Bernadette. Audrey is a victim of Bernadette’s mean streak in one of the more outrageous scenes in the film. Zoe Chao is Audrey’s friend and Elgie’s new Administrative Assistant. Laurence Fishburne appears as Bernadette’s mentor, and Judy Greer is underutilized in the role of psychologist. Others you’ll recognize include James Urbaniak, Claudia Doumit, and Megan Mullaly. But despite all of that talent, this is Cate Blanchett’s (and Bernadette’s) movie. Is it a powerful performance or an overpowering one?  I’m still not sure.

What is certain is that the Production Design of Bruce Curtis is exceptional. The old mansion is worthy of its own story, and provides a distinct contrast to Audrey’s spit-shined coziness next door. The scenes on the ships at sea are also well done, and Bernadette in the kayak makes for an absolute stunning visual.

Of course the film is based on the 2012 best-selling novel by Maria Semple, and director Richard Linklater co-wrote the script with his ME AND ORSON WELLES collaborators of Holly Gent and Vincent Palmo. We typically discuss how an actor might be miscast, but this time the debate could be in regards to the director. Mr. Linklater is a wonderful director with such diverse films as BOYHOOD (2014), BERNIE (2011), BEFORE SUNRISE (1995) and DAZED AND CONFUSED (1994). He’s a naturalistic story-teller with personalities we recognize. Bernadette looms so larger-than-life, with her grandiose gestures and over-dramatizing every moment that she’s almost cartoonish at times. At times, Linklater seems like everyone else … not sure what to make of Bernadette.

The film differs in many details from the novel, but the spirit remains. This plays like ‘Diary of a Mad-Disgruntled-Unfulfilled Housewife’, and it’s obvious to viewers that Bernadette’s near seclusion is actually her hiding from herself. Ms. Blanchett is a marvelous actress, one of the best of all-time. She is set to play the legendary Lucille Ball in Aaron Sorkin’s planned LUCY & DESI film. Ms. Blanchett commands our attention for Bernadette, whether it’s in the comedy segments or the more philosophical moments. Rarely will you see a film whose Act I and Act III are so tonally opposite. The first part plays like an old-fashioned Howard Hawks comedy, while the last part is Bernadette’s more somber search for artistic expression once she is freed from the constraints of family life. It’s the saddest comedy I can recall.

watch the trailer:


NED RIFLE (2015)

April 2, 2015

ned rifle Greetings again from the darkness. The third and final entry to writer/director Hal Hartley’s trilogy provides a fitting end to the saga that began in 1997 with Henry Fool, and continued in 2006 with Fay Grim. Mr. Hartley’s style lends itself well to the indie world and film festival circuit, as he connects with unusually paced and elevated dialogue, an arid-dry sense of humor, and a slew of misfit characters.

The four main characters have been played by the same actors across all three films. Liam Aiken was only 7 years old when he first played Ned, and he becomes the focus of this final chapter. Ned is the son of Fay (Parker Posey) and Henry (Thomas Jay Ryan). When this story picks up, Fay is serving a life sentence in federal prison for terrorist activities, and Henry’s whereabouts are unknown … except by “Uncle” Simon (James Urbaniak), the garbage man-turned-poet laureate.

Ned is turning 18 years old and has spent four years in witness protection as part of a family led by a guilt-ridden Reverend (Martin Donovan). Ned has really taken to religion – especially the fire and brimstone vengeance parts. See, Ned blames Henry for Fay’s life turn and aims to gain revenge.

The first part of the movie has Ned and Susan (Aubrey Plaza) tracking down Henry. Susan is the grad student supposedly working with Fay on her autobiography, and stalking Simon for his poetic metaphysics. But of course, Susan has secrets and some are less than pleasant.

Once Henry is located, Mr. Ryan provides a nice energy boost and shift in tone. He is one glorious film character … unless of course, you are his son or some other poor schmuck left floundering in his wake of life. He and Ned don’t really have much of a bond, but Ryan and Plaza create some fireworks that some may find a bit creepy.

Just keeping up with the rapid-fire dialogue from Henry, Simon and Susan is a cinematic joy, and the off-beat humor prevents the dark material from ever reaching a bleak stage. When Ned visits Fay in prison she asks disgustedly “You’re religious?” – making it clear that she, a convicted felon, is extremely disappointed in her 18 year old son. It’s played for a laugh and gets one. There is another line spouted by Susan that includes a review of “obscene work indifferent to mainstream approval“. We have little doubt that line was written by Mr. Hartley to describe his own work.

watch the trailer: