#Oppenheimer critical

[prideprejudce]

i’m so happy that the only real lasting effect that came from the movie oppenheimer is that more people are finally aware of how terrible christopher nolan has always been at writing women

[fanfic-lover-girl]

Reaction to Oppenheimer

So I watched Oppenheimer on National Cinema Day. And I left the theatre feeling confused. I spent 3 hrs in the theatre and I had no clue what was happening most of the time.

First, when the movie started I did not realize. I thought I was watching a trailer until it never stopped lol. Usually, the beginning of a movie is a lot clearer to me.

Second, I had no clue who the characters were. Even now, I am not sure what the army general's name was.

Third, I had no clue how Oppenheimer related to other characters. Why was he at the social where he met his wife/mistress? Why did he like the mistress and wife? Who was the guy who kept his kid until further notice?

Fourth, some parts felt unnecessary. The female characters were irrelevant. His wife and sidechick could have been taken out and hardly anything would change. His kids felt like props to take up screen time. His brother (Frank??), felt irrelevant too. Did I need to see Florence's breasts? Why did he try to poison his teacher? How was that important?

Fifth, I wished the movie focussed on either politics or the bomb. Enough time was not spent on the bomb itself. I wished more time was spent on the fallout. The brief scenes of the hallucinations of victims were hardly satisfying. Switching between the hearings and the bomb construction made it hard to follow what was happening. Why were some scenes grey?

Sixth, why are movies so hard to listen to? I could hardly decipher the dialogue. It's like I can't enjoy movies anymore without subtitles! It's like the actors are mumbling. RDJ was a top culprit for this.

The movie was okay but I am so disappointed. I literally spent three hours watching fluff. At least I only paid US$6 for this mediocre experience. Probably one of the worst movies I have watched. Maybe my opinion would be different if the dialogue was easier to decipher.

[alpaca-clouds]

Why the media CEOs will always learn the wrong lessons

Yesterday a friend and I talked about how the entire (AAA) game industrie looked at BG3 being as popular as it is and going: "Oh, we need to produce 100+ hour games, I guess! Those sell!" Which... obviously is not why it is popular. The game is not popular because it has 100+ hours of gameplay, but because it has engaging characters, that are well-acted and that work as good hooks for the players. Like, let's face it: The reason why I so far have sunken 160 hours into this game is, because I wanna spend time with these characters - and because I wanna give them their happy endings.

But the same has happened too, just a bit earlier this year, right? When Barbie broke the 1 billion and every Hollywood CEO went: "Oh, so the people want movies based on toy franchises! Got it!" To which the internet at large replied: "... How is that the lesson you learned from this?"

Well, let me explain to you, why this is the lesson they learn: It is because the CEOs and the boards of directors at large are not artists or even engaged with the medium they produce. They mostly are economists. And their dry little hearts do not understand stuff more complex than numbers and spread sheets.

That sounds evil, I know, but... It is sadly the truth. When they look at a successful movie/series/game/book/comic, they look at it as a product, not a piece of art or narrative. It is just a product that has very clear metrics.

To them Barbie is not a movie with interesting stylistic choices that stand out from the majority of high budget action blockbusters. It is a toy movie with mildly feminist themes.

Or Oppenheimer is not a movie to them with a strong visual language and good acting direction. No, it is a historical blockbuster.

And this is true for basically every form of media. I mean, books are actually a fairly good example. In my life I do remember the big book fads that happened. When Harry Potter was a success, there was at least a dozen other "magical school" book series being released. When Twilight was a big success there was suddenly an endless number of "teen girl falls in love with bad boy, who is [magical creature]" YA. When the Hunger Games was a success, there were hundreds of "YA dystopia" books. Meanwhile in adult reading, we had the big "next Game of Throne" fad.

Of course, the irony is, that within each of those fads there might have been one or two somewhat successful series - but never even one that came even close to whatever started the fad.

Or with movies, we have seen it, too. When Avengers broke the 1 billion (which up to this point only few movies did) the studios went: "Ooooooh, so we need shared universe film series" - and then all went to try and fail to create their own cinematic universe.

Because the people, who call the shots, are just immensely desinterested in the thing they are selling. They do not really care about the content. All they care about is having a supposedly easy avenue of selling it. Just as they do not care about the consumer. All they care about is that the consumer buys it. Why he buys it... Well, they do not care. They could not care less, in fact.

So, yeah, get ready for a 20 overproduced games with a bloated 100+ hours of empty gameplay, but without the engaging characters. And for like at least 15 more moves based on some toy franchise, that nobody actually cares about.

And then get ready for all the CEOs to do the surprised Pikachu face, when all of that ends up not financially successful.

Really, I read some interviews yesterday from some AAA-studio CEOs and their blatant shock and missing understanding on why BG3 works for so many people.

Because, yeah... capitalism does not appreciate art. Capitalism does not understand art. It only understands spread sheets.

[emo-batboy]

✨ Two tickets to see 💣 Barbenheimer 💖 please ✨

[magnetostits]

it’s been a day since i’ve seen oppenheimer and i am convinced you bitches have no media literacy whatsoever how do you watch that film and think that it glorifies the bombs being made??? how is it pro america when it criticizes so much about america??? how is it pro fascist when it is about a jewish scientist who originally started his research so the nazi government wouldn’t have a bomb???

[fearnesbells]

daggerheart oneshot as textposts 🤩

[cryptvokeeper]

Also idk maybe it was too subtle but. when oppenheimers wife takes him by the shoulders and says, “stop trying to make people pity you for the sins you committed” like. I just kind of figured that was a pretty explicit indictment of his actions and makes me struggle to take the “Oppenheimer is just a movie about a sad white mans feelings” arguments in good faith.

[mushroomseb]

ROBERT DOWNEY JR. & CILLIAN MURPHY ⏤ 29th Critics' Choice Awards

[acillianproblem]

Cillian Murphy killing fans at Critics Choice Awards

[essektheylyss]

Cassida's perspective on the Factorum Malleus is absolutely chilling. Even if the Primes wanted to kill their siblings outright, once the weapon is made, it now exists. Perhaps it can be unmade, but the knowledge of it can only be eliminated with further bloodshed. She says it can be keep it out of the wrong hands, but whose hands are right to wield a weapon of that kind? If one threat is gone, what else might be viewed as such? Whose might is worth the price of that kind of unilateral dominion and annihilation?

[stopandimagineloveforever]

We won, Mr. Stark. 🥹

[cowboylikesel]

need him so bad it’s not even funny anymore

[pocketgalaxies]

the betabeans and their xarlo's puppies

[the-caleb-widogast]

i will not be taking any comments thank you

[artistantlers]

Just a lil guy in a big world 🐸

[cromwelll]

What Oppenheimer is about: A biopic about one man’s decision to sell his soul to the U.S. government, who then went on to live under intense surveillance and ostracization from the very same government

What Oppenheimer is about: A biopic about a man who sold his soul to the scientific community because he desired validation more than anything else, causing him to be ostracized from the scientific community

What Oppenheimer is about: A cautionary tale about what happens when you sell out with no consideration for the greater good of humanity

What Oppenheimer is about: A cautionary tale about trusting the U.S. government

What Oppenheimer is about: The emotional desolation that comes from becoming the very thing you set out to defeat

What Oppenheimer is about: To show people that if you don’t stand for anything, you’ll fall for anything

What Oppenheimer is about: To remind us that life is short and precious and one small group of white men can and will destroy anyone they want to any time they see fit

What Oppenheimer is about: An indictment of power imbalances, systemic racism, and rampant misogyny

What tumblr says Oppenheimer is about: U.S. government & military propaganda, the glorification of white men, excluding minorities on purpose