Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I and our 14 year old dd loved it. The nude/sex scenes were fairly brief moments. I think our dd survived.

It is strange how so many parents are okay with their teens watching violence on film but can't tolerate brief sex and nudity.

It's American - we enjoy violent movies but are prudish about naked bodies. All the posters lamenting this, that's what's strange. If you prefer it to be the other way around, there are other cultures like that. Not this one.

You’re describing ‘Merica. The rest of us are ok with some boobs.

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I and our 14 year old dd loved it. The nude/sex scenes were fairly brief moments. I think our dd survived.

It is strange how so many parents are okay with their teens watching violence on film but can't tolerate brief sex and nudity.

It's American - we enjoy violent movies but are prudish about naked bodies. All the posters lamenting this, that's what's strange. If you prefer it to be the other way around, there are other cultures like that. Not this one.

I really don’t think that feminism is at a loss from women not getting “credit” for an invention that was used to murder over 200,000 people.

Perspective people!

Read up on marie curie if you wish. Her work was a prerequisite for the Manhattan project.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The movie was outstanding. But then, I like thoughtful movies that leave me thinking about the subject when I leave the theatre. Great casting.

What do you think of the choosing not to show the many women scientists who also worked on the project? This is one of the reasons I refuse to see it.

Penny wise, pound foolish. You missed a superb movie.

I value the truth and I don't like to see women's accomplishments ignored.

Omg, shut up.

Their roles were absolutely, 10000000% minor compared to Oppenheimer, Teller, Fermi, Lawrence, and the other big names covered in the film. There were thousands of people involved, but the movie cannot cover every minor contribution to the project from 2ndary and tertiary teams and individuals.

The movie is OPPENHEIMER. It is a biopic about one man who was the director of the entire project. It doesn't have time to cover contributions of some bench scientists or other lowly scientists in the trenches. In fact, 85% of the movie isn't even really about the Manhattan Project, it is about the rest of his life after the war and the govt came after him to destroy his reputation.

Way to miss the forest for the trees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Some women get turned on by hearing a man speak a beautiful foreign language. Oppie probably should have quoted the Kama Sutra ( a Sanskrit text) in that particular situation though.

That scene wasn't to turn a woman on. Sanskrit texts, particularly the Bhagvad Gita, were important parts of Oppenheimer's life and greatly influenced him. He read from the Bhagvad Gita and the Upanishads frequently. This is well known so the director had to address it somewhere in the film but it's awful the way he chose to throw that in so vulgarly. And you wouldn't know that was the reference either.

Hinduism is mocked and exoticized in Western media, has been since the early days of cinema. This scene has done nothing different in 2023.

If I remember the scene correctly, the couple where sitting and chatting naked when Florence pughs character picks the book up, asks Oppenheimer if he can read the foreign language then asks him to read a passage to her while they have sex again. So the passage is read in the context of verbal foreplay.

Sexualizing an 'exotic', 'ethnic' religion of the East.

My husband and I and our 14 year old dd loved it. The nude/sex scenes were fairly brief moments. I think our dd survived.

It is strange how so many parents are okay with their teens watching violence on film but can't tolerate brief sex and nudity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The movie was outstanding. But then, I like thoughtful movies that leave me thinking about the subject when I leave the theatre. Great casting.

How do you like the fact that the women scientists who also worked on it were larged ignored. And the suffering of the people who lived there?

This was a character exploration of one person.

As a woman in STEM, I’d love to see something about women scientists but that’s a different movie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The movie was outstanding. But then, I like thoughtful movies that leave me thinking about the subject when I leave the theatre. Great casting.

What do you think of the choosing not to show the many women scientists who also worked on the project? This is one of the reasons I refuse to see it.

Penny wise, pound foolish. You missed a superb movie.

I value the truth and I don't like to see women's accomplishments ignored.

Anonymous wrote:The movie was outstanding. But then, I like thoughtful movies that leave me thinking about the subject when I leave the theatre. Great casting.

How do you like the fact that the women scientists who also worked on it were larged ignored. And the suffering of the people who lived there?

I really liked it. It didn’t feel like 3 hours for sure. Things I wish they had done:

More on his relationship with his wife. Didn’t understand their relationship and why they stayed together.

I felt like they made Kitty 1D overwhelmed drunk mother when in fact she was running the health center at LA and studied the effects of radiation. The steel willed, clever woman at the end was a surprise but it shouldn’t have been. The spent more time on the connection with the communist girlfriend and her inner life than that of the wife.

More time on the moral qualms and discussions about that on behalf of the scientists. It was a central part of the whole deal but not well explored.

Other than that, it was beautifully filmed and I can’t remember the last time I was in a theater with such a well behaved, respectful audience which was a real treat. We were at the IMAX at Udvar-Hazy. Finally “I don’t like your phrase” (in the lovely accent of the time) if my new go to.

The final scene with Einstein and the close up on Oppenheimers guilt ridden face was a pretty perfect ending.

Apart from that though that final hour or so after the Hiroshima bombing dragged..OMG. I get that Nolan wanted to convey the backlash Oppy received from the US government for advocating for avoiding a global nuclear arms race but all that time spent on multiple trials was just unnecessary. I would have cut out at least 30 min of that.

Instead, I would have spent more time on just Cillian and seeing how his mindset evolved after the bombing. I didn’t really believe his sudden guilt. At that meeting with the secretary of defence (?) He was all gung ho to bomb civilians to show the world how powerful the bomb was but then just seemed surprised when thousands of innocents got killed.

Just got back. Fantastic movie. I learned a lot of history I never knew about.

Good movie but far too much dialogue and focus on the hearings.

Anonymous wrote:Why did Nolan feel a need to include nearly every scientist involved (and also Einstein, who was NOT part of the Manhattan Project), but he left out John von Neumann?

It's Hollywood, must have fluffy haired wizard.

Why did Nolan feel a need to include nearly every scientist involved (and also Einstein, who was NOT part of the Manhattan Project), but he left out John von Neumann?