Anonymous wrote:Just remember it is THREE HOURS in a theater. I wish I had not committed to going with DH. I was absolutely miserable.

It didn’t lagged in any place. I would have been happy with more actually. I’m a huge fan of Richard Rhodes’ book, Making of the Atomic Bomb. I guess if you aren’t interested in the subject matter it would be boring.

Anonymous wrote:Easily the best movie I've seen in years. I think Oscars for Cillian Murphy, Robert Downey, Jr., and Christopher Nolan are a lock. The acting is superb, the story is riveting, and it didn't feel too long to me at all.

To the PP who asked about nudity - yes, not full frontal, but breasts are shown for maybe 60-90 seconds of screen time total and there are a couple very brief sex scenes. I had heard it was a lot more, so I didn't take my 16yo son, but now that I've seen it, I would let him go. He might not want to sit next to me though!

To the PP who asked about Oppenheimer's personal life - it's not a huge focus of the story but it's not glossed over yet. He comes across as the genius he was, but very much as the flawed human he also was. A big plot point is how his arrogance and questionable personal life come back to haunt him in the early 1950s.

I think Oscar nominations are a lock, but Killers of the Flower Moon could be some SERIOUS competition for Oppenheimer!

Anonymous wrote:I usually detest Robert Downey Jr's brand of manic, self-aware acting - but he totally played against type here and did a fantastic job. Very believable.

Cillian Murphy was excellent too. The whole movie was too long though, and WAY too much constant dialogue.

Downey is an excellent actor who wastes his time with stupid superhero movies. He was excellent in Chaplin! He is phenomenal in this movie. As was Oldman, Murphy, and Blunt.

Fantastic movie. The cinematography is gorgeous. If you can afford the higher ticket price, see it in imax. It was filmed in imax so it really is immersive and spectacular.

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.

Is Richard Feynman featured in the movie and is he depicted with accuracy (ie being the most creative and thoughtful member of the team)?

He’s in it but not a huge role. Young and smiley.

Easily the best movie I've seen in years. I think Oscars for Cillian Murphy, Robert Downey, Jr., and Christopher Nolan are a lock. The acting is superb, the story is riveting, and it didn't feel too long to me at all.

To the PP who asked about nudity - yes, not full frontal, but breasts are shown for maybe 60-90 seconds of screen time total and there are a couple very brief sex scenes. I had heard it was a lot more, so I didn't take my 16yo son, but now that I've seen it, I would let him go. He might not want to sit next to me though!

To the PP who asked about Oppenheimer's personal life - it's not a huge focus of the story but it's not glossed over yet. He comes across as the genius he was, but very much as the flawed human he also was. A big plot point is how his arrogance and questionable personal life come back to haunt him in the early 1950s.

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.

Is Richard Feynman featured in the movie and is he depicted with accuracy (ie being the most creative and thoughtful member of the team)?

Let’s put it this way, it’s the first time I’ve been in a movie theatre audience and no one was chatting or chomping rudely on food. Everyone in that audience was engaged in the dialogue. Strange, not used to this type of audience in the theatre. My dh and I thoroughly enjoyed it

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

Anonymous wrote:Does the movie delve into his sordid personal life?

A bit. Hence Florence Pugh’s nude scenes and the R-rating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just remember it is THREE HOURS in a theater. I wish I had not committed to going with DH. I was absolutely miserable.

But I bet that was no problem for Titanic.

It’s a serious film and many people are not interested in serious films about weighty moral issues.

You should have gone to see Barbie and met husband in the lobby after.

omg the 17-year-old serious film scholar has entered the chat

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just remember it is THREE HOURS in a theater. I wish I had not committed to going with DH. I was absolutely miserable.

But I bet that was no problem for Titanic.

It’s a serious film and many people are not interested in serious films about weighty moral issues.

You should have gone to see Barbie and met husband in the lobby after.

omg the 17-year-old serious film scholar has entered the chat

Does the movie delve into his sordid personal life?

Anonymous wrote:Just remember it is THREE HOURS in a theater. I wish I had not committed to going with DH. I was absolutely miserable.

But I bet that was no problem for Titanic.

It’s a serious film and many people are not interested in serious films about weighty moral issues.

You should have gone to see Barbie and met husband in the lobby after.

RDJr should win an Oscar for his role. Just masterful acting. The movie itself was choppy, unnecessarily long, and too much dialogue. Cillian Murphy was good but RDJr stole the show. Thought Emily Blunt was overacting and insufferable throughout. Movie was interesting and thought provoking but not the best movie ever made. Way overhyped.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I take my 13 year old to see this? What sort of R-rating is this stuff?

Full frontal

Completely unnecessary nudity scenes IMO. And I am not a prude or conservative.

I wouldn’t mind it given the plot except I wanted to bring my kids…