Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,595
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 23, 2023 22:12:49 GMT
1st hour - the weakest third. Bad dialogue, rushed pace, Blunt getting "Dunst"d already.
2th hour - the most interesring. Feels like the first time in ages that Nolan tries to create a memorable location.
3rd hour - where it overstays it's welcome. Predictable and not as hard-cutting as it likes to think. Features the best moments of Murphy and RDJ. Damon I liked the most though.
Right in the middle of Nolan's filmography. Forget the man that gave us Menento and TDK for good...
|
|
Archie
Based
Eraserhead son or Inland Empire daughter?
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 4,372
Member is Online
|
Post by Archie on Jul 23, 2023 23:38:12 GMT
I'm glad everyone here is on the same page regarding Blunt. And it's not even her fault, Nolan is just incapable of writing women.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 23, 2023 23:43:18 GMT
I'm glad everyone here is on the same page regarding Blunt. And it's not even her fault, Nolan is just incapable of writing women. Eh, I think Blunt does share some blame because she is not good at playing drunk.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 24, 2023 1:00:21 GMT
NS this yet, but I’ve seen several people commenting on the movie who have also read the book say the female characters are written very faithfully to the book’s portrayal.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 24, 2023 2:07:49 GMT
2th hour - the most interesring. Feels like the first time in ages that Nolan tries to create a memorable location. The opera house, Amalfi Coast, and Eagle Mountain locations in Tenet alone though...
|
|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Jul 24, 2023 2:14:03 GMT
I'm glad everyone here is on the same page regarding Blunt. And it's not even her fault, Nolan is just incapable of writing women. Eh, I think Blunt does share some blame because she is not good at playing drunk. While I agree she is not good at playing drunk I thought her big scene was good. Also loved the look she gave Teller.
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 24, 2023 2:23:56 GMT
1st hour - the weakest third. Bad dialogue, rushed pace, Blunt getting "Dunst"d already.2th hour - the most interesring. Feels like the first time in ages that Nolan tries to create a memorable location. 3rd hour - where it overstays it's welcome. Predictable and not as hard-cutting as it likes to think. Features the best moments of Murphy and RDJ. Damon I liked the most though. Right in the middle of Nolan's filmography. Forget the man that gave us Menento and TDK for good... What does this mean?
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 24, 2023 2:26:02 GMT
I'm glad everyone here is on the same page regarding Blunt. And it's not even her fault, Nolan is just incapable of writing women. Eh, I think Blunt does share some blame because she is not good at playing drunk. I thought her drunk acting was good tbh. It was her talking like a 1940s movie detective that annoys me the more that I think about it especially in her testimony scene. Her best scene is the cold reaction she gave to Teller
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 24, 2023 2:36:03 GMT
Eh, I think Blunt does share some blame because she is not good at playing drunk. I thought her drunk acting was good tbh. It was her talking like a 1940s movie detective that annoys me the more that I think about it especially in her testimony scene. Her best scene is the cold reaction she gave to Teller Blunt is really good at giving steely glares, that is definitely for sure. I just feel like her mannerisms when she plays drunk, both here and in things like The Girl on the Train, feel very amateur-theater. Part of it is how Nolan writes and stages her scenes (I really do think the early domestic scenes are the film's weak point), but part of it is also her.
|
|
Archie
Based
Eraserhead son or Inland Empire daughter?
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 4,372
Member is Online
|
Post by Archie on Jul 24, 2023 3:08:35 GMT
NS this yet, but I’ve seen several people commenting on the movie who have also read the book say the female characters are written very faithfully to the book’s portrayal. Haven't read the book, but I find that extremely hard to believe. Blunt and Pugh felt like fucking aliens here. I didn't buy a single second of their screentime, and like every other Nolan movie, I'm not blaming the actresses. The way Pugh's depression is handled is straight up disrespectful imo, and Blunt's whole alcoholism thing feels like an SNL "suffering biopic wife" parody.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 24, 2023 3:30:18 GMT
NS this yet, but I’ve seen several people commenting on the movie who have also read the book say the female characters are written very faithfully to the book’s portrayal. Haven't read the book, but I find that extremely hard to believe. Blunt and Pugh felt like fucking aliens here. I didn't buy a single second of their screentime, and like every other Nolan movie, I'm not blaming the actresses. The way Pugh's depression is handled is straight up disrespectful imo, and Blunt's whole alcoholism thing feels like an SNL "suffering biopic wife" parody. FWIW, here's just a couple of people who have read the book (one of them a female film writer for AP): A user from AW, who goes into more depth:
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Jul 24, 2023 3:31:04 GMT
NS this yet, but I’ve seen several people commenting on the movie who have also read the book say the female characters are written very faithfully to the book’s portrayal. Haven't read the book, but I find that extremely hard to believe. Blunt and Pugh felt like fucking aliens here. I didn't buy a single second of their screentime, and like every other Nolan movie, I'm not blaming the actresses. The way Pugh's depression is handled is straight up disrespectful imo, and Blunt's whole alcoholism thing feels like an SNL "suffering biopic wife" parody. There's a little bit more about Kitty, but not that much more. In the book it is indeed mostly about her not really wanting to be the housewife, who turns to drink and ignores her kid to the point of sending him away to live with other people. With Jean, she was clinically depressed and would have the swings because of that. Meanwhile, Oppenheimer himself, just was woefully inadequate in dealing with the women's emotional needs, and how they turn up within the book is essentially "interruptions" in his overall ambition around the bomb, much like how they are in the film.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jul 24, 2023 3:51:25 GMT
Been struggling with sleep recently and I don't really think this will help.
Masterful movie. Not quite Nolan's best - I'm extremely partial to Inception - but it's up there. I found the whole cast excellent from top to bottom (wouldn't be surprised if it wins SAG Ensemble assuming we even have those awards this year), and I don't hold any of the quibbles I'm seeing here about Blunt or Pugh. Score was tremendous, though I do think it might have been used a bit too liberally early on in the film when we're cutting very quickly in getting introduced to everyone. Cillian Murphy and RDJ should be easy Oscar nominees and probable frontrunners and I would be happy to see either of them win. This film going over so well critically and with audiences feels like the culmination of Nolan's pop film dominance and he'd be incredibly deserving of an Oscar himself.
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 24, 2023 4:35:41 GMT
Haven't read the book, but I find that extremely hard to believe. Blunt and Pugh felt like fucking aliens here. I didn't buy a single second of their screentime, and like every other Nolan movie, I'm not blaming the actresses. The way Pugh's depression is handled is straight up disrespectful imo, and Blunt's whole alcoholism thing feels like an SNL "suffering biopic wife" parody. FWIW, here's just a couple of people who have read the book (one of them a female film writer for AP): A user from AW, who goes into more depth: Can someone explain what the point of the nudity was in that scene? I just found it super awkward. Not even uncomfortable but just awkward. It felt like Nolan trying to do artsy nudity and it just fell flat. It didn't help that Murphy and Pugh had zero chemistry
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 24, 2023 6:04:37 GMT
I’ve gotten used to seeing him on autopilot in the MCU, I’ve forgotten how good Downey Jr. can be.
I don’t think I would rank this as my favorite Nolan movie (not my favorite Nolan WWII movie either), but wow, I was breathless during this.
Comparisons to The Social Network are not unfounded, and as someone who sometimes finds Nolan’s dialogue his weakest habit, the delivery and interplay is spot on. It may consist of people talking for extended periods, but it *feels* like an honest to God spectacle, a perfect balance of murky motivations mixed with deeply ridden regret and fear, with some of Nolan’s most visceral sequences of his career. I’m not overly high on Blunt (but I don’t find her bad in any way), but the cast in general is terrific, and Murphy holds it all together splendidly, making the stoic and seemingly detached mind of Oppenheimer feel fragile and horrified by his own machinations.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,595
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 24, 2023 6:45:11 GMT
1st hour - the weakest third. Bad dialogue, rushed pace, Blunt getting "Dunst"d already.2th hour - the most interesring. Feels like the first time in ages that Nolan tries to create a memorable location. 3rd hour - where it overstays it's welcome. Predictable and not as hard-cutting as it likes to think. Features the best moments of Murphy and RDJ. Damon I liked the most though. Right in the middle of Nolan's filmography. Forget the man that gave us Menento and TDK for good... What does this mean? I was referring to Kirsten Dunst's turn in The Power of the Dog; a performance from a solid actress that I'm not a fan of, but more than herself it's also the way the movie treats her that rubs me the wrong way. The sudden alcohol problem is just something "that happens" to her (and Blunt here) without much time-spending and delicacy on the filmmakers' part, as if they just want to add another layer of drama to their pot... Blunt is worse, since there's nothing even posing as a "progression" of her state in this. Oppie just arrives one day and she has a bottle in her hand, and she is going to be this way in 90% of the rest of her scenes. In the grand scheme of the things this movie is going for, one wife's alcoholism can't be the most important thing to address I get it... but this is my issue with all of Nolan's outputs post(and including, with the worst results probably)- Rises; so many plot points and themes, a lot of them end up feeling half-baked or wasted. There is a reason people will rank RDJ and Damon above the rest of the cast (other than their talent) here... The script favors their interactions with Murphy more than somebody like Blunt's, who is better in precisely one scene that comes (too)late in the performance.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,595
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 24, 2023 6:51:36 GMT
2th hour - the most interesring. Feels like the first time in ages that Nolan tries to create a memorable location. The opera house, Amalfi Coast, and Eagle Mountain locations in Tenet alone though... That one really didn't click with me Cake. I know he was changing them locations like he's finally making a full-on Bond movie but none of them had a meaningful, lasting impression on me (I'm not huge on Bond flicks and their approach to a lot of things in general too, which I know you are)… here (in Los Alamos) they "build" the place, interact in it, outsiders refer to it when they speak... I vibed with it, for some reason
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 24, 2023 7:17:44 GMT
So I watched it again and still enjoyed it. I have even less sympathy for Oppenheimer upon rewatch. The rewatch made me realize how the movie questions his genius and points out he's not as brilliant. It was people on his team making discoveries and progressing the project, not him. To be super reductive, he was a good salesman and manager
I love the acting from most of the cast just as much as I did the first time. Once again, I have to sing Alden Ehrenreich's praises bc he was just so good and held his own against someone like RDJ. RDJ's acting still held up, but I realized his familiar schtick bothered me this time around. For example, in one scene when he was in front of the Senate, he put the left side of his face in his left palm. In another scene, he put both hands under his chin while talking. That felt like RDJ's real life mannerisms, NOT Strauss.
I was still not impressed by Florence Pugh (not her fault since the character was underwritten). I'm very annoyed by the Oscar talk for Emily Blunt. I thought her drunk acting was fine, but I hate the 1940s detective accent she put on. It was inauthentic when she went toe to toe with Roger Robb. Her best scene was her cold reaction to Teller. If Blunt does get an Oscar nom for this performance, I'm just going to pretend it was for The Devil Wears Prada which is her best performance to date
Despite that, this ensemble is one of the best ensembles in recent memory. There are literally so many names to choose from!! James Remar was awesome. Gary Oldman was awesome. Kenneth Branagh was awesome. So many talented character actors in this movie from big names to lesser known names like Michael Angarano, David Dastmalchian, and Gustaf Skarsgard.
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 24, 2023 7:18:41 GMT
I was referring to Kirsten Dunst's turn in The Power of the Dog; a performance from a solid actress that I'm not a fan of, but more than herself it's also the way the movie treats her that rubs me the wrong way. The sudden alcohol problem is just something "that happens" to her (and Blunt here) without much time-spending and delicacy on the filmmakers' part, as if they just want to add another layer of drama to their pot... Blunt is worse, since there's nothing even posing as a "progression" of her state in this. Oppie just arrives one day and she has a bottle in her hand, and she is going to be this way in 90% of the rest of her scenes. In the grand scheme of the things this movie is going for, one wife's alcoholism can't be the most important thing to address I get it... but this is my issue with all of Nolan's outputs post(and including, with the worst results probably)- Rises; so many plot points and themes, a lot of them end up feeling half-baked or wasted. There is a reason people will rank RDJ and Damon above the rest of the cast (other than their talent) here... The script favors their interactions with Murphy more than somebody like Blunt's, who is better in precisely one scene that comes (too)late in the performance. Completely agree
|
|
Feesy
New Member
Posts: 178
Likes: 96
|
Post by Feesy on Jul 24, 2023 19:57:21 GMT
Not to be the one to cry “but the book doesn’t matter,” because that’s a whole different debate. But when it comes to the women and how poorly their characters are developed in the film…does the book really matter all that much? I do realize this is supposed to be an adaptation of real life events. But if it’s underwhelming in the movie, then it probably means the original source material is underwhelming if it’s truly a faithful adaptation.
My point being, I don’t care how faithful it is to the original source material. What we got in the film, when it came to the relationship with Kitty and Jean, basically amounted to very little for me. Their relationships on screen felt like they were there simply because “well, these things happened, which means we have to put this in there.”
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jul 25, 2023 2:01:45 GMT
Not to be the one to cry “but the book doesn’t matter,” because that’s a whole different debate. But when it comes to the women and how poorly their characters are developed in the film…does the book really matter all that much? I do realize this is supposed to be an adaptation of real life events. But if it’s underwhelming in the movie, then it probably means the original source material is underwhelming if it’s truly a faithful adaptation. My point being, I don’t care how faithful it is to the original source material. What we got in the film, when it came to the relationship with Kitty and Jean, basically amounted to very little for me. Their relationships on screen felt like they were there simply because “well, these things happened, which means we have to put this in there.” Agree 100%
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 25, 2023 2:12:19 GMT
Not to be the one to cry “but the book doesn’t matter,” because that’s a whole different debate. But when it comes to the women and how poorly their characters are developed in the film…does the book really matter all that much? I do realize this is supposed to be an adaptation of real life events. But if it’s underwhelming in the movie, then it probably means the original source material is underwhelming if it’s truly a faithful adaptation. My point being, I don’t care how faithful it is to the original source material. What we got in the film, when it came to the relationship with Kitty and Jean, basically amounted to very little for me. Their relationships on screen felt like they were there simply because “well, these things happened, which means we have to put this in there.” Well I’d say the book matters in terms of where people are looking to lay the “blame” for the character writing. People taking issue with Kitty and Jean are quick to shit on Nolan because obviously he has a history of being criticized for his female characters (and I won’t defend him in that regard), so he’s an easy target here as the person who wrote the screenplay. I just brought up the book merely to suggest what you said about how the original source material might be “lacking” in its coverage of Kitty and Jean, so maybe we should cut Nolan some slack here for just making a faithful adaptation (unless people were expecting him to take more creative license with the female characters).
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jul 25, 2023 3:32:44 GMT
Felt to me like Oppenheimer's relationships with Jean and Kitty were illustrative of his inability to consider the consequences of his actions - the toll he was putting on both of them through his actions only to regret it afterwards. He does that with them, he does it with Strauss, and he does it with the bomb.
Now, if someone wants to take issue with Nolan using women as little more than a plot point in service of a man's arc rather than full characters themselves, that's their prerogative. Though I'd say in this case that applies to every other character given this film is a character study at its core and even Strauss's perspective is centered wholly on jealousy of Oppenheimer.
|
|
Barbie
Full Member
Posts: 881
Likes: 543
|
Post by Barbie on Jul 25, 2023 8:58:46 GMT
Not to be the one to cry “but the book doesn’t matter,” because that’s a whole different debate. But when it comes to the women and how poorly their characters are developed in the film…does the book really matter all that much? I do realize this is supposed to be an adaptation of real life events. But if it’s underwhelming in the movie, then it probably means the original source material is underwhelming if it’s truly a faithful adaptation. My point being, I don’t care how faithful it is to the original source material. What we got in the film, when it came to the relationship with Kitty and Jean, basically amounted to very little for me. Their relationships on screen felt like they were there simply because “well, these things happened, which means we have to put this in there.” Well I’d say the book matters in terms of where people are looking to lay the “blame” for the character writing. People taking issue with Kitty and Jean are quick to shit on Nolan because obviously he has a history of being criticized for his female characters (and I won’t defend him in that regard), so he’s an easy target here as the person who wrote the screenplay. I just brought up the book merely to suggest what you said about how the original source material might be “lacking” in its coverage of Kitty and Jean, so maybe we should cut Nolan some slack here for just making a faithful adaptation (unless people were expecting him to take more creative license with the female characters). Weirdly I agree with you both lol Funny thing is just a few months ago I was defending Nolan’s female characters. I didn’t get the criticism, and I still don’t. I even heard it irl from a former co-worker. Personally, I liked that his female characters pre-Oppenheimer weren’t sexualized.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,595
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 25, 2023 10:14:37 GMT
Well I’d say the book matters in terms of where people are looking to lay the “blame” for the character writing. People taking issue with Kitty and Jean are quick to shit on Nolan because obviously he has a history of being criticized for his female characters (and I won’t defend him in that regard), so he’s an easy target here as the person who wrote the screenplay. I just brought up the book merely to suggest what you said about how the original source material might be “lacking” in its coverage of Kitty and Jean, so maybe we should cut Nolan some slack here for just making a faithful adaptation (unless people were expecting him to take more creative license with the female characters). Weirdly I agree with you both lol Funny thing is just a few months ago I was defending Nolan’s female characters. I didn’t get the criticism, and I still don’t. I even heard it irl from a former co-worker. Personally, I liked that his female characters pre-Oppenheimer weren’t sexualized. On the "awkward" sex scene you mentioned earlier: it showcased Kitty's imagining of her husband's unfaithfulness... with a now-deceased woman. It looked -literally- out of place when it showed up, but the look that Pugh (who's among those who do well with their brief screentime imo; shoutout to Affleck too) gives her did find a new weight later on my mind, when we find out about her fate... I don't mind it... wish Nolan would make more of these out-there, "artsy" decisions actually, however small and low-key polarizing.
|
|