Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan film)
- Thread starter T & P
- Start date
Epona
Sonic: 1 Nov 2006 - 8 Jan 2022
Alrighty, after discussion with OH just to make sure about his preferences as it is his night off, I have decided I will go to the subtitled matinee on Tuesday afternoon then meet him afterwards in our local for a couple of beers and to play pool, he doesn't reckon he can make it through a 3 hour epic without falling asleep or without spending an extra £20 on cinema snack food so would be better off kipping in bed and having nachos at home when he wakes up before meeting me in the pub later 
Last edited:
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
I did not write the following, I've merely stolen it off shitebook:
The only Oppenheimer film I want to see is an account of how he came to his bafflingly horrid translation of that verse from the bhagavadgītā.
In case anyone is interested, here is what was meant to be a short statement on why this haunts me:
I mean, the obvious thing to nitpick is the word choice for "kāla" ... I don't see why you can't translate it as time. True, it may mean death, but the rest of the verse communicates this sense thoroughly enough that the double-meaning carries through in English. Translating it as death loses the cosmic connotations of Krishna's identification as time. But, this is an issue more with Ryder (who Oppenheimer read Sanskrit with) who seems to be generally alright as a translator. I disagree with him, but whatever, his decision at least makes sense.
What really keeps me up at night is where in the hell he gets "I am become" -- there is the fact in many indo-european languages, the word meaning become often gets used as a copula, especially in Sanskrit. So it first comes off as an amateurish over-translation of the verb "bhavati" as 'become' when its really playing the role of 'is'. But there is no 'bhavati' in the verse. Instead, a very marked 'asmi', cognate with English 'am' -- and moreover, he says this in his weird pretentious gloss of verse "I am become" -- so where the become? I'm pretty sure he must have got this from the word 'pravṛtta", given its proximity to 'iha' (now), and this fact breaks me. Its a word which so clearly does not mean become, instead meaning to engage in, proceed etc. It's not incompatible with the sense of becoming, I suppose but unlike the notion of becoming, 'pravṛt' communicates a notion which immediately associates it with its opposite -- 'nivṛt', to move away, cease etc. There is deliberate activity being communicated here, not simply the state of becoming.
And this makes the 'death' part all the more baffling -- while he clearly seems to be imagining himself in the role of Arjuna, who is hearing his totally hetero bestie declare his godhood, the passive submission to the pull of violence carries into Oppenheimer's memory of the declaration itself, and Krishna appears as a mundane observer who happens upon becoming Death -- with a capital 'D', sure, but still the more individual, not the impersonal inevitable passage of time. It seems that despite trying to imagine himself as Arjuna, he cannot help but slip into the mindset of Krishna ... and somewhere in this mind soup he gets "I am become Death", despite nothing at all about becoming being in the verse ... but its odd enough to sound pretentious and so that's what his mind latches on to, and its pithy enough to catch on into the popular consciousness.
I know nothing about Oppenheimer aside from this aspect of him .. I don't know whether any of my observations based on this one verse are true to the man. But if someone were to give me three hours of a single reading session between him and Ryder, showing the clear process of a mind's derangement, I would very much enjoy that. I somehow feel that this isn't what intrigues Nolan about Oppenheimer.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Lead actor guy is always good. You should check him out in that other film and the television series.
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
saw it this afternoon, loved it. €7.50 at the multiplex in faro. Very Christopher Nolan visually and dramatically. Gorgeous art direction and costumes. He’s one of the only directors I’ll sit through a 3+ hours film of. Held the attention of the geeky husbands.
High Voltage
In the top 97% of Urban's most interesting posters
Saw it this afternoon / early evening
</shrug>It was OK
Wish I'd seen Barbie
</shrug>It was OK
Wish I'd seen Barbie
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
While I can appreciate a good translator rant, especially when people have come to think it was an accurate translation, one of the few things I knew about Oppenheimer before this film is that his "famous line" kinda was his own creation rather than a quote, because he had translated it so badly. And he'd translated it badly because he wasn't a linguist, let alone someone who could actually translate Sanskrit - he was just doing it for fun, with no real pressure to get it right. But even though he became aware that he'd got that line wrong, his mistranslation was what came to mind when he realised just what he'd unleashed on the world.
He felt like a God, but not in a good way, so the misconnect of a bad translation is more fitting than any true translation ever could be. It's basically "I thought I was clever, but I fucked up," even in the actual translation itself.
bcuster
Well-Known Member
'Oppenheimer' sex scene with Cillian Murphy sparks backlash in India: 'Attack on Hinduism'
The sex scene between Cillian Murphy and Florence Pugh in \
www.usatoday.com
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Apparently Nolan said recently he would like at some point to direct a James Bond film, but only if he could pick who gets to play Bond- which I guess it’s not going to happen.
Interesting request as well- seems to suggest Nolan wants control of who the main lead in his films might be, or at least that he reserves the right to veto anyone he might not like to work with.
Shame it’s unlikely to happen. Given what he’s done with the likes of his Batman trilogy, and his trademark spectacular cinematography using practical effects over green screens, I’d love to see what he could with a Bond project.
Interesting request as well- seems to suggest Nolan wants control of who the main lead in his films might be, or at least that he reserves the right to veto anyone he might not like to work with.
Shame it’s unlikely to happen. Given what he’s done with the likes of his Batman trilogy, and his trademark spectacular cinematography using practical effects over green screens, I’d love to see what he could with a Bond project.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
Directors do usually have control over their lead actors and pretty much all the casting choices, so it's not exactly a weird request. Bond is a bit different because the Bond is usually cast before the director, but it's not like it has to be that way.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I guess another stumbling block with the Bond franchise is that they tend to stick with the chosen lead actor for at least 4 films, but not necessarily the same director for more than one film. So they’d have to be fully confident with Nolan’s choice.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
Yeah, he'd absolutely have to choose someone who was willing to sign up for a multiple-movie contract and was suitable for multiple movies. Most of his usual favourites wouldn't work. But it doesn't sound impossible, and Bond is an Imax natural, which Nolan excels at. Especially now he's stopped his thing of having all the dialogue be inaudible - the sound in Oppenheimer was very effective, which was a pleasant surprise.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Nonsense. All films should be at least 4 hours long.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
I think one of the strongest parts of the film is its ability to capture the mixture of elation and fear/horror of the people involved in the Manhattan project when the test does work.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Nolan gets a pasting from NS
www.newstatesman.com
Admittedly had to skip the bits about Oppenheimer as haven't seen it yet, but there seems to be a bit of conjecture about his alleged disdain for people.
Christopher Nolan: the last Tory
The director is a mass entertainer with an elitist disdain for the masses. In his films, order and hierarchy reign supreme.
www.newstatesman.com
Admittedly had to skip the bits about Oppenheimer as haven't seen it yet, but there seems to be a bit of conjecture about his alleged disdain for people.
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
Saw it yesterday - thought it was a massively overhyped and turgid slog.
No way did this need to be 3hrs long. So many baggy scenes where nothing much relevant to the plot happens. I took a red bull with me and I still fell asleep once.
Female characters very 2-dimensional - barely get a look in (and only as foils to Oppie - yes they really call him that). Bizarre bonking scenes that seem to have been shoehorned in at the behest of the producers.
There are some good acting performances (Cilian, Robert Downey Jr, Gary Oldman come to mind), but overall the film is waaay less than the sum of its parts.
No way did this need to be 3hrs long. So many baggy scenes where nothing much relevant to the plot happens. I took a red bull with me and I still fell asleep once.
Female characters very 2-dimensional - barely get a look in (and only as foils to Oppie - yes they really call him that). Bizarre bonking scenes that seem to have been shoehorned in at the behest of the producers.
There are some good acting performances (Cilian, Robert Downey Jr, Gary Oldman come to mind), but overall the film is waaay less than the sum of its parts.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Not “Bob”, like his friends did?
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
I think the Bond producers have a lot of control and i doubt they would give Nolan the level of control he is used to having. Danny Boyle walked from the last film due to that.
not-bono-ever
meh
I did it in 3 tranches. Problem is I knew the story already , so kinda coloured my take. Cillian is great. Pretty fuckin stellar cast across the board. It’s not worth 3 hours of my life again tho. YMMV
I haven’t seen this film, not sure if I will tbh
Anyway I was listening to something today and learnt that there was a film made in 1989 about the manhattan project directed by Roland Joffe (the killing fields) - called Shadow Makers in the Uk. Oppenheimer is played by Dwight Schultz (howling mad murdoch of the A team is what I know him from) in what feels like unlikely casting. It doesn’t seem to have very good reviews though
en.m.wikipedia.org
Anyway I was listening to something today and learnt that there was a film made in 1989 about the manhattan project directed by Roland Joffe (the killing fields) - called Shadow Makers in the Uk. Oppenheimer is played by Dwight Schultz (howling mad murdoch of the A team is what I know him from) in what feels like unlikely casting. It doesn’t seem to have very good reviews though
Fat Man and Little Boy - Wikipedia
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
I remember a double page spread on it in the Daily MirrorI haven’t seen this film, not sure if I will tbh
Anyway I was listening to something today and learnt that there was a film made in 1989 about the manhattan project directed by Roland Joffe (the killing fields) - called Shadow Makers in the Uk. Oppenheimer is played by Dwight Schultz (howling mad murdoch of the A team is what I know him from) in what feels like unlikely casting. It doesn’t seem to have very good reviews though
Fat Man and Little Boy - Wikipedia
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Just seen it and yes to all of that. Wasn't a great fan of the chronological shifts as well. Barely 4/5, not an Oscar (not that I give ashite who gets the Oscar of course).
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I was trying to recall the earlier film I saw about the Manhattan project, could have been this one. I liked it.I haven’t seen this film, not sure if I will tbh
Anyway I was listening to something today and learnt that there was a film made in 1989 about the manhattan project directed by Roland Joffe (the killing fields) - called Shadow Makers in the Uk. Oppenheimer is played by Dwight Schultz (howling mad murdoch of the A team is what I know him from) in what feels like unlikely casting. It doesn’t seem to have very good reviews though
Fat Man and Little Boy - Wikipedia
No.
