The movie called "Oppenheimer" is mainly about Oppenheimer (shocking, right?), it's not about "the bomb", otherwise it would have been called "Trinity" or "Manhattan" or something.
If you want to see a movie about "the bomb" don't watch Oppenheimer.
> During World War II, Lt. Gen. Leslie Groves Jr. appoints physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer to work on the top-secret Manhattan Project. Oppenheimer and a team of scientists spend years developing and designing the atomic bomb. Their work comes to fruition on July 16, 1945, as they witness the world's first nuclear explosion, forever changing the course of history.
Literally from the description of the movie.
It promised work of Oppenheimer and team of scientists working on the Manhattan project. Instead it’s a shitty avengers rip off where Oppenheimer assembles team of scientists without any substance and literally no focus on Manhattan project.
I expected to see at least the Imitation Game level movie, not subpar plot focused on sex and politics.
The film was fascinating, quite nuanced, and beautifully shot. It’s about people, their relationships, and the evolution of their worldviews much more than it was about a detonation.
I think he was a human with a rich multi-faceted life and this line of reasoning is exactly how we arrive in 2023 with people who, for instance, don't know about Columbus' genocides because "discovering America overshadowed the rest of his life so we didn't bother to cover it in school".
A movie about Oppenheimer should’ve at least shown what haunted him and weight of his decisions, not one minute (!) of Oppenheimer watching some background video showing surprised face like on this video.
I disliked the anarchism erasure of portraying the Spanish civil war as a "communist party" cause (the authoritarian vanguardist type of communism that the movie focused on)
anarchists (well maybe except for insurrectionist anarchists) believe in communism as an outcome, but they most definitely do not agree with vanguardism as a means of achieving it. vanguardism is just a kind of elitist authoritarianism.
I would phrase it this way: (non-communist) anarchists believe in communal living as an outcome
Aware that this isn't historically accurate terminology but very few people will appreciate the nuances your definitions requires, as the modern meanings have diverged
Not
SPOILERS
Mediocre politics, sex, boredom biopic.