Introduction
Oppenheimer (2023) is a movie directed by Christopher Nolan and is based on J. Robert Oppenheimer’s Pulitzer Prize-winning biography written by Martin J. Sherwin and Kai Bird about the so-called “father of the atomic bomb” (Frizzell 13). On the surface, the film explores the professional and personal milestones of the main character revolving around the creation of the atomic bomb. However, on a deeper level, it demonstrates the psychological tribulations associated with the invention of the weapon as well as the broader perspective on how it would affect the entire world for the rest of history. The fact that the movie was released at the time when a nuclear country invaded a country that had no nuclear weapon illustrates the relevance of its theme and the importance of knowing history.
Brief Summary of the Film
In the film, Nolan explores the invention of the atomic bomb by J. Robert Oppenheimer during World War II, along its the consequences of the development of the mass-destruction weapon. Oppenheimer was appointed as the director of “The Manhattan Project,” which took place in a remote location in Los Alamos (Krishnan). The United States government and the armed forces were extremely interested in the creation of the atomic bomb because it would not allow for the balance of power between Nazi Germany and its rivals but would also be used as a tool in political propaganda. Despite Oppenheimer’s scientific breakthrough, the movie illuminates the accusations that he had to endure further in his career.
The episodes from the security hearing show that the government suspected him of being associated with communists and possibly a Soviet spy. Ultimately, Oppenheimer does not pass a security clearance, causing him to lose his position in the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). The AEC commissioner, Lewis Strauss (played by Robert Downey Jr.), played a large role in discrediting Oppenheimer as a part of the political game.
The scientist understood the repercussions of creating a weapon of mass destruction based on his experience in Los Alamos and did not want to be involved in the development of the hydrogen bomb. When his AEC security clearance was revoked, Oppenheimer became a less important figure in both private and public debates about the new technology, discrediting his valuable ideas (De Witte). Thus, the movie shows that a person who was considered a hero could be scrutinized for his political views for the purpose of diminishing his influence.
Description of My Evaluation of the Film
Personally, my impression is that Oppenheimer is a movie that perfectly captures the unpredictable nature of the history of atomic technology development and the relevance of the discussion about nuclear weapons even today. As noted by Wellerstein, “The history of nuclear secrecy in the United States is one about the troublesome quandary raise by fears of dangerous knowledge in a nation where information is anything but easy to control” (11).
In the film, the creation of the atomic bomb is not the main issue; rather, it is the ongoing political, social, and ethical debate surrounding the implications of its development. Depending on the perspective, some may say that the Japanese would not have surrendered to the Allied forces were it not for that atomic bomb, while others would argue that its use could have been avoided and traditional warfare would have caused the country’s defeat over time (Compton). Finally, the film shows that there is a line between creating a weapon of mass destruction and using it.
Methodology for Analyzing the Film
I planned to watch this film two to three times. In the initial viewing, I surrendered myself to the cinematic encounter focusing on the tale and enjoying the film without distressing about the argument it will ultimately foster. In my second viewing, I attempted to distance myself from the plot while concentrating on interesting aspects of the film that I could outline in an analysis. I separated the elements into several key categories: formal elements comprising the mise-en-scène, lighting, and editing, while the cultural elements include history and sexuality.
Formal Elements
Mise-en-Scène
In filmmaking, the term mise-en-scène represents all aspects of cinematography that appear before the camera, ranging from the lighting and set to actors’ costumes and makeup. The director made a conscious choice to enhance the quality of the movie through the use of the IMAX technology that would create an encapsulating experience for viewers. In the composition, special care is taken to create symmetrical shots, integrate precise tracking, and use close-ups, which provide the right proximity and wideness (Kirchgessner 8). The setting design followed a lot of locations that were connected to Oppenheimer. For instance, during his early years, Oppenheimer studied at UC Berkeley University, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.
When preparing for the role of Oppenheimer, Cillian Murphy dedicated himself to losing some weight to appear thinner and bear a greater resemblance to the scientist. Furthermore, the physical appearance was enhanced through makeup, costume, and hairstyle to lead to mise-en-scène and assist in fully discovering the work of both actors and screenwriters (Kirchgessner 3). While the resemblance between the actor and the scientist is not uncanny, their features bear a similar essence, which is what is important in filmmaking (Figure 2). Murphy’s charisma and presence, as well as immersion in his role, are what make him the perfect actor to portray J. Robert Oppenheimer on the big screen.
Lighting and Editing
Nolan employs lighting using both key light and low light in his starring film. One cannot have cinema without light as it exposes the image, allowing viewers to see it, although it involves the creative application of light. The use of low-key lighting can be seen in the film in which the key light remains subtle and subordinate to other sources of lighting, as illustrated in Figure 2 below. Moreover, the shot illustrates one of the most notable cinematic techniques, which is the juxtaposition of black and white and colored imagery. The director’s intention was to shoot scenes in color that are from Oppenheimer’s perspective, while those in black and white are from the objective observer’s point of view (Krishnan).
A film is created three times, firstly by the screenwriter, then by a director and crew, and lastly by the editor during post-production. The editing in Oppenheimer is relentless and prismatic, mostly in the faintly, bouncing between three or more time periods in seconds (Ide 4). The musical accompaniment is weaved into both dialogues and monologues to create an odd feeling in the audience, as if building to a culminative moment in the film.
Cultural Elements
History
The film is centered on American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer and borrows liberally from it as it examines the life of Oppenheimer and his work on the Manhattan Project in the Los Alamos stretch, New Mexico. As a result of the dedicated work of the team, they managed to create a weapon that ended WWII (National Security Archive). It must be noted that Oppenheimer spoke openly about the issues scientists and the international community would endure once nuclear weapons became a reality (Atomic Heritage Foundation). Even though Oppenheimer led the team that created the nuclear bomb, he was not the one to order its use on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Sexuality
Although some may view the scenes revolving around the theme of sexuality as unnecessary in the movie about a nuclear weapon, the director considered them an essential part of the story. They allowed for revealing the deep connection between Oppenheimer and Jean Tatlock (played by Florence Pugh), especially due to her ties with the American Communist Party and the implications for the scientists’ reputation (Sharf). According to Nolan himself, “that aspect of his [Oppenheimer’s] life, the aspect of his sexuality, his way with women, the charm that he exuded, it’s an essential part of his story” (Sharf). Indeed, sexuality is part of life, and its exploration allows for a much more insightful look at a person.
Conclusion
To conclude, the filmmakers made a conscious effort to weave in the complex relationships that Oppenheimer had with the people closest to him into the movie’s plot. Considering the goal that the scientist pursued, creating a weapon of mass destruction, he would encounter numerous moral and ethical dilemmas. The personal attacks on Oppenheimer from the AEC illustrate the complicated nature of scientific research and its sociopolitical repercussions.
Works Cited
“Cillian Murphy, J. Robert Oppenheimer.” Deadline. Web.
“University of California (UC) Berkeley, California.” Travelandleisureasia. Web.
Atomic Heritage Foundation. “Oppenheimer’s Farewell Speech.” Nuclear Museum, 2022. Web.
Compton, Karl T. “If the Atomic Bomb Had Not Been Used.” The Atlantic. 1946. Web.
De Witte, Melissa. “Oppenheimer and the Pursuit of Nuclear Disarmament.” Stanford News. 2023. Web.
Frizzell, James J. Oppenheimer: The Father of the Atomic Bomb. Amazon Digital Services LLC, 2023.
Ide, Wendy. “Oppenheimer Review – Christopher Nolan’s Volatile Biopic Is a Towering Achievement.” The Observer, 2023. Web.
Kirchgessner, Brian. “Oppenheimer: Every Detail the Film Gets Right about the True Story.” MovieWeb, 2023. Web.
Krishnan, Gaurav. “Why Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer is More Relevant Than Ever.” Movieweb. 2023. Web.
National Security Archive. “The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II.” NS Archive. 2020. Web.
Sharf, Zack. “Christopher Nolan Was ‘Appropriately Nervous’ Filming His First Sex Scenes for ‘Oppenheimer,’ Calls ‘Sexuality’ an ‘Essential Part of the Story.’” Variety. 2023. Web.
Wellerstein, Alex. Restricted Data: The History of Nuclear Secrecy in the United States. The University of Chicago Press, 2021.