I am not disagreeing... but you/we are out of the target market was my point. Some movies are still made the old fashion way.
Oppenheimer
- Thread starter Tom Brennan
- Start date
I think you may have something here
They are not stupid, and they need to put butts in seats. "We" will go to the theater because it is how we have always consumed movies; The younger generations are cool with streaming it later. At 58 I am squarely in the wait for streaming camp. I cannot remember the last time I went to see a movie at the theater, this is the first one I have tried to in years, it has not worked out the last few weekends.
We don't go often. Usually the wife wants to go. I haven't been antsy to see a movie in a theater since Ford v Ferrari.
trainbuftony
Electron Herder
Did anyone notice the lab in Los Alamos, they had 2 speakers hung high on a wall, in a laboratory, in Like 1943 or 4?
Those of you who share an interest in stereophonic reproduction may note that stereo became a thing in the late 1950s...
That one detail bugged me a bit even though I love to see audio equipment in film.
Those of you who share an interest in stereophonic reproduction may note that stereo became a thing in the late 1950s...
That one detail bugged me a bit even though I love to see audio equipment in film.
Of historical interest multi channel stereo sound was developed in the 1930s, not that it was in home use. In 1940 several theaters presented Fantasia in multi channel Fantasound developed by RCA and Disney. In the early 1950s Cinerama and Cinemascope both used multi channel stereo sound.
trainbuftony
Electron Herder
Point well taken and i agree, But there would be no reason to have stereo speakers in such a utilitarian space as a hastily built lab in the middle of the desert. A single speaker would suffice and I would not even expect to see that given that the facility was purpose built, months earlier...
It seemed like a strange thing to have in the lab in the first place even before I noticed that there were 2 of em...
It seemed like a strange thing to have in the lab in the first place even before I noticed that there were 2 of em...
Bill Ferris
Lunatic Member
Maybe 1 speaker would be in each room of the complex for intercom duty/PA/warning area announcement use, like was installed and used in every room of every public school I attended..
As to the movie`s lab scene showing 2 wall mounted speakers, just might have been the young movie`s set dresser`s oversight !
Just a speculative guess !
Pio1980
AK Member
Strange, yes, a visual allegory of the process of being shamelessly stripped naked with no personal privacy considerations in an inquisition intended to discredit the subject. It unambiguously makes that point.
There have been numerous criticisms of the film not covering other points of the story re the victims or the downwinders of atomic testing, or details of the project, other productions have covered related subjects adequately numerous times, this one is Nolan's screen narrative Strauss vs Oppenheimer as a master manipulator stalking an oblivious innocent for spite, with the Manhattan project and it's aftermath as context as taken from American Prometheus.
Last edited:
This is one of the best reviews of Oppenheimer I have read so far. It references Strauss a more religious Jew but trying to conceal his Jewish heritage, and Oppenheimer a non observant Jew calling him on it.
https://www.algemeiner.com/2023/08/...nheimer-is-stunning-and-should-win-the-oscar/
https://www.algemeiner.com/2023/08/...nheimer-is-stunning-and-should-win-the-oscar/
DesertRatt
All Bark, No Bite!
I did. I though the sound was hideous and obnoxious and mostly ruined my enjoyment of the movie. It's been about 10 years since I've been in an IMAX theater. I last went when "Everest" came out. In that film, the sound was great and added immensely to the realism of the film. But in Oppenheimer it was so frickin' loud that I had to cover my ears for most of the movie. The ridiculous SPL was inexplicable to me. It was by far the worst film scoring I have ever heard - and I am a film score lover. It was "avant guard noise" according to the composer Ludwig Goransson.
The story needed absolutely NONE of what was in that score. It's a powerful story and really needs no augmentation. The acting was brilliant. The direction was very mediocre, and the score was a failure.
The story needed absolutely NONE of what was in that score. It's a powerful story and really needs no augmentation. The acting was brilliant. The direction was very mediocre, and the score was a failure.
I saw it in IMAX and it was a big disappointment. Very few theaters showed the movie as projected IMAX FILM, a process that runs 70mm film sideways through the projector making for a huge negative with very low grain and incredible resolution and clarity ( VistaVision with 70mm film rather than 35mm). Most IMAX theaters, including the one I saw the movie in, merely digitally project the picture. In effect you're watching a giant 4K TV, big deal. The picture had digital artifacts and looked washed out. It will probably look better as a Bluray disc on my home TV.
And even had the movie been shown on large format film it lacked the kind of scope and vision that made the large format roadshow movies of the 1950s and 60s such a visual treat--think Lawrence of Arabia, El Cid, Ben Hur and How the West Was Won. Oppenheimer would've worked just as well, if not better, had it been shot in black and white on 35mm film in the old Academy ratio. With mono sound.
And even had the movie been shown on large format film it lacked the kind of scope and vision that made the large format roadshow movies of the 1950s and 60s such a visual treat--think Lawrence of Arabia, El Cid, Ben Hur and How the West Was Won. Oppenheimer would've worked just as well, if not better, had it been shot in black and white on 35mm film in the old Academy ratio. With mono sound.
DesertRatt
All Bark, No Bite!
On the money.
I have seen what the IMAX film reel look like - 600# of film! So, I very much doubt our IMAX had that playing now that I think about it. It was probably just a digital projection. Along with my other complaints, I thought the direction was unnecessarily confusing. The first hour about his early life was presented as a pastiche of short scenes wherein new characters and places emerged with little explanation - a kind of jigsaw puzzle tossed into the air. I think director Nolan is mainly noted for idiotic super-hero movies, so he did not have what I would regard as a "deft touch" for drama.
Side note: That was the first time I've been in a movie theater in about ten years. So, I was anticipating greatness of experience and it was a painful flop. But, I plan to go again in 2033, so we'll see how that works out.
sternwachter
New Member
One thing that I noticed that they got right was the yellow stop sign at Los Alamos-- stop signs were yellow until 1954 or so when they were replaced with red ones. I picked up on it (I think) because when I was a boy in the 60's, there were a couple of yellow stop signs on roads near my boyhood house (in those days it was a rural area-- not so much anymore). They were getting rusty, but I plainly remember them.
No Money
Super Member
I found this article (maybe paywalled) today. Background on the supply of uranium to the US from the Congo during the development of the atomic bomb.
www.wired.com
Saw the movie the other night, and thought it was good but not Nolan's best work (Memento is his best in my books). I would have liked more time spent on Oppenhimers earlier years as they seemed to me to have been very important in his personal and scientific development. Some of the other characters (Teller for example) were treated in a very two dimensional way. Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Robert Downey Jr and Florence Pugh were great.
The scenes with Robert Downey Jr at the senate hearing where the movie switched to Black and White were a great touch.
Would I go and see it again? Maybe.
The Dark History ‘Oppenheimer’ Didn't Show
Coming from the Congo, I knew where an essential ingredient for atomic bombs was mined, even if everyone else seemed to ignore it.
Saw the movie the other night, and thought it was good but not Nolan's best work (Memento is his best in my books). I would have liked more time spent on Oppenhimers earlier years as they seemed to me to have been very important in his personal and scientific development. Some of the other characters (Teller for example) were treated in a very two dimensional way. Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Robert Downey Jr and Florence Pugh were great.
The scenes with Robert Downey Jr at the senate hearing where the movie switched to Black and White were a great touch.
Would I go and see it again? Maybe.
