Trials of Loyalty
Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Written by: Christopher Nolan, Kai Bird, Martin Sherwin
Cast: Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Robert Downey, Jr., Matt Damon, Florence Pugh
Swift shot: Don’t be fooled by the atomic hype; this is actually a courtroom drama! In fact, there are three courts in session: the AEC hearing on Oppenheimer’s Q Clearance; the Strauss confirmation hearing; and the overall Court of human morality. With Oppenheimer, you get three films in one epic performance as a man has to defend his life, his loves, and his loyalties. And ultimately you get to decide for yourself if he is guilty.
Oppenheimer marks the first time Cillian Murphy has undertaken a lead role under his favorite director, Christopher Nolan. And it is easy to say that Murphy completely owns the role now. His little hat nod and chain smoking will be forever etched in cinematic iconography. But it takes more than an amazing actor to make a film complete.
If you read any of my Nolan reviews, it’s clear I am not a tremendous fan of his. But I appreciate his novel approaches to filmmaking . . . when done right. I was not a fan of Tenet, Inception, nor Dunkirk in their entirety. There are aspects of his films that I think are amazing and worthy of praise, but much of what people find “cool” and genius, I just think takes me out of the movie and annoys me. To each their own, right?
Having said that, I rushed out to see Oppenheimer in theaters on my own dime, because I knew that Nolan was working on something special for the audience, something mentally unnerving and ultimately psyche-shattering. While there were jarring moments in the movie, and the subject matter is incredibly controversial (today) I wasn’t left changed by the Oppenheimer experience.
When I see a biopic about a pivotal chapter in World War II, I want to come out damaged on some level. But, instead, I felt more annoyed that Hollywood again focused on the anti-Commie waves that swallowed up so many of their friends. Or to be more succinct, I have seen this movie before, several times. Only this time we pick on scientists and not writers and actors.
However, I genuinely enjoyed the film.
As I mentioned, there are two trials running throughout the movie setting up the narratives. The black and white scenes are during the 1959 Strauss confirmations while the color scenes are playing as Oppenheimer is forced to defend his Q Clearance and his past to the AEC panel which took place in 1954.
[Swift aside: Incidentally, the AEC is the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, not that Nolan ever spells that out, or if he did, I missed it.]
Robert mentions his time in college and abroad and how he ended up working at Berkley and Princeton and his overseeing the Los Alamos project. Really, that’s one movie, just watching him tell his story to a board of the AEC determined to revoke his clearance. Fun historical fact, it was due to expire anyway, this was actually to see if it would be renewed.
Meanwhile, Strauss (Downey Jr.) is working with his aides, played by Alden Ehrenreich and Scott Grimes on the confirmation. Normally these hearings are a formality, because no cabinet confirmation has been denied since 1925. But as the hearings go on, Strauss is grilled much like his pal, Oppy, and he is beginning to get nervous.
I’m not going to give you the play-by-play of the movie, but suffice it to say, there are tough questions being put to both men and the film shows different moments of them recalling events leading up to the hearings.
This isn’t the movie I came to see. I came to see a movie about the bomb!
When we finally get to that in earnest, I appreciated the commitment to the authenticity of what that whole experience must have been like, right down to choosing Oppenheimer as the “Mayor” of the Los Alamos location. I learned something about why that specific location was used by Oppenheimer which was amusing and interesting.
But the more I learned about this man, the less I felt I knew him. Which is kind of odd, but also a kind of paradox.
I guess that is what you get with a man though, a series of paradoxes where he tries to maintain his loyalties to his friends and family and country but never quite measures up.
Let’s not forget the women in his life. First, we see his instant attraction to a psychiatrist, Jean (Pugh) as she seduces him and toys with his emotions. It’s through her that we learn about Oppenheimer’s dark side and his sins.
Then he carries on an affair with a married woman, Kitty (Blunt) who marries him and that makes four for her . . . at a very young age. Turns out she isn’t mother material and drinks excessively and resents men or something. I did like the few times she fought for Oppenheimer when he was playing the pacifist. And she does get a satisfying moment at the end of the film.
And of course there are the countless, faceless scientists working with Oppenheimer. I understand that Nolan didn’t want to create a composite of any of these characters, because he felt they all deserved to be represented in the story. Great, but not so great in execution.
In fact, the biggest flaw I have with Oppenheimer, as with most Nolan movies, is that I need to watch them several times just to piece everything together. With sci-fi movies, that’s to be expected. But with Oppenheimer, I shouldn’t need a Manhattan Project primer guide to know who all these people are and why they matter to the story. That is the Director’s job to connect those dots on screen. Don’t give me fucking homework, Nolan!
I was expecting an experience, but what I got was just a movie, albeit an incredibly well-shot and well-acted movie but the story lacked something never captured on screen. Also, I noticed there wasn’t one shot of Japan or anything Japanese. I wonder what their version of Oppenheimer might look like under their “Nolan?”
My biggest takeaway from Oppenheimer is this, once the U.S. Government deems you useless, you serve no use for them – plan accordingly.
