Katarina Spisakova
Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer has sparked debates over whether it effectively highlights the devastating consequences of nuclear weapons. For me, the film felt like it pushed me towards sympathising with the creator of the atomic bomb, looking away from the consequence of his actions.
Oppenheimer centers around J. Robert Oppenheimer – the creator of the first atomic bomb during the Second World War – depicting his earlier life as a student, the subsequent development of the atomic bomb, and the struggles he had to face along the way.
“the film suffers from a problematic neglect of the horrors that followed the atomic bomb”
Nolan does an incredible job of drawing the audience into the film – which is based on the book American Prometheus – with impactful sounds and visualisation, which make the scenes more thrilling for the viewer.
However, the film suffers from a problematic neglect of the horrors that followed the atomic bomb. Instead, it focuses on its construction, resulting in many anti-nuclear protesters since arguing that the film fails to depict the reality of using atomic bombs and the horrors that follow.
Oppenheimer and filmmaker responsibilities
Perhaps Nolan’s main intention in making such a film was to document and dramatise Oppenheimer’s personal life, and the suffering and turmoil he faced throughout his life. Maybe he aimed to prompt the audience to research atomic bombs further after watching the film.
Arguably, the film could have offered a stronger portrayal of the suffering caused by atomic bombs, but perhaps that is not the intention Nolan had when making this film. Perhaps we can even question whether it is the job of the filmmaker to focus on the consequences of dropping the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atomic bombs, with some claiming that such explorations lie firmly outside of Nolan’s responsibilities.
“Nolan understands that he can not sufficiently explore everything that preceded and followed Oppenheimer’s actions”
Nevertheless, as a recognition of the horrors which unfolded due to Oppenheimer’s actions, it may have been appropriate to insert some small sequences of real-life images, as a nod to the consequences of these weapons for the masses, in order to make the audience more aware of the reality of nuclear weapons.
Educating audiences on nuclear weapons
Naturally, the new release is not the only source audiences can turn to to learn more about the devastation of nuclear weapons. Many other documentary sources explore what happened in 1945, from books to films such as White Light/Black Rain: The Destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Hiroshima by John Hersey.
Have you seen #Oppenheimer yet? If you watched the film and want to know more, read our extract from his biography: https://t.co/fQqsBHfgqV
— Penguin Books UK (@PenguinUKBooks) August 14, 2023
In Oppenheimer, it seems that Nolan understands that he can not sufficiently explore everything that preceded and followed Oppenheimer’s actions. Rather, he chose to nod towards these events while focusing on Oppenheimer’s life.
Overall, the film is well done, with brilliant storytelling through camera, sound, and acting. When watching a biographical movie, these are perhaps the most essential features, encouraging audiences to think further about the topics at its core.
READ NEXT:
- BARBENHEIMER: A GENIUS MARKETING TACTIC?
- IS AI A THREAT TO JOURNALISM?
- RINA SAWAYAMA AND MATTY HEALY: RACISM IN EXECUTIVE MUSIC POWER
‘Featured image courtesy of Anika de Klerk via Unsplash. No changes were made to this image. Image license found here.
