That has nothing to do with what they said

No, because Oppenheimer was not an instructional video on nuclear drills. Not that there are any; if nukes successfully hit, it’s the lottery if you survive healthy enough to continue humanity. I’m not sure how Oppenheimer is meant to change that fact. Good job reading my comment with zero comprehension I guess.

“West Anderson” LMAO

It’s not about the movie(s) in question, it is a general statement. Saying a movie is automatically good because the underlying story is good or worth telling is denouncing so many factors that play into making a movie a good movie. PatFussy was only pointing out that the cutting was terrible (I haven’t seen the movie itself so I cannot judge it) and too fast paced. This is something that can absolutely ruin an otherwise great movie and make it unbearable to watch. The story, the script, the dialogue, the acting, the effects, the cutting, the lighting, the sound and soundtrack- all these things (and many more) are individually important and only when everything works well together a movie can be good (doesn’t automatically mean it is a good movie). Is Oppenheimer a story worth being told? Probably. Most stories are. Has it been told in a well executed way? I don’t know, and also this is a highly personal matter of taste. If someone thinks the cutting is epileptic then that’s a valid opinion that has nothing to do with their intelligence, not understanding a movie, or having an unsophisticated taste in cinema.

As a side note, putting “West” Anderson in a category with Christopher Nolan is ridiculous. One makes arty, more indie movies with rather obscure storylines that rely heavily on the script and dialogue, while the other makes grand style blockbuster action movies. Except for both of them being famous and making movies, the difference could not be vaster.

I’d like to apologize on behalf of [email protected] ESTEEMED ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATED CHARACTER ACTRESS MARGOT ROBBIE

I liked you in skinny Pete. I think that’s what it was called. And I think it was Margot

Nominated. Would have been winning* if they let me name the movie “It’s Hardin’ Time” instead of “I, Tonya” then have Jared Leto rip me off.

True genius is never appreciated until it is too late.

it’s not about that at all.

my criticisms in brief:

• creating a post-post-modern work but centering the drama around the pre-modern harmartia in a character
• the absolute break neck speed of narrative in an incredibly long work, without intermission is very draining and not enjoyable
• the absence of charisma from the lead character coupled with the inexplicable attraction and support of everyone around him to him
• “who’s story was it?” there were so many conflicting POVs, and about half a dozen endings
• the surrealism wasn’t earned or justified
• the entire thing is about the possible human cost of such decisions but the only victim we see is imaginary
• most of the dialog is essentially exposition of scientific or legal terms
• although what happens - post hoc - was interesting. the actual experience of watching it unfold was just watching a bunch of people bicker about their jobs

Honestly man, have you never heard of atom bombs and nuclear power before that movie? You make it sound like this movie is enlightening humanity about the dangers of nuclear weapons and revealing some kind of secrets that haven’t been common knowledge for decades.

Or to use your degrading language that you seem to like to make us dumb dumbs understand: small thing goes boing, that bad, we deady-dead, just as granny said.

While the feminist message was not meant to be subtle, there are plenty of subtle messages that people still haven’t figured out yet. At it’s core, Barbie is about identity and existence.

It’s not that deep, but it is a bit more complex than at first glance.

Ok I’m definitely out