I'd obviously much rather go see the newest adrenaline-charged Mission: Impossible film than watch the more cerebral "Oppenheimer," but I'm hearing excellent things about the latter film. My problem in a nutshell: by now, we're all aware that, with the exception of his Dark Knight trilogy, director Christopher Nolan has given in to an obsession with the concept of time such that all his films (again, with the exception of the Dark Knight trilogy) play with time by using devices like nonlinear narratives, faster/slower frame rates, etc. Doesn't it get tiresome after a while? I was tired by "Dunkirk." I didn't even bother to see "Tenet" because everything I'd seen about the film suggested that it was way, way up its own ass. It feels as if Nolan has been, over the years, sliding further and further into his own black hole of pretentiousness, and with "Oppenheimer" weighing in at a hefty three hours, I have to wonder whether I'd have the stamina to watch it in a theater. I think I'd rather wait until the movie comes out on streaming video even if that means sacrificing the grandeur of the IMAX cinematography. By all reports, "Oppenheimer" is a gorgeous, well-acted film that uses a minimum of CGI in its visuals (ironically a point in its favor these days, given how CGI has been falling out of favor), so I know I'll be losing out on one of the film's main virtues. But I have my huge Mac desktop at home, and I sit close to it, so I'll get at least a whiff of the big-screen experience, I think.
Yes... I think "Oppenheimer" can wait.
I saw MI7 last Monday and enjoyed it. I am in the process of writing a "review" that has turned into more of a rant about how the media portrays AI. It's, uh, kind of gotten away from me a little bit. I should be able to keep it under 10,000 words, though. Hopefully.
ReplyDeleteI do plan on seeing Oppenheimer, too.