Cool and Crushing: In Anticipation for the Oscars
Harry Donoghue looks forward to the 10th of March and hopes Oppenheimer wins big.
photo by Doug Kline
On the 10th of March, the 96th Academy Awards will be held in the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood. It’s that time of the year again when we find out who have been deemed to be at the very pinnacle of their industry, not just actors and directors but also sound mixers, editors, and costume designers. The excitement is building not just for those directly involved in the world of cinema but also for les cinéphiles, people who have watched the films in their spare time and now want the chance to see whether their views are shared, if their opinions have some validity or if, in fact, their thoughts about what makes great cinema are completely misguided.
The most interesting category this year, and perhaps every year, is the award for best picture. Last year the award went to Everything, Everywhere, All at Once, which I think was much deserved, despite it being a film which greatly divided opinion between the generations. This year we are set for an ultra-divisive year as the nominees for best picture are not all just brilliant films but have garnered cult-like following - who can forget the Barbenheimer summer, or those who rave about Anatomy of a Fall or Past Lives (nod to Mark Kermode). Unlike last year, it is very tough to judge who might come out on top - all of the films would be likely winners in a less competitive year.
“Why does Oppenheimer deserve to win? Firstly, it is superior to the other nominees because of how many different boxes it ticks as a film.”
I loved all the nominated films. I adored Past Lives with its brilliant acting and how nostalgic and full of emotion the story is - despite the fact that on the surface nothing really happens. I found Poor Things strange and intriguing, though a bit too pornographic. I loved Maestro and Bradley Cooper’s 5-year-long obsession to learn the art of conducting. Who could forget The Zone of Interest with its outstanding soundtrack or The Holdovers? American Fiction or the mighty Killers of the Flower Moon, the latter with its grim portrayal of the bloody founding of the US? I also have fond memories of watching Barbie in the cinema with my girlfriend and looking down to see an ocean of pink row upon row. Though some argue that Barbie is no way near deep enough to merit an Oscar, you can’t discredit the way it raised people’s spirits and captured the whole world with its message of empowerment. It made people feel good, perhaps more than any other of the nominations and more than any film has done in recent times - that certainly shouldn’t be discounted. All the nominations are worthy to be in the fight, but, for me, Oppenheimer stands cool and at a distance above the rest.
Why does Oppenheimer deserve to win? Firstly, it is superior to the other nominees because of how many different boxes it ticks as a film. The subject matter is both personal and monumentous, centring on the life and struggles of a genius as well as one of the most important scientific projects, and historical events, to have ever taken place. I thought Christopher Nolan told the story exceptionally well, darting back and forth in time and lacing the main story of the man leading the Manhattan Project with other stories from Oppenheimer’s youth; his love affairs, political views, inner fears, and the brutal hearing where his security clearance is revoked, instigated by Lewis Strauss.
It is true Poor Things and Killers of The Flower Moon were both long and encompassed a great sphere of action, politics, and society in their films. Yet for me, Oppenheimer still comes out on top. In the world of wine, a key quality of an excellent vintage is the finish - whether the good taste remains in your mouth after you’ve finished your sip. Poor Things is fictional, absurd with a beautiful set and masterful performers, but for me, I didn’t think that much about it after I left the cinema - except vague notions of a “be free” message and thoughts such as “did her brain age really quickly or was it still just the mind of a three-year-old?”. Killers of The Flower Moon was a masterpiece in its own right about the bloody birth of modern America and the serial murders of the Osage tribe in the 1920s. This film had bags of finish but its note was sour and rather depressing - a completely undesirable characteristic in both wine and film.
“One common criticism of the film is that it did not discuss enough the effect of the bomb on Japanese citizens. Yet I would argue that this is simply not true.”
I think any film that tries to depict history is condemned to be either greatly successful or a complete flop. An example of the latter is Ridley Scott’s Napoleon which fell into the trap of being monotonous, too chronological and just falling incredibly short of its potential. Oppenheimer, on the other hand, swings in the complete opposite direction. It gives a sensitive depiction of character and manages to weave his journey, his own spiritual battles with the overarching war his country is engaged in. This is the main triumph of the film. It is about a historical moment but is not limited to a simple telling of the facts. Instead, it grows its own story out of it, almost searching to expand the viewer’s own perception of the history in a way that offers a view of individual players and their characters in a wider storm of geopolitics, corruption, and malevolence.
One common criticism of the film is that it did not discuss enough the effect of the bomb on Japanese citizens. Yet I would argue that this is simply not true. A chilling reference is the scene where Robert Oppenheimer speaks before an audience, raving with applause. We see him hallucinate and freeze with terror, imagining the effect of the bomb on human skin, faces, and families. Christopher Nolan himself said that he wanted the film to be completely subjective to the experience of the scientist. We see this through the inner conflict of the protagonist, masterfully portrayed by Cillian Murphy. Whole seas of emotions flow across his face - his tough exterior as the leader at Los Alamos and his vulnerability when he rides away into the woods to weep over the death of his lover Jean Tatlock (played by Florence Pugh). We see the character arc of a man at first hopeful for his country to use science for the good of the world, only to acknowledge the crushing truth about the corruption which runs deep.
The film is centred on Oppenheimer and his life and because of this we only see brief flashes of his inner horror. He is stoic and often battles to repress these feelings. Furthermore, there is a greater focus on the idea of the time, misguided or not, that the bomb was developed “for the greater good”, it was safer in the hands of the Americans than the Germans. The race to beat the enemy in creating this bomb is made even more dramatic by the nagging doubt that such a bomb might horribly backfire. Who can forget the scene with Einstein (some wish it weren’t there) when they discuss the not-zero chance of a chain reaction from the bomb destroying the whole world. Robert Oppenheimer seriously ponders the problem but the US Army still gives the go ahead to use it even after Germany has surrendered. However the tide of the film begins to change after the key moment when he realises that for all his scientific genius, the US government only cares for the final product - he is useless to them afterwards, and his knowledge and empathy make him a threat.
I am very excited to see what the Oscar judges decide on for this year. Will it be a clean sweep for Oppenheimer? Will Barbie be snubbed as perhaps it rightfully should be? Will we see awards to films like Past Lives or The Holdovers who are shorter, and whose plot deals with the little things in life instead of great moments in history, battles, wars, and philosophies?
Oppenheimer left me feeling inspired. I felt so much awe after it had finished - at the story depicted, the world-changing scientific discovery, but also at having been able to see such a well-done, artistic film. Just watch the scene when they test Trinity in the New Mexican desert and you can see why the odds are startlingly in favour of Nolan’s film coming home with the trophy.