Nolan showcases brilliance in ‘Oppenheimer’.

“Oppenheimer” is Christopher Nolan’s greatest ⁣achievement as⁢ a filmmaker. ⁢He’s already​ had a long prolific career of‍ excellent‌ films, half of which were instant classics.‍ But “Oppenheimer” really⁣ stands out in his canon. It will probably⁤ be remembered alongside ⁣films like “Citizen Kane,” “The Godfather,” and “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Nolan has⁣ done something new⁢ and truly unique with Oppenheimer, while​ still maintaining ‍much of his‌ trademark stylistic‌ genius.

Ultimately though the film’s greatest achievement isn’t artistic,​ but rather how it manages to turn all our​ myths about the atomic bomb⁢ into ⁤a coherent narrative around the life of one man. Nolan has‍ made⁢ epic films full of action and spectacle. Here he ⁢turns the camera inward, on the human soul.

The great Conservative thinker Russell Kirk had quite a few profound thoughts about the bombing of Japan at the​ end of WWII. But perhaps his most poignant,‍ and most​ relevant to “Oppenheimer” was this:

“And now a few ‌words concerning⁢ power ‌among⁤ the nations. It is ⁣ours already; and ​we have ⁢done with it what men always have done with pure power: we​ have employed it abominably.  I do not⁤ say that the Nazis⁣ or the Japanese militarists would have employed ⁤it to better advantage, or that the Communists would use it‍ mercifully; on the‍ contrary, I am ⁣certain that, to the best of their⁤ ability, they ​would have striven to accomplish still greater mischief.  But‍ that does not excuse ⁣us.  The learning ⁢of‍ physical science, ⁣and the perfection of technology, instead of ⁣being put to the improvement of ⁢Reason, have been‌ applied by modern man‍ to achieve mastery over⁣ nature ​and humanity; ‌and that mastery has been brutal. We Americans happened to be first in the race for‌ the acquisition ​of ​the tools of mass slaughter, and we used those tools as the Roman used his sword and his catapult against Carthage.”

This paragraph is about as close to a thematic summary ‌of “Oppenheimer” as possible. This film isn’t really about science — it’s about ‌the human capacity for sin. And not just epic sin, like snuffing out​ thousands of lives⁢ in an‍ instant,​ but⁤ the⁢ everyday sins ​of narcissism, ego, and ⁢pride.

If Ron ⁤Howard, or really any lesser filmmaker⁤ than Nolan, ⁣had tackled ⁣this subject it would probably have been ⁢about the challenge of making nuclear weapons possible. A nuts and bolts ⁢story ⁤where the narrative goes from a problem‍ to a solution.‍ But Nolan⁤ isn’t really telling ⁤a story about ⁤Nuclear‍ weapons.

Oppenheimer is about the human propensity for evil, and how destructive our​ attempts at creativity and so-called progress ‌can be. How knowledge and hubris are eternally linked. The creation of nuclear warfare is ⁢an act of utter horror, one that “Oppenheimer” weighs against the evils of the Nazis and the Soviets exactly⁤ as Kirk outlines above. It is a sort of Frankenstein story, and⁤ we’re keyed into this by the⁣ opening words that reference the myth⁤ of Prometheus. The film is essentially ⁤an adaptation of the Pulitzer prize-winning‌ non-fiction book‌ American ⁢Prometheus by Kai Bird.

But ⁤unlike Prometheus, ⁣whose work ‍benefits mankind, it’s unclear how the brilliant physicist accomplished anything positive at all. This is the supreme tragedy at the heart of Nolan’s version of⁤ this story, which seems to stick mostly⁤ to the actual history. The dark truth at the film’s‌ core is that Oppenheimer’s accomplishment isn’t ‍the defeat of ​the Nazis, but rather the possible destruction of⁢ everything else. The scientists he brings on board are ⁤all hesitant about being a part of a bomb-building project. What they’re all united on is that the Nazis have to be ​beaten to the creation of⁤ the atomic bomb. But when Hitler is defeated sans nukes what are the⁣ scientists supposed to do then? Their moral justification⁣ is taken away, leading to moral confusion.

Nolan’s ‍excellent handling of all this ‌isn’t just visually as a director, but in the script ⁣as both ⁢writer and adapter.⁢ The subject matter is ⁤so ​complex, spanning decades of time, and deals with some of life’s​ biggest questions, ​yet there is⁢ a constant throughline. Nolan’s strength ⁣as a writer ⁢has always been to⁢ cut ⁤away anything extraneous to the story he’s trying to tell, and constantly build to a ⁤concluding crescendo that takes the audience’s breath⁣ away. This mesmerizing technique is apparent in almost all of ​his films. ⁣Before‌ “Oppenheimer,” I would have said⁢ “The​ Dark Knight” was ‌where he did this​ the best, ⁣but now it might be this film. The weight of the end is ⁢truly staggering.

Nolan’s⁣ opus isn’t about America, WWII, or even the Cold War. It’s about the nature of humanity, power, and‍ revenge. Some of the ugliest parts of Oppenheimer’s life are laid bare,⁣ such as his ​infidelities. Cillian Murphy plays the‌ lead role with incredible subtlety, never delving too deeply into the complex⁤ emotions of this most bizarre person. ‍His face barely changes throughout the three ​hours and⁢ quite literally ⁣hundreds of‌ scenes. Yet somehow his performance is keyed in the​ entire time, giving an anchor⁢ to the volatility. There ‍are bizarre moments where Nolan gives us‌ feverish nightmare glimpses into the‌ psyche‍ of the⁣ great physicist, unlike anything‌ in his previous films.

What’s most surprising is ⁤that ⁢the​ real framing device of the film is ⁣Robert Downey ‌Jr.’s character arc. He portrays⁤ Lewis Strauss, a little-known figure⁤ in US history outside of his controversial connection to Oppenheimer. In the⁤ first half ⁣of the 20th century, he had ⁣considerable influence but mostly receded into⁣ obscurity. ⁤Strauss is essentially the villain of ⁣this story and Downey plays him with reserved bile. Even when ⁣he’s being heroic, via Iron Man, Downey doesn’t seem all that much‍ like a hero so it was logical that he could play this kind of character.

But from the beginning, it doesn’t really feel like Downey. Even‍ while doing a bad British accent as Sherlock Holmes, Downey still has trademark quirks, bizarre Downeyisms that always make him memorable. ⁤Somehow in this‍ film, he’s left those things behind. It’s one ⁣of his best performances, ​mostly because of how little he’s doing overtly. His character stands in for the casual evil that elite men enter into when dealing ⁤with⁣ power. Many scenes are littered ‍throughout ⁢the film depicting the narcissistic indifference of great men to⁣ their evil deeds.

“Oppenheimer” is⁣ in many ways⁤ a shadowy conspiracy film, in the tradition of Oliver⁣ Stone’s masterpiece “JFK,” something Nolan hasn’t been shy about acknowledging. He gives what can ⁣only be seen as ⁢an overt‌ acknowledgment to the legacy of that‌ film in particular towards​ the end.

Nolan‍ has left some of his old tricks by the wayside. Most of the film is furious‌ cutting between ‌men who are talking. This‍ sounds⁤ like a recipe for boredom, but the script is so meticulously constructed with forward motion​ in mind that the‌ viewer barely⁣ has a ​chance to ⁢catch their‌ breath.‍ It ⁣combines the dark paranoia of “JFK”⁢ with the​ gripping ​entertainment of “Goodfellas.” Nothing like this has ever been accomplished before. Nolan is flexing every last one of ​his ​filmmaking muscles, reaching a ​new height while still continuing in the ⁢same bold and unique ⁣style he’s been pioneering for decades. It’s unclear what he would have to do next in ⁢order to top this.

“Oppenheimer” is both entertaining, educational, and artistic. It is difficult to describe what the film ⁤is like. It must be actually experienced on the big screen, something Nolan has become one ​of the supreme champions⁢ of. This⁤ is​ a cinematic maelstrom that grips the ⁣viewer ⁣and throws them around for three hours. Some critics have gone⁤ after the third act as being boring, and while it ‍is more subdued‌ than the first two, it really pulls ⁢together ⁣all ​the strands into a final dizzying view⁤ of the⁤ disastrous consequences⁤ of power and knowledge.

Like all the best stories⁤ it is a film about a particular ‍time that resonates for ‌all time. By delving into the life of arguably ⁢the most consequential scientist ‍of the last several centuries Nolan has put a mirror⁣ up to the human soul itself and gazed into‌ that⁢ dark abyss.