FIRST TIME WATCHING Oppenheimer (2023)

When Killian was talking to Daman about the detonation ( 1 hr 50 min in), Killian sounded AN AWFUL LOT like Robin Williams.... holy crap. Was having flash backs to Good Will Hunting.

adam99x

Not going to lie... as soon as I heard Casey Affleck's voice...i laughed. He did a good job...but he just didn't fit the role for me. :)

adam99x

People always forget that the fire bombings in Japan killed way more people than the atomic bombs ever did. The moral scruples seem silly when they’re focused solely on the bombs and not war in general.

YYZHawk

Sometimes I feel sorry for Rob and Trin and many other reaction channels, these types of movies MUST be seen in the cinema xD

Johann Miranda V.

First time watching too. Didn't realize it was 3 hours long. I'll be watching an hour at a time.

Jenny Lee Villanueva

Cool

Simon Williams

It's easier to argue the moral implications of the bomb after the fact. I think everyone was scared to death of Germany getting the bomb before anyone else. So yes it was absolutely necessary for the Allies (especially the US) to work as hard as they could once they realized the Germans had split the atom. Once the war in Europe was over though, there was still urgency. Japan still had a class society based on a Monarch system. The Emperor was never going to surrender without an overwhelming show of superiority. This meant an invasion into the main island of Japan. The Allies had fought for years on tiny islands and were beating the Japanese, but still taking heavy losses to do so. An invasion of Japan would have been devastating to both sides. I do believe the bombs saved lives in the end. Do I believe it was right? For that reason alone, yes. Yet it was wrong and horrible and tragic and disgusting for what it did to the innocents. To me it isn't black and white, but all gray all over. Why both Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Well it was said in the movie. "The first to show we can do it. The second to show we can keep doing it until they surrender." Interestingly though, I could be wrong about this, I think I remember reading somewhere that after the second bomb at Nagasaki it would've been a couple of months before we had enough material to make a third. Again not sure if that's true or not.

Marty McGee

The Man in the High Castle is a great series to explore the idea that the Germans and the Japanese won WW2

John Borek

the pacific is awful.

Snax

Nope, it was actually Casey Affleck, Ben’s brother.

christine minihane

Oh. You guys should watch “Band of Brothers” and “The Pacific” next time you’re looking to start a series

Simon Williams

Beth

The guy with the weird eyes is in an amazing show called Mr. Robot

Anthony Hempstead

Regarding the chances of atmospheric ignition, the math showed that it was impossible, but if their understanding of the underlying physics was off, it could in fact be possible. So the "near zero" chance was basically the chances that the math was based on faulty assumptions.

WalkingTaako

The vast range of the actors in this movie is crazy there’s so many noticeable faces. When I watched in the theater I never realized Jasper was in it. Also fun fact there are nuclear bombs today that are 3000 times stronger than the one of Hiroshima

James

It's really sad. Atomic bombs have only ever been used twice, and both times it was the US on civilian populations. Also interesting, is the parallels of the Red Scare and McCarthyism in the US then and now. Almost 80 years later, and the US still uses its favorite scapegoat, Communism.

GoodDocGonzo

There is actually a bigger bomb then this one, its a hydrogen bomb Teller was talking about, he invented it years later. The bombs dropped on Japan were atomic bombs not hydrogen and they are two different bombs. Hope that clears some things.

SajonaraHitori

This movie just gives me chills, the way its shot, and the emotions portrayed along with the history is just fascinating and beautiful

Leksa

These bombs actually were a proven deterrent in the cold war but in this movie the choice was put in terms of a 'trolley problem' of sorts, meaning that prolonging the fight against Japan would cause more deaths than the bomb would. We'll never really know. We know that killing civilians can never be forgiven and political decisions are NOT straightforward by any means. It certainly didn't end all wars, it only brought a brief moment in history of relative peace for the west, and even that was due to several reasons. When it comes to responsibility, Oppie is not to be exempt imo but science is science, how people choose to use the tools and knowledge scientists provide us with is a totally different matter. Put it this way: whoever invented the rifle knew it would be used by people to conduct massacres in schools? I doubt it. Should automatic weapons have not been invented then? Probably, but who commissions the building of weapons, and of weapons of mass destruction? What I keep going back to is the 'logic of war' to be essentially at fault. And it seems unlikely we'll ever be rid of it

FedeM

I'll always remember the experience of watching this in the theater. The sound and the visuals gave me a headache after 3 hours, it was unsettling. But fully immersive and unforgettable

FedeM

I can't believe people thought this wouldn't make for a good reaction movie. I've seen this movie so many times and I will never get bored of it. The imagery is really beautiful and powerful and it will always bring up questions about life and morality and loyalty....and I know I would never want to find myself in a position of power where my decision decides the lives of thousands of people. I couldn't do what any of these people could. In my opinion, this was a necessary evil. If there was another, less deadly way of ending the war I would obviously prefer it, but I'm of the opinion, after reading countless books from all sides about many aspect of the war, that the Japanese would not have surrendered, and that this show of power and destruction was one of very few ways to ensure the end of the war with Japan and prevent a larger loss of life on all sides, not just Americans and its allies. It was a tragedy that was not preventable. You're left with the questions of 'what if' and 'us or them'. Impossible questions to answer. EDIT: I also wanted to point out; you mentioned that yes, we did it first but the Germans were still working on theirs. While that may have been true, the difference is this: 1) Those in the arms race now knew that the allies were ahead of them in arms power, and 2) Should the allies be attacked by a wmd, they now held the ability to retaliate should they so choose. That alone makes someone second guess attacking first. Hence the Cold War. Also, you seem to just be referring to the war in Europe being over when the bomb was created. You're forgetting, ignoring, or are unaware of the war in the Pacific. That wasn't something you can just brush aside as not as important or not as significant because it was 'on the other side of the world'. It wasn't just America and her allies that the Japanese were attacking at the time. Again, want to point out that the loss of life on all sides is horrible. Many victims of war tend to be civilians. It's a tragedy for everyone.

Snax

You should watch "The Theory of Everything" (2014) to complete the genius trilogy, it's the story of Stephen Hawking. Why Hiroshima and Nagasaki? https://www.globalzero.org/updates/the-atomic-bombings-why-hiroshima-and-nagasaki/

PsYcHoKiLLa

literally the greatest film in the past decade

Luke Morrison

My Sunday sorted

SamT

Get to watch this for the first time with you guys!

Jose Dominguez