What made this film so successful?
Oppenheimer becomes the biggest biopic of all time
|by Anonymous||reply 58||September 19, 2023 11:48 PM|
I dunno, it’s a major piece of history. You tell me.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||September 18, 2023 5:51 PM|
Cillian is one dreamy chick.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||September 18, 2023 5:51 PM|
[quote]What made this film so successful?
Its little competition with the Barbie movie, that's what. Couldn't have asked for better marketing.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||September 18, 2023 5:53 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 4||September 18, 2023 5:53 PM|
Living as we are in the eve of destruction, the film is a colossal wakeup call.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||September 18, 2023 5:57 PM|
In the 50s and 60s when movie theaters were decimated by television, the studios began making big screen films which really needed to be seen on big screens. Everything from Roman Empire epics like Ben-Hur and Spartacus to comedies like The Pink Panther to musicals like Gypsy.
Oppenheimer simply recalled that era and put all the tools of the modern big screen experience to use and told the audience that this was an event to be seen in the theater and audiences responded. Remember that audiences haven’t gotten a film like this (an adult big screen experience movie) in years. Maybe the last one was The Revenant in 2015.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||September 18, 2023 6:03 PM|
Actually 1917 also was marketed that way in 2019.
But, like The Revenant, that film was largely dialogueless and sold as an experience rather than a story. Oppenheimer was sold as a story first and foremost.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||September 18, 2023 6:08 PM|
Actually up until the 90s studios used to regularly release a big adult oriented talky historical films - JFK, Apollo 13, Saving Private Ryan. Then came superheroes and IP and everything went to hell in a handbasket.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||September 18, 2023 6:26 PM|
It looks boring.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||September 18, 2023 6:27 PM|
it's the first movie to come out in like a million years if you're not interested in childrens comic book stories where roided out bimbos and himbos fly around on trapeze wire punching CGI models across green screens
|by Anonymous||reply 10||September 18, 2023 6:43 PM|
R9, I thought it might be as well. I went to see it because my father had gone to Japan after the bombs were dropped. He'd gone as an engineer to help set up rebuilding of main infrastructure. I have his medals and the photos he took. He never talked about it much but his photos say it all. The movie is very loud with plenty of imagery. Oppenheimer was used by the US Govt and thought of as having sympathies with the Communists. 'McCarthyism' was starting to rear its ugly head by then. For me it was an emotional movie. Cillian was fabulous as the lead I thought.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||September 18, 2023 6:46 PM|
It was the earth-shattering KA-BOOM!
|by Anonymous||reply 12||September 18, 2023 6:49 PM|
Another reason that CM will win the AA Best Actor (and Globe, CC, BAFTA, SAG).
|by Anonymous||reply 13||September 18, 2023 6:49 PM|
It was a pleasure to see a truly adult movie even if it was too long and boring in parts. But also depressing because it reminded you of another era when everything wasn’t pap or garbage. I am surprised it did so well outside the US.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||September 18, 2023 7:12 PM|
Biopics are not always sure things......
|by Anonymous||reply 15||September 18, 2023 7:22 PM|
The radio dudes in the morning pointed out that Rami Malek had been in both movies.
Bohemian Rhapsody Oppenheimer
While I’ve seen it twice, I was expecting more boom 💥 and devastation.
Still a great film.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||September 18, 2023 7:25 PM|
Oh, please. The only reason this film is so popular is that it was linked with " Barbie." " Barbenheimer" led to the people going to see the film. If not for "Barbie", it would be a moderate hit.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||September 18, 2023 8:00 PM|
Tell me about it, r15.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||September 19, 2023 12:09 AM|
R17, The hype helped both, I'm sure. But your cause-effect I think is flawed.
R16, Rami's one lucky bug-eyed guy.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||September 19, 2023 12:12 AM|
r11 Oppenheimer was not used by the US government; he wanted the job and enjoyed it. While he has a nebulous connection with the Communist Party of the US he was involved in many issues the party supported and had friends in the party. Read his biography American Prometheus.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||September 19, 2023 1:15 AM|
Better than Lawrence of Arabia? I think not.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||September 19, 2023 1:23 AM|
More like Florence of Arabia! Amirite?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||September 19, 2023 1:50 AM|
Cillian's perfect jaw line!😍
|by Anonymous||reply 23||September 19, 2023 5:15 AM|
That’s not saying much. The film did okay. Figure in inflation and it doesn’t come close.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||September 19, 2023 6:08 AM|
The film was beaten by Barbie. Let that sink in. lol
|by Anonymous||reply 25||September 19, 2023 6:08 AM|
R24 agreed, these box office gross revenue lists are meaningless without adjusting for inflation. Oppenheimer hasn’t cracked the top 100 when factoring inflation, but Barbie is currently 75th. Lawrence if Arabia is 88th,
From Wiki: second figure is the adjusted. Note there’s not even a film from this century in the top 10.
1 Gone with the Wind 1939 202,286,200 $2,143,286,406
2 Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope 1977 178,119,500 $1,887,232,559
3 The Sound of Music 1965 142,485,200 $1,509,675,856
4 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial 1982 142,045,058 $1,505,021,996
5 Titanic 1997 T135,549,800 $1,451,226,890
6 The Ten Commandments 1956 131,000,000 $1,387,986,522
7 Jaws 1975 128,641,358 $1,362,993,408
8 Doctor Zhivago 1965 124,135,500 $1,315,254,969
9 The Exorcist 1973 110,599,200 $1,171,833,580
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs 1937 109,000,000 $1,154,889,549
88 Lawrence of Arabia 1962 55,437,000 $587,372,586
|by Anonymous||reply 26||September 19, 2023 7:53 AM|
What's with the "adjusted for inflation" bit? The tallies relate to ticket sales.
Box Office ➗ Average Ticket Price = Estimated Butts in Seats.
Even so, when a movie today is shown for only, say, 45 days in theaters [See: "Elvis"] as opposed to innumerable days,/months that should be a factor.
E.g , "GWTW" for many years was shown and available only in theaters. It was then re-released often. It was also a curiosity, for its then-highest expense and its lead actress.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||September 19, 2023 10:59 AM|
I prefer The Glenn Miller Story.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||September 19, 2023 11:18 AM|
R26's list seems to prove that popular films are usually just that.
Only three on that list could be considered "adult films" is any meaningful way and all three of them are heavily romanticized takes that would not be possible to make today, lawsy, Miss Scarlett.
This whole "Wahhh! Superheroes ate my IQ!" riff is bullshit.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||September 19, 2023 12:21 PM|
This is the film the anti-woke crowd has been waiting for. The cast is all white, the director is a white guy, and it is devoid of sexual and racial politics. I think that’s part of the reason Oppenheimer did so well. Also, yes Barbenheimer helped both films immensely.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||September 19, 2023 12:27 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 31||September 19, 2023 1:05 PM|
^ Has anyone ever upvoted a single one of your "LoL! :)" posts. They are so incredibly pointless and unfunny.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||September 19, 2023 1:29 PM|
Doesn't Oppenheimer have to abide by some racial quota rules to get nominated for an Oscar this year? There are no black, disabled or trans people in the film. I thought in the future they have to cast a black actor to play Einstein for example to be allowed a nomination.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||September 19, 2023 1:51 PM|
They can be behind the scenes
|by Anonymous||reply 34||September 19, 2023 1:53 PM|
Actually if they include neurodivergence as a criteria then Oppenheimer probably more than exceeded its quota.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||September 19, 2023 1:54 PM|
Do the actors have to be neurodivergent? or the characthers they play? This could get tricky.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||September 19, 2023 1:57 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 37||September 19, 2023 1:58 PM|
Cillian played Oppenheimer, so that shouldn’t be a problem.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||September 19, 2023 2:03 PM|
Rami Malek was in it.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||September 19, 2023 2:06 PM|
The only people I know who were horny to see Oppenheimer were grumpy misogynists who wanted to send a message about Barbie, but weren't so crazy as to see that weird child trafficking qanon movie
|by Anonymous||reply 40||September 19, 2023 2:09 PM|
Exactly how, without being anachronistic, could "Oppenheimer" have included anybody but Whites, and mostly men?
|by Anonymous||reply 41||September 19, 2023 3:28 PM|
If they showed the Japanese?
|by Anonymous||reply 42||September 19, 2023 3:30 PM|
Was "All Quiet on the Western Front" racially diverse?
Was "Parasite" (2020) racially diverse?
|by Anonymous||reply 43||September 19, 2023 3:32 PM|
Christopher Nolan is the greatest director of his generation.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||September 19, 2023 3:35 PM|
R42, In that case, it would have been a different movie, with a different purpose, with a different story.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||September 19, 2023 3:38 PM|
Sounds like a real blast.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||September 19, 2023 3:40 PM|
[quote] If they showed the Japanese?
It would have been cool to show one who participated in the inhuman attack on Pearl Harbor later being justly incinerated by an a-bomb.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||September 19, 2023 3:41 PM|
R26 Your list isn’t limited to biopics.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||September 19, 2023 4:29 PM|
Not many people know that Einstein was a trans person of color.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||September 19, 2023 5:09 PM|
I love Oppenheimer, the person who said it felt like an old-fashioned adult talkie "epic" was right - JFK is an apt comparison. Barbie is brain rotting nonsense for children, its success says nothing new.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||September 19, 2023 5:15 PM|
R47, Except that we didn't bomb the Japanese military (or Imperial residence), whereas, sneak attack though it was, the Japanese did pick a military target (and not, say, Waikiki).
So your just-desserts fantasy would have been historically inaccurate for this film's purpose, plus hokey, the very opposite of "cool."
|by Anonymous||reply 51||September 19, 2023 5:35 PM|
It was produced by NBCU/Comcast and was in heavy rotation weeks before it opened.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||September 19, 2023 5:46 PM|
R51, it would also be cool to see all in the general population who supported Japan’s inhuman war actions to be justly incinerated. Both things would be cool, to see justice served.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||September 19, 2023 6:18 PM|
Peacock has the streaming rights when the time comes. Max has Barbie.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||September 19, 2023 6:26 PM|
Oppenheimer is meant to seen on a big screen. Won’t be the same streamed.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||September 19, 2023 6:33 PM|
R53, Do you think the same of 1945 Germans?
(Disclaimer: IMO, Bavaria should have been made the Jewish State, but nobody in Britain asked me.)
|by Anonymous||reply 56||September 19, 2023 8:31 PM|
Maybe "The Sound of Music" and "The Ten Commandments" can be classified as biopics.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||September 19, 2023 8:36 PM|
The fact that "the Japanese will NEVER surrender" was an actual line of dialogue in the film, and of course it was true. It came down to Truman's choice of a massive number of American casualties in the initial domestic assault of the Japanese islands planned for September, or dropping the two atomic bombs. He chose correctly.
I just saw the film on Sunday and was hugely impressed and entertained.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||September 19, 2023 11:48 PM|