curtisherenow

The script was rewritten to give diCaprio a role with more depth so that he could play better with deNiro. It somehow doesn't quite work, as it's not clear what exactly diCaprio's character is supposed to represent. A miniature version of the sheriff embodied by deNiro, or a character who develops in a positive way and is a bit more reformed.

As I've already read in other comments on the film, which I have to agree with, the material for the film would have been better suited to a Fargo-style mini-series. The Native American characters could also have been given more character and depth. However, Scorsesse, deNIro and diCaprio don't like making series, as they are in favour of the big screen. The result is an epically long film that is likely to have been quite a challenge for cinema-goers.

The film's soundtrack is excellent and will probably win an Oscar. The picture composition and scenery could also be honoured.

The supporting actress delivered a good performance as a new face, but that's not enough for an Oscar for best supporting actress. Her character didn't show enough development and wasn't easy to understand for the viewer.

The other supporting characters were real characters and very well cast.

I really like Scorsesse when he makes critical films and satires, like "Wolf of Wall Street" and plays like this. It is simply excellent how it manages to expose social injustices without pointing a moral finger.

All in all, it was a great experience watching the film.

The film has a lot of scenery and backdrops. However, the camera angles are not as innovative as Wes Anderson's and the story doesn't get to the bottom of the characters in the way that Paul Thomas Anderson does. The film is absurd, but it's not really absurdly funny. Even copying from Monthy Python (Meaning of Life) or Anders Thomas Jensen (Men & Chicken) doesn't help.

The soundtrack is convincing and so is the leading actress. However, she shouldn't have been so revealing. As a viewer, you didn't have to see so much to know what was happening.

All in all, the film leaves me a little perplexed and despite the primordial nature of it, nothing really sticks with me except for the disturbing scenes with William Defoe as a surgeon in the Victor Frankenstein style.

The movie was too long and there were too many characters introduced. Also, the story was not told in a linear fashion, so you didn't always know what was happening. The last third and parts of the first third of the film were not really necessary. I had expected more.

Acting was also rather poor, because the backgrounds of the other characters were not told, because everything was focused only on the main character Oppenheimer. So it was an impressive ensemble of actors, but all actors remained very pale in their roles. The supporting characters could have just as easily been cast by no-name actors. Cillian Murphy in the leading role was good, but not Oscar worthy.

The camera wasn't good either, as there was too much focus on close-ups and too few white-angle shots.

I didn't like the picture either. It was too dark and colors were barely shown.

The best thing about the film was the soundtrack. It was very well nuanced and in tune with the film.

In general, it can be said that biopics are not Nolan's genre. Spielberg (Schindler's List) and Scorsese (Aviator) can do that worlds better. Moreover, there are already excellent documentaries and books on the Manhattan Project.