It put a bit of narrative weight behind the monstrosity of the bomb and it’s use and depicted it in a very visceral horrifying way. But… the narrative weight was almost entirely on how it effected Robert’s feelings about the project and future projects and the consequences he experienced professionally and socially from that change in sentiment. Which is to say… man heads project to build bomb, bomb kills hundreds of thousands of civilians and starts global nuclear armament, man feels regret and gets career ruined as a result. So, yeah, I think he’s pretty right. They dodged depicting the actual devastation of the Japanese people, not even showing the bombs going off in the cities, nor showing a single Japanese person. It’s all off camera and the only real lasting effect demonstrated is Robert’s guilt. That’s obviously central to a biopic about Oppenheimer, but they made a specific choice to avoid showing the actual destruction, probably to maintain as much sympathy as possible for him, I think.

“…and now back to my soulless, utterly mid Avatar films that I’ve decided to end my career on.”

It was a dog shit narrative mess that went nowhere. Barbie was far superior and I had to be tricked to see it.

Nolan’s film tells the story of one man’s experience. Cameron is criticizing it for not telling a different story, one that focuses on the horror of the violence. It’s not a cop out to tell a different story. Cameron, while well meaning, is just full of shit here. I hope he makes his own movie exploring these subjects instead of more blue people fantasy cartoons.

Oppenheimer was already really long, and I feel like it portrayed the complexity of the moral struggle Oppenheimer faced pretty well, as well as showing him as the very fallible human being he was. You can’t make a movie that talks about every aspect of such an historical event as the development and use of the first atomic bombs. There’s just too much. It would have to be a documentary, and even then it would be days long. Just because it wasn’t the story James Cameron considers the most compelling/important about the development of the atomic bomb doesn’t mean it’s not a compelling/important story.

I mean, it’s Cameron. Great director, but an absolute asshole. As others have already said, you don’t have to go for the throat to make a good biopic or semi-biographical movie like Oppenheimer. You don’t have to always tell the exact same kind of story.

This is just Cameron being his usual dickish self.

Hello @[email protected],

FYI [email protected] is more active, feel free to crosspost there

My immediate thought is that I don’t really care. Why?

Feels like it’s a cop out to just go straight for that ‘third rail’, as he puts it. Directors portraying characters and scenarios from WW2 Nazi Germany have to use restraint in depicting atrocities, in order to leave room for nuanced stories (see The Zone of Interest - 2023). Is Cameron just trying to drum up anticipation for his film? And will it be a Hiroshima action piece?

Curious to see how he works nearly drowning his actors into this one.

From the guy who glossed over real historical/social issues in Titanic? Who ignored many of the moral issues of Bruce Wayne preferring to play dress up instead of working to fix Gotham? [Edit: I’m an idiot] Or who ripped off storylines from better movies, slapped Papyrus font on the title, and made an overly indulgent series of movies that are more pretty screensaver than cinema? He can fuck off.