.

It felt to me like Tenet was Christopher Nolan closing the book on the first phase of his career. He had become known for intricate narratives that often played ingeniously with concepts of time, and his last film took this to its furthest point in a manner that seemed to say he was done with that and intended to move on. Oppenheimer appears to confirm this, as while the story covers three different periods in its famous subject’s life, with flashbacks within it, the movie is far less concerned with this than it is the person at the heart of it. As a biopic, the science is also of the non-fiction type here and plays no part in the construction of a temporal puzzle box, as it did in Tenet, Inception and Interstellar. Neither does the film contort linear progression as with Memento or Dunkirk. The way Oppenheimer weaves its different times together is undoubtedly sophisticated but only in the same way as Greta Gerwig did with Little Women; on this occasion it is not the key conceit of Nolan’s whole vision. Gerwig, of course has her own follow up film in cinemas this weekend but now that they are both out they can start to stand apart and live their own lives. There is no competition here, Barbie will get the biggest box office for sure but come March next year when Christopher Nolan is holding an Oscar in his hand it will feel like both movies have had their victory.

What this next chapter in the filmmaker’s work looks to be centring on then, as suggested, is character. Nolan has never given us underwritten players in his films; and his complex plots have often overshadowed what a good director of actors he actually is, but this is the first time he has concentrated so closely on a protagonist. It is interesting that in the trio of narratives this movie has, Cillian Murphy’s J. Robert Oppenheimer doesn’t actually appear in one of them but still he is totally tied in to the events on screen throughout. When he is present the camera is so intensely fixed on him as to present a microscopic view of the man. If you watch the movie in IMAX then this feels literal, you can see every pore his face, but it is figuratively true as well. The screenplay is adapted from a book and it is that medium that normally manages this kind of examination of its subject. Somehow though Nolan has taken the detailed and precise focus on a person that is normally the domain of the written word and transferred it to this visual canvas. This is not assisted by voice over or exposition but having seen the movie I have as good an understanding of this complex human being as I would have done if I’d read and devoured the descriptions and analysis of him on the page.

This is partly done through the occasional use of imagery. There is a reoccurring motif that is surprisingly good at depicting Oppenheimer’s internal conceptualisation of physical theory. There is also visual metaphor though, including a very powerful moment that shows how exposed the man is at one point while also brilliantly depicting the feelings of Kitty his wife, as she sits silently alongside him. Mostly though the information is put across by the performances. Murphy is excellent and what he and Nolan have achieved here is masterful. Emily Blunt is also superb as Kitty and there are comparable appearances from Florence Pugh, David Krumholtz, Robert Downey Jr. and Benny Safdie. Then there are numerous bit part turns from a range of recognisable actors, many of who have been headliners in their own films in the past. Matt Damon may not shine as much as he has previously done, but that is only because he is just doing what the part requires and he like everyone is committed to this above all else.

Key to Oppenheimer, the man and the movie, is of course the historical task he found himself involved in. Here Nolan draws the right level of suspense and discomfort. Having followed the scientists on their mission it is impossible not to cheer with them when they are successful but you never forget what this actually means. There are fascinating elements of history here but overall the concern is with the legacy the world was left with and what this means to us now, especially now. Yet still Oppenheimer is not a downer; the story is one of wins and losses, both relatively small and of the utmost magnitude, but the balance is met so that the overall experience is not too heavily oppressive.

Different as all of this might be for Nolan, you are never in doubt of whose movie you are watching. This is not the work of an artist looking to reinvent himself, rather it is an example of someone taking all his skill and channeling it in a new way. I still don’t imagine we’ll see Christopher Nolan heading up any thinky sci-fi thrillers again because he has reached the pinnacle of that, but what Oppenheimer shows is that this director still has plenty of places to go. To turn around the famous quote, he is the bringer of breadth and the builder of worlds. With this magnificent film Nolan is inviting us to follow him to the ends of the Earth in more ways than one.

If you only see one film today, see this one.

.

The Ripley Factor:

Women have always taken a back seat in Nolan movies and what I hope he does next is something, anything, with a female lead. What he shows in Oppenheimer though, more than ever, is how being in the background does not diminish those in such a position and there is value in that.