'Oppenheimer' crowned best picture at an Academy Awards shadowed by war

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By JAKE COYLE
Updated 12:57 AM CDT, March 11, 2024

LOS ANGELES (AP) — “Oppenheimer,” a solemn three-hour biopic that became an unlikely billion-dollar box-office sensation, was crowned best picture at a 96th Academy Awards that doubled as a coronation for Christopher Nolan.

After passing over arguably Hollywood’s foremost big-screen auteur for years, the Oscars made up for lost time by heaping seven awards on Nolan’s blockbuster biopic, including best actor for Cillian Murphy, best supporting actor for Robert Downey Jr. and best director for Nolan.

In anointing “Oppenheimer,” the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences did something it hasn’t done for more than a decade: hand its top prize to a widely seen, big-budget studio film. In a film industry where a cape, dinosaur or Tom Cruise has often been a requirement for such box office, “Oppenheimer” brought droves of moviegoers to theaters with a complex, fission-filled drama about J. Robert Oppenheimer and the creation of the atomic bomb.

“For better or worse, we’re all living in Oppenheimer’s world,” said Murphy in his acceptance speech. “I’d like to dedicate this to the peacemakers.”



Read more: https://apnews.com/article/2024-oscars-academy-awards-show-e72ce0ad9d9fbb77cb43770766b2042d

[samnsara]

1. i have a hard time commiting to a 3 hour movie...

its gotta be reaaalllly good and some of the movies nominated dont sound that interesting

[Elessar Zappa]

4. Many (most?) movies that come out now are over 2.5 hours long.

Oppenheimer is one of them and it’s definitely worth watching.

[maxsolomon]

9. streaming makes it possible to watch it over 2 nights

and press pause every time you need a bathroom break.

Oppenheimer could have been shorter.

[TexasBushwhacker]

10. Killers of the Flower Moon was 3 hrs 26 minutes

That's just ridiculous.

[maxsolomon]

12. It was ridiculous.

It was glacial and repetitive.

[riverbendviewgal]

2. It was a very engrossing film that I was hesitant to watch

I was amazed at how fast 3 hours went by. Great acting and writing in it. I am 76 and learned a few things I didn't know. I highly recommend the film. I also watched Barbie and Holdovers. Both were excellent but Oppenheimer deserved the award.

[Irish_Dem]

3. I thought it was a good movie.

A bit slow in the beginning, but then really picked up.

[Novara]

5. I had issues with the science and with the terminology

I didn't think it was as good as others think it was. The actors used some verbiage that wasn't used liberally back then. And I preferred that they focus more on how groundbreaking the science was and less on sensationalist backstories.

As a scientist, it was clear to me that they didn't have a good foundation in science and nuclear theory. They glossed over so much of what was incredibly groundbreaking at the time.

But hey, if you're looking for entertainment, it was a typical Hollywood movie.

[FailureToCommunicate]

6. Congrats to the winners. I thought the film was good, but it sure didn't need the

weird gratuitous sex and nudity. Ick.

Anyway, nice to see Cillian Murphy acknowledge all the behind the scenes scientists and other peacemakers who have worked to keep us back from the brink of nuclear annihilation ever since those dark days, and that terrible weapon's invention.

[Dulcinea]

7. I enjoyed Oppenheimer.

I enjoyed Barbie, too, even though they're such different movies.

[ArkansasDemocrat1]

8. This one received nothing, however. Not even a Nom

[link:?1689994056|

[TexasBushwhacker]

11. It was nice to see a movie for grownups

do so well with the awards AND the box office.

I liked what Cord Jefferson, writer and director of American Fiction, had to say about Hollywood, taking risks and big budget movies.

?si=OJqjmA844wbvV9ud