What Oppenheimer Left Out
Gia Priore
July 27, 2024
Since Oppenheimer broke into theaters last July, it has received innumerable praise, grossing nearly one billion dollars and landing eight Golden Globe nominations according to Medium. The three-hour-long film directed by Christopher Nolan tackled J. Robert Oppenheimer’s quest to construct the first atomic bomb and the ensuing inner turmoil he faced in the aftermath of his achievement.
While in the movie’s conclusion, Oppenheimer briefly recalls how he and Albert Einstein worried that testing their nuclear weapon would destroy the planet, their concern serves only as a foreshadowing, bringing the film to a satisfying close. Ending the story on a post-apocalyptic note that only hints at future demolition undermines the real-life consequences of Oppenheimer’s invention. The narrow focus on one man’s contribution to science distracted from atomic bomb victims.
According to National Geographic, on July 16, 1945, girls attending a dance camp just forty miles away from the test site in Los Alamos, New Mexico, experienced a startling blast. Eagerly, they ran outside to play in the “snow,” which turned out to be ash from the experimental explosion. A Nuclear Threat Initiative study found that out of the twelve girls who were present, eleven died as a direct result of their exposure. The only surviving member later developed multiple types of cancer.
The girls were not the only group affected by fallout from the Trinity Test; numerous communities faced devastating repercussions from an incident they had no prior knowledge of and no means of protection from.
Perhaps the development of these weapons was inevitable. With the fast-paced technological advancements of the 20th century, humans may have been bound to invent a weapon with the potential for mass destruction.
Oppenheimer was not alone in believing nuclear weapons were a necessary measure to end the Second World War. Thus, Oppenheimer’s role is undoubtedly historically significant.
The atomic weapons that were unleashed on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killed a total of 199,000 people according to Atomic Archive—half of whom were incinerated instantly, engulfed in temperatures of up to 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit, National Park Services reported. It is estimated by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament that around 95% of the combined casualties were civilians and families.
There is very little attention given to these events in Nolan’s biopic. It seems like we have forgotten the real implications of the Manhattan Project for the sake of a plot that is easier to rationalize. The movie doesn’t shy away from Oppenheimer’s feelings of terror as he reflects on his creation; he begins hallucinating and is unable to bear the reality of atomic bombs. The tortured genius trope comes off as extremely superficial when put against the backdrop of hundreds of thousands of deaths. If the movie confronted some of the darkest scenes in human history, it could have been a powerful commentary on the atrocities of war and the sacrifices made in the name of progress.
Why produce a movie of this nature without allowing it to take a moral stance? Although not all entertainment should be obligated to serve a political position, certain subjects—particularly ones based on real historical events—demand more holistic portrayals. History should not exist for the mere purpose of becoming entertainment.
Social responses to the movie’s release also solidified its detachment from reality. The counterprogramming of Barbie and Oppenheimer elicited memes and merchandise that encouraged people to take sides in the Barbenheimer trend. When considering the content of Oppenheimer, referring to it in such casual, even comedic terms is alarmingly distasteful. Many schools, including my own, participated in a “Barbie vs. Oppenheimer” day for Spirit Week.
In one of Oppenhiemer’s posters, Cillian Murphy, the actor who plays the film’s protagonist, stands at the forefront of the image with an impassive expression as light shoots out from a nuclear combustion. His back is turned to the atrocities that lie behind him. Such marketing makes it easy to forget that this isn’t science fiction, nor is it the story of some superhero or villain. This is the story of a very flawed yet highly intelligent individual whose contributions to science had immediate and devastating ramifications that forever altered the course of history.
It is a testament to our own historical ignorance that we, just like Oppenheimer himself, struggle to face the destruction born from advancement.
Japan committed terrible atrocities during the Second World War, and many people firmly believe their government would not have surrendered had such powerful forces not been exerted. While we may not be personally accountable for events of the past, our treatment of history intertwines us in its ever-evolving path, and likewise, our understanding of the past is inextricably linked to the future.
To some people, it may just be a movie. But, to me, portraying a subject matter that bears such considerable moral weight should have been handled with respect for the sake of those who lost their lives. Instead of pursuing a biopic, this film may have been better off as an examination of the past through multiple perspectives and layers that capture the complexity of such a relevant issue.