Support NeoGAF

[JimmyRustler]

Ledger was a side character, and Nolan didnt kill DiCaprio, McChaugeneheyheyehey, Christian Bale, Danzel Washington Jr. and that nameless Dunkirk protagonist to earn those opening weekends. Tenet made $340 million when half of the theaters were still closed.

He's simply been more consistent in pulling the audience that Villenvue deserves. And yes, I agree, Villenvue a better director of the two and I say that as a diehard Nolan fan.

It’s what made him famous. Without the buzz about Ledger’s death neither Dark Knight would have made such bank nor Nolan would have become THAT big. He’d be on a level with Villeneuve. Meaning, we would all know he makes great movies but he still has to fight for the general audience every time. Just look at what his movies made before Dark Knight, Begins included (which was arguebly even the better Batman movie).

 

[PlayofSparta]

I really don't know why people don't talk more about this movie, even Nolan's fans.

 

[Doom85]

It’s what made him famous. Without the buzz about Ledger’s death neither Dark Knight would have made such bank nor Nolan would have become THAT big. He’d be on a level with Villeneuve. Meaning, we would all know he makes great movies but he still has to fight for the general audience every time. Just look at what his movies made before Dark Knight, Begins included (which was arguebly even the better Batman movie).

I still say a Batman film with a strong Joker performance was going to put butts in seats regardless of an actor’s death or not. Nicholson didn’t need to die for the ‘89 film to be a big success. The fact is, Ra’s and Scarecrow were far less well known compared to Joker and Two-Face to the general public especially back in 2005. Plus coming off Batman and Robin, Begins was always going to draw less of a crowd than TDK.

People also claimed (not you necessarily) that the only reason Heath was awarded the Oscar was due to his death and a comic book movie performance would never get such an award. Then in 2019 (well, 2020 for the award show), Joaquin Phoenix showed how fucking stupid that theory was.

 

[iorek21]

I really loved this movie. Amazing acting from everyone (Emily Blunt was awesome), gorgeous scenery, mesmerizing soundtrack… sublime.

Not a perfect movie though, the third act was probably the worst part of it, despite still having worthwhile content to chew on, but it just changed too much of the flow, feeling like a different movie.

I think this story would’ve worked better as a miniseries like Chernobyl, but still one of the best Nolan films.

Also:

Spoiler

The last scene is so thought provoking that I’m still thinking about it. This must be a very heavy scene for people that lived thorough the Cold War. That final shot of the world burning means so much.

 

[EviLore]

Saw it a second time. Able to fully appreciate all the setup and plot threads from early on, and was able to settle in and admire the cinematography and music more on an intellectual level rather than as a function of tension.

Masterpiece of cinema. Enjoyed the post-bomb act more on a second viewing as well.

So many outstanding performances.

 

[EviLore]

 

[iorek21]

One thing that bothered me a little bit was that there was very little "science" in the movie. I know delving too much into specifics the general audience (myself included) barely understands, but I missed the actual craft of the bomb, the processes, the discussions, the challenges, how it actually worked etc. They do address some stuff but not with lots of depth. It's very weird, I was really expecting lots of science talk for Oppenheimer, but there isn't much to chew on.

I know, it's a movie about the man himself and not the bomb, but still, it feels weird to see that they had so much time to work on the project and with just a few scenes we get from blackboard discussions to the thing being assembled.

 

[EviLore]

One thing that bothered me a little bit was that there was very little "science" in the movie. I know delving too much into specifics the general audience (myself included) barely understands, but I missed the actual craft of the bomb, the processes, the discussions, the challenges, how it actually worked etc. They do address some stuff but not with lots of depth. It's very weird, I was really expecting lots of science talk for Oppenheimer, but there isn't much to chew on.

I know, it's a movie about the man himself and not the bomb, but still, it feels weird to see that they had so much time to work on the project and with just a few scenes we get from blackboard discussions to the thing being assembled.

Yes, that's my biggest disappointment. I was hoping to see all the cool science work, but it was mostly talked about rather than shown.

The Manhattan Project involved unprecedented levels of computation to perform the physics calculations, with all sorts of elaborate mechanical computers being used in tandem by the men and women (especially the women later on) there. Feynman described rooms of their mechanical computers where they'd pass off computations to one another in stages, working around the clock, and Feynman would repair the computers himself when they broke down.

There's a lot of really interesting stuff that wasn't covered. A quick story from Feynman about it:

 

[Doom85]

One thing that bothered me a little bit was that there was very little "science" in the movie. I know delving too much into specifics the general audience (myself included) barely understands, but I missed the actual craft of the bomb, the processes, the discussions, the challenges, how it actually worked etc. They do address some stuff but not with lots of depth. It's very weird, I was really expecting lots of science talk for Oppenheimer, but there isn't much to chew on.

I know, it's a movie about the man himself and not the bomb, but still, it feels weird to see that they had so much time to work on the project and with just a few scenes we get from blackboard discussions to the thing being assembled.

As you said, that would be more fitting for a documentary focusing on the creation of the bomb, not a film that serves as a character study of who Oppenheimer is. Nolan made the right choice IMHO to focus on the man over the science, moviegoers generally care far more about the story and characters over details on how things in the story work whether it be fictional or nonfictional. Barely anyone cares that in Lord of the Rings that the limitations of Gandalf’s powers are pretty vague, because they like Gandalf for being an engaging character.

Like, imagine The Social Network focusing more on the details on the programming of Facebook, how people would use the website, etc. as opposed to focusing on who Mark was and how his behavior ultimately alienated everyone away from him (and before someone points it out, I’m aware some of this was changed from what really happened). For me and a lot of people, that would result in a far less interesting film. I’m sure people interested in programming and such would get a kick out of it, but that’s not as wide an audience.

At the end of the day, a subject of any kind, whether it be quantum physics, programming, etc., can only interest so many people. On the other hand, the question of who any person is is universally relatable and engaging. One can’t blame a filmmaker for knowing what most people want from a movie.

 

[iorek21]

Yes, that's my biggest disappointment. I was hoping to see all the cool science work, but it was mostly talked about rather than shown.

The Manhattan Project involved unprecedented levels of computation to perform the physics calculations, with all sorts of elaborate mechanical computers being used in tandem by the men and women (especially the women later on) there. Feynman described rooms of their mechanical computers where they'd pass off computations to one another in stages, working around the clock, and Feynman would repair the computers himself when they broke down.

Yeah, there was so much going on the Manhattan Project and we barely touched that subject. I think The Imitation Game had a better balance between science and the life of Turing, but I guess that movie was more of a mix of both instead of a biopic.

As you said, that would be more fitting for a documentary focusing on the creation of the bomb, not a film that serves as a character study of who Oppenheimer is. Nolan made the right choice IMHO to focus on the man over the science, moviegoers generally care far more about the story and characters over details on how things in the story work whether it be fictional or nonfictional. Barely anyone cares that in Lord of the Rings that the limitations of Gandalf’s powers are pretty vague, because they like Gandalf for being an engaging character.

Like, imagine The Social Network focusing more on the details on the programming of Facebook, how people would use the website, etc. as opposed to focusing on who Mark was and how his behavior ultimately alienated everyone away from him (and before someone points it out, I’m aware some of this was changed from what really happened). For me and a lot of people, that would result in a far less interesting film. I’m sure people interested in programming and such would get a kick out of it, but that’s not as wide an audience.

At the end of the day, a subject of any kind, whether it be quantum physics, programming, etc., can only interest so many people. On the other hand, the question of who any person is is universally relatable and engaging. One can’t blame a filmmaker for knowing what most people want from a movie.

I agree. I'm still very happy for what Oppenheimer was. The book probably gives much more insight on the project and everything else. Maybe it's just the academic in me that craves for more content, even if I would probably understand only 25% of it.

Maybe for this movie specially most of the making of the bomb could've been done visually, just like Breaking Bad showed us the process of cooking meth without telling anything technical.

 

[thefool]

Finally gonna watch this Monday (at a weird ass hour). Imax near me keps getting sold out super quick. WTF.

 

[Doom85]

Finally gonna watch this Monday (at a weird ass hour). Imax near me keps getting sold out super quick. WTF.

I barely made it to the 7 PM IMAX on opening Saturday. I was there 40 minutes before it started, and the cashier pulled up the seating screen, and only three were available. I picked one, and before she could lock it in, it was gone. I quickly said one of the others and she was able to get it in time. Thankfully was still mostly in the center and was in the D row (I prefer E, but D is still close but without being too close).

 

[SlimySnake]

As you said, that would be more fitting for a documentary focusing on the creation of the bomb, not a film that serves as a character study of who Oppenheimer is. Nolan made the right choice IMHO to focus on the man over the science, moviegoers generally care far more about the story and characters over details on how things in the story work whether it be fictional or nonfictional. Barely anyone cares that in Lord of the Rings that the limitations of Gandalf’s powers are pretty vague, because they like Gandalf for being an engaging character.

Like, imagine The Social Network focusing more on the details on the programming of Facebook, how people would use the website, etc. as opposed to focusing on who Mark was and how his behavior ultimately alienated everyone away from him (and before someone points it out, I’m aware some of this was changed from what really happened). For me and a lot of people, that would result in a far less interesting film. I’m sure people interested in programming and such would get a kick out of it, but that’s not as wide an audience.

At the end of the day, a subject of any kind, whether it be quantum physics, programming, etc., can only interest so many people. On the other hand, the question of who any person is is universally relatable and engaging. One can’t blame a filmmaker for knowing what most people want from a movie.

Have you seen The Imitation game? I think they did a great job focusing on Alan Turing the man while also diving deep into the science behind the enigma decoder, the soviet era intelligence intrigue, and even the morality of not using the enigma intel to save lives.

That said, Im a fan of how different Nolan movies feel compared to the more traditional filmmaking of The Imitation Game. 50 years from now, no one will remember Imitation Game while people will still be talking about Oppenheimer. Nolan loves to deconstruct every genre he tackles, and this feels unlike any biopic ive ever seen. He will be remembered as a genius long after he retires but his latest movies have left me wanting more.

 

[BossLackey]

One thing that bothered me a little bit was that there was very little "science" in the movie. I know delving too much into specifics the general audience (myself included) barely understands, but I missed the actual craft of the bomb, the processes, the discussions, the challenges, how it actually worked etc. They do address some stuff but not with lots of depth. It's very weird, I was really expecting lots of science talk for Oppenheimer, but there isn't much to chew on.

I know, it's a movie about the man himself and not the bomb, but still, it feels weird to see that they had so much time to work on the project and with just a few scenes we get from blackboard discussions to the thing being assembled.

I feel the same way. Movie was phenomenal and really achieved what it set out to do. But I was disappointed that so little actual science was talked about. The ACTUAL ACHIEVEMENT of science was really glossed over in favor of politics.

 

[iorek21]

As a sidenote, I really hope Nolan tackles Fantasy/Medieval/Ancient Times one day. His vision for it might be even revolutionary for the genre.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

Got to finally see it in IMAX last night. Definitely worth seeing on the giant screen with the pounding sound system. Nolan continues to be one of the GOATs, I agree with those wanting more science but I was happy with the direction he went nonetheless…maybe he could’ve traded some of the final act run time for the science but whatever. Got some real There Will Be Blood vibes at times.

10/10, will watch again. It was one of the only times I’ve been in a pretty crowded theater and it was virtually silent when the sound drops out during dramatic moments…I think everyone was just entranced. Great experience

 

[Rentahamster]

Review time - This movie was fantastic. I couldn't even begin to imagine how to handle writing and editing a film that deals with this kind of subject material, but goddamn did Nolan go full on "hold my beer" and create an engaging and tension filled drama that is mostly people talking in rooms. The strength of not only the writing, but the acting really holds up. Murphy, Blunt, Downey, all incredible performances, and the guy who played Einstein too. Great stuff.

The multi-timeline approach to editing could very well have made this a muddled 3-hour mess, but fortunately the editing was tight and the transition and meshing of what is essentially two different plots is seamless and works well enough so that all the unclear pieces from the first half fall into place by the second half (as long as you're paying attention. Less attentive movie goers may need a second viewing, and that's okay). Kudos to the team that had to piece together what must have been reams and reams of film. I can just imagine what a fucking nightmare that must have been. Their talent shows.

Throughout the movie, I was thinking in the back of my mind, "okay this is a Nolan film, how the fuck is he going to end this..." and I was pleasantly thrown for a loop when what I originally thought was a minor scene was turned into a reveal that tied up the themes and the conflicts of the movie around all timelines in one final heavy moment. Chills. Very well done. I did get flashbacks from Terminator 3, but that's a me problem, not a Nolan problem lol.

Similar to Barbie, I appreciate how this movie was made with minimal CGI and a large emphasis on practical set and effects. I also appreciated how these two vastly different films could also present the tragedy and complexity of the human condition in such powerful ways to the viewing audience. I am more than satisfied to have paid full price for both films. The creators deserve the recognition.

 

[Rentahamster]

I think it's strangely impressive how both Barbie and Oppenheimer can make the audience feel very uncomfortable with what they are experiencing on screen - as it portrays the terrible complexity of humans and makes us reflect of the immense power of our imaginations and the potentially dark and destructive pathways that it can expand to. The manifestations of these themes in both movies are obviously very different, but the underlying philosophical concepts that we as a species have been wrestling with forever are still very present.

 

[Rentahamster]

One thing that bothered me a little bit was that there was very little "science" in the movie.

Same, but I understand why Nolan did it the way he did it. This is ultimately more of a drama than a documentary, so erring on the side of the human interpersonal conflicts makes sense. I do like how Nolan incorporates science into his movies. This is probably why this one and Interstellar are my top 2 Nolan films, if I think about it now.

 

[Rentahamster]

None of the actors in the film distracted me from their performance by the strength of the characters they've portrayed in the past (even RDJ which is a testament to his amazing talent), except for one guy. The prosecution dude. I kept seeing John Conner from Terminator Genesys. Why is it always fucking Terminator movies lmao.

 

[Rentahamster]

Did nudity felt out of place?

I thought it was fine. A friend of a friend critiqued it by calling it reliant on the "male gaze" because boobs, but I don't buy it. Sexual drama is part of the movie and depicting it visually is not a problem in and of itself. I saw Cillian's bare chest just as much as Florence's.

 

[EviLore]

I thought it was fine. A friend of a friend critiqued it by calling it reliant on the "male gaze" because boobs, but I don't buy it. Sexual drama is part of the movie and depicting it visually is not a problem in and of itself. I saw Cillian's bare chest just as much as Florence's.

You saw Oppenheimer with Laura Mulvey? Must’ve been a blast…

 

[Deleted member 1159]

This is a movie where I feel like omitting the nudity would actually have been a huge mistake. Especially in the board review scene, it played a huge part in how it felt having his affair laid bare (literally) in front of strangers and his wife.

And let’s face it I never seen IMAX tiddies before that’s definitely the largest representation of boobs I’ve ever seen so bravo, Chris.

 

[Husky]

I went to an IMAX theater for the first time (and with actual 70mm IMAX film projection), had a great time with Oppenheimer. Also saw a digital projection of Barbie on the same day.
Before seeing Oppenheimer I bought a set of high fidelity concert earplugs, and I ended up needing them for about 90% of the movie. Sounded way better that way.

The audiences for both films were very liberal with their phone use. I think phone addicts have ruined theaters. I'll still see screenings that have something special to them (real IMAX, HFR, or a Cinerama screening if I'm ever able to actually see one), but I don't think I'll ever go to a standard showing for a movie again. At home I know there won't be any distractions.

 

[SkylineRKR]

This is Nolan's best movie. And Murphy is a shoe in for the oscars. And I reckon Downey Jr for supporting actor, in the post bomb act is he is fucking brilliant. Oppenheimer is an experience, an audiocinematic and acting tour de force. 3 hours biopic about quantum physics but it didn't bore me for one second. Its brilliant. Go see.

I am glad MCU is struggling lately and this movie is doing very well. At some point it was only superheroes cash ins, now it seems the tides sort of turn.

 

[Husky]

This is Nolan's best movie. And Murphy is a shoe in for the oscars. And I reckon Downey Jr for supporting actor, in the post bomb act is he is fucking brilliant.

I think I still prefer The Prestige, but even a year ago I felt like Oppenheimer would be Nolan's best movie since The Dark Knight. I wasn't really into his 2010s output, but seeing him adapt a serious dramatic story in a non-linear fashion had me expecting something akin to The Prestige again, and he delivered.

The post-bomb act was my favorite part of the movie, I really hope Cillian Murphy gets major awards recognition.

 

[Rentahamster]

I really hope Cillian Murphy gets major awards recognition.

Same. What other performances would he be contending with for Oscar?

 

[EviLore]

Same. What other performances would he be contending with for Oscar?

 

[Nobody_Important]

Saw it tonight. Might be the best fucking movie I have seen in years. Cillian Murphy has it in him to be the next Daniel Day Lewis. He has that indescribable edge and ability to be so convincing that you forget that you are watching a movie. He becomes Oppenheimer in this. You feel his stress and his mental strain. Its all over his face. You feel his ups and downs. You feel the exact moment when the brilliant scientist feels that he has become a monster and how it proceeds to haunt his every step. The look in his eyes in some scenes gave me chills. You see guilt and misery in those eyes.


The last time I saw a movie and said to myself "This guy wins everything" was Lincoln. If he doesn't win every fucking award for this movie I would consider it a travesty.

 

[arkhamguy123]

I went to an IMAX theater for the first time (and with actual 70mm IMAX film projection), had a great time with Oppenheimer. Also saw a digital projection of Barbie on the same day.
Before seeing Oppenheimer I bought a set of high fidelity concert earplugs, and I ended up needing them for about 90% of the movie. Sounded way better that way.

The audiences for both films were very liberal with their phone use. I think phone addicts have ruined theaters. I'll still see screenings that have something special to them (real IMAX, HFR, or a Cinerama screening if I'm ever able to actually see one), but I don't think I'll ever go to a standard showing for a movie again. At home I know there won't be any distractions.

Yeah I've made Alamo draft house my exclusive theater of choice for this reason. NPCs can't help themselves.

Man I was driving today and would look over occasionally and after 9 years of driving it dawned on me how addicted people are to their phones. So many people drive while mindlessly scrolling. Theaters don't stand a chance if the road can't keep people off the phone. It sucks.

 

[Rentahamster]

Haha it might be a possibility. Gosling's performance was pretty good, but no way he'd take it over Murphy. Besides, Gosling would be Best Supporting Actor anyway, no?

 

[Grildon Tundy]

As a sidenote, I really hope Nolan tackles Fantasy/Medieval/Ancient Times one day. His vision for it might be even revolutionary for the genre.

I'd watch any of his films of any genre. He's built that kind of credibility. I don't think he's as genius as some people say, but he's great at making crowd-pleasing, interesting, yet somehow still-unique movies.

 

[iorek21]

For a long time I thought that showing Hiroshima’s bombing would be interesting, but now I’m glad it isn’t in the film.

Just saw on Twitter a scene of “Barefoot Gen” and I don’t ever want to see anything like that in live action.

Can’t imagine how the real Oppenheimer felt after hearing the reports on the bombings and seeing images of it. I’m pretty sure he had access to info we can’t imagine of.

 

[DKehoe]

For a long time I thought that showing Hiroshima’s bombing would be interesting, but now I’m glad it isn’t in the film.

Just saw on Twitter a scene of “Barefoot Gen” and I don’t ever want to see anything like that in live action.

Can’t imagine how the real Oppenheimer felt after hearing the reports on the bombings and seeing images of it. I’m pretty sure he had access to info we can’t imagine of.

With the focus of the film being on him as a person rather than the war in general I think it works better to leave the focus on him sitting alone in a room waiting for it to happen and then hearing about it on the radio. Him knowing it’s coming and having to wait for the confirmation, during which time he can only imagine what it was like, drives home the lonely horror of what he’d done and will now have to live with.

 

[Laieon]

For a long time I thought that showing Hiroshima’s bombing would be interesting, but now I’m glad it isn’t in the film.

Just saw on Twitter a scene of “Barefoot Gen” and I don’t ever want to see anything like that in live action.

Can’t imagine how the real Oppenheimer felt after hearing the reports on the bombings and seeing images of it. I’m pretty sure he had access to info we can’t imagine of.

One of my high school history teachers showed me Barefoot Gen. It's stuck with me ever since.

 

[Tams]

Just saw it today.

Fantastic, truly fantastic. They got the balance right in many ways and the way the complicated concepts were visualised was wonderful. The acting was incredible, and I didn't even recognise Robert Downey Jr; he was that good.

And that was seeing it at a shitty cinema, that even had the aircon noisily come on at one point. I hope to see it at an IMAX some day.

 

[Rickyiez]

I'd watch any of his films of any genre. He's built that kind of credibility. I don't think he's as genius as some people say, but he's great at making crowd-pleasing, interesting, yet somehow still-unique movies.

If he's not genius, I don't know who is.

 

[DKehoe]

 

[Rentahamster]

The grandson's Twitter is a good source of information to see how the family feels about all of this.

https://twitter.com/choppen5

 

[Grildon Tundy]

If he's not genius, I don't know who is.

I left myself wiggle room by saying "as genius". I think he is one, but the most genius director? Debatable.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

I left myself wiggle room by saying "as genius". I think he is one, but the most genius director? Debatable.

Your mom’s a director

 

[Grildon Tundy]

Your mom’s a director

 

[deafmedal]

just got back from catching it at the Chinese Theatre in 70mm IMAX, managed a center-ish seat not too close. the house was packed and quite well behaved. i wasn’t sure how i would feel about Nolan doing a biopic but there was nothing to worry about… absolutely fantastic film. i cannot wait to watch again. really hit me in the feels, what a masterclass in acting.

 

[scoobidoo112]

This sure looks to be a giant hit. Tried to get IMAX tickets for a second viewing today, and literally every single showing for the next week or so is already at 80% capacity.

Haven't seen that kind of popularity since the pandemic.

 

[DKehoe]

The grandson's Twitter is a good source of information to see how the family feels about all of this.

https://twitter.com/choppen5

This is interesting to see. I'll give it more of a read later when I get the chance. I saw he had retweeted this post



I had heard the family had objected to the apple scene, which is fair enough since it seems like it's disputed whether or not it happened. But with the atmospheric ignition I get why there was the focus on it because the ending of the film is about the idea that it's unleashed this escalation that poses an existential threat, so even if they didn't end the world by igniting the atmosphere they may have done so through the process it started. So although it's more of a minor footnote in the actual development of the atomic bomb it works thematically for the story.

Seeing it again tonight and looking forward to seeing how it is

 

[3liteDragon]

Saw it on the 24th in IMAX 70mm with my friends, absolute masterpiece & a VERY close second to TDK for me which I still think is Nolan’s best. The only complaint I really had was that the last hour felt slightly longer than it should have, but was still exceptional. The entire cast was pretty much on fire, Cillian & RDJ are coming for that Oscar, Emily Blunt was amazing too. The soundtrack is up there with Interstellar man, really added a lot to every scene. Oh and easily one of the greatest endings of all time without a doubt.

9.6/10

Watching it again on Thursday.

8K scans in 5 perf/70mm & 15 perf/70mm IMAX from Universal.




(removed, web browser breaking)

 

[Aesius]

Saw it yesterday with my wife. IMAX Laser (closest 70mm is 2 hours away).

Obviously a phenomenal movie, but the entire Trinity Test sequence was just masterful. My heart was POUNDING despite knowing the outcome.

Nolan's vision, the incredible soundtrack, and the all-encompassing IMAX screen combine to create pure movie magic. The last time I had such an experience was...Interstellar in IMAX.

 

[thefool]

Nobody cross-cuts like this man, and this is 3 hours of him cross-cutting

What a marvelous technical achievement. I expected something vastly different, but this really distances itself from a mere biopic.

As I was coming home, I was thinking how happy I was that I will be able to see many more Nolan movies.

 

[DKehoe]

Just back in from seeing it for the second time. This time we had much better seats. Still absolutely incredible and I think it might have cemented it as my favourite of Nolan’s.

Also, I went into it this time looking to see if Jean Tatlock was being drowned rather than committed suicide since I wasn’t sure first time round. There did look to be a black glove holding her under the water in one of the shots. What did you guys take away from that scene?

 

[EviLore]

Just back in from seeing it for the second time. This time we had much better seats. Still absolutely incredible and I think it might have cemented it as my favourite of Nolan’s.

Also, I went into it this time looking to see if Jean Tatlock was being drowned rather than committed suicide since I wasn’t sure first time round. There did look to be a black glove holding her under the water in one of the shots. What did you guys take away from that scene?

From what I could tell, there’s a brief shot of her being drowned by a black gloved hand, then it cuts away, then it cuts back to an alternate shot of her committing suicide.

I think it’s there to express the ambiguity of her death. There were unusual chemicals in her system in addition to barbiturates, and she was being illegally surveilled 24/7 by Hoover’s FBI. Given that she was a communist and Oppenheimer’s on and off lover, they may have considered her a national security risk and killed her. It’s possible. But she was also depressive and leaned on Oppenheimer when she was at her low points.

I expect that Oppenheimer was aware of both possibilities and probably saw her death as his fault either way.