Defending Oppenheimer

I do not concur with the substance of a recently published letter by Bárbara Cruvinel Santiago and Lindsay Rand titled “Beyond the cinematic feat: Consequences Oppenheimer ignored ” (Physics Today, July 2024, page 11). The film was half the extraordinary “Barbenheimer” phenomenon, which encouraged audiences to return to physical theaters, and it won the Academy Award for Best Picture. I think most physicists would agree that the film was remarkably successful in engaging broad audiences with the origins of nuclear weapons and with the consequences of their use.

As have many other critics of Oppenheimer, the letter writers point out the film’s limited treatment of the devastation and death that occurred as a result of the Manhattan Project. In the Los Angeles Times, Justin Chang provides a more nuanced discussion, writing “I get those complaints. I also think they betray an inherent disrespect for the audience’s intelligence and curiosity, as well as a fundamental misunderstanding of how movies operate.” ¹ That commentary is the first listed in the body of work for which Chang won the 2024 Pulitzer Prize for criticism.