FAT MAN AND LITTLE BOY
A film review by Eugene Miya
This review is in the public domain
This is yet another telling of the story of the development of the atomic bomb. I have been informed by a knowledgeable person (L. Badash) that the total count of such films is between 4-6. This story is well documented by many historians: Hersey, Jungk, most recently, Rhoades, and dozens of other authors.
The story is important to the history of science because it happens about the time when science in America became "big" even before Sputnik. This makes the story complex: few single people who stand out. The perspective is largely from Leslie Groves (whom many people don't realize built the Pentagon) played by Paul Newman for star value.
The second is from a new young physicist fresh from Chicago. He is involved in many aspects of the development (ignoring compartmentalization). The other notable members of the physics and science communities are simply blurs. Time is compressed and distorted. A post-war event with Plutonium is added for dramatic effect. In fact lots of stuff is sacrificed for dramatic effect.
The "affair" that Oppenheimer has in the movie did take place, but it was overblown. J. R. had more problems with his brother Frank (who founded the SF Exploratorium and DID work at Los Alamos) and his Berkeley friends. These are the basic characters.
Laura Dern plays a nurse involved the the young physicist. The other real people from Szilard to Stimson make appearances, but you have to know the players in advance to know who they are.
The scenery is spectacular. It rivals (nearly) the real Los Alamos. Oh, to answer one quick question: NO, Richard Feynman does not appear as a character.
The film does not convey the fear that the physicists and other felt at the beginning of the war. If this film has been made closer to WWII, it would have probably told a different story. Such advantage different perspectives allow. Note that one scene involving radiation sickness probably had Dr. Robert Gale (UCLA and Chernobyl) as a consultant.
Place names, code names had to be removed (who ever heard of Oak Ridge before the War?).
The American Playhouse PBS series Oppenheimer with Sam Waterston is a better accounting. But it tends to make the physicists looks innocent.
If you want a numeric rating an a scale from -4 to +4 (mine is Gaussian):
-1 to -0. If you want a solid historical reference (non-standard):
%A Lawrence Badash
%A Joseph O. Hirschfelder
%A Herbert P. Broida, eds
%T Reminisences of Los Alamos, 1943
%S Studies in the History of Science
%V 5
%I D. Reidel Publishing
%C Holland
%D 1980
Quick additional rating since, I was at odds with the IN COUNTRY review: -0 (contrasting to the +2).
Another gross generalization from
--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews