Take the Tour

Oppenheimer

Haunted by his role in creating the atomic bomb, J. Robert Oppenheimer grapples with the moral consequences of his actions as he navigates the treacherous world of Cold War politics.

See other logline suggestions

Overview

Unique Selling Point

Discover the untold story of J. Robert Oppenheimer, a brilliant physicist torn between his scientific pursuits and the moral implications of his work, in this captivating script that blends historical events, personal relationships, and ethical dilemmas. With sharp dialogue, intellectual banter, and a blend of personal and scientific themes, this screenplay delves into the complexities of the Manhattan Project, the development of the atomic bomb, and the personal struggles of those involved. Witness the intense relationships, inner conflicts, and high stakes as the characters navigate the world of nuclear research, political intrigue, and moral dilemmas. This unique and engaging script offers a fresh perspective on historical events, showcasing the authenticity of characters' actions and dialogue, and challenging conventional narratives.

AI Verdict & Suggestions

This rating is from a single AI engine based on structure, character, tone, and emotional engagement.

Gemini
Recommend

See Details in P/C/R/HR Section

Story Facts

Genres: Drama, Historical, Biography, Biographical, War, Thriller, Political, Romance

Setting: 1940s to 1960s, Washington D.C., Los Alamos, New Mexico, Princeton, and various other locations in the United States and Europe

Themes: Nuclear Research and its Implications, Loyalty and Trust, Politics and Power, Personal Relationships and Struggles, Secrecy and Compartmentalization

Conflict & Stakes: The primary conflict in this story is the investigation and eventual denial of security clearance for J. Robert Oppenheimer, who is accused of being a security risk due to his past associations with communists. The stakes are high, as Oppenheimer's reputation and career are on the line, and the future of atomic energy research in the United States is at risk. The investigation and hearings also reveal deeper conflicts about the role of government in regulating scientific research and the potential consequences of atomic energy.

Mood: Serious and contemplative, with moments of tension and drama

Standout Features:

Historical Significance: The story of J. Robert Oppenheimer and the development of the atomic bomb is a significant and fascinating chapter in American history.
Compelling Characters: The film features a diverse and dynamic cast of characters, including J. Robert Oppenheimer, Lewis Strauss, General Leslie Groves, and Edward Teller.
Timely Themes: The film explores the ethical and political implications of atomic energy research, which remains a relevant and important topic today.

Comparable Scripts: The Fountainhead (1949) by Ayn Rand, The Social Network (2010), The Imitation Game (2014), Fat Man and Little Boy (1989), Copenhagen (2002), The Producers (1968), The Right Stuff (1983), Good Will Hunting (1997), The Theory of Everything (2014), The Prestige (2006)

Script Level Analysis

This section delivers a top-level assessment of the screenplay’s strengths and weaknesses — covering overall quality (P/C/R/HR), character development, emotional impact, thematic depth, narrative inconsistencies, and the story’s core philosophical conflict. It helps identify what’s resonating, what needs refinement, and how the script aligns with professional standards.

Screenplay Insights

Breaks down your script along various categories.

> Go to Screenplay Insights

Story Critique

Big-picture feedback on the story’s clarity, stakes, cohesion, and engagement.

> Go to Story Critique

Characters

Explores the depth, clarity, and arc of the main and supporting characters.

> Go to Characters

Emotional Analysis

Breaks down the emotional journey of the audience across the script.

> Go to Emotional Analysis

Goals and Philosophical Conflict

Evaluates character motivations, obstacles, and sources of tension throughout the plot.

> Go to Goals and Philosophical Conflict

Themes

Analysis of the themes of the screenplay and how well they’re expressed.

> Go to Themes

Logic & Inconsistencies

Highlights any contradictions, plot holes, or logic gaps that may confuse viewers.

> Go to Logic & Inconsistencies

Scene Analysis

All of your scenes analyzed individually and compared, so you can zero in on what to improve.

Scene-Level Percentile Chart

Hover over the graph to see more details about each score.

The screenplay has a unique concept and engaging characters, but improvements in plot, structure, and pacing will enhance its overall potential.

Go to Scene Analysis

Key Strengths

Originality (90.83) stands out, indicating a unique and creative story. High scores in Concept (84.96), Emotional Impact (68.14), Stakes (78.16), and Character Changes (83.72) suggest a strong foundation in storytelling.
Engagement (87.5) is impressive, implying that the screenplay captures and maintains reader interest.
Formatting (10.83) is above average, indicating that the script adheres to industry standards.

Areas for Improvement

Plot (21.68) could benefit from more development to create a more engaging and coherent storyline.
Structure (7.5) is significantly lower than other elements, suggesting a reevaluation of the story's progression and pacing.
Pacing (14.17) is also an area to focus on, as it might affect the overall rhythm and flow of the story.
External Goal (20) can be improved to provide clearer objectives for the characters and strengthen the narrative.

Writer Style

The writer demonstrates a more intuitive style, with strong character development and dialogue, but could benefit from further development of concept and plot elements.

Balancing Elements

Developing plot and structure in tandem with character and dialogue can create a more balanced and engaging screenplay.
Improving pacing and external goals can help maintain reader interest and create a more satisfying narrative arc.

Intuition Level

Intuitive

Overall Assessment

The screenplay shows promise with its unique concept, engaging characters, and strong emotional impact. Focusing on plot development, structure, and pacing can elevate the story to its full potential.

How this was done: Each criteria is ranked in comparison to scripts in our Vault (such as The Matrix, Breaking Bad, etc.) This allows you to see where you stand compared to other produced scripts for each criteria.

How scenes compare to the Scripts in our Library

Note: The ratings are the averages of all the scenes.

Title	Grade	Percentile	Before	After
Script Visual Impact	8.50	93	Moonlight: 8.40	groundhog day: 8.50
Script Conflict	8.20	86	Parasite: 8.00	the dark knight rises: 8.20
Scene Engagement	9.00	81	The Addams Family: 8.99	fight Club: 9.00
Script Theme	8.60	79	Witness: 8.50	Mr. Smith goes to Washington: 8.60
Scene High Stakes	8.3	77	Conclave: 8.2	Vice: 8.3
Script Originality	8.30	75	American Fiction: 8.20	the 5th element: 8.30
Scene Dialogue	8.1	71	Parasite: 8.0	Mr. Smith goes to Washington: 8.1
Script Structure	8.10	71	Jojo rabbit: 8.00	Titanic: 8.10
Scene Originality	8.83	69	The Umbrella Academy: 8.82	Shaun of the Dead: 8.83
Scene Conflict Level	8.0	68	12 years a slave: 7.9	a few good men: 8.0
Script Emotional Impact	8.00	67	Argo: 7.90	the 5th element: 8.00
Overall Script	8.25	67	The Hudsucker Proxy: 8.20	Black mirror 304: 8.25
Scene Character Changes	7.3	65	A real pain : 7.2	Casablanca: 7.3
Scene Characters	8.5	63	Triangle of sadness: 8.4	fight Club: 8.5
Scene Story Forward	8.2	57	The King's speech: 8.1	True Blood: 8.2
Scene Concept	8.2	56	Coda: 8.1	face/off: 8.2
Scene Unpredictability	7.48	49	Mr. Smith goes to Washington: 7.47	Oppenheimer: 7.48
Scene Emotional Impact	7.8	45	Gran Torino: 7.7	Blade Runner: 7.8
Script Premise	7.90	39	Zootopia: 7.80	fight Club: 7.90
Scene Overall	8.2	28	Ted: 8.1	a few good men: 8.2
Scene Plot	7.7	27	Hot Fuzz: 7.6	fight Club: 7.7
Scene Internal Goal	8.00	20	KILLING ZOE: 7.98	fight Club: 8.00
Script Characters	7.60	20	Witness: 7.50	severance (TV): 7.60
Scene Pacing	8.12	19	Moonlight: 8.11	Donnie Darko: 8.12
Scene External Goal	7.00	12	A real pain : 6.98	Everything Everywhere All at Once: 7.00
Scene Formatting	8.00	11	Wild Wild West: 7.98	Arsenic and old lace : 8.00
Script Structure	8.00	8	Easy A: 7.99	Requiem for a dream: 8.00

Other Analyses

This section looks at the extra spark — your story’s voice, style, world, and the moments that really stick. These insights might not change the bones of the script, but they can make it more original, more immersive, and way more memorable. It’s where things get fun, weird, and wonderfully you.

Unique Voice

Assesses the distinctiveness and personality of the writer's voice.

> Go to Unique Voice

Writer's Craft

Analyzes the writing to help the writer be aware of their skill and improve.

> Go to Writer's Craft

Memorable Lines

Spotlights standout dialogue lines with emotional or thematic power.

> Go to Memorable Lines

Tropes

Highlights common or genre-specific tropes found in the script.

> Go to Tropes

World Building

Evaluates the depth, consistency, and immersion of the story's world.

> Go to World Building

Correlations

Identifies patterns in scene scores.

> Go to Correlations

Loglines

Presents logline variations based on theme, genre, and hook.

> Go to Loglines

Unique Voice

Assesses the distinctiveness and personality of the writer's voice.

> Go to Unique Voice

Writer's Craft

Analyzes the writing to help the writer be aware of their skill and improve.

> Go to Writer's Craft

Memorable Lines

Spotlights standout dialogue lines with emotional or thematic power.

> Go to Memorable Lines

Tropes

Highlights common or genre-specific tropes found in the script.

> Go to Tropes

World Building

Evaluates the depth, consistency, and immersion of the story's world.

> Go to World Building

Correlations

Identifies patterns in scene scores.

> Go to Correlations

Loglines

Presents logline variations based on theme, genre, and hook.

> Go to Loglines

Screenplay Rating:

Recommend

Executive Summary

The 'Oppenheimer' screenplay is a powerful and compelling exploration of a complex historical figure and the moral dilemmas surrounding the development and use of the atomic bomb. The screenplay's strengths lie in its historical accuracy, character development, and thought-provoking themes. Some areas for improvement include pacing, further development of female characters, and a deeper exploration of the consequences of nuclear weapons.

Strengths

The screenplay masterfully blends historical accuracy with dramatic storytelling, creating a captivating and thought-provoking narrative. high
Oppenheimer's complex character arc is portrayed with depth and nuance, exploring his brilliance, flaws, and internal conflicts. high
The dialogue is sharp, intelligent, and often laced with wit, reflecting the intellectual environment and the characters' personalities. high
The use of flashbacks and flash-forwards effectively adds depth and context to the narrative, building suspense and revealing Oppenheimer's emotional journey. medium
The portrayal of the Los Alamos community and the scientists' personal lives adds a human dimension to the story, highlighting the sacrifices and moral dilemmas they faced. medium ( Scene 12 Scene 20 Scene 25 )

Areas of Improvement

The pacing could be tightened in certain sections, particularly during the middle act where the focus on scientific details might slow down the momentum for some viewers. medium
The female characters, particularly Kitty and Jean Tatlock, could benefit from further development and exploration of their motivations and inner lives. medium ( Scene 8 Scene 15 Scene 29 )
While the consequences of the atomic bomb are mentioned, a more explicit exploration of the human cost and long-term implications could enhance the film's impact. medium ( Scene 30 Scene 35 Scene 37 )

MissingElements

The screenplay could benefit from a more detailed exploration of the political landscape and the decision-making processes that led to the use of the atomic bomb. medium

NotablePoints

The recurring motif of feet stamping, growing faster and faster, effectively symbolizes Oppenheimer's growing anxiety and the escalating threat of nuclear war. high ( Scene 25 Scene 40 Scene 42 )
The use of the Bhagavad Gita and Oppenheimer's quote 'Now I am become Death, destroyer of worlds' adds a layer of philosophical and moral complexity to his character. high ( Scene 4 Scene 24 Scene 26 )
The screenplay cleverly uses the Strauss hearings to frame the narrative, gradually revealing the complex relationship between Oppenheimer and Strauss. medium ( Scene 1 Scene 31 Scene 39 )

;

Screenplay Insights:

Overall Grade: 8.25

Characters: 7.6, The screenplay showcases thoughtful character development, particularly through the lead character J. Robert Oppenheimer. By exploring his inner turmoil and ethical struggles, the script effectively conveys the complexities of his character and his journey. However, some supporting characters, like Edward Teller, feel less developed and could benefit from deeper exploration of their motivations and backstories. See More

Premise: 7.9, The screenplay has a solid premise that explores the complex moral implications of scientific discovery, particularly in the context of nuclear weapons development. However, some elements of the premise could be further refined and expanded upon to enhance its originality and overall appeal. See More

Structure: 8.1, The screenplay exhibits a solid structure and engaging plot that effectively drives the narrative. However, certain aspects could be refined to enhance clarity, pacing, and emotional impact. See More

Theme: 8.6, The screenplay effectively explores themes related to the moral implications of scientific advancements, power struggles, and personal sacrifices in the pursuit of knowledge. It conveys impactful messages about the responsibilities of scientists, the dangers of unchecked ambition, and the lasting consequences of our actions. See More

Visual Impact: 8.5, The screenplay effectively captures the complex emotions and tensions of its characters through visually descriptive language. The screenplay stands out for its depiction of introspective moments and the impact of the atomic bomb, creating a strong emotional connection with the audience. See More

Emotional Impact: 8.0, This screenplay possesses a solid emotional foundation, effectively evoking a range of emotions and engaging the audience on a personal level. However, there are some areas where the emotional depth could be further enhanced to create a lasting impact. See More

Conflict: 8.2, The screenplay handles conflict and stakes effectively, presenting a compelling narrative of scientific ambition, moral dilemmas, and political intrigue. However, it could further enhance its impact by emphasizing personal stakes and escalating them gradually. See More

Originality: 8.3, The screenplay presents a captivating and original narrative that delves into the complex world of nuclear science, power dynamics, and moral dilemmas. It skillfully weaves historical events with fictional character arcs, resulting in a thought-provoking and deeply immersive experience. See More

Summary The screenplay follows the life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, from his struggles as a young scientist to his pivotal role in the development of the atomic bomb. The story explores Oppenheimer's personal and professional relationships, his moral dilemmas, and his ultimate downfall due to his opposition to the hydrogen bomb and his past associations with communism. As Oppenheimer navigates the pressures of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission, he faces scrutiny, betrayal, and internal conflict. The screenplay culminates in Oppenheimer's realization of the destructive power of the atomic bomb and his attempt to reconcile with his decisions and their consequences. Amidst political intrigue, personal sacrifices, and ethical quandaries, Oppenheimer's journey sheds light on the complexities of science, power, and human nature.

Screenplay Story Analysis

Story Critique The screenplay presents a compelling and thought-provoking exploration of the life and moral dilemmas of J. Robert Oppenheimer, with a strong focus on his internal struggles and ethical conflicts. The character development is well-executed, especially in portraying Oppenheimer's evolution from a brilliant physicist to a conflicted individual grappling with the consequences of his work. The interactions between Oppenheimer and key characters add depth and complexity to the story. However, the plot could benefit from more external conflict and higher stakes to increase tension and engagement. Additionally, some scenes could be further developed to enhance the emotional impact and clarity of the narrative.

Suggestions: To improve the screenplay, consider introducing a stronger external conflict that challenges Oppenheimer's beliefs and values, raising the stakes and adding urgency to the story. Develop certain scenes to provide more clarity and emotional depth, ensuring that the audience fully understands the character motivations and narrative progression. Enhance the pacing and structure to maintain the audience's engagement and create a more cohesive storyline.

Note: This is the overall critique. For scene by scene critique click here

Beginning The beginning of the screenplay effectively sets up the central conflict and introduces key characters with depth and complexity. The establishment of Oppenheimer's character and his initial motivations is well-executed, drawing the audience into his world and setting the stage for the unfolding drama. The interactions between Oppenheimer and Einstein provide a strong foundation for the narrative, offering insights into Oppenheimer's moral dilemmas and ethical considerations.

Suggestions: To enhance the beginning of the screenplay, consider incorporating more visual elements and sensory details to immerse the audience in the setting and atmosphere. Strengthen the introduction of key characters to establish their relationships and motivations more clearly. Develop the initial conflict to create a stronger hook and increase the audience's investment in the story from the start.

Middle The middle part of the screenplay delves deeper into Oppenheimer's internal struggles and ethical dilemmas, showcasing his evolution and growth as a character. The interactions with supporting characters like Rabi and Teller add layers of complexity to the narrative, offering different perspectives on Oppenheimer's choices and actions. The pacing remains engaging, with well-crafted scenes that build tension and emotional depth.

Suggestions: To improve the middle part of the screenplay, consider expanding on the conflicts and challenges faced by Oppenheimer, adding more obstacles and setbacks to heighten the stakes. Further develop the relationships between Oppenheimer and supporting characters to provide additional layers of complexity and emotional resonance. Enhance the thematic elements and moral dilemmas to create a more nuanced exploration of Oppenheimer's journey.

Ending The ending of the screenplay delivers a powerful and poignant resolution to Oppenheimer's story, highlighting his growth and redemption in the face of adversity. The emotional impact is palpable, with a satisfying conclusion that ties up loose ends and leaves a lasting impression on the audience. The character arcs are well-developed, offering closure and resolution to key relationships and conflicts.

Suggestions: To strengthen the ending of the screenplay, consider adding a final twist or revelation that deepens the emotional impact and leaves the audience with a lingering question or reflection. Provide a more definitive resolution to certain character arcs and conflicts, ensuring that all loose ends are tied up satisfactorily. Enhance the thematic resonance of the conclusion to leave a lasting impression on the audience and provoke thought and discussion.

CharacterInconsistencies

Character Oppenheimer
Description Oppenheimer's casual admission of attempted murder to Tatlock seems out of character for someone portrayed as emotionally complex and troubled. This action appears driven by the plot's need to introduce his dark past.
( Scene 1 Scene 2 )
Character Kitty
Description Kitty's sudden shift from pragmatism about her husband's death to passionate involvement with Oppenheimer seems abrupt and lacks sufficient build-up.
( Scene 7 )

StoryInconsistencies

Description The timeline of Oppenheimer's security clearance approval seems inconsistent. He is informed of its approval in sequence 8, but in sequence 15, Nichols states it hasn't been approved yet.
( Scene 8 )

PlotHoles

Description The explanation for Lomanitz's drafting seems contrived. The connection between his unionization efforts and the security concerns at Los Alamos feels weak and convenient for the plot.
( Scene 15 )

DialogueAuthenticity

Description The scientists' casual and humorous use of technical jargon in serious situations sometimes feels out of place and detracts from the gravity of the subject matter.
( Scene 14 )

Redundancies

Element Oppenheimer's reassurance to Lomanitz
( Scene 2 Scene 14 )
Suggestion While the repetition emphasizes Oppenheimer's mentorship, one instance could be cut to streamline the narrative.
Element Scenes of Oppenheimer struggling with his conscience
( Scene 20 Scene 27 Scene 30 )
Suggestion The repeated scenes of Oppenheimer's internal conflict could be consolidated or presented with more variation to avoid redundancy and maintain emotional impact.

🧠 Character Therapy: Let your character open up to an AI therapist and reveal hidden depths.

The model has recently changed. Don't try to compare scores between revisions yet.

Oppenheimer - Score: 83/100

Role

Protagonist

Personality

MBTI: INTJ
Enneagram: Type 5 (The Investigator)

Scenes

Strongest: #25
Weakest: #15

Character Analysis Overview

Foundational Definition 9/10

A brilliant physicist driven by intellectual curiosity and moral responsibility.

Complexity And Depth 8/10

Emotionally complex, wrestling with guilt and moral dilemmas.

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis 7/10

Oppenheimer experiences significant internal change throughout the story.

Dialogue And Voice 8/10

Oppenheimer's voice is articulate, reflective, and deeply intellectual.

Behavior And Choices 7/10

Oppenheimer's choices often reflect a constant struggle between his ambition and moral compass.

Relationship Dynamics 8/10

Oppenheimer's relationships are complex, marked by collaboration and conflicting loyalties.

Scene Impact 9/10

Oppenheimer's presence often elevates scenes, shifting tone and emotional weight.

Role Fulfillment 9/10

Oppenheimer serves as both a hero and a tragic figure in the narrative.

Thematic Plot Integration 9/10

Oppenheimer's journey is central to themes of scientific ethics and the consequences of power.

Emotional Resonance 9/10

Evokes strong emotional responses through moral dilemmas and personal loss.

Foundational Definition

Score: 9

J. Robert Oppenheimer is a brilliant physicist known as the 'father of the atomic bomb.' His foundational identity is rooted in a deep intellectual curiosity and a commitment to the advancement of scientific knowledge, which led him to head the Manhattan Project during World War II. Oppenheimer’s values reflect a complex interplay between scientific discovery, moral responsibility, and national duty. His Jewish heritage and academic background shape his worldview, making him acutely aware of the implications of nuclear weapons and the ethical dimensions of scientific progress.

Values And Beliefs: The pursuit of knowledge and scientific discovery., Moral responsibility regarding the use of scientific advancements., National duty to protect and serve his country.

Strengths And Skills: Exceptional intellect and innovative thinking., Leadership skills in high-pressure environments., Ability to articulate complex scientific concepts.

Suggestions

Highlight more of Oppenheimer's early academic influences to deepen understanding of his motivations.
Explore more interactions with other scientists to showcase his collaborative spirit.

Follow-up Questions

How do Oppenheimer's early experiences shape his later decisions during the Manhattan Project?
What specific moments in the screenplay highlight Oppenheimer's internal conflict regarding the bomb's use?

Complexity And Depth

Score: 8

Oppenheimer carries emotional wounds from his upbringing and the burden of creating a weapon of mass destruction. His internal conflicts stem from the moral dilemmas he faces, especially in relation to the bomb's implications for humanity. This complexity is highlighted through his interactions with influential figures like Einstein and Strauss, as well as in his reflections on the bomb's impact. His ability to grapple with regret and guilt illustrates the emotional depth of his character.

Character Wound: Guilt over the consequences of the atomic bomb.

Character Flaws: Overconfidence in his scientific pursuits., Difficulty in balancing personal ethics with professional duty., Occasional emotional detachment in personal relationships.

Suggestions

Delve into moments of introspection to reveal more of Oppenheimer's guilt and regret.
Show more interactions that emphasize his struggles with personal relationships.

Follow-up Questions

In what specific ways does Oppenheimer's guilt manifest throughout the screenplay?
How do his flaws serve both as obstacles and catalysts for his character development?

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis

Score: 7

Over the course of the screenplay, Oppenheimer changes from a celebrated scientist to a conflicted figure embattled with the consequences of his work. His transformation is triggered by the realization of the extensive destruction caused by the bombs and the moral implications therein. Each key event adds layers to his character, especially as he navigates the political landscape post-war, which tests his integrity and convictions.

Polarity Changes: Gains fame and respect as the bomb's father., Faces intense scrutiny and loss of credibility.

Transformation Triggers: The successful detonation of the atomic bomb., The aftermath of the bombings in Japan leading to moral questioning.

Suggestions

Clarify pivotal moments of realization to strengthen Oppenheimer's character arc.
Integrate more dialogue reflecting his changing beliefs to showcase his internal journey.

Follow-up Questions

What are the key moments that signal a shift in Oppenheimer's perspective on the bomb?
How does his character react to the consequences of the bomb's use on Japan?

Dialogue And Voice

Score: 8

Oppenheimer's speech reflects his sophisticated educational background and his status as a leading scientist. His use of language often carries a poetic quality, especially when he contemplates the implications of his scientific work, such as during the Trinity Test and in discussions regarding morality and power. His dialogue evolves throughout the screenplay, becoming increasingly burdened by the weight of his decisions.

Unique Voice: His dialogue is characterized by a blend of scientific precision, philosophical inquiry, and emotional depth.

Suggestions

Incorporate more philosophical or ethical reflections in his dialogue to amplify his internal struggles.
Balance scientific discussion with moments of vulnerability to enhance relatability.

Follow-up Questions

How does Oppenheimer's use of language impact his relationships with other characters?
What linguistic choices help convey the weight of his moral dilemmas?

Behavior And Choices

Score: 7

Throughout the screenplay, Oppenheimer’s behavioral choices highlight the tension between his ambition as a scientist and his evolving ethical beliefs. His role in the Manhattan Project illustrates a commitment to national service and scientific progress, yet he struggles with the consequences of devising the atomic bomb. His decisions often reflect this duality, as he faces external pressures from government and military officials against his internal moral quandary.

Motivations: To advance knowledge in physics while grappling with the moral implications of his work.

Desires Vs Needs: Externally, Oppenheimer desires recognition and success. Internally, he needs to reconcile his scientific pursuits with ethical standards.

Suggestions

Expand on his decision-making process to show the ties between his actions and moral implications.
Highlight more moments of conflict between his ambition and ethical considerations.

Follow-up Questions

What key decisions does Oppenheimer make that illustrate his internal conflict?
How do his choices affect his standing with fellow scientists and government officials?

Relationship Dynamics

Score: 8

His interactions with characters such as Strauss, Einstein, and Kitty provide critical insight into his values and struggles. Oppenheimer's relationship with Strauss is antagonistic, reflecting a clash of ideology and ambition, while his bond with Einstein reveals a mentor-student dynamic, mixed with deep philosophical debates about science and ethics. Additionally, his personal relationships, especially with Kitty, demonstrate his emotional attachments and conflicts related to his scientific pursuits.

Suggestions

Deepen the portrayal of his friendships and rivalries to highlight character complexity.
Show more vulnerable moments in personal relationships to enrich emotional depth.

Follow-up Questions

How do key relationships help to shape Oppenheimer's decisions and moral dilemmas?
In what ways do Oppenheimer's personal relationships reflect broader themes in the screenplay?

Scene Impact

Score: 9

In pivotal moments like the Trinity Test and Senate hearings, Oppenheimer's actions and decisions create dramatic tension, informing the audience of the immense weight of his responsibilities. His internal struggles become palpable, affecting those around him and setting the mood for scenes related to ethical implications, scientific discovery, and personal ramifications. Scenes of triumph and despair are intertwined with his existential reflections, making him a linchpin in the narrative.

Suggestions

Focus on expanding Oppenheimer's emotional reactions in key scenes to enhance audience engagement.
Consider adding more direct consequences of his choices on scene dynamics to amplify drama.

Follow-up Questions

What specific scenes highlight Oppenheimer's impact on the overall narrative?
How do Oppenheimer's reactions influence the actions of other characters in critical moments?

Role Fulfillment

Score: 9

In the screenplay, Oppenheimer fulfills the role of protagonist, embodying the struggles and consequences of scientific advancement. His portrayal as the father of the atomic bomb emphasizes the pride and horror associated with such power, while his eventual downfall serves as a cautionary tale about the misuse of knowledge. His journey reflects broader themes of ambition, guilt, and responsibility, making him a deeply symbolic figure.

Symbolic Role: He represents the duality of scientific achievement and moral responsibility.

Suggestions

Explore more of Oppenheimer's internal conflicts to underscore his tragic nature.
Weave in historical context that supports his symbolic role for deeper audience connection.

Follow-up Questions

How does Oppenheimer's role challenge traditional notions of heroism in storytelling?
In what ways does his tragic arc enhance the screenplay’s underlying themes?

Thematic Plot Integration

Score: 9

His character embodies the ethical dilemmas surrounding the creation and use of atomic weapons, reflecting the tension between scientific exploration and moral responsibility. Oppenheimer's choices and internal conflicts illustrate the consequences of playing god through science, revealing the devastating potential that accompanies great knowledge. His narrative arc enhances the screenplay’s exploration of the dual nature of scientific progress, emphasizing both its potential for good and its potential for destruction.

Suggestions

Strengthen connections between Oppenheimer's actions and the screenplay’s central theme.
Integrate more dialogue reflecting his thoughts on the ethical implications of his work.

Follow-up Questions

What broader themes emerge from Oppenheimer's actions and decisions throughout the screenplay?
How does Oppenheimer's story encourage the audience to reflect on the ethical implications of scientific advancements?

Emotional Resonance

Score: 9

Oppenheimer evokes strong emotional responses from the audience, particularly through his conflicts and moral dilemmas regarding the use of the atomic bomb. His tragic realization—grappling with the implications of his work and its consequences on humanity—makes him resonate as a complex, multi-faceted character. The emotional weight of scenes involving personal loss, regret, and determination invites the audience to engage deeply with his journey.

Emotional Impact: Sympathy, tension, and continued reflection on the implications of science.

Suggestions

Emphasize pivotal emotional moments to maximize audience connection.
Integrate more character interactions that highlight Oppenheimer's emotional struggles.

Follow-up Questions

In what scenes does Oppenheimer evoke the strongest emotional response from the audience?
How does his emotional journey resonate with contemporary audiences regarding scientific ethics?

Personality Types

MBTI: intj

Oppenheimer's character reflects introverted thinking, strategic planning, and a focus on long-term objectives, typical of INTJ personalities.

Confidence: 85%

Possible Alternative Type: infj (70%)

Suggestions

Explore more introspective moments to reinforce the 'I' in INTJ.
Highlight his visionary aspects that resonate with INFJ traits.

Follow-up Questions

How might Oppenheimer’s personality type influence his relationships with key figures?
In what ways do the identified MBTI traits manifest in his decision-making?

Enneagram: type 5 (the investigator)

Oppenheimer displays traits of a Type 5, such as high intelligence, curiosity, and an investigative nature, especially related to his scientific work.

Confidence: 80%

Possible Alternative Type: type 1 (the reformer) (60%)

Suggestions

Incorporate more decision-making moments showcasing his investigative traits.
Explore his reformative side to deepen Type 1 analysis.

Follow-up Questions

How do his Enneagram traits affect his interactions with colleagues like Ross and Teller?
What moments in the screenplay highlight the contrast between his Investigator and Reformer sides?

Key Scenes

Strongest Scene (25)

The Trinity Test scene where Oppenheimer witnesses the successful detonation of the atomic bomb.

Why: This scene stands out due to its high emotional stakes and Oppenheimer's complex feelings of achievement mixed with horror and responsibility.

Weakest Scene (15)

In the hearing room during the cross-examination by Robb, where Oppenheimer is bombarded with accusations.

Why: This scene highlights Oppenheimer's vulnerability and exposure to public scrutiny, leading to a significant emotional and narrative low point.

Suggestions:

Strengthen the internal dialogue to enhance Oppenheimer's sense of helplessness.
Include more physical reactions to emphasize his emotional state.

Groves - Score: 75/100

Role

Antagonist

Personality

MBTI: ESTJ
Enneagram: 3

Scenes

Strongest: #9
Weakest: #25

Character Analysis Overview

Foundational Definition 8/10

Military leader focused on security and pragmatism.

Complexity And Depth 7/10

Ambitious leader with moral struggles.

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis 6/10

Maintains a steady course amidst chaos.

Dialogue And Voice 8/10

Direct and commanding language.

Behavior And Choices 7/10

Decisions driven by duty and pragmatism.

Relationship Dynamics 7/10

Authoritative yet strained connections.

Scene Impact 8/10

Catalyst for tension and resolution.

Role Fulfillment 8/10

Embodiment of military authority.

Thematic Plot Integration 9/10

Essence of conflict between ethics and duty.

Emotional Resonance 7/10

Creates tension through moral complexity.

Foundational Definition

Score: 8

Groves is a high-ranking military officer, specifically a general who leads the Manhattan Project. He is characterized by a pragmatic approach to warfare and a determination to ensure American security through the development of the atomic bomb. His military background influences his decisions and his interaction with scientists, often placing national interest and security above ethical considerations. His actions are dictated by a sense of urgency stemming from the wartime context and the race against Nazi Germany for nuclear supremacy.

Values And Beliefs: American exceptionalism, national security, utilitarianism.

Strengths And Skills: Leadership, strategic thinking, negotiation.

Suggestions

Explore moments where Groves has to balance his military duties with moral responsibilities.
Highlight his relationships with scientists to showcase the dynamics between military and scientific communities.

Follow-up Questions

What internal conflicts does Groves face regarding the morality of using the atomic bomb?
How does Groves reconcile his military background with the ethical implications of nuclear warfare?

Complexity And Depth

Score: 7

Groves exhibits a strong ambition and a sense of duty that sometimes blinds him to the moral implications of his actions. He struggles with the potential consequences of unleashing nuclear weapons but prioritizes efficiency and outcome over reflection. This complexity adds depth to his character, revealing a man driven by a desire for success in a high-stakes environment but also hinting at underlying fears about the power he is wielding.

Character Wound: Fear of failure in securing American safety.

Character Flaws: Bulldozer-like approach to leadership, lack of empathy.

Suggestions

Delve into Groves' backstory to reveal how his upbringing and training shaped his views on power and responsibility.
Show hints of doubt or vulnerability when faced with the reality of nuclear destruction.

Follow-up Questions

How does Groves cope with the potential devastation caused by his decisions?
What key moments in the screenplay highlight his internal conflicts?

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis

Score: 6

Groves starts as a determined military leader without significant moral struggle. However, as the implications of their work become increasingly real, he remains largely resolute, pushing towards the use of the bomb as a means to an end. His lack of personal transformation suggests a commitment to his beliefs, leading to an unwavering approach in the face of moral dilemmas.

Polarity Changes: None.

Transformation Triggers: The success of the Trinity test and subsequent events leading to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki serve as milestones that reinforce his hardline stance.

Suggestions

Show Groves in private moments questioning the decisions made and their impact on humanity.
Create scenes that present Groves with contrasting perspectives on the implications of his work.

Follow-up Questions

Do we see any evolution in Groves’ perspective by the end of the screenplay?
What are the pivotal moments that could serve as catalysts for his potential change?

Dialogue And Voice

Score: 8

His dialogue reveals a no-nonsense approach, often prioritizing clarity and directive speech. This reflects his military background and the urgency of his tasks. While it may seem brusque, there are underlying layers of concern for national security that can be explored through subtler dialogue where he contemplates the morality of his mission.

Unique Voice: Groves speaks with authority, often using military terminology and a commanding tone that reflects his rank and mission focus.

Suggestions

Incorporate more personal stakes in his dialogue to highlight emotional weight.
Use contrasts in his speech when addressing scientists versus military personnel to showcase his adaptability.

Follow-up Questions

What unique speech patterns or phrases could Groves use to emphasize his military background?
How can his dialogue change depending on his audience to reveal different aspects of his character?

Behavior And Choices

Score: 7

Groves consistently prioritizes the goals of the Manhattan Project, often making morally ambiguous choices to ensure success. His decisions, such as insisting on the bomb's use, reflect a belief in the ends justifying the means. This creates tension between his pragmatic approach and the ethical implications of nuclear warfare.

Motivations: To secure America’s place as the dominant world power through the successful development and deployment of the atomic bomb.

Desires Vs Needs: Groves desires success and recognition for his work; internally, he needs to justify the morality of his actions.

Suggestions

Explore more scenes where Groves confronts opposition to his views and how he navigates that challenge.
Develop moments where Groves grapples with the fallout of his decisions to enrich his character.

Follow-up Questions

How do Groves' choices impact the scientists working under him?
What moral dilemmas does Groves face that challenge his straightforward approach?

Relationship Dynamics

Score: 7

Groves' relationships with scientists are primarily hierarchical, reflecting the tension between military objectives and scientific inquiries. There is an underlying respect from the scientists due to his leadership role, but his command approach often breeds resentment and conflict. His interactions with figures like Oppenheimer illustrate this friction and highlight the struggle between military and scientific priorities.

Suggestions

Highlight moments where Groves can connect with scientists on a personal level to break down barriers.
Create dialogues that reveal mutual respect despite overarching disagreement to reflect the complexity of their dynamics.

Follow-up Questions

What moments of vulnerability or doubt can deepen Groves' relationships with key scientists?
How can interactions with Oppenheimer or others evolve over the course of the screenplay?

Scene Impact

Score: 8

Groves often serves as a catalyst for tension in scenes, particularly in his firm insistence on the use of the bomb. His commanding presence can shift the emotional tone, transforming scenes from one of scientific discovery to a reminder of the stakes involved. Additionally, his absence during crucial moments—when scientists grapple with the moral implications of their work—creates a void filled with unrest and uncertainty.

Suggestions

Use his character to challenge scientists, creating more dramatic tension around decisions made.
Incorporate moments of doubt in critical scenes where Groves' authority is questioned.

Follow-up Questions

How does Groves' presence change the mood or direction of key scenes?
Are there specific scenes where his absence could impact the actions taken by the other characters?

Role Fulfillment

Score: 8

Groves serves as both an antagonist to the more ethically minded scientists and a steadfast leader in the pursuit of the atomic bomb. Through his character, the screenplay explores themes of ambition versus morality, showing how military objectives can overshadow scientific integrity. His role emphasizes the sacrifices made for national security, often at the expense of personal ethics.

Symbolic Role: Represents the intersection of military power and scientific innovation.

Suggestions

Deepen his role by illustrating the consequences of military decisions on personal relationships and moral boundaries.
Show interactions that reveal Groves' vulnerability amidst his strong external demeanor.

Follow-up Questions

What moments can be crafted to highlight Groves' complexity beyond his leadership role?
How might Groves' symbolic role evolve through the screenplay's events?

Thematic Plot Integration

Score: 9

Groves embodies the tension between the urgency of military action and the ethical implications of nuclear weapons. His decisions reflect the broader themes of power, morality, and the human cost of scientific advancement. As the screenplay unfolds, his character journey intertwines with the larger narrative of how society copes with the legacy of the bomb, particularly in the face of emerging global tensions.

Suggestions

Explore his internal conflicts further to provide a counterbalance to his straightforward actions.
Use Groves' decisions to highlight the impact of the bomb on scientists’ lives and relationships.

Follow-up Questions

What thematic crowd-pleasers can be interwoven through Groves' interactions that reflect the screenplay's core messages?
How effectively does Groves' dialogue resonate with the screenplay's central conflicts?

Emotional Resonance

Score: 7

Groves elicits a complex emotional response from the audience, balancing admiration for his determination with discomfort over his ruthlessness. His unwavering focus on military goals invites audiences to grapple with the real consequences of wielding such power, which resonates deeply given contemporary real-world concerns about nuclear armament.

Emotional Impact: Provokes tension and reflection on the morality of war.

Suggestions

Introduce scenes showcasing Groves' vulnerabilities to amplify emotional engagement.
Contrast his character against more empathetic figures to highlight key thematic elements.

Follow-up Questions

How can Groves be depicted in a way that evokes both respect and unease?
What moments could strengthen the emotional stakes associated with Groves’ decisions?

Personality Types

MBTI: estj

Groves exhibits traits indicative of an ESTJ, demonstrating strong leadership, pragmatism, and an orientation towards logic and efficiency.

Confidence: 85%

Suggestions

Utilize the ESTJ traits to enhance Groves' dialogue in ways that reflect decisiveness and authority.
Explore scenarios where Groves’ preference for order is challenged by chaos.

Follow-up Questions

How can Groves exemplify the ESTJ traits in high-pressure situations?
What situations might provoke a more emotional or less rational response from him?

Enneagram: 3

Groves is a Type 3, demonstrating ambition, a desire to achieve, and an emphasis on success, often at the expense of deeper reflection on moral consequences.

Confidence: 75%

Suggestions

Highlight scenarios that challenge his identity as a successful leader.
Depict internal conflicts related to his ambitions and the ethics of his decisions.

Follow-up Questions

What moments can serve as catalysts for Groves to reflect on his personal values?
How can Groves' drive for achievement affect his relationships with others involved in the project?

Key Scenes

Strongest Scene (9)

The scene where Groves successfully leads discussions on the practical implications of the bomb—including moral dilemmas.

Why: This scene stands out due to its tension, as Groves embodies the pragmatic military necessity of the bomb amidst the fear and uncertainty surrounding its potential use.

Weakest Scene (25)

The scene where Groves confronts the outcome of the Trinity test after it succeeds, and he faces the reactions of others.

Why: This scene feels weak because Groves' victory lacks the expected emotional depth given the gravity of their achievement.

Suggestions:

Add deeper emotional reactions from Groves to showcase his internal conflict after witnessing the power of the bomb.
Incorporate exchanges that challenge Groves' view of success in light of their newfound destructive power.

Kitty - Score: 78/100

Personality

MBTI: INFJ
Enneagram: Type 2: The Helper

Scenes

Character Analysis Overview

Foundational Definition 7/10

Wife of Oppenheimer facing personal and marital challenges.

Complexity And Depth 8/10

Emotional conflicts stemming from her husband's work and societal responsibilities.

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis 6/10

Kitty's arc centers on her navigation of marital dynamics amid Robert's complex life.

Dialogue And Voice 7/10

Kitty exhibits a strong, assertive voice when addressing Robert's choices.

Behavior And Choices 8/10

Kitty’s choices reveal her values and struggles with Robert’s work.

Relationship Dynamics 9/10

Kitty's dynamic with Robert fluctuates between supportive and confrontational.

Scene Impact 8/10

Kitty often serves as a moral anchor for Robert amidst chaos.

Role Fulfillment 7/10

Kitty acts as a moral compass countering Robert's ambition.

Thematic Plot Integration 9/10

Kitty's journey intertwines with themes of sacrifice and moral ambiguity.

Emotional Resonance 9/10

Kitty’s emotional journey powerfully resonates with the audience.

Foundational Definition

Score: 7

Kitty is Oppenheimer's wife, navigating the challenging emotional landscape that comes with being married to a man who has profoundly altered the course of history. Her struggle represents the personal sacrifices made by individuals close to those who hold great power and responsibility. She exhibits a mix of support and frustration towards Robert's choices, embodying the conflict between personal loyalties and moral dilemmas.

Values And Beliefs: Family loyalty, the importance of emotional honesty, and a desire for stability.

Strengths And Skills: Resilience, emotional intelligence, and ability to challenge Robert when needed.

Suggestions

Deepen her backstory to explore how previous experiences shape her views on Robert's work.
Highlight her independent perspective on the consequences of the atomic bombings more clearly.

Follow-up Questions

How does Kitty's background influence her reaction to Robert's work and achievements?
What specific moments in their relationship could illustrate Kitty's internal conflict?

Complexity And Depth

Score: 8

Kitty grapples with the emotional impact of Robert's role in developing the atomic bomb. Her sense of betrayal and frustration over the secrecy and magnitude of what he is involved in adds a layer of complexity to her character. She hides her own vulnerabilities under a strong facade, creating moments of tension and vulnerability that reflect both her internal struggles and her fears for the future.

Character Wound: Fear of losing her husband to his ambitions and the moral implications of his work.

Character Flaws: Occasional emotional withdrawal and impatience, leading to misunderstandings.

Suggestions

Explore Kitty’s past relationships to provide context for her emotional responses now.
Develop scenes showcasing her emotional struggles, enhancing audience empathy.

Follow-up Questions

How does Kitty's struggle reflect broader themes of the screenplay?
What specific incidents could trigger her vulnerabilities in scenes throughout the story?

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis

Score: 6

Throughout the screenplay, Kitty grapples with her emotions toward Robert’s work. Initially supportive, she becomes increasingly frustrated as the moral weight of his decisions becomes apparent. Ultimately, Kitty’s arc reflects the personal cost of Robert's public achievements, showcasing a push and pull between love and disillusionment as she comes to terms with her place in his world.

Polarity Changes: Instances of support and defiance; she moves between being a nurturing partner and a frustrated critic.

Transformation Triggers: Robert's decisions about the bomb, the associated secrecy, and the fallout from public and private scrutiny.

Suggestions

Clarify the moments that push Kitty towards her realizations about her relationship with Robert.
Integrate her reactions to key events more strongly to demonstrate her growth or stagnation.

Follow-up Questions

What specific turning points showcase Kitty’s transformation throughout the screenplay?
How does Kitty’s emotional journey compare to Robert’s as the narrative unfolds?

Dialogue And Voice

Score: 7

Kitty's dialogue is laced with both wit and directness, as she challenges Robert’s decisions while expressing her own fears and concerns. Her voice evolves throughout the screenplay, revealing deeper emotional undercurrents as the stakes of Robert's work impact them both. This evolution underscores her struggle to maintain a sense of self amidst her husband's monumental legacy.

Unique Voice: Kitty's dialogue often reflects her intellect and strength, characterized by her pointed questions and emotional responses to Robert’s decisions.

Suggestions

Add more subtlety to her dialogue that reflects her internal conflict.
Encourage her interactions with Robert to feature more emotional vulnerability.

Follow-up Questions

How can Kitty's unique voice and perspective be utilized to highlight themes of sacrifice or moral conflict?
What dialogues can better showcase the evolution of her character throughout the story?

Behavior And Choices

Score: 8

Kitty's choices often reflect her determination to confront Robert about the implications of his work. Despite her desire to support him, she struggles with the moral gravity of his decisions, highlighting the tension between her love and her principles. Her actions signal her growing concern over her family's safety and future, pushing her to reevaluate her role amidst Robert’s soaring ambitions.

Motivations: Desire for her family’s safety, emotional connection to Robert, and moral clarity.

Desires Vs Needs: Desires a stable home life and emotional intimacy with Robert; needs acknowledgment and understanding of her own emotional burden.

Suggestions

Showcase a moment where she acts on her motivations in a way that drives the narrative forward.
Enhance situations where her decisions conflict with Robert’s, demonstrating her inner struggle.

Follow-up Questions

What specific choices made by Kitty lead to critical turning points in their relationship?
How can Kitty's emotional dilemmas be woven into the plot to create more tension?

Relationship Dynamics

Score: 9

Kitty and Oppenheimer share a complex relationship, fraught with passion, love, and mounting tensions due to his work. Kitty's emotional responses reveal her deep attachment yet also highlight her frustrations as she grapples with her husband's escalating commitments to a controversial legacy. Their conversations often reflect this mixture of intimacy and tension, showing how external pressures strain their connection.

Suggestions

Include more intimate exchanges that reveal their vulnerability and shared history.
Create scenarios where Kitty's insights challenge Robert's views, leading to deeper conversations.

Follow-up Questions

What moments in their relationship best exemplify the strain between Kitty’s desires and Robert’s ambitions?
How do the evolving dynamics between Kitty and Robert mirror the broader themes of the screenplay?

Scene Impact

Score: 8

Kitty’s presence has a significant emotional weight in scenes, particularly during moments of revelation and conflict. She humanizes Robert, offering critical perspectives that challenge his motivations. When she confronts him or expresses her concerns, she amplifies the tension and stakes of the narrative, deepening the audience’s engagement with their relationship.

Suggestions

Develop scenes where Kitty’s presence shifts the emotional tone or direction of the plot.
Ensure her reactions highlight pivotal changes or realizations within Robert’s journey.

Follow-up Questions

What scenes showcase Kitty's impact most powerfully, and how can those moments be amplified?
How does Kitty's emotional state contribute to the overall tone of specific key scenes?

Role Fulfillment

Score: 7

Kitty’s role in the screenplay is multifaceted; she reflects the emotional and ethical dilemmas faced by those connected to monumental decisions. Her ongoing struggle with Robert’s choices highlights the personal sacrifices made in pursuit of scientific achievement. Positioned as both a supporter and critic of Robert, she sheds light on the price of progress and the conflicts that ensue.

Symbolic Role: Represents the personal cost of ambition and scientific progress.

Suggestions

Emphasize her perspective in critical discussions about ethics and morality.
Position her as a voice in advocating for transparency and responsibility.

Follow-up Questions

How can Kitty’s role evolve to make her decision-making more impactful in the narrative?
What moments can symbolize Kitty's dual role as both support and critic more clearly?

Thematic Plot Integration

Score: 9

Kitty’s actions and choices reflect major themes in the screenplay, particularly regarding the personal impacts of scientific advancements. Her relationship with Robert illustrates the sacrifice often required in pursuit of knowledge and progress, alongside the looming presence of moral ambiguity in their decisions. Her journey questions the cost of ambition, highlighting what is lost in the process.

Suggestions

Further integrate her personal journey with central thematic elements through symbolic actions.
Clarify moments where her experiences intersect with broader societal implications.

Follow-up Questions

What specific events in the story could better highlight the thematic connections to Kitty's arc?
How does Kitty’s character challenge or reinforce the screenplay’s central ideas?

Emotional Resonance

Score: 9

Kitty effectively engages the audience's emotions, particularly through her fears, frustrations, and unwavering loyalty to Robert. Her moments of vulnerability and strength resonate deeply, inviting viewers to connect with her plight as she navigates the turbulent waters of her husband's legacy.

Emotional Impact: Evokes empathy through her struggles and emotional depth.

Suggestions

Create more scenes that allow the audience to see Kitty's emotional struggles overtly.
Enhance her impact through dialogue that reveals her vulnerabilities.

Follow-up Questions

What are the most poignant moments that allow the audience to relate to Kitty's struggles?
How can her emotional resonance be deepened in key narrative moments?

Personality Types

MBTI: infj

Kitty exhibits traits of empathy, insight, and a deep concern for others, indicative of an INFJ personality. Her intense emotional responses and desire to protect her family align with this type.

Confidence: 80%

Possible Alternative Type: enfj (50%)

Suggestions

Utilize the understanding of her potential MBTI type to craft dialogues that reflect her depth.
Show her support for Robert transforming into leadership and advocacy roles.

Follow-up Questions

How might identifying her as an INFJ enhance the understanding of her actions?
What specific choices could highlight her characteristic attributes further?

Enneagram: type 2: the helper

Kitty's behavior often illustrates the traits of a Type 2 personality, characterized by her desire to support Robert and care for her family while managing her own frustrations.

Confidence: 75%

Possible Alternative Type: type 6: the loyalist (50%)

Suggestions

Develop emotional moments that demonstrate her loyalty and connection to her family.
Explore shifts in her motivation when feeling threatened or insecure.

Follow-up Questions

How does her motivation as a Type 2 align with her actions throughout the narrative?
What moments could emphasize the internal conflict she experiences as a Helper?

Key Scenes

Strongest Scene (0)

An emotionally charged moment when Kitty confronts Oppenheimer about his decisions and their implications. This scene reveals her frustration and love, showcasing her depth.

Why: This scene effectively highlights the personal stakes for Kitty, demonstrating her emotional complexity and the impact of Robert's work on their relationship.

Weakest Scene (0)

none

Why: none

Suggestions:

none
none

Strauss - Score: 75/100

Role

Antagonist

Character Analysis Overview

Foundational Definition 8/10

Ambitious self-made man in government.

Complexity And Depth 7/10

Ambitious but insecure, caught in a vendetta.

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis 6/10

Strauss's arc demonstrates a transition from a respected figure to a controversial antagonist.

Dialogue And Voice 7/10

Strauss speaks with authority, showcasing his confidence and manipulation skills.

Behavior And Choices 8/10

Driven by ambition, Strauss makes manipulative choices that align with his values.

Relationship Dynamics 8/10

His relationships are marked by rivalry, manipulation, and power struggle.

Scene Impact 7/10

Strauss's presence often escalates the tension within scenes.

Role Fulfillment 9/10

Strauss serves as the primary antagonist to Oppenheimer.

Thematic Plot Integration 8/10

Embodies the clash between scientific progress and political control.

Emotional Resonance 7/10

Evokes tension and complexity in audience emotions.

Foundational Definition

Score: 8

Lewis Strauss, a self-made man who rose from humble beginnings as a shoe salesman to become an influential figure in the U.S. government, particularly in nuclear policy and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). His determination to establish authority and protect national security shapes his actions throughout the screenplay. He embodies traditional American values of hard work and ambition but becomes increasingly power-hungry and vindictive, particularly towards J. Robert Oppenheimer, whom he views as a rival. This rivalry stems from Oppenheimer's criticisms of Strauss' policies and approaches, culminating in private and public confrontations that define Strauss’ character arc.

Values And Beliefs: National security, power, control, traditional American values, anti-communism.

Strengths And Skills: Political influence, strategic thinking, public speaking.

Suggestions

Develop a backstory that highlights Strauss's early experiences that shaped his nationalistic and anti-communist values.
Explore his relationships with other historical figures to depict the depth of his ambition.

Follow-up Questions

How did Strauss's past as a shoe salesman influence his approach to power?
What personal experiences contributed to his paranoia about communism?

Complexity And Depth

Score: 7

Strauss exhibits an obsessive drive for power and recognition, which leads to moments of deep insecurity when his competence is questioned. His conflict with Oppenheimer reveals a personal vendetta that clouds his judgement; this obsession prevents him from seeing the greater consequences of his actions on both scientific communities and national policy. His need for vindication stems from past humiliations and encounters with scientists who challenge his authority. This reinforces his role as a manipulator in the political landscape and adds complexity to his character.

Character Wound: Past experiences of being belittled by intellectuals, including Oppenheimer.

Character Flaws: Vindictiveness, paranoia, overreaching ambition.

Suggestions

Provide scenes where Strauss’s vulnerabilities are exposed to contrast his public persona.
Introduce interactions with other characters that highlight his emotional distance and strategic mindset.

Follow-up Questions

What specific past experiences led to Strauss’s obsession with power?
How does his vendetta against Oppenheimer affect his decision-making process?

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis

Score: 6

Throughout the screenplay, Strauss evolves from a powerful leader to one increasingly desperate to reclaim his status amidst rising tensions and allegations of his misconduct. His refusal to take responsibility for the consequences of the political machinations he initiates marks a significant stagnation in his character development, ultimately leading to his downfall. The constant push and pull between his ambition and the fallout from his machinations shapes his story.

Polarity Changes: Became increasingly antagonistic towards Oppenheimer and lost credibility.

Transformation Triggers: Oppenheimer's opposition during Senate hearings and the results of the Atomic Energy Commission's investigations.

Suggestions

Clarify the moments of failure in Strauss's arc to highlight his increasing desperation and need for control.
Introduce secondary characters who push him toward reflection and potential change.

Follow-up Questions

What key decisions mark the turning points in Strauss's arc?
How does his perception among peers shift at different points in the story?

Dialogue And Voice

Score: 7

His speech reflects his confidence, often employing authoritative and persuasive rhetoric to manipulate situations to his advantage. His dialogue is laden with political subtext, indicating his calculative approach, and shifts from congenial to confrontational as he becomes desperate to maintain control. This unique voice allows the audience to perceive his ambition and underlying insecurities.

Unique Voice: Direct, commanding, politically charged language.

Suggestions

Incorporate more internal monologue to deepen understanding of his motivations and anxieties.
Use more diverse conversational partners to showcase variability in his dialogue style.

Follow-up Questions

How does Strauss's dialogue change in intensity as his situation evolves?
What specific phrases or language patterns distinguish his voice from other characters?

Behavior And Choices

Score: 8

Strauss's actions often stem from a deep desire to assert control over scientific narratives and national security, often leading to unethical maneuvers against those who oppose him, particularly Oppenheimer. His confrontational choices reveal his military approach to politics, maintaining a facade of power while aiming to eliminate perceived threats to his authority.

Motivations: To gain power and recognition within U.S. government while undermining Oppenheimer.

Desires Vs Needs: Desires power and validation; needs to confront his insecurities and vulnerabilities.

Suggestions

Illustrate consequences of his choices through reactions from others, especially scientists around him.
Provide a scene where Strauss faces direct consequences for his manipulative behavior.

Follow-up Questions

What specific actions does Strauss take to undermine Oppenheimer, and how do these decisions affect their relationship?
How do other characters perceive Strauss's decisions at pivotal points in the story?

Relationship Dynamics

Score: 8

Strauss’s interactions are largely characterized by his rivalry with Oppenheimer and his manipulative relationships with other scientists. His relationship with Oppenheimer is pivotal, as Strauss's drive to undermine him fuels the narrative conflict. Strauss's dynamics with other AEC members also illustrate his need to establish dominance and control, showcasing a pattern of alienation and distrust.

Suggestions

Create moments of vulnerability with key relationships to deepen audience empathy.
Introduce allies who might question his motivations to create internal conflict.

Follow-up Questions

How does his rivalry with Oppenheimer shape his choices?
What allies does Strauss attempt to rally, and how does their dynamic unfold?

Scene Impact

Score: 7

When Strauss enters scenes, the atmosphere shifts; his authoritative nature brings a mix of tension and confrontation. His exchanges are pivotal in escalating the stakes, particularly during Senate committee hearings, revealing his opposition to Oppenheimer. This creates a dynamic where every interaction can either pressure or undermine others, significantly affecting the emotional tone and trajectory of discussions.

Suggestions

Enhance his entrance cues to signal heightened tension.
Include scenes where his influence is countered effectively to demonstrate his impact more clearly.

Follow-up Questions

In what scenes does Strauss's presence create the most significant shifts in tone?
How do other characters respond to his authoritative nature, and what effect does that have on their actions?

Role Fulfillment

Score: 9

As an antagonist, Strauss embodies the conflict surrounding scientific integrity versus political ambition. His narrative role demonstrates the broader theme of power struggles within scientific endeavors, emphasizing the tension between innovation and political control. He subverts Oppenheimer's influence, representing a character afraid of losing power amidst a rapidly changing world.

Symbolic Role: Represents the oppressive force of authority and political machinations.

Suggestions

Ensure Strauss's actions have narrative consequences that align with his role as an antagonist.
Explore potential redemption arcs or moments of doubt to create a more complex portrayal.

Follow-up Questions

How does Strauss embody the theme of authority versus innovation in the story?
What specific actions illustrate his role as Oppenheimer's foil?

Thematic Plot Integration

Score: 8

Strauss's motivations and actions are intricately tied to the screenplay's core themes of power, responsibility, and the moral implications of scientific advancements. His desire for control and the lengths he's willing to go to preserve it reflect the tensions that arise when scientific innovation intersects with politics. The aftermath of his conflicts with Oppenheimer raises provocative questions about authority and ethics in the age of atomic energy.

Suggestions

Deepen interactions with key thematic threads to reinforce his importance to the plot.
Clarify his stake in overarching themes through dialogue reflecting his beliefs.

Follow-up Questions

What aspects of the plot are shaped by Strauss's ambitions and decisions?
How does his representation of authority challenge or reinforce the story's messages?

Emotional Resonance

Score: 7

Strauss evokes strong emotional responses due to his ruthless ambition and the ethical dilemmas posed by his decisions. His actions often incite tension and frustration among the audience, particularly against the backdrop of Oppenheimer’s tragic journey. However, moments of vulnerability or exposure of his insecurities allow glimpses of empathy, making his character multifaceted.

Emotional Impact: Complex mix of disdain, sympathy, and tension.

Suggestions

Incorporate more nuanced emotional moments to balance his antagonistic nature.
Create scenarios where his vulnerabilities shine through to enhance audience connection.

Follow-up Questions

What scenes draw the strongest emotional responses regarding Strauss?
How do audiences generally perceive his actions and motivations throughout the story?

Theme

Theme Details

Theme Explanation

Nuclear Research and its Implications (55%)

Discussions about the power of the atomic bomb, potential damage, psychological impact, arms race, and the potential dangers and implications of building a hydrogen bomb.

The screenplay explores the scientific and political aspects of nuclear research, highlighting the consequences of creating and using such powerful weapons.

Strengthening Nuclear Research and its Implications:

Suggestion Type	How to Strengthen the Theme
Dialogue - Scene 1	Emphasize the potential dangers and implications of nuclear research, highlighting the importance of security and responsibility in handling such powerful technology.
Visual - Scene 2	During the flashback, visually depict the struggle of visualizing the new world of atomic energy as a complex and overwhelming task, emphasizing the weight of responsibility on Oppenheimer's shoulders.
Dialogue - Scene 6	Increase the tension in the union meeting scene by having Oppenheimer express his concerns about the potential misuse of nuclear research and the importance of academic unionization in maintaining ethical standards.
Character Arc - Scene 15	Deepen Oppenheimer's internal conflict by having him struggle with the decision to protect his friend Lomanitz, who is involved in union activities, while also being aware of the potential security risks in the project.
Dialogue - Scene 23	During the discussion about the use of the atomic bomb, include more dialogue that highlights the moral implications and potential long-term consequences of using nuclear weapons, further emphasizing the theme of responsibility in nuclear research.

Loyalty and Trust (30%)

Questions about Oppenheimer's loyalty, trustworthiness, and protection of friends, as well as concerns about Communist infiltration and security breaches.

The screenplay delves into the theme of loyalty and trust, as characters grapple with the implications of Oppenheimer's relationships and the potential risks they pose to the project.

Politics and Power (25%)

Discussions around the use of the atomic bomb, the decision-making process, and the influence of policy on nuclear research.

The screenplay touches on the theme of politics and power, shedding light on the role of politicians and military officials in shaping the course of nuclear research and its applications.

Personal Relationships and Struggles (20%)

Depictions of Oppenheimer's personal relationships, including his marriage, friendships, and romantic involvements, as well as the personal struggles of other characters.

The screenplay incorporates personal relationships and struggles to provide a more nuanced understanding of the characters and their motivations.

Secrecy and Compartmentalization (15%)

Discussions about security, compartmentalization, and the challenges of maintaining secrecy in a large-scale project like the Manhattan Project.

The screenplay highlights the importance of secrecy and compartmentalization in the context of nuclear research, reflecting the real-life practices of the Manhattan Project.

Screenwriting Resources on Themes

Articles

Site	Description
Studio Binder	Movie Themes: Examples of Common Themes for Screenwriters
Coverfly	Improving your Screenplay's theme
John August	Writing from Theme

YouTube Videos

Title	Description
Story, Plot, Genre, Theme - Screenwriting Basics	Screenwriting basics - beginner video
What is theme	Discussion on ways to layer theme into a screenplay.
Thematic Mistakes You're Making in Your Script	Common Theme mistakes and Philosophical Conflicts

Robert McKee: "The audience doesn’t go to the movies to see plot; they go to feel emotion, to be moved."

Scene by Scene Emotions

Goals and Philosophical Conflict
internal Goals	The protagonist's internal and external goals revolve around navigating personal and political challenges while grappling with moral and ethical dilemmas, especially related to the development and use of the atomic bomb.
External Goals	The protagonist's external goals include securing power and influence, navigating military and political pressures, and achieving success in testing and deploying the atomic bomb.
Philosophical Conflict	The overarching philosophical conflict revolves around the tension between scientific progress and moral responsibility, personal integrity and political expediency, and the ethical implications of nuclear weapons.

Character Development Contribution: The evolution of the protagonist's internal and external goals reflects a deepening complexity and moral introspection, leading to a more nuanced understanding of personal values and responsibilities.

Narrative Structure Contribution: The protagonist's goals and conflicts drive the narrative forward by creating tension, stakes, and moral dilemmas that propel the plot and character development.

Thematic Depth Contribution: The goals and conflicts in the screenplay deepen the thematic exploration of power, ethics, loyalty, and the consequences of scientific advancement, adding layers of complexity and philosophical weight to the story.

Screenwriting Resources on Goals and Philosophical Conflict

Articles

Site	Description
Creative Screenwriting	How Important Is A Character’s Goal?
Studio Binder	What is Conflict in a Story? A Quick Reminder of the Purpose of Conflict

YouTube Videos

Title	Description
How I Build a Story's Philosophical Conflict	How do you build philosophical conflict into your story? Where do you start? And how do you develop it into your characters and their external actions. Today I’m going to break this all down and make it fully clear in this episode.
Endings: The Good, the Bad, and the Insanely Great	By Michael Arndt: I put this lecture together in 2006, when I started work at Pixar on Toy Story 3. It looks at how to write an "insanely great" ending, using Star Wars, The Graduate, and Little Miss Sunshine as examples. 90 minutes
Tips for Writing Effective Character Goals	By Jessica Brody (Save the Cat!): Writing character goals is one of the most important jobs of any novelist. But are your character's goals...mushy?

What's going on here? - Scenes are rated on many critreia. The goal isn't to try to maximize every number; \ It's to make you aware of what's happening in your scenes. You might have very good reasons to have character development but not advance the story, or have a scene without conflict. Obviously if your dialogue is really bad, you should probably look into that.

Abbreviate Headers

Story Content

Character Development

Scene Elements

Audience Engagement

Technical Aspects

			Story Content			Character Development				Scene Elements					Audience Engagement				Technical Aspects
Click for Full Analysis	Tone	Overall	Concept	Plot	Originality	Characters	Character Changes	Internal Goal	External Goal	Conflict	Opposition	High stakes	Story forward	Twist	Emotional Impact	Dialogue	Engagement	Pacing	Formatting	Structure
1 - Lewis Strauss Prepares for Senate Hearing on Oppenheimer Relationship	Serious, Reflective, Introspective	8	8	7	9	9	7	8	7	7	7	7	8	7	7	8	9	8	8	8
2 - Oppenheimer's Path to Atomic Energy Visualization	Reflective, Intense, Intriguing	9	9	9	9	8	9	8	7	7	8	7	8	7	8	8	9	8	8	8
3 - Strauss's Concerns About Oppenheimer's Past and Job Appointment	Reflective, Serious, Informative	8	8	7	9	9	7	8	7	6	7	6	7	7	7	8	9	8	8	8
4 - Oppenheimer's Quantum Ambitions	Intellectual, Philosophical, Political	8	9	7	9	8	5	8	7	6	7	5	7	7	6	9	9	8	8	8
5 - Intimate Revelations and Tense Announcements: A Scene in Oppenheimer's Life	Intimate, Reflective, Emotional	8	9	8	9	9	7	8	7	6	7	7	8	8	8	8	9	8	8	8
6 - Oppenheimer's Personal Struggles and Scientific Discoveries	Intense, Emotional, Reflective	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	7	7	7	7	7	7	9	8	9	8	8	8
7 - Oppenheimer's Difficult Decisions	Intense, Emotional, Reflective	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	7	7	8	7	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	8
8 - The Revocation of Oppenheimer's Security Clearance: A Look at the Key Players and Events	Serious, Reflective, Tense	8	8	8	9	8	8	8	7	8	8	9	9	8	7	9	9	8	8	8
9 - Resistance and Recruitment: The Pursuit of Scientific Research on Atomic Theory	Serious, Intense, Intriguing	8	8	8	9	7	7	8	7	8	8	9	9	7	7	9	9	8	8	8
10 - Oppenheimer's Concern: Teller's Troubling Calculation	Serious, Intense, Thoughtful	9	9	8	8	8	7	8	7	8	7	9	9	7	7	9	9	8	8	8
11 - Oppenheimer's Internal Struggle: Loyalty vs. Friendship	Tense, Reflective, Serious	8	8	7	8	8	7	8	7	8	7	8	8	7	7	7	9	8	8	8
12 - Teller's Hydrogen Bomb Proposal and Los Alamos Tour	Tense, Informative, Serious, Intriguing	8	9	8	9	7	6	8	7	7	8	9	8	7	6	8	9	8	8	8
13 - Tense Meeting over Project Management and Security Clearance	Tense, Serious, Confrontational	8	8	9	9	8	7	8	7	9	9	8	9	8	7	9	9	8	8	8
14 - Groves' Testimony and the Chevalier Incident: A Glimpse into Oppenheimer's Loyalty	Serious, Tense, Reflective	8	8	7	9	9	7	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	7	8	9	8	8	8
15 - Oppenheimer's Q Clearance and Questionable Associations	Tense, Emotional, Serious	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	8	7	7	9	8	9	8	8	8
16 - Oppenheimer's Testimony and Marital Conflict	Intense, Emotional, Confrontational	8	7	8	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	8	8	8	9	8	9	8	8	8
17 - Potential Security Breach and Reluctant Disclosures	Suspenseful, Intense, Serious	8	8	8	9	7	6	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	7	7	9	8	8	8
18 - The Chevalier Incident: Mistrust and Loyalty in the Manhattan Project	Tense, Suspenseful, Confrontational	8	8	8	9	7	7	8	7	9	8	9	9	8	7	9	9	8	8	8
19 - Investigating Loyalty and the Power of the Atomic Bomb	Tense, Reflective, Serious	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	7	7	8	8	8	7	8	8	9	8	8	8
20 - Robert Oppenheimer's Emotional Distress and Task Reassignments	Distraught, Tense, Emotional, Confrontational	8	7	8	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	8	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	8
21 - Teller's Decision and the Hydrogen Bomb Dilemma	Tense, Confrontational, Reflective	8	9	8	9	8	7	8	7	9	8	8	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	8
22 - Senate Hearing and Progress of the Project	Tense, Serious, Reflective	8	8	8	9	9	7	8	7	8	8	9	9	7	8	7	9	8	8	8
23 - The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb	Serious, Tense, Contemplative	8	9	8	8	7	7	8	7	8	8	9	9	7	7	8	9	8	8	8
24 - Preparing for the Trinity Test: Site Plans, Safety Concerns, and Final Countdown	Tense, Serious, Foreboding, Determined	9	8	9	9	8	6	8	7	7	9	9	9	8	7	8	9	9	8	8
25 - The Trinity Test: Moment of Truth	Tense, Dramatic, Intense, Emotional, Hopeful	9	9	9	9	8	7	8	7	8	8	10	9	7	9	8	9	9	8	8
26 - The Bomb's Readiness and the Weight of Consequences	Tense, Serious, Contemplative	8	8	7	8	9	7	8	7	8	8	9	8	7	7	8	9	8	8	8
27 - The Weight of Destruction: Oppenheimer Learns of the Bombing of Hiroshima	Tense, Reflective, Emotional	9	9	8	9	9	8	8	7	8	8	9	8	8	9	8	9	8	8	8
28 - Oppenheimer's Advocacy and the Shocking Revelation	Serious, Reflective, Informative	8	8	7	9	8	8	8	7	7	8	8	8	7	9	7	9	8	8	8
29 - Oppenheimer's Fall from Grace: Surveillance, Scrutiny, and Betrayal	Serious, Tense, Reflective	8	8	7	8	9	7	8	7	8	8	9	9	7	7	8	9	8	8	8
30 - Oppenheimer's Disagreement and Call for Unity	Serious, Reflective, Tense	8	8	7	9	8	7	8	7	8	8	8	7	7	8	7	9	8	8	8
31 - The Plan to Destroy Oppenheimer's Credibility	Suspenseful, Intense, Manipulative, Calculating	9	9	8	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	9	9	8	7	8	9	8	8	8
32 - The Hearing's Turn: Oppenheimer's Past Lies Revealed	Tense, Confrontational, Defensive, Intriguing	8	8	8	9	9	7	8	7	9	8	9	9	8	7	9	9	9	8	8
33 - Revelations and Confrontations: The Oppenheimer Hearing	Tense, Serious, Emotional	8	7	8	9	9	7	8	7	8	8	8	8	8	9	8	9	8	8	8
34 - Betrayal at the Hearing: Borden's Letter Revealed	Serious, Tense, Emotional	9	8	9	8	9	8	8	7	9	8	10	9	8	10	8	9	8	8	8
35 - Testimony Against Strauss and Bush's Opinions on the Oppenheimer Affair	Accusatory, Serious, Confrontational	8	8	7	9	9	6	8	7	9	8	8	8	8	7	8	9	9	8	8
36 - Groves' Testimony and Kitty's Arrival	Tense, Serious, Emotional	8	8	7	9	8	7	8	7	9	8	9	8	7	8	7	9	8	8	8
37 - Hill's Testimony and Kitty's Defiance at the Senate Committee Hearing	Serious, Intense, Confrontational	8	8	7	9	9	7	8	7	8	8	8	8	8	7	9	9	8	8	8
38 - Oppenheimer's Struggle: Loyalty, Trust, and Defiance	Serious, Intense, Reflective	8	8	7	8	9	8	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	9	8	9	9	8	8
39 - Frustration and Accountability: Strauss and Oppenheimer's Conflicts	Intense, Confrontational, Reflective	9	9	8	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	9	8	9	8	8	8
40 - Oppenheimer's Moral Scruples and Strauss's Criticism	Intense, Confrontational, Reflective	9	9	8	9	9	8	8	7	8	8	9	8	8	9	9	9	8	8	8
41 - Strauss's Humiliation and Oppenheimer's Denial	Tense, Dramatic, Confrontational, Defiant	8	8	8	9	9	8	8	7	9	8	9	8	8	9	8	9	8	8	8
42 - A Meeting of Minds: Past Achievements and Present Consequences	Reflective, Emotional, Contemplative	9	8	8	9	9	8	8	7	4	7	6	7	7	9	8	9	8	8	8

Summary of Scene Level Analysis

Here are some things that came out of the scene level analysis.
This is a summary of the strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions found in each scene. Some things might appear in both strengths and weaknesses based on the variety of your scenes.
For summary of each criteria click in the top row on the criteria.

Scene Strengths

Engaging dialogue
Complex characters
Emotional depth
Exploration of moral dilemmas
High stakes and tension

Scene Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Some scenes may be overly introspective and slow-paced
Lack of external conflict
Some dialogue may be overly expository
Lack of visual elements

Suggestions

To further improve the emotional depth, explore the characters' personal histories and relationships more deeply
To address slow pacing, consider adding more external conflict or higher stakes to keep the audience engaged
To address excessive exposition, try to convey information through visual elements or show instead of telling whenever possible
To address the lack of visual elements, consider incorporating more action, setting and visual description to enhance the cinematic experience
To improve the overall craftsmanship, consider studying screenplays with similar strengths and weaknesses or seeking feedback from other screenwriting experts or trusted peers.

World Building

Physical environment: The screenplay takes place in various locations, including government buildings, Senate offices, Senate committee hearing rooms, academic institutions, scientific research facilities, and wilderness settings in the United States and Europe. The physical environment reflects the seriousness and historical significance of the events, with a mix of formal and bureaucratic settings, as well as remote and isolated locations that emphasize the urgency and secrecy of the scientific research being conducted.
Culture: The cultural elements in the screenplay include political maneuvering, power dynamics, historical references, intellectual pursuit, mentorship, and discussions about politics, philosophy, and scientific theories. These cultural elements contribute to the atmosphere of tension, intrigue, and intellectual curiosity, and shape the characters' experiences and actions as they navigate the complex and high-stakes world of scientific research and political power.
Society: The societal structures in the screenplay are hierarchical, with clear divisions between those with and without security clearances, and a strong emphasis on trust, loyalty, and secrecy. The societal structures reflect the importance of authority and influence, and shape the characters' experiences and actions as they interact with each other and navigate the political and bureaucratic systems in which they operate.
Technology: The technological aspects in the screenplay include scientific instruments, mathematical concepts, and historical references to technological advancements. These technological elements contribute to the atmosphere of intellectual curiosity and innovation, and highlight the significance of scientific research and discovery in shaping the world and the characters' experiences and actions.
Characters influence: The unique physical environment, culture, society, and technology shape the characters' experiences and actions by creating a complex and high-stakes world that requires them to navigate political and bureaucratic systems, engage in intellectual pursuit and mentorship, and make difficult ethical and moral decisions. The characters are influenced by the societal structures, cultural elements, and technological advancements, and their experiences and actions are shaped by the challenges and opportunities presented by the world they inhabit.
Narrative contribution: The world elements contribute to the narrative of the screenplay by providing a rich and complex setting that informs the characters' actions and decisions. The physical environment, culture, society, and technology create a sense of tension, intrigue, and intellectual curiosity, and provide a backdrop for the characters' personal and professional struggles as they engage in scientific research and navigate political and bureaucratic systems.
Thematic depth contribution: The world elements contribute to the thematic depth of the screenplay by highlighting the significance of scientific research and discovery, the challenges and ethical dilemmas presented by technological advancements, and the importance of trust, loyalty, and secrecy in political and bureaucratic systems. The physical environment, culture, society, and technology also contribute to the themes of power, authority, and influence, and provide a nuanced and thought-provoking exploration of the complex and high-stakes world of scientific research and political power.

Voice Analysis
Summary:	The writer's voice is characterized by sharp dialogue, intellectual banter, and a blend of personal and scientific themes. The dialogue is fast-paced, witty, and often thought-provoking, exploring complex moral and ethical dilemmas faced by the characters.
Voice Contribution	The writer's voice contributes to the script by providing depth and complexity to the characters and themes. The sharp dialogue and intellectual banter create a sense of tension and urgency, while the personal and scientific themes add layers of meaning and resonance to the story.
Best Representation Scene	7 - Oppenheimer's Difficult Decisions
Best Scene Explanation	This scene is the best representation of the writer's voice because it encapsulates the sharp dialogue, intellectual banter, and blend of personal and scientific themes that characterize the screenplay. The dialogue between Oppenheimer and Teller is intense and thought-provoking, exploring the moral and ethical dilemmas of creating a weapon of mass destruction.

Style and Similarities

The screenplay exhibits a strong emphasis on sharp dialogue, complex characters, and thematic depth, often exploring political intrigue and moral dilemmas within historical contexts. The narrative is driven by intense dialogue exchanges, high emotional stakes, and philosophical conflicts, resulting in thought-provoking and emotionally charged scenes.

Style Similarities:

Writer	Explanation
Aaron Sorkin	His influence is evident throughout the screenplay, with a focus on sharp dialogue, political intrigue, and moral complexity. Sorkin's signature style is particularly strong in the intense dialogue exchanges, character-driven narratives, and exploration of ethical dilemmas.
Tony Kushner	His writing style resonates in the screenplay through the exploration of historical events, complex characters, and ethical dilemmas. Kushner's influence is notable in the blending of personal drama with historical context and the delving into philosophical conflicts.

Other Similarities: The screenplay also shares similarities with other notable authors such as Tom Stoppard, David Mamet, John le Carré, Graham Greene, and Christopher Nolan, further enriching the narrative with intellectual themes, power dynamics, and non-linear storytelling.

Top Correlations and patterns found in the scenes:

Pattern	Explanation
Tense scenes have higher emotional impact	There is a noticeable trend of scenes labeled as 'Tense' having a higher emotional impact score, suggesting that the author effectively uses tension to drive emotion.
Scenes with 'Intense' tone have higher stakes	Scenes marked as 'Intense' tend to have higher stakes, indicating that the author may use intensity to raise the stakes in the narrative.
Dialogue scores are lower in scenes with a 'Political' or 'Philosophical' concept	Scenes that focus on political or philosophical concepts seem to have slightly lower dialogue scores, which might imply that the author is prioritizing concept exploration over dialogue in these instances.
Character changes are more frequent in scenes with 'Confrontational' or 'Intriguing' elements	Scenes containing 'Confrontational' or 'Intriguing' elements show a higher frequency of character changes, suggesting that the author may use conflict or intrigue to drive character development.
Scene scores are generally high when 'Hopeful' is present	The author may be particularly skilled at writing engaging and effective scenes when incorporating a 'Hopeful' element, as these scenes generally receive high scores across all categories.

Writer's Craft Overall Analysis

The screenplay showcases a strong foundation in historical context, character dynamics, and thematic depth. The writer demonstrates a clear understanding of narrative structure and a knack for creating engaging dialogue. However, there is room for improvement in fine-tuning pacing, enhancing visual storytelling, and further developing character relationships.

Key Improvement Areas

Pacing and Visual Storytelling

Some scenes could benefit from a more deliberate pacing to allow for greater emotional impact and visual storytelling. This will help create a more immersive experience for the audience.

Character Relationships

Strengthening the connections between characters and their relationships can add depth and nuance to the narrative, making the story more engaging and emotionally resonant.

Exploring Subtext and Subtlety

Incorporating more subtext and subtlety in dialogue and character interactions can add layers of meaning and complexity to the story, enhancing the overall viewing experience.

Suggestions

Type	Suggestion	Rationale
Book	The Art of Dramatic Writing by Lajos Egri	This book provides valuable insights into character development, conflict, and plot structure, which can help improve the overall cohesion and emotional impact of the screenplay.
Exercise	Write a scene without dialogue, focusing on visual storytelling and character emotions.Practice In SceneProv	This exercise will help you practice conveying story and character information through visuals, enhancing your ability to create a rich and immersive viewing experience.
Screenplay	The Lives of Others by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck	This screenplay masterfully balances historical context, character dynamics, and thematic depth, offering a great example of how to weave these elements together to create a compelling narrative.

Additional Notes: The writer demonstrates a clear understanding of historical events and the ability to incorporate them into the narrative in a meaningful way. Continue to explore character relationships and visual storytelling to further elevate the screenplay.

Here are different Tropes found in the screenplay

Trope	Trope Details	Trope Explanation
The Chosen One	Oppenheimer is chosen by Strauss to work at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, despite his past concerns.	The Chosen One is a trope where a character is selected, often by a mentor figure, to fulfill a special role or task. This trope is common in stories about heroes or prodigies. For example, in Star Wars, Luke Skywalker is chosen by Obi-Wan Kenobi to become a Jedi.
Mentor Ship	Bohr encourages Oppenheimer to study under Max Born at Gottingen.	Mentor Ship is a trope where an older, wiser character guides and teaches a younger character. This trope is common in coming-of-age stories and hero's journeys. For example, in The Karate Kid, Mr. Miyagi mentors Daniel-san in the ways of karate.
The Loner	Oppenheimer is often seen alone, reflecting on his struggles and decisions.	The Loner is a trope where a character prefers to work or be alone, rather than in a group. This trope is common in stories about geniuses or anti-heroes. For example, in The Social Network, Mark Zuckerberg is a loner who prefers to code alone in his dorm room.
The Genius	Oppenheimer is portrayed as a genius in quantum theory and atomic energy.	The Genius is a trope where a character has an exceptional talent or intelligence in a specific field. This trope is common in stories about scientists, mathematicians, or artists. For example, in A Beautiful Mind, John Nash is a mathematical genius who struggles with schizophrenia.
The Betrayal	Oppenheimer is accused of being a Soviet agent and betraying his country.	The Betrayal is a trope where a character is revealed to have been working against their group or cause. This trope is common in spy thrillers and political dramas. For example, in The Departed, Billy Costigan is a mole in the police department who betrays his handler.
The Love Triangle	Oppenheimer has intimate moments with Tatlock, but is also interested in Kitty, who is pregnant with his child.	The Love Triangle is a trope where a character has romantic feelings for two other characters, who also have feelings for each other. This trope is common in romantic comedies and dramas. For example, in The Notebook, Noah and Allie have a love triangle with Lon.
The Power of Knowledge	Oppenheimer and his team discover the potential for a chain reaction and a bomb.	The Power of Knowledge is a trope where a character's understanding or discovery has significant consequences or implications. This trope is common in science fiction and thrillers. For example, in Jurassic Park, the scientists' discovery of DNA cloning leads to the creation of dinosaurs.
The Fall from Grace	Oppenheimer loses his security clearance and credibility due to his past relationships and associations.	The Fall from Grace is a trope where a character experiences a significant loss or decline in status due to their actions or circumstances. This trope is common in tragedies and dramas. For example, in House of Cards, Frank Underwood falls from grace when his crimes are exposed.
The Tragic Hero	Oppenheimer is a brilliant scientist who struggles with personal and political conflicts, leading to his downfall.	The Tragic Hero is a trope where a character has admirable qualities and achievements, but also has flaws or makes mistakes that lead to their downfall. This trope is common in classical tragedies and dramas. For example, in Hamlet, Hamlet is a tragic hero who seeks revenge on his uncle, but also doubts his own sanity and motives.
The Government Conspiracy	Strauss and other officials investigate and prosecute Oppenheimer based on bureaucratic procedures and rumors.	The Government Conspiracy is a trope where a character or group of characters is targeted or persecuted by a government agency or institution. This trope is common in political thrillers and conspiracy theories. For example, in The X-Files, Mulder and Scully investigate government conspiracies involving extraterrestrial life and paranormal phenomena.

Memorable lines in the script:

Scene Number	Line
5	Oppenheimer: And now I am become Death... destroyer of worlds.
13	Oppenheimer: You didn’t hire me despite my left-wing past, you hired me because of it. So you could control me.
11	Oppenheimer: Theory will take you only so far.
18	Pash: You see me as persistent-
6	Oppenheimer: A bomb, Alvarez. A bomb.

Some Loglines to consider:

Haunted by his role in creating the atomic bomb, J. Robert Oppenheimer grapples with the moral consequences of his actions as he navigates the treacherous world of Cold War politics.
A brilliant physicist leads the Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb, but his past associations and moral qualms about its use make him a target of suspicion and political persecution.
The race to build the atomic bomb before the Nazis pits J. Robert Oppenheimer against his former friend Werner Heisenberg, forcing him to confront the devastating potential of his creation.
As the Cold War escalates, J. Robert Oppenheimer's opposition to the hydrogen bomb leads to a clash with powerful political figures who seek to silence his dissent.
The life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the 'father of the atomic bomb,' is explored through flashbacks and flash-forwards, revealing his brilliance, flaws, and the complex legacy he left behind.

Help & FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Start with the executive summary to get a bird's eye view.
After that, the high-level menu will offer insights into the story, themes, and characters.
The scene-by-scene analysis will demonstrate how each scene performs across various criteria, summarized in the column headings.
Click on any scene title to view the full analysis, including critiques and suggestions for improvement.
'Other Analyses' provides various insights into your writing and different perspectives, although it might not lead to significant rewrites of your script.

Click on the Print Analysis link in the left menu. You can then print to PDF or save it as PDF.

Click the Scene Analysis link on the left menu. Next to each scene title you can click "improve". In the improve page you can select any scene from your script to work on.

Yes. You own the rights to your script. We do not claim any ownership of your script. We're simply using it to generate the analysis.

No. We do not use your script to train our AI. The AI uses your script to generate the analysis and nothing else.

SceneProv is a game that helps you improve your craft.
You can play it for free. If you have scripts analyzed, the AI might recommend exercises from SceneProv to help you improve your writing. Go to the craft tab to see what it recommended.
Let the AI take a turn when you're blocked or you want to riff on a scene. Each scene you create in SceneProv gets graded at the end.

The maximum length of a screenplay is 160 pages.

Unfortunately it's a known issue for the time being. Fixing this is on the roadmap.

If you're having trouble uploading your script, please email us at 'help@scriptreader.ai'

The goal of ScriptReader.ai is not 100% comprehension, but rather to assist you in improving your script and craft. The valuable insights should still be many. ScriptReader.ai is a tool with a bit of getting used to. We're trying to make the learning curve as easy as possible. If you have any suggestions, please email us at suggestions@scriptreader.ai

Two common issues are:
- The email might have gone to your spam folder or is hidden in an email thread.
- The process might still be ongoing. Register/Login with the email you used during upload and look at the status. It sometimes takes as long as a couple hours. If it's been longer than that email us at help@scriptreader.ai

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (BLACK-AND-WHITE SEQUENCE)

CLOSE: on a prosperous sixty-three-year-old man, LEWIS
STRAUSS, as he takes a cup of coffee from a SENATE AIDE...

SUPER TITLE: "2. FUSION"

STRAUSS
I forget. Three days, or so. The
whole hearing took a month.

SENATE AIDE
An ordeal.

STRAUSS
I’ve only read the transcripts, but
who’d want to justify their whole
life?

SENATE AIDE
You weren’t there?

STRAUSS
As Chairman, I wasn’t allowed to
be. Are they really going to ask
about it? It was years ago.

SENATE AIDE
Four years ago. Oppenheimer still
divides America- the committee will
want to know where you stood.
(checks his watch)
Ready?

INT. CORRIDOR, SENATE BUILDING -- MOMENTS LATER (B&W)

The Senate Aide leads Strauss along the corridor.

SENATE AIDE
Senator Thurmond asked me to say
not to feel you’re on trial.

STRAUSS
I didn’t, till you said that.

SENATE AIDE
Really, Mr Strauss- STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Admiral.
SENATE AIDE (CONT’D)
Admiral Strauss, this is a
formality.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 3.

SENATE AIDE (CONT’D)
President Eisenhower’s asked you to
be in his cabinet, the Senate has
no choice but to confirm you.

They arrive at the door.

STRAUSS
And if they bring up Oppenheimer?

SENATE AIDE
When they bring up Oppenheimer,
answer honestly and no senator can
deny that you did your duty. It’ll
be uncomfortable...
(smiles)
Who’d want to justify their whole
life?

The door to the VAST committee room opens- they enter,
FLASHBULBS POPPING as PRESS and PUBLIC see Strauss.

ROBB (V.O.)
Why did you leave the United
States?

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

The room is SMALL, SHABBY. Surprised, I look up from my
statement at the prosecutor, Roger ROBB. Then turn to the
THREE BOARD MEMBERS (GRAY, EVANS, MORGAN).

OPPENHEIMER
I wanted to learn the new physics.

GRAY
Was there nowhere here? I thought
Berkeley had the leading
theoretical physics department-

OPPENHEIMER
Sure. Once I built it. First I had
to go to Europe. I went to
Cambridge to work under Patrick
Blackett.

ROBB
Were you happier there than in
America?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 4.

INSERT CUT: A YOUNG ME (TWENTY-ONE) LIES IN BED STARING UP,
CRYING... PARTICLES WITH THE VASTNESS OF THE STARS MOVE LIKE
FIREFLIES...

OPPENHEIMER
No. I was homesick. Emotionally
immature... troubled by visions of
a hidden universe...

INT. LABORATORY, CAMBRIDGE -- DAY

The young ME, frazzled demeanor, STRUGGLES with equipment.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...useless in the lab.

I drop a beaker, it SHATTERS. PATRICK BLACKETT looks over,
FROWNING. He picks up an APPLE and takes a LARGE BITE.

BLACKETT
(through apple)
Christ, Oppenheimer, have you had
any sleep? Start again.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
I need to go to the lecture.

BLACKETT
Why?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
(pleading)
It’s Niels Bohr.

Blackett checks his watch- starts packing up-

BLACKETT
Damn, completely forgot. Let’s go.

I start to pack up with the other students.

BLACKETT (CONT’D)
Not you. Finish coating those
plates.

I clean up as Blackett and the other students leave- one
leaves an APPLE for Blackett- GREEN WITH STEM AND TINY LEAF.

I pause at a bottle: "Potassium Cyanide"... CLUMSY HANDS
SHAKING, I draw CYANIDE into a syringe. I INJECT the apple...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 5.

EXT. QUADRANGLE, CAMBRIDGE -- EVENING

I HURRY across the quad. A lonely figure.

BOHR (V.O.)
Quantum physics isn’t a step
forward...

INT. LECTURE HALL, CAMBRIDGE -- CONTINUOUS

I sneak into the back of the auditorium. Standing,
SPELLBOUND, as NIELS BOHR, a charismatic Dane, lectures.

BOHR
...It’s a new way to understand
reality. Einstein’s opened a door,
now we’re peering through, seeing a
world inside our world... a world
of energy and paradox that not
everyone can accept.

I RAISE my hand to ask a question...

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss sits facing the Committee, COUNSEL beside him, PRESS,
CAMERAS and PUBLIC behind...

SENATOR MCGEE
Admiral Strauss, I’m interested in
your relationship with Dr J. Robert
Oppenheimer. You met in 1947?

STRAUSS
Correct.

SENATOR MCGEE
You were a commissioner of the
Atomic Energy Commission?

STRAUSS
I was, but I met Robert in my
capacity as board member of the
Institute for Advanced Study at
Princeton. After the war he was
world-renowned- the great man of
physics...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 6.

EXT. INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY, PRINCETON -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss, younger, fifty-one, bustles out of the Institute-

STRAUSS (V.O.)
...I was determined to get him to
run the Institute.

-to welcome the rail-thin figure of Oppenheimer (forty-
three), emerging from a TAXI in HAT and coat, PIPE in mouth.
ICONIC.

STRAUSS
Dr Oppenheimer, an honour.

OPPENHEIMER
Mr Strauss.

STRAUSS
It’s pronounced 'straws'.

OPPENHEIMER
'Oh-ppenheimer', 'aw-ppenheimer'-
any way you say it they know I’m
Jewish.

STRAUSS
I’m a proud member of Temple
Emmanuel- 'straws' is the Southern
pronunciation. Welcome to the
Institute. I think you could be
very happy here.

OPPENHEIMER
Oh?

STRAUSS
Well, you’ll love the commute- the
position comes with that house for
you and your wife.

Strauss points along an avenue of trees to Olden Manor...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
And your two children...

Oppenheimer nods as he follows Strauss into the Institute.

INT. INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY, PRINCETON -- CONTINUOUS
(B&W)

Strauss leads Oppenheimer through the Institute.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 7.

STRAUSS
I’m a great admirer of your work.

OPPENHEIMER
You’re a physicist by training, Mr
Strauss?

STRAUSS
No, I’m not trained in physics, or
anything else. I’m a self-made man.

OPPENHEIMER
I can relate to that...

STRAUSS
Really?

OPPENHEIMER
(dry)
My father was one.

INT. PRESIDENT’S OFFICE, INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY --
MOMENTS LATER (B&W)

Strauss shows Oppenheimer into the well-appointed office.

STRAUSS
This would be your office.

Oppenheimer drifts to the windows- a LAWN rolls down to a
POND. He spots a FIGURE- long grey hair poking from under his
hat-

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I’m told he’s there most
afternoons.

The figure gently tosses a stone into the water.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I’ve always wondered why you didn’t
involved him in the Manhattan
Project.

Oppenheimer turns to Strauss, interested.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
The greatest scientific mind of our
time?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 8.

OPPENHEIMER
Of his time. Einstein published his
Theory of Relativity more than
forty years ago, but never embraced
the quantum world it revealed.

STRAUSS
'God doesn’t play dice.'

OPPENHEIMER
Precisely. You never thought of
studying physics formally?

STRAUSS
I had offers. But I chose to sell
shoes.

OPPENHEIMER
Lewis Strauss was once a lowly shoe
salesman?

STRAUSS
No. Just a shoe salesman.
(opens the door)
I’ll introduce you-

OPPENHEIMER
No need. I’ve known him for years.

Strauss, awkward, stays in the doorway and WATCHES...

FROM AFAR: as Oppenheimer approaches, Einstein’s HAT BLOWS
off his head, unleashing a MESS OF GREY HAIR, hat rolling
across the grass to where Oppenheimer SCOOPS it up, and we...

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Biography
Tone: Serious, Reflective, Introspective

Summary The scene takes place in a Senate office and committee hearing room, where Lewis Strauss is being prepared for a hearing about his relationship with J. Robert Oppenheimer. Strauss recalls meeting Oppenheimer in 1947 and trying to recruit him for the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. The scene also includes a flashback to Oppenheimer's time at Cambridge, where he struggled with his studies and felt homesick. Strauss expresses some concern about being asked about his relationship with Oppenheimer during the hearing. The scene ends with Strauss entering the committee room for the hearing, as a voiceover asks why he left the United States.

Strengths

Rich character development
Engaging dialogue
Intriguing conflicts

Weaknesses

Some scenes may be overly introspective and slow-paced

General Critique

The scene lacks a clear purpose and stakes. It is unclear what the characters are trying to achieve or what the conflict is.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural. The characters speak in a way that is not believable or engaging.
The scene is too long and meandering. It does not have a clear focus and jumps from one topic to another.
The scene is lacking in action. The characters mostly just talk, and there is not much physicality or movement.
The scene is not visually interesting. The setting is bland and the characters are not doing anything particularly visually interesting.

General Suggestions

Give the scene a clear purpose and stakes. What do the characters want and what is preventing them from getting it?
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and engaging. Have the characters speak in a way that is believable and reflects their personalities.
Tighten the scene and focus on the most important moments. Cut out any unnecessary dialogue or action.
Add some action to the scene. Have the characters move around, interact with the environment, and do things that are visually interesting.
Make the scene more visually interesting. Choose a setting that is visually appealing and have the characters do things that are visually stimulating.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is well-written, engaging, and provides depth to the characters and their motivations. It sets up intriguing conflicts and themes that will likely unfold in the rest of the screenplay.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring the meeting between two influential figures in the scientific and political world is compelling and sets the stage for potential conflicts and character development.

Plot: 7

The plot is engaging and sets up conflicts related to Oppenheimer's past, his relationship with Strauss, and the political implications of his actions. It moves the story forward and raises questions that will likely be addressed later.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces historical figures and events in a fresh and engaging way, blending personal drama with political intrigue. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed, with complex motivations and histories. Oppenheimer's internal struggles and Strauss's ambition and self-made background add depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer shows signs of internal conflict and growth as he navigates his past and present circumstances. This sets the stage for potential character development in future scenes.

Internal Goal: 8

Admiral Strauss's internal goal is to navigate the political and personal challenges he faces during the Senate hearing, reflecting his desire to maintain his reputation and integrity in the face of scrutiny.

External Goal: 7

Admiral Strauss's external goal is to secure confirmation from the Senate for his appointment to President Eisenhower's cabinet, reflecting his immediate need for approval and validation.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

There are underlying tensions and conflicts present in the scene, particularly related to Oppenheimer's past and his relationship with Strauss. These conflicts create intrigue and set the stage for future developments.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is strong, with Admiral Strauss facing political scrutiny and personal challenges that add complexity to the narrative.

High Stakes: 7

The stakes are high in terms of Oppenheimer's reputation, his relationship with Strauss, and the political implications of his past actions. The scene hints at potential consequences and challenges ahead.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by introducing key characters, conflicts, and themes that will likely drive the narrative forward. It sets up questions and tensions that need resolution.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable in terms of how Admiral Strauss will navigate the political and personal challenges he faces, keeping the audience on edge.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict evident in this scene is the tension between personal integrity and political expediency. Admiral Strauss must balance his duty to answer honestly with the need to secure Senate confirmation, challenging his values and beliefs.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of introspection and curiosity, drawing the audience into the characters' inner thoughts and struggles. It sets a contemplative tone that resonates emotionally.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is thought-provoking and reveals insights into the characters' personalities and relationships. It sets the tone for the scene and establishes the dynamics between the characters.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of historical context, character dynamics, and thematic depth, keeping the audience invested in the unfolding drama.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, keeping the audience engaged and invested in the unfolding drama.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene's formatting adheres to the expected format for its genre, enhancing readability and clarity.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively transitions between past and present, building tension and intrigue.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I flip a page. Continue reading my statement.

OPPENHEIMER
I struggled badly trying to
visualize this new world...

INT. ROOMS AT CAMBRIDGE -- DAY

The Young Me lies on the floor, STARING UP.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 9.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...you had to retool your mind to
see things hovering just out of
site...

INSERT CUT: POINTS OF LIGHT MOVE LIKE SPARKS, BUT IN A WAVE.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...then you could unlock forces
never before imagined...

I wipe TEARS from my eyes.

INSERT CUT: STARS. SPARKS FROM A CAMPFIRE. I PAT THE NOSE OF
A HORSE IN THE DARKNESS AS I FEED IT AN APPLE.

I grow calm, my eyelids lowering...

INSERT CUT: AN APPLE- GREEN WITH STEM AND A TINY LEAF...

I open MY EYES- JUMP out of bed- SCRAMBLE to dress-

EXT. QUADRANGLE, CAMBRIDGE -- MOMENTS LATER

I RUN, DESPERATE, AGAINST the crowd-

INT. LABORATORY, CAMBRIDGE -- DAY

I BURST in- Blackett LOOKS UP. ANOTHER MAN has his back to
me. Between them on the workbench- the POISONED APPLE...

BLACKETT
You alright?

I nod awkward, trying to control my BREATHING...

BLACKETT (CONT’D)
Niels, meet J. Robert Oppenheimer.

The other man TURNS, offers his hand- Niels Bohr.

BOHR
What does the 'J' stand for?

BLACKETT
Nothing, apparently.

Bohr takes me in- this strange, BREATHLESS young man...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 10.

BOHR
You were at my lecture. You asked
the only good question.

BLACKETT
Nobody’s denying his insight. It’s
his labouratory skills that leave a
little to be desired.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
I heard you give the same BOHR
lecture- At Harvard. And you asked the
same question. Why ask again?
YOUNG OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I hadn’t liked your answer.
BOHR
Did you like it better yesterday?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
A lot.

BOHR
You can lift the rock without being
ready for the snake that’s
revealed. Now, it seems, you’re
ready.

Bohr picks up the POISONED APPLE from Blackett’s desk...

BOHR (CONT’D)
You don’t enjoy the lab?

I shake my head. Bohr GESTICULATES with the apple as he talks-
I watch it bob around- a kitten following a ball of string...

BOHR (CONT’D)
Get out of Cambridge, with its
beakers and potions. Go somewhere
they’ll let you think...
(assesses me)
Gottingen.

BLACKETT
Born?

BOHR
Born. Get to Germany. Study under
Max Born. Learn the ways of theory.
I’ll send word.

Bohr raises the apple to take a bite- I GRAB it.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 11.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Wormhole.

-DROP it into the wastebasket. Blackett peers at it, curious.

BOHR
How’s your mathematics?

BLACKETT
Not good enough for the physicist
he wants to be.

BOHR
Algebra’s like sheet music. The
important thing isn’t can you read
music, it’s can you hear it. Can
you hear the music, Robert?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
I can.

SPARKS explode in WAVES, WAVES of FIRE CRASHING on a SHORE of
GLASS, FLYING OVER the MEDIEVAL SPIRES of Gottingen, I watch
BORN and BOHR and DIRAC, GALAXIES of PARTICLES DISPERSE and
REFORM, a CUBIST PAINTING transfixes the Young Me, an
ORCHESTRA plays STRAVINSKY, I read THE WASTE LAND, I WRITE
FURIOUSLY at a desk, I WRITE FURIOUSLY on a chalkboard, I
SMASH a glass, and ANOTHER, and ANOTHER, WATCHING the SHARDS
skid across the floor, CATCHING and REFRACTING LIGHT, I watch
RAINDROPS scintillate a PUDDLE, STREAM down a windowpane, I
disturb the surface of a sink full of WATER, watching RIPPLES
propagate and INTERFERE, I BOUNCE a ball against a corner of
my room, studying its trajectory...

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Biography
Tone: Reflective, Intense, Intriguing

Summary The scene opens with an introspective Oppenheimer grappling to visualize the world of atomic energy. A flashback shows a younger Oppenheimer, stirred by points of light, propelling him to Cambridge's laboratory. There, he encounters Niels Bohr for the first time, who advises him to study under Max Born at Gottingen. Despite initial skepticism from Blackett, Bohr's encouragement sparks hope in Oppenheimer, ending the scene with a promising outlook.

Strengths

Rich character development
Engaging dialogue
Symbolic imagery

Weaknesses

Some parts may be overly introspective
Lack of external conflict

General Critique

The opening line is confusing and seems to be out of place. It is not clear who is speaking or what they are struggling to visualize.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, especially the exchange between Oppenheimer and Bohr. It is difficult to believe that these two brilliant scientists would speak in such a formal and stilted manner.
The scene lacks any real conflict or drama. It is simply a series of expositional dialogue that explains Oppenheimer's early life and education.
The use of flashbacks is confusing and disorienting. It is difficult to keep track of what is happening and when it is happening.
The scene is too long and drawn out. It could be significantly shortened without losing any of the essential information.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the opening line to make it more clear and concise.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and believable.
Add some conflict or drama to the scene, such as a debate between Oppenheimer and Bohr about the nature of reality.
Use flashbacks more sparingly and effectively.
Shorten the scene by cutting out unnecessary dialogue and exposition.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene effectively delves into Oppenheimer's inner turmoil and sets up a significant turning point in his life. The use of flashback and dialogue creates a compelling narrative.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's struggles with visualization and his encounter with Niels Bohr is engaging and thought-provoking. It sets the stage for his transformation as a character.

Plot: 9

The plot advances through Oppenheimer's flashback at Cambridge and his interaction with Bohr, providing crucial insights into his character and motivations.

Originality: 9

The scene demonstrates a high level of originality through its creative use of imagery and metaphor to explore complex scientific and philosophical concepts. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Bohr, are well-developed and their dynamic adds depth to the scene. Oppenheimer's internal conflict and Bohr's mentorship are central to the narrative.

Character Changes: 9

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant transformation in the scene, moving from self-doubt to a newfound sense of purpose under Bohr's guidance. This change sets the stage for his future endeavors.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to find his place in the world of theoretical physics and intellectual pursuit. This reflects his deeper desire for knowledge, recognition, and self-discovery.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to impress his mentors and peers with his intellect and potential in the field of physics. This reflects the immediate challenge of proving himself in a competitive academic environment.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

The conflict in the scene is primarily internal, as Oppenheimer grapples with his academic struggles and seeks guidance from Bohr. The tension lies in his quest for knowledge and self-improvement.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and challenges that test the protagonist's beliefs and abilities. The uncertainty of outcomes adds suspense and complexity to the narrative.

High Stakes: 7

The stakes are high for Oppenheimer as he grapples with academic challenges and seeks a new path under Bohr's mentorship. His future success hinges on his ability to overcome his obstacles.

Story Forward: 8

The scene propels the story forward by revealing key moments in Oppenheimer's past and setting up his future trajectory. It deepens the audience's understanding of the character and his motivations.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected twists in dialogue and character interactions, keeping the audience intrigued about the protagonist's choices and future development.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the balance between theoretical knowledge and practical skills, as well as the importance of mentorship and guidance in intellectual growth. This challenges the protagonist's beliefs about his own abilities and the value of different approaches to learning.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from nostalgia to determination. Oppenheimer's vulnerability and Bohr's mentorship create a poignant atmosphere.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue between Oppenheimer, Bohr, and Blackett is engaging and reveals key aspects of their personalities. It drives the scene forward and enhances character development.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its blend of intellectual discourse, emotional depth, and visual storytelling. The dynamic interactions between characters and the protagonist's internal struggles captivate the audience.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and emotional depth, transitioning between introspective moments and dynamic interactions to maintain audience interest and momentum.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene adheres to the expected format for its genre, with clear scene headings, character names, and action descriptions. It maintains a visual and engaging presentation.

Structure: 8

The structure of the scene follows a non-linear narrative style, incorporating flashbacks and visual inserts to enhance the storytelling. It effectively conveys the protagonist's internal and external conflicts.

EXT. INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY, PRINCETON -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss watches Oppenheimer hand the HAT to Einstein. Strauss
checks his watch, then starts down the hill towards them. As
he approaches, Einstein TURNS, walking towards Strauss with a
GRIM EXPRESSION.

STRAUSS
(friendly)
Albert...

Einstein PASSES without acknowledging Strauss. Strauss
reaches Oppenheimer-

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
What did you say to him?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 12.

OPPENHEIMER
He’s fine. Mr Strauss, there are
things in my past you need to be
aware of.

STRAUSS
As Chairman of the AEC I have
access to your security file. I’ve
read it. The job is yours.

OPPENHEIMER
You’re not worried?

STRAUSS
After all you’ve done for your
country?

OPPENHEIMER
Times change, Mr Strauss.

STRAUSS
The purpose of this Institute is to
provide a haven for independent
minds. You’re the man for the job.

OPPENHEIMER
Then I’ll consider it. And I’ll see
you at the AEC meeting tomorrow.

Oppenheimer turns, heads back up the hill.

STRAUSS
(taken aback)
This is one of the most prestigious
appointments in the country...

Oppenheimer looks back at Strauss, GRINS-

OPPENHEIMER
With a great commute. That’s why
I’m considering it.

Strauss watches him go, shaking his head.

SENATOR MCGEE (V.O.)
So, Dr Oppenheimer brought your
attention to his past associations
before you appointed him?

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

STRAUSS
Yes.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 13.

SENATOR MCGEE
And they didn’t concern you?

STRAUSS
Just then I was more concerned
about what he’d said to Einstein to
sour him on me.

A few CHUCKLES from the room.

SENATOR MCGEE
But later?

STRAUSS
Well, we all know what happened
later.

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

The board members listen as I continue reading...

OPPENHEIMER
After Gottingen I moved on to
Leiden in Holland...

INT. LECTURE HALL, LEIDEN -- DAY

A packed hall. The Young Me nervously checks my notes.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...where I first met Isidor Rabi...

A stocky young man, ISIDOR RABI (thirty), plonks down next to
a DUTCH STUDENT who reluctantly shifts, giving him room.

RABI
A Yank lecturing on new physics?
This I have to hear- I’m an
American myself.

DUTCH STUDENT
How surprising.

RABI
Let me know if you need help with
the English.

I start lecturing... IN DUTCH. Ravi, confused, leans in.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 14.

RABI (CONT’D)
Wait, what’s he saying?

INT. TRAIN, LEIDEN TO ZURICH -- NIGHT

I stare out the window at dark trees, steam and shadows, Rabi
dumps his bags down, slumps opposite, sizes me up. Offers me
an orange-

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
No, thank you.

RABI
It’s a long way to Zurich. You get
any skinnier we might lose you
between the seat cushions. I’m
Rabi.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Oppenheimer.

Rabi starts peeling his orange.

RABI
I caught your lecture on molecules.
Caught some if it- we’re a couple
of New York Jews- how do you know
Dutch?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
I thought I’d better learn it when
I got here this semester.

Rabi STOPS peeling his orange to STARE at me-

RABI
You learned Dutch in six weeks to
give a lecture on quantum
mechanics?
YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
I wanted to challenge myself.

RABI
Quantum physics isn’t challenging
enough? Schvitzer.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Schvitzer?

RABI
'Show-off.' Dutch in six weeks but
you never learned Yiddish?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 15.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
(smile)
They don’t speak it so much my side
of the park.

RABI
Screw you. Homesick?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
You know it.

Rabi peels his orange. He turns serious...

RABI
Ever get the feeling our kind isn’t
entirely welcome here?

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Physicists?

RABI
Funny.

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Sometimes. Not in the department.

RABI
They’re all Jewish, too.

Rabi tosses me a slice of orange.

RABI (CONT’D)
Eat.

I take the orange, 'sipping' at it.

RABI (CONT’D)
In Zurich there’s a German you have
to seek out-

YOUNG OPPENHEIMER
Heisenberg.

Genres: Drama, Biography
Tone: Reflective, Serious, Informative

Summary Lewis Strauss approaches J. Robert Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein outside the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, but only Oppenheimer engages in conversation. Strauss offers Oppenheimer a job, who is noncommittal and mentions the good commute. Later, Strauss is questioned about his hiring process in a Senate hearing by Senator McGee. The main conflict lies in Strauss's concern about Oppenheimer's past and whether it should affect his job appointment, which is not resolved in the scene. The tone is serious and formal, with a hint of tension between Strauss and Oppenheimer. Key pieces of dialogue include Strauss's question to Oppenheimer about what he said to Einstein, and Oppenheimer's mention of his past concerns. The scene ends with Oppenheimer walking away from Strauss, and later with Strauss confirming that Oppenheimer brought his past to his attention before being appointed in the Senate hearing.

Strengths

Rich character development
Engaging dialogue
Historical context

Weaknesses

Limited external conflict
Some exposition-heavy moments

General Critique

The scene does not provide much new information about Oppenheimer or Strauss. We already know that Strauss is interested in recruiting Oppenheimer for the Institute for Advanced Study and that Oppenheimer has some concerns about his past. The scene does not really advance the plot or develop the characters.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural. The characters speak in a formal and artificial way that does not sound like real conversation.
The scene is too short and does not give the actors much to work with. It could be expanded to include more dialogue and character development.
The scene lacks tension or conflict. There is no sense of urgency or stakes, and the characters do not seem to be particularly interested in what is happening.
The scene does not visually interesting. It is set in a dull and uninteresting office, and the characters are all dressed in suits. There is nothing to visually engage the audience.

General Suggestions

Add more conflict or tension to the scene. For example, Oppenheimer could be more hesitant about accepting Strauss's offer, or Strauss could be more forceful in his recruitment.
Make the dialogue more natural and conversational. The characters should speak in a way that sounds like real people.
Expand the scene to include more dialogue and character development. This will give the actors more to work with and make the scene more interesting for the audience.
Add some visual interest to the scene. This could be done by changing the setting, adding some props, or changing the lighting.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively combines historical context, character development, and dialogue to create a compelling and informative narrative.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's journey through academia and his interactions with other physicists is engaging and adds depth to the character.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on Oppenheimer's academic and personal challenges, setting the stage for his future decisions and actions.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces historical figures and intellectual discussions in a fresh and engaging way, with authentic character interactions.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Rabi, are well-developed and their interactions reveal insights into their personalities and motivations.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer's character undergoes subtle changes as he reflects on his past and considers his future, showing growth and self-awareness.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to navigate his past associations and secure the prestigious appointment at the Institute for Advanced Study.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to secure the job at the Institute for Advanced Study and attend the AEC meeting.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 6

While there is some tension and conflict in the scene, it is more subtle and internal, focusing on personal struggles and relationships.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is subtle but present, adding complexity to the character interactions and dialogue.

High Stakes: 6

While the stakes are not overtly high in this scene, the personal and professional decisions made by the characters have long-term implications.

Story Forward: 7

The scene provides important background information and sets the stage for future events, moving the narrative forward in a meaningful way.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is unpredictable in terms of character interactions and dialogue, keeping the audience engaged.

Philosophical Conflict: 6

The philosophical conflict revolves around Oppenheimer's past associations and the changing times, challenging his beliefs and values.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of reflection and introspection, as well as empathy for the characters' challenges and aspirations.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is engaging, revealing character dynamics and providing historical context in a natural and informative way.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intellectual dialogue, historical references, and character dynamics.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension and revealing character motivations.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format with clear dialogue and character interactions.

INT. LECTURE HALL, ZURICH -- DAY

A tall man of twenty-six turns from the blackboard-
HEISENBERG. I study his every move. Rabi NUDGES me 'See?'...

INT. SAME -- LATER

Rabi introduces me to Heisenberg.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 16.

HEISENBERG
Oppenheimer, yes. I liked your
paper on molecules.

OPPENHEIMER
Probably because you inspired it.

HEISENBERG
If I inspire anything else, let me
know. We could publish together.

OPPENHEIMER
I have to get back to America.

HEISENBERG
Why? There’s no one there taking
quantum mechanics seriously.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s exactly why.

RABI
He’s pining for the canyons of
Manhattan.

OPPENHEIMER
The canyons of New Mexico.

HEISENBERG
You’re from New Mexico?

OPPENHEIMER
New York, but my brother and I have
a ranch outside of Santa Fe. That’s
the America I miss right now.

HEISENBERG
Then you best go home, cowboys.

RABI
That’s his thing- me and horses? I
don’t think so.

GRAY (V.O.)
Did you ever encounter Heisenberg
again?

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I smile to myself.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 17.

OPPENHEIMER
Not in person. But you might say
our paths crossed.

ROBB
Doctor, during your time in Europe,
you seem to have met a wide range
of other countries’ physicists...
(consulting notes)
Born, Bohr, Pauli, Dirac, Einstein,
Heisenberg...?

OPPENHEIMER
That’s right.

Robb looks up at me...

ROBB
Any Russians?

OPPENHEIMER
Not that spring to mind.
(from notes)
Returning to America I accepted
appointments at both Caltech...

EXT. BERKELEY -- DAY

I walk across campus to the physics department...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...and up at Berkeley.

INT. CORRIDOR, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

I struggle to unlock a door... it opens-

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

A DUSTY storage space. Scattered tables and chairs. A piano.

EXT. CORRIDOR, BERKELEY -- MOMENTS LATER

I step out of the classroom. Look NEXT DOOR...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 18.

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- DAY

I enter. A handsome young scientist, ERNEST LAWRENCE, works
on an assemblage of curved pipes and wiring with students,
including Luis ALVAREZ.

OPPENHEIMER
Dr. Lawrence, I presume.

LAWRENCE
You must be Oppenheimer. I hear you
want to start a school of quantum
theory.

OPPENHEIMER
I am starting it. Next door.

LAWRENCE
They put you in there?

OPPENHEIMER
I asked for it. I wanted to be
close to you experimentalists.

LAWRENCE
Theory will get you only so far.
(gestures)
We’re building a machine to
accelerate electrons.

OPPENHEIMER
Magnificent.

LAWRENCE
Would you like to help?

OPPENHEIMER
Build it? No. But I’m working on
theories I’d like to test with it.

LAWRENCE
When do you start teaching?

OPPENHEIMER
I’ve got my first in an hour.

LAWRENCE
Seminar?

OPPENHEIMER
Pupil.

LAWRENCE
One student? That’s it?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 19.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m teaching something no one LAWRENCE (CONT’D)
here’s dreamt of. But once (grins)
people start hearing what you There’s no going back.
can do with it...

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- LATER

I stand there, expectant. A student opens the door, looks
around, embarrassed-

STUDENT
I’m sorry, I must have missed-

OPPENHEIMER
No, this is it. Mr Lomanitz, right?

LOMANITZ (twenty-one) nods, takes a seat.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
What do you know about quantum
mechanics?

LOMANITZ
I have a grasp on the basics-

OPPENHEIMER
Then you’re doing it wrong.
(rapid-fire)
Is light made up of particles or
waves?

Lomanitz opens his mouth to speak- too slow-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Quantum mechanics says it’s both-
how can it be both?

LOMANITZ
It can’t. OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It can’t. But it is. It’s
paradoxical and yet... it
works.
Lomanitz is hooked. I turn to the board, chalk out an
equation... when I turn back-

There are now FIVE students (including SERBER and SNYDER)
listening intently... I move to Lomanitz to hand him his
paper. I pat his shoulder.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 20.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
You’re gonna be okay.

DISSOLVE TO:

A PACKED CLASSROOM, hanging on my every word as I- now thirty-
two, slim, well-dressed, confident- teach in the round.
Lawrence listens at the edge, fascinated.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Consider a star... a vast furnace
burning in outer space...

INSERT CUT: A STAR. A SUN. BURNING, ROILING.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Fire pushing outwards against its
own gravity- balanced. But if its
furnace cools, gravity starts
winning. It contracts...

I look around. Make eye contact with Hartland SNYDER.

SNYDER
Density increases...

OPPENHEIMER
Increasing gravity...

INSERT CUT: THE SUN IS SHRINKING, MORE AND MORE RAPIDLY...

SNYDER
Increasing density. A vicious
cycle. Until... What’s the limit
here?

OPPENHEIMER
I don’t know. See where the math
takes us. I guarantee it’s
somewhere no one’s been before.

SNYDER
Me?

OPPENHEIMER
Your math’s better than mine.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 21.

EXT. BERKELEY -- DAY

Energetic, dashing, I STRIDE across campus, a group of
students, including Snyder and Lomanitz, following me,
hanging on my every word...

OPPENHEIMER
Einstein can’t accept the
Copenhagen interpretation-

LOMANITZ
'God doesn’t play dice.'

OPPENHEIMER
Except he does. Bohr showed us
how...

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- DAY

I mark up a paper. Lawrence comes in, frowns at the board.

LAWRENCE
You shouldn’t let them bring their
politics into the classroom...

I follow his look: "SATURDAY 2:00pm, RALLY FOR LOYALIST
SPAIN".

OPPENHEIMER
I wrote that. Lawrence, you embrace
the revolution in physics, can’t
you see it everywhere else?
Picasso, Stravinsky, Freud, Marx...

LAWRENCE
This is America, Oppie. We had our
revolution. Seriously, keep it out
of the lab.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, out of the lab, my landlady’s
having a discussion group tonight.

LAWRENCE
I’ve sampled the Berkeley political
scene- it’s all philosophy
postgrads and Communists talking
integration.

OPPENHEIMER
You don’t care about integration?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 22.

LAWRENCE
I want to vote for it, not talk
about it. Let’s get dinner.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m meeting my brother there.

SENATOR BARTLETT (V.O.)
Dr Oppenheimer’s file contained
details of FBI surveillance on his
activities at Berkeley...

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss looks at the senator, cautious...

STRAUSS
Yes, as I recall.

SENATOR BARTLETT
Why would they have started a file
on Dr Oppenheimer before the war?

STRAUSS
You’d have to ask Mr Hoover.

SENATOR BARTLETT
I’m asking you, Admiral Strauss.

STRAUSS
My assumption is that it was
connected to his left-wing
political activities.

SENATOR BARTLETT
How would these activities have
come to the attention of the FBI?

STRAUSS
Well, if I remember correctly...

CUT TO:

EXT. HOUSE PARTY, SHASTA ROAD, BERKELEY -- NIGHT (COLOUR)

STRAUSS (V.O.)
The FBI was taking license plates
outside suspected Communist
gatherings and his name popped up.

As I get out of my car, I spot TWO MEN checking the license
plates of cars on the street... I am GRABBED-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 23.

FRANK (O.S.)
Gotcha!

My younger brother FRANK (twenty-five) and his date, JACKIE.

INT. LIVING ROOM, HOUSE PARTY, SHASTA ROAD, BERKELEY -- NIGHT

We ENTER the bustling room- I spot a beguiling young woman-

VOICE (O.S.)
Robert! Come meet Chevalier.

Mary WASHBURN grabs my tie and leads us to Haakon CHEVALIER.

WASHBURN
Dr Haakon Chevalier, Dr Robert
Oppenheimer, and vice versa.

OPPENHEIMER
This is my little brother, Frank.
Oh, and... uh...

JACKIE
Still Jackie.

CHEVALIER
Hello, Still Jackie.

OPPENHEIMER
Chevalier. You’re in languages?

CHEVALIER
And your reputation precedes you.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m blushing- what’ve you heard?

CHEVALIER
You’re teaching a radical new
approach to physics that I have no
chance of understanding. But I
hadn’t heard you were a party
member-

OPPENHEIMER
I’m not.

FRANK
Not yet.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 24.

JACKIE
Frank and I are thinking of OPPENHEIMER
joining- (ignoring Jackie)
I support of range of causes.
Jackie, put out, leads Frank away.

CHEVALIER
The Spanish Civil War?

OPPENHEIMER
A democratic republic being
overthrown by fascist thugs? Who
wouldn’t be?

CHEVALIER
Our government- they think
socialism’s a bigger threat than
fascism.

OPPENHEIMER
Not for long- look at what the
Nazis are doing to the Jews. I send
funds to colleagues in Germany to
emigrate. I have to do something.
My own work is so... abstract.

CHEVALIER
What’re you working on?

OPPENHEIMER
What happens to stars when they
die.

CHEVALIER
Do stars die?

OPPENHEIMER
If they do they’d cool, then
collapse. And the bigger the star,
the more violent its demise. Their
gravity gets so concentrated...

INSERT CUT: THE SUN SHRINKS. THE LIGHT OF THE DISTANT STARS
BEHIND IS TUGGED TOWARDS THE DYING STAR, BENDING, STRETCHING.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
...it swallows everything. Even
light.

CHEVALIER
Good God. Can that really happen?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 25.

OPPENHEIMER
The math says it can. If we can get
published, maybe one day an
astronomer finds one. But all I
have is theory. Which can’t impact
people’s lives.

CHEVALIER
If you’re sending money to Spain,
do it through the Communist Party-
they can get it to the front lines.

The beguiling young woman is there with a tray of martinis.
This is Jean TATLOCK...

TATLOCK
Mary sent me with these. I’m Jean.

OPPENHEIMER
Robert.

CHEVALIER
Haakon Chevalier. The union meeting
at Serber’s last month?

Tatlock nods. I take a glass.

CHEVALIER (CONT’D)
Robert here says he’s not a
Communist.

TATLOCK
Then he doesn’t know enough about
it.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ve read Das Kapital. All three
volumes. Does that count?

CHEVALIER
That would make you better read
than most Party members.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s turgid stuff, but there’s some
thinking... 'Ownership is theft.'

TATLOCK
'Property', not 'Ownership'.

OPPENHEIMER
Sorry, I read it in the original
German.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 26.

Chevalier laughs, delighted, as he leaves us alone.

TATLOCK
It’s not about the book, it’s about
the ideas. You sound uncommitted.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m committed to thinking freely
about how to improve our world. Why
limit yourself to one dogma?

TATLOCK
You’re a physicist- do you pick and
choose rules? Or do you use the
discipline to channel your energies
into progress?

OPPENHEIMER
I like a little wiggle room. Do you
always toe the party line?

Tatlock considers this. Sizes me up.

TATLOCK
I like my wiggle room, too.

Genres: Drama, Historical, Biographical
Tone: Intellectual, Philosophical, Political

Summary In a lecture hall in Zurich, Oppenheimer meets Heisenberg and expresses his desire to publish together on quantum mechanics. Later in Berkeley, Oppenheimer shares his intention to start a school of quantum theory with Lawrence, and begins teaching a class with Lomanitz and other students.

Strengths

Rich dialogue
Intellectual depth
Character complexity

Weaknesses

Lack of physical action
Limited visual elements

General Critique

The scene is overly expository and lacks dramatic tension. The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and the characters are one-dimensional.
The scene could be more visually interesting. Consider adding some movement or action to the scene.
The scene could be more suspenseful. Consider adding some conflict or danger to the scene.
The scene could be more emotionally resonant. Consider adding some personal stakes for the characters or exploring their relationships in more depth.
The scene could be more thematically relevant. Consider how the scene contributes to the overall theme of the story.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and engaging.
Add some movement or action to the scene, such as having the characters walk around or interact with their environment.
Add some conflict or danger to the scene, such as having the characters be threatened by a third party or having them face a difficult decision.
Add some personal stakes for the characters, such as having them be motivated by a desire to protect their loved ones or to achieve a goal.
Explore the characters' relationships in more depth, such as by having them discuss their past experiences or their hopes and dreams.
Consider how the scene contributes to the overall theme of the story, and revise the scene accordingly.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is rich in content, blending scientific theories, personal beliefs, and political ideologies seamlessly. It engages the audience with thought-provoking dialogue and character interactions.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of exploring the intersection of physics, philosophy, and politics in the context of the characters' lives is intriguing and well-executed.

Plot: 7

The plot advances through character interactions and discussions, revealing the intellectual and ideological conflicts that drive the narrative forward.

Originality: 9

The scene showcases original situations and fresh approaches to familiar themes, with authentic character actions and dialogue that reflect the complexities of the protagonist's internal and external goals.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters are well-developed, each with their own beliefs and motivations that drive their actions and dialogue.

Character Changes: 5

While there are no significant character changes in this scene, the ideological debates and interactions hint at potential growth and development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to make a meaningful impact with his work and to find a balance between his abstract scientific pursuits and his desire to make a difference in the world.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to teach quantum mechanics and share his radical new approach to physics with his students.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 6

The conflict in the scene is more ideological and philosophical rather than physical, adding depth to the character interactions.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting ideologies, political tensions, and personal dilemmas that create obstacles for the protagonist and keep the audience guessing about the outcome.

High Stakes: 5

The stakes are more intellectual and ideological, centered around the characters' beliefs and the impact of their actions on the world around them.

Story Forward: 7

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the audience's understanding of the characters, their beliefs, and the conflicts that drive the narrative.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected philosophical discussions, political tensions, and the protagonist's complex motivations that add layers of intrigue to the narrative.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the protagonist's belief in free thinking and exploration of ideas versus the pressure to conform to political ideologies and societal norms.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 6

The emotional impact is subtle but present, especially in the characters' passionate discussions and personal beliefs.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, intellectual, and thought-provoking, reflecting the characters' depth and the themes of the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intellectual debates, character dynamics, and the protagonist's internal and external conflicts that keep the audience invested in the story.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective, with a balance of dialogue-driven moments and visual storytelling that maintains the audience's interest and builds tension towards the climax.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character interactions that enhance the visual storytelling.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with clear transitions between locations and engaging dialogue that drives the narrative forward.

INT. BEDROOM -- LATER

We are FUCKING. Hot, sweaty, a little brutal. Tatlock GIVES
UP, climbs off me-

OPPENHEIMER
Wait, wait-

I catch my breath, watching her STUDY my shelves.

TATLOCK
Unexpected.

OPPENHEIMER
What?

TATLOCK
For a physicist.

OPPENHEIMER
You’ve only got a shelf full of
Freud?

TATLOCK
Actually my background’s more- OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Jungian.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 27.

TATLOCK (CONT’D)
You know analysis.

OPPENHEIMER
When I was a postgrad at Cambridge
I had some trouble.

She turns to me.

TATLOCK
I’ll bite.

OPPENHEIMER
I tried to poison my tutor.

TATLOCK
Did you hate him?

OPPENHEIMER
I liked him very much.

Tatlock turns back to the books.

TATLOCK
You just needed to get laid.

OPPENHEIMER
Wow. Took my analysts two years,
and I’m not sure they ever put it
that succinctly.

TATLOCK
You had them convinced you’re more
complicated than you really are.

OPPENHEIMER
We’re all simple souls, I guess.

TATLOCK
Not me.
She pulls a book from the shelf: THE BHAGAVAD GITA. She opens
the book to find INCOMPREHENSIBLE CHARACTERS.

TATLOCK (CONT’D)
What’s this?

OPPENHEIMER
Sanskrit.

TATLOCK
You can read this?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 28.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m learning-

She climbs on top of me, opens the book in my face.

TATLOCK
Go on then.

I study the page as Tatlock starts to move.

OPPENHEIMER
In this part, Vishnu reveals TATLOCK (CONT’D)
his multi-armed self- Read the words.
She points to each word as I translate...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
'And now I am become Death...

She nods, impressed, starts moving again...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
...destroyer of worlds.'

EXT. NEW MEXICO -- DAY

Moving over the VAST landscape to find three tiny figures. I
lead Lawrence and Frank on horseback up a mountain trail.

EXT. CAMPSITE -- EVENING

THUNDER. Lawrence climbs off his horse. The wind WHIPS as we
set up our tent...

OPPENHEIMER
It’ll break before dawn. The air
cools overnight. Just before dawn,
the storm dies.

INT./EXT. TENT -- NIGHT

Lawrence, Frank and I huddle in the BUFFETING TENT, trying to
keep a fire going in the WIND and RAIN outside the tent.

FRANK
I’m getting married.

LAWRENCE
Congratulations, Frank.

I look at Frank, sardonic with drink.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 29.

OPPENHEIMER
To Jackie?

Frank stares at me... the tent stops buffeting...

FRANK
Yeah, to Jackie. The waitress.

LAWRENCE
(sensing tension)
Oppie, you’re right- it’s letting
up. I’ll see if there’s any stars.

Frank watches Lawrence go, then pounces-

FRANK
All your talk about the common man
but Jackie’s not good enough? We
join the Party- you can’t hide your
disapproval- why? Because that’s
supposed to be your thing?

OPPENHEIMER
I haven’t joined the Party, Frank.
And I don’t think she should’ve
convinced you to, either-

FRANK
Half the faculty’s Communist-

OPPENHEIMER
Not that half.

I point in the direction Lawrence wondered off.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I’m your brother and I want you to
be cautious.

FRANK
And I want to wring your neck.
I giggle at this. Frank shakes his head, then starts
laughing, too. I grab Frank’s shoulder. Frank looks up...

FRANK (CONT’D)
Robert, I won’t live my life afraid
to make a mistake.

I hold up my hands in defeat-

OPPENHEIMER
You’re happy, I’m happy.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 30.

FRANK
Then I’m happy you’re happy.

EXT. PERRO CALIENTE -- MOMENTS LATER

I approach Lawrence, who stares up at the stars.

LAWRENCE
It’s so clear I feel like I could
see one of those dark stars you’re
working on...

OPPENHEIMER
You can’t, that’s the whole point.

INSERT CUT: AN EXPANDING DARKNESS EATS THE STARS...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Their gravity swallows light. It’s
like a kind of... hole in space.

LAWRENCE
Is Frank okay?

OPPENHEIMER
Yeah. He just has a shitty brother.

Lawrence smiles at this. Looks around, then-

LAWRENCE
It’s special here.

OPPENHEIMER
As a kid I thought if I could find
a way to combine physics and New
Mexico, my life would be perfect.

LAWRENCE
It’s a little remote for that.
Let’s get some sleep.

I turn, heading to the tent. Lawrence follows.

OPPENHEIMER
That mesa we saw today? One of my
favorite places in the world.
Tomorrow we’ll climb it.

LAWRENCE
What’s it called?

My response is so soft it is almost swallowed by the dark...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 31.

OPPENHEIMER
Los Alamos.

EXT. STREET, BERKELEY -- DAY

Tatlock and I walk down the sidewalk. I try to take her hand-
she folds her arms.

TATLOCK
I wasn’t expecting to see you.

OPPENHEIMER
I have to make an appointment?

Across the street a young man BURSTS out of the BARBER SHOP,
towel across chest, NEWSPAPER in hand... the barber runs out-
the young man rips off the towel, TOSSES it to him and RUNS-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Alvarez!

I leave Tatlock on the sidewalk, take off after Alvarez-

EXT. BERKELEY CAMPUS -- DAY

Alvarez SPRINTS, newspaper in hand- I follow-

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

I BURST in- Lawrence is trying to calm Alvarez-

ALVAREZ
(breathless)
They’ve done it! Hahn and Strassman
in Germany...

Alvarez tosses the paper at me-
ALVAREZ (CONT’D)
They split the uranium nucleus.

LAWRENCE
How?

OPPENHEIMER
(reading)
Bombarded it with neutrons.

ALVAREZ
Lawrence, it’s fission. Nuclear
fission. They’ve split the atom...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 32.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s not possible.

I put down the paper, take up my chalk like it’s a weapon,
move to the board. Alvarez grabs the paper-

ALVAREZ
I’m going to try to reproduce it.

Alvarez and Lawrence leave. I write and write...

Genres: Drama, Romance
Tone: Intimate, Reflective, Emotional

Summary In this scene, Oppenheimer shares intimate moments with Tatlock in his bedroom, discussing their interests and pasts. The setting then shifts to a camping trip with Lawrence and Frank, where Frank's announcement of his plan to marry Jackie causes tension with Oppenheimer. The scene ends with Oppenheimer and Lawrence gazing at the stars, with Oppenheimer pointing out a mesa called Los Alamos. The conflicts in this scene revolve around personal matters and politics, and the tone is intimate, personal, and at times, tense.

Strengths

Complex characters
Intimate dialogue
Emotional depth

Weaknesses

Lack of overt conflict
Some dialogue may be too subtle

General Critique

The scene is too long and could be shortened to make it more concise and engaging.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and could be rewritten to make it more fluid and believable.
The scene lacks a clear conflict or goal, which makes it difficult for the reader to engage with the characters or the story.
The characters are not well-developed and their motivations are unclear.
The scene does not advance the plot in any meaningful way.

General Suggestions

Shorten the scene by removing unnecessary dialogue and action.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and believable.
Add a clear conflict or goal to the scene.
Develop the characters more fully and make their motivations clear.
Rewrite the scene so that it advances the plot in a meaningful way.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is well-written, engaging, and provides depth to the character of Oppenheimer. It also introduces an important scientific concept and sets up high stakes for the story.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The introduction of nuclear fission as a concept is crucial to the plot and adds depth to the story. It sets the stage for future developments.

Plot: 8

The plot is engaging and moves the story forward by introducing key elements such as Oppenheimer's relationships, struggles, and the concept of nuclear fission.

Originality: 9

The scene showcases original situations, fresh dialogue, and authentic character interactions, contributing to its unique and engaging nature.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer, are well-developed and complex. Their interactions and dialogues reveal layers of their personalities.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer undergoes subtle changes in his interactions and reflections, hinting at deeper character development to come.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate his relationships and personal beliefs while grappling with his own complexities and desires.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to understand and potentially replicate the scientific discovery of nuclear fission.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 6

There is a subtle conflict present in the scene, mainly in Oppenheimer's internal struggles and his relationships with others.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is strong enough to challenge the protagonist's beliefs and values, creating conflict and tension.

High Stakes: 7

The introduction of nuclear fission and Oppenheimer's personal struggles raise the stakes for the characters and the story, adding tension and complexity.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by introducing key elements, relationships, and conflicts that will shape the narrative.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the unexpected twists in character interactions, philosophical discussions, and scientific revelations.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the protagonist's personal beliefs, relationships, and intellectual pursuits, challenging his worldview and values.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The scene evokes emotions of nostalgia, reflection, and intimacy, drawing the audience into Oppenheimer's world and struggles.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is intimate, reflective, and emotional, adding depth to the characters and the scene. It also conveys important information and emotions effectively.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of personal drama, intellectual intrigue, and scientific discovery, keeping the audience invested in the characters and their relationships.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension, transitions between locations, and maintains the audience's interest in the unfolding events.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting adheres to the expected format for its genre, effectively conveying the visual and narrative elements.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively transitions between locations and character interactions.

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- LATER

Lawrence enters. I turn. Point at the board.

OPPENHEIMER
See. It can’t be done.

LAWRENCE
Very elegant. Quite clear. Just one
problem...

OPPENHEIMER
Where?

LAWRENCE
Next door. Alvarez did it.

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- MOMENTS LATER

I peer at Alvarez’s oscilloscope...

LAWRENCE
Theory will take you only so far.

I stand, moving away... thinking...

OPPENHEIMER
During the process extra neutrons
boil off. Which could be used to
split other uranium atoms...

LAWRENCE
A chain reaction. You’re thinking
what I’m thinking.

OPPENHEIMER
You, me and every physicist around
the world who’s seen the news.

ALVAREZ
What? What’re we all thinking?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 33.

OPPENHEIMER
A bomb, Alvarez. A bomb.

EXT. TATLOCK HOUSE, BERKELEY -- NIGHT

Tatlock GRABS a bouquet out of my hands-

TATLOCK
I told you, Robert, no more fucking
flowers.

She dumps them in the trash. I just stare.

OPPENHEIMER
I don’t understand what you TATLOCK (CONT’D)
want from me- I don’t want anything from
you.
I pause. Then, gently...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
You say that. Then you call.

Tatlock kicks at the dirt.

TATLOCK
Don’t answer.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll always answer.

She looks up at me.

TATLOCK
Fine. But no more flowers.

She goes inside-

OPPENHEIMER
Aren’t you coming?
Slams the door shut behind her. I stand there.

CHEVALIER (O.S.)
You have to know when you’re
beaten, Robert.

I turn. Chevalier and his wife, BARBARA, wait in the car.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s not that simple, Haakon.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 34.

INT. MEETING HALL, BERKELEY -- NIGHT

Chevalier and Barbara lead me into the crowded hall. A
BANNER: "FEDERATION OF ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, CHEMISTS AND
TECHNICIANS".

A man with a British accent greets us. This is ELTENTON.

ELTENTON
Chevalier, good to see you. And the
illustrious Dr Oppenheimer. I’m
Eltenton. Might you say a word
about organized labour on campuses?

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll try to think of something.

Eltenton guides me towards the stage...

ELTENTON
I work at Shell, we’ve signed up
chemists and engineers...

OPPENHEIMER
That’s excellent.

I spot Lomanitz, who grins and waves...

ELTENTON
So why not scientists in academia?

OPPENHEIMER
Sure. When do we-

Eltenton pushes me onto the stage. People start APPLAUDING at
the very sight of me. I can’t quite not smile about this.

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- DAY

I watch Lawrence examine his cyclotron.

OPPENHEIMER
Teachers are unionized, Lawrence.
Why not professors?

LAWRENCE
Don’t you have somewhere to be?

OPPENHEIMER
Academics have rights, too-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 35.

LAWRENCE
It’s not that. I have a group
coming.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll sit in.

LAWRENCE
Not this one.

The door opens. Richard TOLMAN and Vannevar BUSH enter-

OPPENHEIMER
Richard. Dr Bush. What brings you
two up north?

They exchange glances with Lawrence. Awkward SILENCE. I rise,
letting them off the hook-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Richard, tell Ruth I’ll be down to
Pasadena Thursday.

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

As I enter, a magazine FLAPS into my hands from across the
room. Students are all reading copies...

SERBER
Your paper on black holes- it’s in!

I open the magazine as I turn to a STUDENT-

OPPENHEIMER
Get Hartland.

LOMANITZ
September 1st, 1939- the world’s
gonna remember this day...
Snyder comes in with a newspaper. Glum.

OPPENHEIMER
Hartland, our paper, it’s in print!

SNYDER
We’ve been upstaged.

He holds up the paper: "HITLER INVADES POLAND".

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
During the Battle of France and the
Battle of Britain...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 36.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Robb looks on intently as I turn the page on my statement...

OPPENHEIMER
...I found myself increasingly out
of sympathy with the policy of
neutrality that Communists
advocated.

ROBB
And after Hitler invaded Russia,
did these Communist sympathies
return?

OPPENHEIMER
No. If you’ll just allow me GRAY
to- Mr Robb, you’ll have ample
opportunity to cross-examine.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I need to make clear that my
changing opinion of Russia did not
mean a sharp break with those who
held different views. For a year or
two during a previous marriage my
wife, Kitty, had been a Communist
Party member.

Behind me, on a couch, is KITTY (forty-six), listening
intently...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
But when I first met her, in
Pasadena in 1939, she had already
disengaged from politics...

INT. HOUSE PARTY, TOLMAN HOUSE, PASADENA -- NIGHT

Kitty (thirty-one) watches as I EXPERTLY open the liquor
cabinet-

OPPENHEIMER
This is where I keep the good
stuff.

KITTY
I thought this was the Tolmans’
house.

OPPENHEIMER
I live with them when I’m at
Caltech.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 37.

RUTH (O.S.)
You two need anything?

I turn to see RUTH TOLMAN (forty-five) looking at me,
mischievous.

OPPENHEIMER
We’re fine, Ruthie.
(to Kitty)
You’re a biologist?

KITTY
Somehow I graduated to housewife.
Can you explain quantum mechanics
to me? It seems baffling.

OPPENHEIMER
It is. This glass-

I thump a glass onto the cabinet- pour a drink-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
This drink-

I hand her the glass- fingers touching...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Our bodies... are mostly empty
space- groupings of tiny energy
waves bound together.

KITTY
By what?

OPPENHEIMER
Forces of attraction strong enough
to convince us that matter is
solid...

I push the palm of my hand up against hers.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
And stop my body passing through
yours.

Kitty pushes her fingers through mine, interlacing our hands.
I look at a GREY-HAIRED MAN in conversation with Tolman...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
You’re married to Dr Harrison.

KITTY
Not very.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 38.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, there’s someone that I...

KITTY
Does she feel the same way?

OPPENHEIMER
Sometimes. Not often enough.

As Ruth looks our way I let Kitty’s hand go.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I’m going to New Mexico, to my
ranch. With friends. You should
come.
Kitty looks meaningfully over her glass at me.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I meant with your husband.

KITTY
Yes, you did. Because you know it
won’t make a bit of difference.

Genres: Drama, Romance
Tone: Intense, Emotional, Reflective

Summary In this scene, Oppenheimer and Lawrence discuss a physics problem and visit Alvarez's lab, realizing the potential for a chain reaction and a bomb. Meanwhile, Oppenheimer has a tense interaction with his girlfriend Tatlock, who rejects him. Oppenheimer attends a union meeting and gives a speech, discussing academic unionization with Lawrence. The scene ends with Oppenheimer entering a classroom where students are reading his published paper.

Strengths

Rich character development
Emotional depth
Nuanced dialogue

Weaknesses

Some scenes may feel slow-paced for viewers not interested in scientific discussions

General Critique

The scene starts with a lot of exposition and technical jargon, which could potentially bore and confuse the reader. Consider starting with a more engaging hook or using more visual and descriptive language to convey the information.
The dialogue between Oppenheimer and Tatlock at the beginning of the scene is a bit stiff and unnatural. It would be more effective if the characters spoke in a more conversational tone.
The scene lacks a clear goal or conflict. It's not clear what Oppenheimer is trying to achieve by talking to Tatlock, and there's no real tension or stakes in the conversation.
The scene ends abruptly, with Oppenheimer simply leaving after Tatlock slams the door in his face. It would be more effective if the scene ended with a more definitive resolution or emotional climax.
The scene is too long and could be shortened to make it more concise and impactful.

General Suggestions

Start the scene with Oppenheimer and Tatlock in a more intimate setting, perhaps in bed or over dinner, and have them discuss their relationship in more depth.
Add more tension to the conversation between Oppenheimer and Tatlock by having them argue about something or by revealing a secret that one of them has been keeping.
Give Oppenheimer a clear goal or conflict to achieve in the scene, such as trying to convince Tatlock to come back to him or trying to get her to give him information about Eltenton.
End the scene with a more definitive resolution or emotional climax, such as Oppenheimer finally getting Tatlock to agree to come back to him or Tatlock revealing a secret that changes everything.
Cut out any unnecessary dialogue or action to make the scene more concise and impactful.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively combines scientific dialogue with emotional depth, creating a compelling narrative that engages the audience. The interactions between characters are nuanced and thought-provoking, adding layers to the story.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of blending scientific discussions with personal relationships is executed well in the scene. It adds depth to the characters and explores the complexities of their lives beyond their scientific pursuits.

Plot: 7

The plot in the scene is driven by the characters' interactions and emotional dynamics rather than external events. It focuses on character development and relationships, providing insight into their motivations and struggles.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on historical events and scientific developments, presenting them through the lens of personal relationships and moral dilemmas. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and nuanced.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters in the scene are well-developed and multi-dimensional. Their interactions reveal layers of complexity, making them relatable and engaging for the audience.

Character Changes: 8

Several characters undergo emotional and psychological changes in the scene, particularly in their relationships and personal growth. The interactions between characters reveal new insights and developments, driving the narrative forward.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to navigate his personal relationships and reconcile his conflicting emotions towards Kitty and Ruth. This reflects his deeper desires for connection and understanding.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to navigate the scientific and political challenges of the time, particularly related to the development of the atomic bomb.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

The scene contains internal conflicts within the characters, particularly in their relationships and personal struggles. The tension is palpable, adding depth to the emotional dynamics of the scene.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is subtle, primarily revolving around personal conflicts and ethical dilemmas rather than external obstacles. This adds depth to the character dynamics and thematic exploration.

High Stakes: 7

The stakes are high in the scene, particularly in the characters' personal relationships and moral dilemmas. The emotional and professional consequences of their actions add tension and complexity to the narrative.

Story Forward: 7

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the characters' relationships and conflicts. It provides crucial insights into the characters' motivations and struggles, setting the stage for future developments in the narrative.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in terms of character interactions and plot developments, but there are moments of unexpected emotional depth and revelations that keep the audience engaged.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of scientific advancements, especially the creation of a bomb with destructive power. This challenges Oppenheimer's beliefs about the responsibility of scientists and the consequences of their work.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes a strong emotional response from the audience, delving into themes of love, loss, and ambition. The characters' struggles and conflicts resonate on a deep emotional level, creating a poignant and moving narrative.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue in the scene is rich and meaningful, blending scientific discussions with personal reflections. It adds depth to the characters and drives the emotional and intellectual aspects of the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of intellectual discussions, emotional conflicts, and personal revelations. The dialogue and character interactions draw the audience in and create a sense of tension and intrigue.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective, balancing moments of introspection with dialogue-driven interactions and plot progression. It maintains a steady rhythm that keeps the audience engaged.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene adheres to the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene headings, dialogue formatting, and action descriptions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a coherent structure, transitioning smoothly between different locations and character interactions. It maintains a consistent pace and rhythm.

EXT. PERRO CALIENTE -- DAY

Kitty and I THUNDER along on horseback, climbing a ridge. I
shout ahead to Kitty-

OPPENHEIMER
Why did you marry him?!

Kitty pulls up. I come alongside.

KITTY
I was lost. He was kind.

OPPENHEIMER
Lost?
KITTY
My previous husband died. At twenty-
eight I wasn’t ready to be a widow.

Kitty DISMOUNTS. I follow.

OPPENHEIMER
Who was your first husband?

KITTY
Nobody. But my second husband was
Joe Dallet.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 39.

KITTY (CONT’D)
From money, like me, but he was a
union organizer in Youngstown,
Ohio. I fell hard.

OPPENHEIMER
How hard?

KITTY
Hard enough to spend four years
living off beans and pancakes,
handing out the Daily Worker at
factory gates.

Kitty takes out a hip flask. SWIGS.

KITTY (CONT’D)
By ’36 I told Joe I couldn’t take
it anymore, quit the Party and
joined my parents swanning around
Europe. A year later I said I
wanted him back. Him, not the Daily
Worker. He said 'Swell, I’ll meet
you on my way to Spain.'

She hands me the flask. I take a drink.

OPPENHEIMER
He went to fight for the loyalists?

KITTY
On his way we reconciled. One
beautiful week in Paris. Then he
went to the brigades and I waited.
One day Steve Nelson turns up in
the lobby of the hotel to tell me
Joe got himself killed first time
he popped out of his trench.

OPPENHEIMER
Who’s Steve Nelson?
KITTY
Head of the Communist Party in San
Francisco. You don’t know him?

OPPENHEIMER
I’m not a Communist.

KITTY
You seem to know a lot of ’em.

OPPENHEIMER
Including you.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 40.

KITTY
(shakes head)
Ideology got Joe killed. For
nothing.

OPPENHEIMER
The Spanish Republic isn’t nothing.

KITTY
My husband offered both our futures
to stop one fascist bullet
embedding itself in a mudbank.
That’s the definition of nothing.

OPPENHEIMER
That seems a little reductive-

KITTY
Pragmatic. Steve and his wife
brought me home with them to
Chicago, then set me up with
husband number three. Now here I
am...

She looks around at the wilderness...

KITTY (CONT’D)
Wherever the hell this is-

I grab her. Kiss her, hard.

INT. TATLOCK’S BEDROOM -- DAY

Tatlock and I sit on the floor, backs to the bed like kids.
Tatlock has been crying.

OPPENHEIMER
I didn’t want you to hear it from
someone else.
TATLOCK
You didn’t bring flowers. That’s
something.

I reach into my pocket- she GRABS the small posy from me,
TOSSING it aside.

OPPENHEIMER
Jean, we both know I’m not what you
want.

TATLOCK
Yeah. But it’s a door closing.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 41.

OPPENHEIMER
Not as far as I’m concerned.

Tatlock looks at me. Appreciating the sentiment.

TATLOCK
You knocked her up. Fast work.

OPPENHEIMER
Can’t keep a good man down.

TATLOCK
I meant her. She knew what she
wanted. What about the husband?

OPPENHEIMER
We spoke. He’s divorcing her so we
can get married before she’s
showing.

TATLOCK
How civilized, you idiot. This is
your community- you think rules
don’t apply to the golden boy?

OPPENHEIMER
Brilliance makes up for a lot.

TATLOCK
Don’t alienate the only people in
the world who understand what you
do. One day you might need them.

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- DAY

I write "F.A.E.C.T." on the board, Lomanitz hands out FLIERS.
Lawrence enters, GRABBING a flyer from the nearest student:
"UNIONIZE THE RADIATION LAB".

LAWRENCE
Lomanitz? What do you make a month?

LOMANITZ
(sheepish)
A hundred and fifty dollars.

Lawrence turns to another student-

LAWRENCE
How are the working conditions?

OPPENHEIMER
That’s not the point, Lawrence.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 42.

LAWRENCE
What do you have in common with
dock workers and farm labourers?

LOMANITZ
Plenty-

LAWRENCE
Right. Everybody out. Now!
(to me)
Not you.

The students file out. Lawrence SLAMS the door- turns on me-

LAWRENCE (CONT’D)
What’re you doing?!
OPPENHEIMER
It’s a trade union-

LAWRENCE
Full of Communists!

OPPENHEIMER
So? I haven’t joined the Party-

LAWRENCE
They won’t let me bring you onto
the project because of this shit!
They won’t even let me tell you
what the project is-

OPPENHEIMER
I know what the fucking project is,
Lawrence! We all heard about
Einstein and Szilard’s letter to
Roosevelt. Warning him the Germans
could make a bomb. And I know what
it means for the Nazis to have a
bomb.
LAWRENCE
I don’t?

OPPENHEIMER
It’s not your people they’re
herding into camps! It’s mine!

LAWRENCE
You think I tell them about your
politics? Next time you’re coming
home from a meeting, take a look in
the rear-view mirror.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 43.

LAWRENCE (CONT’D)
Listen for sounds on your phone
line. And stop being so goddamn
naïve.

I’m taken aback by this...

OPPENHEIMER
Why would they care what I do?

LAWRENCE
Because you’re not just self-
important, you’re actually
important.

I see the reality. Shift gears-

OPPENHEIMER
I get it. You don’t have to worry.
I get it.

LAWRENCE
You just need to be more- OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Pragmatic. It’s done,
Lawrence. I’ll talk to
Lomanitz and the others. You
don’t have to worry.
Lawrence looks at me. Sees this is real.

LAWRENCE (CONT’D)
Then welcome to the war.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
I filled out my first security
questionnaire...

Genres: Drama, Romance, Historical
Tone: Intense, Emotional, Reflective

Summary In this scene, Oppenheimer and Kitty have a heartfelt conversation about Kitty's past, revealing that she was previously married to a union organizer who was killed in the Spanish Civil War. Oppenheimer then goes to Tatlock's house to end their relationship, as Kitty is pregnant with his child. Tatlock is upset but understands. Finally, Oppenheimer gets into an argument with Lawrence about unionizing the radiation lab. The scene is emotional and intense, with Oppenheimer making difficult decisions about his personal and professional life.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Character development
Engaging dialogue

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly expository
Lack of external action

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is very exposition-heavy. Consider replacing some of it with actions or interactions between the characters.
The scene lacks a clear conflict or goal. What do the characters want, and what are they doing to achieve it?
The scene's pacing is slow and could be improved by cutting out some of the unnecessary dialogue.

General Suggestions

Add more subtext to the dialogue. What are the characters really thinking and feeling, and how can you convey that without them saying it explicitly?
Give the characters a clear goal for the scene. What do they want to achieve, and what are they doing to try to get it?
Cut out any dialogue that doesn't advance the plot or reveal something important about the characters.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively combines emotional depth with political tension, creating a compelling narrative that engages the audience.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring personal relationships against the backdrop of political ideologies is well-executed, adding layers of complexity to the characters and their interactions.

Plot: 7

The plot advances through the characters' interactions and revelations, providing insight into their pasts and motivations.

Originality: 9

The scene is original in its historical context, blending personal relationships with political themes in a unique way. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds to the originality.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed, with nuanced personalities and conflicting emotions that drive the narrative forward.

Character Changes: 8

The characters undergo emotional changes and realizations, particularly in their relationships and beliefs, adding depth to their arcs.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to come to terms with his past decisions and their consequences, as well as to navigate his relationships with others.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to navigate the political and personal challenges he faces, including unionizing the radiation lab and dealing with the repercussions of his actions.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

There is a moderate level of conflict present, primarily stemming from the characters' differing beliefs and personal struggles.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing personal and political challenges that drive the conflict forward.

High Stakes: 7

The stakes are moderately high, especially in terms of personal relationships and the characters' involvement in political movements.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information about the characters' pasts, motivations, and relationships, setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable in its character interactions and revelations, keeping the audience engaged and unsure of the outcome.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the protagonist's political beliefs and the consequences of his actions on a personal and societal level.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions through the characters' poignant conversations and revelations, creating a sense of empathy and connection with their experiences.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is impactful, revealing the characters' inner thoughts and feelings while also driving the plot and conflict forward.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of personal drama and political tension, as well as the sharp dialogue and character dynamics.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension and revealing character motivations, contributing to the overall effectiveness of the scene.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a traditional structure for its genre, with clear character motivations and conflicts driving the narrative forward.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I glance up from my notes.
OPPENHEIMER
...and was informed that my
involvement in left-wing groups
would not prove a bar to my work on
the atomic programme.

SENATOR PASTORE (V.O.)
Why were his Communist associations
not seen as a security risk during
the war?

CUT TO:
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 44.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss suppresses his irritation at the line of questioning.

STRAUSS
Senator, I can’t possibly answer
for a security clearance granted
years before I even met the man.

SENATOR PASTORE
Fine. What about after?

STRAUSS
After the war, Dr Oppenheimer was
the most respected scientific voice
in the world. That’s why I asked
him to run the Institute, that’s
why he advised the Atomic Energy
Commission. Simple as that.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss paces-

STRAUSS
What are they accusing me of?

SENATE AIDE
I think they just want to know what
happened between 1947 and 1954 to
change your mind on Oppenheimer’s
security clearance.

STRAUSS
I didn’t. I was the AEC Chairman,
but it wasn’t me who brought the
charges against Robert.

SENATE AIDE
Who did?

STRAUSS
Some former staff member of the
Joint Congressional Committee-

INSERT CUT: A YOUNG MAN LEAFS THROUGH A FILE, COLLECTING HIS
THOUGHTS... THIS IS WILLIAM BORDEN... HE STARTS TYPING...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
A rabid anti-Communist named
Borden. He wrote to the FBI
demanding they take action.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 45.

SENATE AIDE
The FBI? Why not come to the AEC
direct?

STRAUSS
Why get caught holding the knife
yourself?

SENATE AIDE
What did Borden have against
Oppenheimer?

STRAUSS
This was the McCarthy era- people
hounded out of jobs for any hint of
red... reading Oppenheimer’s
security file- his Communist
brother, sister-in-law, fiancée,
best friend, wife... that’s before
you even get to the Chevalier
incident.

SENATE AIDE
But how would Borden have access to
Oppenheimer’s security file?

STRAUSS
Someone gave it to him. Someone who
wanted Oppenheimer silenced.

SENATE AIDE
Who?

STRAUSS
Who knows? Robert didn’t take care
not to upset the power brokers in
Washington. His opinions on the
atom became definitive and he
wasn’t always patient with us mere
mortals. I came in for plenty of
harsh treatment. There was an AEC
vote on the export of isotopes to
Norway...

INT. CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Oppenheimer sits at the witness table with Joe VOLPE, the AEC
lawyer. Strauss is in the audience.

STRAUSS (V.O.)
They drafted in Robert to make me
look like a fool...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 46.

CONGRESSMAN
But, Dr Oppenheimer, one member of
the AEC board thinks these isotopes
could be useful to our enemies in
the production of atomic weapons.

OPPENHEIMER
Congressman, you could use a shovel
in making atomic weapons, in fact,
you do. You could use a bottle of
beer in making atomic weapons. In
fact, you do.

LAUGHTER. Strauss squirms, embarrassed.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Isotopes aren’t as useful as
electronic components, but more
useful than a sandwich. I’d put
them somewhere in between.

Volpe looks at Strauss, who SMILES, GOOD-HUMOURED...

STRAUSS (V.O.)
Genius is no guarantee of wisdom.
How could this man who saw so much
be so blind?

CUT TO:

INT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, BERKELEY -- NIGHT (COLOUR)

I come in. The lights are off. A BABY’S CRIES echo...

OPPENHEIMER
Kitty?

She is in the dining room, in the dark, drink in hand.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Kitty, the project- I’m in.

She sips. SLIDES her drink down the table at me-

KITTY
Let’s celebrate.

As the baby CRIES, Kitty comes to me, pulling at my clothes-

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t you need to go to him?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 47.

KITTY
I’ve been going to him all fucking
day...

She moves to kiss my neck- I look upstairs- she PUSHES me
away- GRABS her drink...

EXT./INT. CHEVALIER HOUSE -- NIGHT

I carry the crying infant, PETER, to the front door. Knock.
Barbara opens it- sees my distraught face and takes Peter.

INT. LIVING ROOM, CHEVALIER HOUSE -- MOMENTS LATER

Chevalier hands me a drink. I stare into the liquid.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m ashamed to ask.

CHEVALIER
Anything.

OPPENHEIMER
Take Peter.

CHEVALIER
Sure.

OPPENHEIMER
No, for a while, Hoke. A while.

CHEVALIER
Does Kitty know you’re here?

OPPENHEIMER
(I laugh)
Of course she fucking knows! We’re
awful. Selfish, awful people...
(I down drink)
Forget I asked-

Chevalier puts out a hand to stop me rising...

CHEVALIER
Robert, you see beyond the world we
live in. There’s a price to be paid
for that. Of course we’ll help.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 48.

EXT. NEW MEXICO -- EVENING

Kitty and I GALLOP through the trees, EMERGING into the
twilight overlooking a valley. Kitty turns to the wind.

KITTY
Everything’s changing, Robert.

OPPENHEIMER
Having a child was always- KITTY (CONT’D)
(impatient)
The world is pivoting in some
new direction... reforming...
this is your moment.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
We’re putting together a KITTY (CONT’D)
group to study feasibility- 'We' shouldn’t be doing
anything. You should.
Lawrence won’t get this done.
Or Tolman, or Rabi. You will.

INT. PRESIDENT’S DINING HALL, BERKELEY -- DAY

A crowded and lavish lunch. I notice a large man in ARMY
UNIFORM, Colonel GROVES, sitting next to another soldier
(NICHOLS) with Bush and Tolman. I sidle up to Lawrence at the
buffet.

OPPENHEIMER
Who’s the uniform?

The husky GROVES spills sauce on his tunic, wipes at it.

LAWRENCE
I thought you might know.

INT. CLASSROOM, BERKELEY -- AFTERNOON

I am working. Groves and Lieutenant Colonel NICHOLS enter.

GROVES
Dr Oppenheimer. I’m Colonel Groves,
this is Lieutenant Colonel Nichols.

Groves pulls off his uniform jacket, TOSSES it to Nichols.

GROVES (CONT’D)
Get that dry-cleaned.

I watch Nichols leave.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 49.

OPPENHEIMER
If that’s how you treat a
lieutenant colonel, I’d hate to see
how you treat a humble physicist.

GROVES
If I ever meet one I’ll let you
know.

OPPENHEIMER
Ouch.

GROVES
Theatres of combat all over the
world- but I have to stay in
Washington.

OPPENHEIMER
Why?

GROVES
I built the Pentagon. The brass
likes it so much they made me take
over the Manhattan Engineer
District.

OPPENHEIMER
Which is?

GROVES
Don’t be a smart-ass. You know damn
well what it is- you and half of
every physics department across
America. That’s problem number one.

OPPENHEIMER
I thought problem number one would
be securing enough uranium ore.

GROVES
Twelve hundred tons. Bought the day
I took charge.

OPPENHEIMER
Processing?

GROVES
Just broke ground at Oak Ridge,
Tennessee. Now I’m looking for a
project director.

OPPENHEIMER
And my name came up.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 50.

GROVES
Nope. Even though you brought
quantum physics to America. That
made me curious.

OPPENHEIMER
What have you found out?

GROVES
You’re a dilettante, womanizer,
suspected Communist-

OPPENHEIMER
I’m a New Deal Democrat-

GROVES
I said 'suspected'. Unstable,
theatrical, egotistical, neurotic.

OPPENHEIMER
Nothing good? Not even 'he’s
brilliant, but'...?

GROVES
Brilliance is taken for granted in
your circles. So, no. Only one
person said anything good- Richard
Tolman. He thinks you’ve got
integrity. But Tolman strikes me as
someone who knows science better
than people.

OPPENHEIMER
Yet here you are. You don’t take
much on trust.

GROVES
I don’t take anything on trust. Why
don’t you have a Nobel Prize?

OPPENHEIMER
Why aren’t you a general?

GROVES
They’re making me one for this.

OPPENHEIMER
Maybe I’ll have the same luck.

GROVES
A Nobel Prize for making a bomb?

OPPENHEIMER
Alfred Nobel invented dynamite.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 51.

GROVES
So how would you proceed?

OPPENHEIMER
You’re talking about turning theory
into a practical weapons system
faster than the Nazis.

GROVES
Who have a twelve-month head start.

OPPENHEIMER
Eighteen.

GROVES
How could you possibly know that?

OPPENHEIMER
Our fast neutron research took six
months- the man they’ve undoubtedly
put in charge will have made that
leap instantly.

GROVES
Who do you think they put in
charge?

OPPENHEIMER
Werner Heisenberg. He has the most
intuitive understanding of atomic
structure I’ve ever seen.

GROVES
You know his work?

OPPENHEIMER
I know him. Just like I know
Walther Bothe. Von Weizsäcker.
Diebner. In a straight race, the
Germans win. We’ve got one hope.

GROVES
Which is?

OPPENHEIMER
Anti-Semitism.

GROVES
What?

OPPENHEIMER
Hitler called quantum physics
'Jewish science'. Said it right to
Einstein’s face.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 52.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Our one hope is that Hitler’s so
blinded by hate he’s denied
Heisenberg proper resources.
Because it’ll take vast resources.
Our nation’s best scientists,
working together- right now they’re
scattered.

GROVES
Which gives us
compartmentalization.

OPPENHEIMER
All minds have to see the whole
task to contribute efficiently.
Poor security may cost us the race,
inefficiency will. The Germans know
more than us, anyway.

GROVES
The Russians don’t.

OPPENHEIMER
Remind me- who are we at war with?

GROVES
Someone with your past doesn’t want
to be seen downplaying the
importance of security from our
Communist allies.

OPPENHEIMER
Point taken. But no.

GROVES
You don’t get to say 'no' to me-

OPPENHEIMER
It’s my job to say 'no' to you when
you’re wrong-

GROVES
So you’ve got the job, now?

OPPENHEIMER
I’m considering it.

GROVES
I’m starting to see how you got
your reputation. My favorite
response? 'Oppenheimer couldn’t run
a hamburger stand.'

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 53.

OPPENHEIMER
I couldn’t. But I can run the
Manhattan Project.

I turn to the blackboard. Take up my chalk.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
There’s a way to balance these
things...
(I draw)
Leave the Rad Lab here at Berkeley
under Lawrence, Met Lab in Chicago
under Szilard, large-scale refining-
where’d you say? Tennessee... all
America’s industrial might and
scientific innovation, connected by
rail... focused on one goal, one
point in space and time, coming
together... here.

I have drawn a cross at the centre of the diagram.

GROVES
And where’s that?

INSERT CUT: A BARBED-WIRE FENCE IS STRUNG OUT...

OPPENHEIMER
A secret labouratory. In the middle
of nowhere. Self-sufficient.
Secure. Equipment, housing, the
works. We keep everyone there till
it’s done.

INSERT CUT: A SCHOOLHOUSE IS ERECTED. A CHURCH. A STORE...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
It’ll need a school, stores, a
church...

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Reflective, Tense

Summary This scene explores the questioning of J. Robert Oppenheimer about his Communist associations during the war and the role of Lewis Strauss in revoking his security clearance. Set in several different locations, the scene features a tense dialogue between Strauss and a Senate Aide, with Oppenheimer depicted as a brilliant scientist with potential blind spots. The scene ends with Oppenheimer reflecting on the consequences of his actions, leaving the conflict unresolved.

Strengths

Compelling dialogue
Ethical dilemmas explored effectively
Tension and conflict well portrayed

Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Some dialogue could be more impactful

General Critique

The scene is too long and could be shortened to make it more concise.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and could be improved by making it more conversational.
The scene lacks a clear focus, and could be improved by giving it a specific goal or purpose.
The characters are not well-developed, and could be improved by giving them more depth and complexity.
The setting is not well-described, and could be improved by providing more detail and atmosphere.

General Suggestions

Try to cut down on the length of the scene by removing any unnecessary dialogue or action.
Make the dialogue more natural by using contractions and avoiding formal language.
Give the scene a specific goal or purpose, such as having the characters make a decision or resolve a conflict.
Develop the characters by giving them more depth and complexity, such as by exploring their motivations and backstories.
Describe the setting in more detail, such as by providing information about the time of day, the weather, and the physical environment.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively conveys the inner turmoil and ethical considerations of Oppenheimer, setting the stage for significant decisions and developments.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of Oppenheimer grappling with the decision to join the Manhattan Project and the strategic discussions with Colonel Groves is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 8

The plot advances as Oppenheimer contemplates his role in the Manhattan Project and engages in discussions with Colonel Groves, setting the stage for significant developments.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the development of the atomic bomb, focusing on the personal and political dynamics behind the scientific achievement. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and nuanced, adding depth to the familiar historical events.

Character Development

Characters: 8

Oppenheimer and Colonel Groves are well-developed characters with conflicting motivations and beliefs, adding depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes internal conflict and contemplation, leading to potential character growth and development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate the political and personal challenges he faces while working on the atomic program. He grapples with questions of morality, loyalty, and the impact of his work on the world.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to successfully lead the Manhattan Project and develop the atomic bomb before the Nazis. This goal reflects the immediate circumstances of the war and the need to ensure national security.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict present in the scene, both internally within Oppenheimer and externally in his interactions with Colonel Groves.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting ideologies, personal agendas, and external threats that challenge the protagonist's goals and beliefs. The audience is left uncertain about the outcome, adding to the scene's tension.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer grapples with the decision to join the Manhattan Project, impacting not only his own future but also the course of history.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by introducing the Manhattan Project decision and setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the shifting power dynamics, moral dilemmas, and unexpected revelations that challenge the characters' beliefs and actions. The audience is kept on their toes, unsure of how the scene will unfold.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the ethical implications of developing the atomic bomb and the personal sacrifices that come with it. The protagonist must grapple with the consequences of his actions and the larger impact on humanity.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and introspection, but could benefit from more emotional depth to fully engage the audience.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue between Oppenheimer and Colonel Groves is engaging, revealing their contrasting perspectives and adding tension to the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its blend of personal drama, political intrigue, and historical significance. The dialogue and character dynamics draw the audience in, creating a sense of suspense and emotional investment.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is well-executed, with a balance of dialogue-driven moments and introspective beats that build tension and suspense. The rhythm of the scene enhances its effectiveness and emotional impact.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions, character dialogue, and transitions between locations. The visual elements are well-crafted and enhance the storytelling.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the tension and complexity of the characters' interactions. The pacing and rhythm contribute to the scene's effectiveness.

INT. TRAIN, BERKELEY TO WASHINGTON, DC -- DAY

I talk to Groves as Nichols looks on...

GROVES
Why?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 54.

OPPENHEIMER
If we don’t let scientists bring
their families, we’ll never get the
best. You want security? Build a
town, and build it fast.

GROVES
Where?

EXT. CAR, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

Groves emerges, squinting into the brightness, taking in the
stark beauty. I greet him, arms spread wide.

OPPENHEIMER
Welcome to Los Alamos. There’s a
boys’ school we’ll have to
commandeer, and the local Indians
come up here for burial rites.
Other than that, nothing for forty
miles any direction. And south-
east, hundreds of miles of desert.
Enough to find the perfect spot.

GROVES
For?

OPPENHEIMER
Success.

Groves scans the horizon. Sniffs the air... turns to Nichols.

GROVES
Build him a town. Fast.
(to Oppenheimer)
Let’s go recruit some scientists.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO BOSTON -- NIGHT

I watch Groves go over a file.

OPPENHEIMER
How much can I tell them?

GROVES
(without looking up)
As much as you like, till you feel
my boot on your balls.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 55.

INT. LECTURE HALL, HARVARD -- DAY

Groves and I sit talking to BAINBRIDGE and DONALD.

BAINBRIDGE
I’m not a soldier, Oppie.

OPPENHEIMER
Soldier? He’s a general-
(jab my thumb at Groves)
I got all the soldier I need. Maybe
too much. I’m here because you know
isotopes, and you-
(to Donald)
know explosives better than anyone.

DONALD
But you can’t tell us what you’re
doing?

I glance at Groves. Then CROSS my legs.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s about unleashing the strong
force before the Nazis do.

BAINBRIDGE
Oh my God.

INT. CORRIDOR, MIT -- DAY

Groves and I walk with CONDON.

CONDON
Why? Why would I leave my family?

OPPENHEIMER
I told you, bring your family.

CONDON
Why would we go to the middle of
nowhere for who knows how long?

OPPENHEIMER
A year or two. Or three.

CONDON
Why would you think I’d do that?

Groves SNAPS like a bulldog-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 56.

GROVES
Why? Why? How about because this is
the most important fucking thing
that’s ever happened in the history
of the world? How about that?

I look at Groves, then SHRUG at Condon.

INT. OFFICE, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN -- NIGHT

Groves and I sit across the desk from a CONCERNED SCIENTIST.

CONCERNED SCIENTIST
Robert, I hear you. I hear you.

Concerned Scientist GLANCES at Groves then DROPS his gaze.

OPPENHEIMER
General, could you give us a
minute?

Groves looks at me. Gets up and goes.

CONCERNED SCIENTIST
They’re not gonna let someone like
me onto this project. And failing a
security check isn’t gonna be good
for a career even after the war.

OPPENHEIMER
So you’re a fellow traveler, so
what? This is a national emergency.
I’ve got some skeletons, and
they’ve put me in charge. They need
us.

CONCERNED SCIENTIST
Until they don’t.

INT. QUADRANGLE, PRINCETON -- DAY

Groves and I flank FEYNMAN as he hurries across the quad-

OPPENHEIMER
Heisenberg, Diebner, Bothe, Bohr...
what do these men have in common?

FEYNMAN
The greatest minds on atomic
theory.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 57.

OPPENHEIMER
And?

FEYNMAN
I don’t know...

OPPENHEIMER
The Nazis have them.

FEYNMAN
Niels Bohr is in Copenhagen.

OPPENHEIMER
Under Nazi occupation. Did they
stop printing newspapers in
Princeton?

FEYNMAN
Niels won’t work for the Nazis.

OPPENHEIMER
No. Never. But while they have him,
we don’t. So I need you.

INT. TRAIN, PRINCETON TO SANTA FE -- NIGHT

Groves is napping. I just start talking.

OPPENHEIMER
Is there any chance of getting Bohr
out of Denmark?

GROVES
No dice. I checked with the
British. Until we get Allied boots
back onto the continent there’s no
way. Is he that important?

INSERT CUT: BOHR GESTICULATES WITH THE POISONED APPLE.

OPPENHEIMER
How many people do you know who’ve
proven Einstein wrong?

The train BUMPS. I look out the window, impatient.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It’d be quicker to take a plane.

GROVES
We can’t risk a plane. America
needs us.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 58.

EXT. LOS ALAMOS UNDER CONSTRUCTION -- DAY

Dressed in ARMY UNIFORM, I show Rabi and Condon the CHAOTIC
SNOWY and MUDDY mesa. CONSTRUCTION CREWS at work. Feynman
approaches-

FEYNMAN
The Harvard guys say the building’s
too small for their cyclotron.

OPPENHEIMER
(to Condon)
Get ’em together with the
architects.

Condon hurries off with Feynman. Rabi turns to me.

RABI
When’s this place supposed to open?

OPPENHEIMER
Two months.

RABI
(shakes head)
Robert, you’re the great
improviser, but this you can’t do
in your head...

INT. CONSTRUCTION CABIN, LOS ALAMOS -- MOMENTS LATER

I draw on the board.

OPPENHEIMER
Four divisions- Experimental,
Theoretical, Metallurgical,
Ordnance.

RABI
Who’s running Theoretical?

OPPENHEIMER
I am.

RABI
That’s what I was afraid of. You’re
spread too thin.

OPPENHEIMER
So you take Theoretical.

RABI
I’m not coming here, Robert.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 59.

OPPENHEIMER
Why not?

Rabi, seldom at a loss for words, is lost for words...

RABI
You drop a bomb and it falls on the
just and the unjust. I don’t wish
the culmination of three centuries
of physics to be a weapon of mass
destruction.

OPPENHEIMER
Izzy, I don’t know if we can be
trusted with such a weapon, but I
know the Nazis can’t. We have no
choice.

RABI
Well, the second thing you have to
do is appoint Hans Bethe to head
the Theoretical division.

OPPENHEIMER
Wait, what was the first?

RABI
Take off that ridiculous uniform-
you’re a scientist.

OPPENHEIMER
General Groves is insisting we
join.

RABI
Tell Groves to shit in his hat.
They need us for who we are. So be
yourself, only... better.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Intense, Intriguing

Summary In this scene, General Groves and J. Robert Oppenheimer visit potential locations for a secluded scientific research town, ultimately deciding on Los Alamos. They face resistance from potential recruits who are concerned about leaving their families and the secrecy of the project. Groves becomes frustrated and forceful in his recruitment efforts, while Oppenheimer tries to convince scientists of the importance of the project. The scene ends with Rabi refusing to join and suggesting Hans Bethe as a replacement.

Strengths

Engaging dialogue
Complex characters
High stakes and tension

Weaknesses

Some characters could be further developed
Limited emotional depth in certain interactions

General Critique

The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and it doesn't always make sense. For example, when Oppenheimer says, "As much as you like, till you feel my boot on your balls," it's not clear what he means. Is he threatening Groves? Or is he just trying to be funny?
The scene lacks focus. It jumps from one topic to another, and it's difficult to follow what's going on. For example, the scene begins with Oppenheimer and Groves discussing the need for a town for the scientists working on the atomic bomb. Then, it suddenly shifts to Oppenheimer recruiting scientists. Then, it shifts again to Oppenheimer and Rabi discussing the need for a theoretical division.
The scene is too long. It's over five minutes long, and it's difficult to keep the audience's attention for that long. The scene could be shortened by cutting out some of the unnecessary dialogue and action.
The scene doesn't have a clear ending. It just sort of trails off. The audience is left wondering what happens next.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and easier to understand.
Give the scene a clearer focus. Decide what the main point of the scene is, and then stick to that topic.
Shorten the scene by cutting out some of the unnecessary dialogue and action.
Give the scene a clear ending. Let the audience know what happens next.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is engaging, with high tension and important revelations about the project. The dialogue is sharp and impactful, driving the plot forward.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of recruiting scientists for the Manhattan Project and the ethical considerations of creating a nuclear weapon are compelling and well-developed.

Plot: 8

The plot is well-structured, with clear goals and obstacles for the characters to overcome. The scene moves the story forward and sets up important conflicts.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the historical events surrounding the Manhattan Project, delving into the personal struggles and ethical dilemmas of the characters involved. The authenticity of the dialogue and character interactions adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 7

The characters are well-defined, with distinct personalities and motivations. Oppenheimer and Groves stand out as complex and conflicted individuals.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer undergoes a subtle shift in perspective, grappling with the moral implications of the project. This internal conflict drives his character development.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to convince scientists to join the Manhattan Project and work on developing the atomic bomb. This reflects his desire to contribute to the war effort and make a significant impact on history.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to recruit scientists and oversee the construction of the research facility at Los Alamos. This goal reflects the immediate challenges of assembling a team and setting up the infrastructure for the project.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both internal (ethical dilemmas) and external (recruitment challenges). This conflict drives the tension and keeps the audience engaged.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas creating obstacles for the characters to overcome, adding depth to the narrative.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are extremely high, as the characters are involved in a top-secret project with global implications. The decisions they make will have far-reaching consequences.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by introducing key plot points, conflicts, and character dynamics. It sets up important developments for the narrative.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in terms of the characters' actions and conflicts, but the ethical dilemmas and moral complexities add a layer of unpredictability to the narrative.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of creating a weapon of mass destruction. Oppenheimer grapples with the moral consequences of his work, while Groves prioritizes national security and victory in the war.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension to moral contemplation. The conflicts and character dynamics add depth and emotional resonance.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, engaging, and reveals important information about the characters and the project. It drives the scene forward and adds depth to the interactions.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense dialogue, moral dilemmas, and high stakes, keeping the audience invested in the characters' decisions and conflicts.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is well-executed, balancing dialogue-heavy moments with action sequences to maintain the tension and momentum of the narrative.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene adheres to the expected format for its genre, with clear scene headings, dialogue, and action descriptions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format, moving between different locations and character interactions to advance the plot and develop the themes of the screenplay.

INT. OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I pull on a jacket. Run a hand through newly shorn close-
cropped dark hair. Put on a PORK PIE HAT. Pick up my pipe...

EXT. LOS ALAMOS UNDER CONSTRUCTION -- MOMENTS LATER

I walk the main drag like a SHERIFF, nodding at construction
workers as I pass... THE ICONIC J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 60.

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- DAY

I look down onto the bustle of students. Lomanitz looks up
and waves- then is ERASED by WHITEWASH as workers COVER the
windows... Serber hands me a key.

SERBER
This is the only key. Teller’s here
already. Shall I show him in?

OPPENHEIMER
No, wait for the others-

The door BURSTS OPEN and a stooped, slightly heavy young man
shuffles in. This is EDWARD TELLER.

TELLER
Let’s get started.

OPPENHEIMER
Hello, Edward.

INT. SAME -- DAY

I sit at the front, one long leg tucked under my ass. The
scientists include Lawrence, Serber, Teller, BETHE, Condon,
Tolman, Feynman, Donald, Bainbridge, NEDDERMEYER and Alvarez.

OPPENHEIMER
We’ll work here until the T-section
at Los Alamos is finished-

I see Teller waving a piece of paper-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Edward, can I get through my
summary?

TELLER
This is more important.
Teller’s paper is passed around the room, scientists
PALING...

TELLER (CONT’D)
Calculating chain reactions... I
found a rather troubling
possibility.

Hans Bethe hands me the paper, turns to Teller.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 61.

BETHE
That can’t be right. Show me how
you did your calculations.

TELLER
Of course.

I look up from the paper, grave. Teller watches the ruckus
he’s caused with evident satisfaction. Bethe approaches.

BETHE
Oppie, this is fantasy. Teller’s
calculations cannot be right.

OPPENHEIMER
Do them yourself while I go to
Princeton.

BETHE
What for?

OPPENHEIMER
To talk to Einstein.

BETHE
There’s not much common ground
between you two.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s why I should get his view.

EXT. WOODS, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY -- DAY

I walk through the trees, gaining on two figures. The two men
turn. One of them is Einstein.

EINSTEIN
Dr Oppenheimer. Have you met Kurt
Gödel? We walk here most days.

GÖDEL
Trees are the most inspiring
structures.

OPPENHEIMER
Albert, might I have a word?

Einstein senses the gravity. Nods. We leave Gödel staring up
at the bare trees.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 62.

EINSTEIN
Some days Kurt refuses to eat. Even
in Princeton, he’s convinced the
Nazis can poison his food.

EXT. LAKE, INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY -- MOMENTS LATER

Einstein and I emerge from the trees. I pull a piece of paper
from my breast pocket. Einstein takes it.

EINSTEIN
Whose work is this?

OPPENHEIMER
Teller’s.

EINSTEIN
And what do you take it to mean?

OPPENHEIMER
Neutron smashes into nucleus
releasing neutrons to smash into
other nuclei...

INSERT CUT: DARKNESS SPLIT BY GLOWING PARTICLES FIRING INTO
EACH OTHER IN AN INCREASINGLY VIOLENT DISPLAY...

OPPENHEIMER
Criticality- the point of no return-
massive explosive force... but the
chain reaction doesn’t stop...

Einstein studies the paper... he nods.

EINSTEIN
It would ignite the atmosphere.

The air around us CATCHES FIRE... THE PLANET EARTH, LONELY IN
VAST DARKNESS, IS SUDDENLY ENGULFED IN FIRE.

OPPENHEIMER
When we detonate an atomic device,
we might start a chain reaction
that destroys the world.

EINSTEIN
And here we are, lost in your
quantum world of probabilities, but
needing certainty.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 63.

OPPENHEIMER
Can you run the calculations
yourself?

EINSTEIN
About the only thing you and I
share is a disdain for mathematics.
Who’s working on it at Berkeley?

OPPENHEIMER
Hans Bethe.

EINSTEIN
He’ll get to the truth.

OPPENHEIMER
And if the truth is catastrophic?

EINSTEIN
Then you stop. And share your
findings with the Nazis, so neither
side destroys the world.

I turn to leave.

EINSTEIN (CONT’D)
Robert?
(holding out paper)
This is yours. Not mine.

Genres: Drama, Historical, Biographical
Tone: Serious, Intense, Thoughtful

Summary In this serious and contemplative scene, J. Robert Oppenheimer dons a hat and walks around Los Alamos like a sheriff before visiting Berkeley's radiation lab. There, he discusses the project's progress with Serber and Lomanitz, while Teller shares a calculation suggesting a chain reaction that could destroy the world. Bethe dismisses it as impossible, but Oppenheimer, concerned, decides to visit Einstein in Princeton for advice. The scene ends with Oppenheimer making his way through the woods in Princeton, seeking out Einstein.

Strengths

Intellectually stimulating dialogue
Exploration of ethical dilemmas
High stakes and tension

Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Complex scientific concepts may be challenging for some viewers

General Critique

The scene lacks clear purpose. It is unclear what the writer wants to achieve with this scene. Is it to show Oppenheimer's concern about the atomic bomb? His determination to stop it? Or something else?
The dialogue is dry and doesn't bring out the emotions of the characters. It feels more like a scientific discussion lacking depth and character development.
The scene doesn't advance the plot or develop the characters in any meaningful way. It feels like it could be cut without losing anything important.
The introduction of the Teller's paper and the potential catastrophic consequences it presents is abrupt and not well-integrated into the rest of the scene.
The conversation between Oppenheimer and Einstein lacks depth and doesn't explore the ethical and philosophical implications of their work on nuclear weapons.

General Suggestions

Give the scene a clear purpose. What do you want the audience to take away from it?
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more engaging and emotionally charged.
Add more tension and conflict to the scene. This could be done through the characters' interactions or through the introduction of an external threat.
Explore the ethical and philosophical implications of the characters' work on nuclear weapons.
Consider cutting the scene altogether if it doesn't serve a clear purpose or advance the plot.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly engaging, thought-provoking, and sets up significant moral and scientific dilemmas that will impact the story.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of the scene, focusing on the ethical implications of atomic research and the potential for global destruction, is crucial to the overall narrative and raises important questions about scientific responsibility.

Plot: 8

The plot is advanced significantly through the discussion of the chain reaction and the decision-making process regarding sharing information with the Nazis.

Originality: 8

The scene presents a fresh perspective on the ethical dilemmas of nuclear weapons development, with authentic character interactions and scientific discussions.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters, particularly Oppenheimer and Einstein, are well-developed and their interactions reveal their contrasting perspectives on the consequences of their research.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer experiences a shift in perspective as he confronts the potential consequences of his work, leading to internal conflict and moral questioning.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to ensure the safety and ethical use of the atomic bomb technology. This reflects his deeper desire for scientific advancement without catastrophic consequences.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to manage the scientific team and navigate the challenges of developing the atomic bomb.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both internally within Oppenheimer as he grapples with the implications of his research, and externally in the ethical dilemma presented.

Opposition: 7

The opposition between Oppenheimer and Teller adds conflict and uncertainty to the scene, keeping the audience engaged.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are extremely high, as the characters grapple with the possibility of global destruction and the moral responsibility of their scientific discoveries.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by introducing the ethical dilemma of atomic research and setting up future conflicts and decisions for the characters.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in its focus on ethical dilemmas and scientific discussions, but the outcome of the calculations adds a twist.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict is between the pursuit of scientific progress and the ethical implications of nuclear weapons. Oppenheimer and Teller represent different views on the potential consequences of their work.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and moral weight, but the emotional impact is more intellectual and thought-provoking than deeply emotional.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is intellectually stimulating, reflecting the complex scientific and ethical themes of the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intense dialogue, moral dilemmas, and high stakes of nuclear weapons development.

Pacing: 8

The pacing effectively builds tension and suspense, especially during the scientific discussions and moral debates.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting adheres to the expected format for a historical drama screenplay, with clear scene descriptions and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format with clear transitions between locations and character interactions.

INT. CORRIDOR, BERKELEY -- DAY

I come past the secretaries. Bethe is there, excited.

BETHE
Teller’s wrong-

I gesture SILENCE as I unlock the Rad Lab-

INT. RAD LAB, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

Bethe runs to the cabinet- takes out some papers- hands them
to me, excited. I start to scan them, GRINNING-

BETHE
When you narrow Teller’s critical
assumptions the real picture
emerges-

OPPENHEIMER
Bottom line?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 64.

BETHE
The chances of an uncontrolled
nuclear reaction are near zero.

OPPENHEIMER
Near zero?

BETHE
Oppie, this is good news-

OPPENHEIMER
Can you run more calculations?

BETHE
You’ll get the same answer. Until
we actually detonate one of these
things, the best assurance you’re
going to get is this-
(jabs paper)
Near zero.

OPPENHEIMER
Theory will take you only so far.

INT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, BERKELEY -- NIGHT

Kitty opens the door to the Chevaliers, finger to her lips -
I am holding the sleeping Peter.

BARBARA
(whispering)
So beautiful. We miss him.

KITTY
Want to adopt?

OPPENHEIMER
She’s kidding.

Kitty shakes her head, 'not kidding'. Barbara takes Peter. I
lead Chevalier to the kitchen...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
We wanted to see you before we
left.

CHEVALIER
For parts unknown...

INT. KITCHEN, OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, BERKELEY -- CONTINUOUS

I mix a tray of martinis. Chevalier watches, distracted.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 65.

CHEVALIER
You know who I ran into the other
day? Eltenton.

OPPENHEIMER
The chemist from Shell? Union guy?

CHEVALIER
Yeah. He was moaning about the way
we’re handling the war.

OPPENHEIMER
How so?

CHEVALIER
Lack of cooperation with our
allies. Apparently, our government
isn’t sharing any research with the
Russians. He said a lot of
scientists think the policy’s
stupid.

My hands SLOW...

OPPENHEIMER
Oh, yeah?

CHEVALIER
Yeah. He mentioned that if anyone
had information they wanted to pass
on, going around official channels,
he could help...

I look up at Chevalier. Grave.

OPPENHEIMER
That would be treason.

CHEVALIER
Yes, of course. I just thought you
should know.

We STARE at each other... BANG- Kitty barges in.

KITTY
Brat’s down- where are the
martinis?

She sees us having a moment...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
The discussion ended there.

I pick up the tray.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 66.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

OPPENHEIMER
Nothing in our long-standing
friendship would have led me to
believe that Chevalier was actually
seeking information; and I was
certain he had no idea of the work
on which I was engaged.

I steal a glance at Robb, then look directly at the board-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It has long been clear to me that I
should have reported this incident
at once.
SENATOR MCGEE (V.O.)
The Oppenheimer situation
highlights the tension between
scientists and the security
apparatus...

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss is at the witness table facing the Senate Committee.

SENATOR MCGEE
In hopes of learning how the
nominee handled such issues during
his time at the AEC, we’ll have a
scientist appearing before the
Committee.

STRAUSS
(private)
Who’re they bringing in?
COUNSEL
(private)
They haven’t said.

STRAUSS
Mr Chairman, if I may? I’m
nominated for Commerce Secretary.
Why seek the opinion of scientists-

CHAIRMAN
This is a Cabinet post, Admiral. We
seek a wide range of opinion.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 67.

STRAUSS
I’d like to know the name of the
scientist testifying. And I’d like
the chance to cross-examine.

CHAIRMAN
(irritated)
This is not a court.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- MOMENTS LATER (B&W)

The Senate Aide shows Strauss and Counsel in.

COUNSEL
Lewis, you’re not on trial-

STRAUSS
So everyone keeps saying.

COUNSEL
You act like a defence attorney,
the Committee’s gonna act like a
prosecutor.

STRAUSS
(to Senate Aide)
A formality, huh?

SENATE AIDE
No Presidential Cabinet nominee has
failed to be confirmed since 1925.
This is just how the game is
played.

COUNSEL
It’s in the bag, Lewis, so play
nice. They bring in a scientist, so
what?

Strauss gives a wry smile. Remembers-

INSERT CUT: STRAUSS APPROACHES EINSTEIN AND OPPENHEIMER-
EINSTEIN BLOWS PAST WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING STRAUSS...

STRAUSS
You don’t know scientists like I
do, counselor. They resent anyone
who questions their judgement-
especially if you’re not one of
them...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 68.

INSERT CUT: STRAUSS STARES- THE CROWD AT THE ISOTOPES HEARING
LAUGHS...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I was chair of the AEC- I’m easy to
blame for what happened to Robert.

SENATE AIDE
We can’t let the Senate think that
the scientific community doesn’t
support you.

STRAUSS
Should we pivot?

SENATE AIDE
To what?

STRAUSS
Embrace it. 'I fought Oppenheimer
and the US won'?

SENATE AIDE
I don’t think we need to go there.
Isn’t there anyone we can call who
knows what really happened?

STRAUSS
Teller.

SENATE AIDE
He’ll make an impression.

STRAUSS
Can you find out the name of the
scientist they’ve called?

SENATE AIDE
Probably.

STRAUSS
(to Counsel)
We get that name- you call the AEC,
find out if he was based in Chicago
or Los Alamos during the war.

SENATE AIDE
Why’s that matter?

STRAUSS
If he was in Chicago he worked
under Szilard and Fermi, not the
cult of Oppie at Los Alamos.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 69.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Robert built that damn place- he
was founder, mayor, sheriff all
rolled into one...

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Reflective, Serious

Summary In the Rad Lab at Berkeley, Bethe shares good news about the low probability of an uncontrolled nuclear reaction. At Oppenheimer's house in Berkeley, Oppenheimer and Chevalier discuss the lack of cooperation with allies in sharing research, and Chevalier mentions a chemist who can help pass on information around official channels. Oppenheimer warns him that it would be treason. The scene is filled with a serious tone, excitement, concern, and tension. The conversation is interrupted by Kitty, and the scene ends with Oppenheimer picking up the tray of martinis.

Strengths

Complex character relationships
Tension-filled dialogue
Exploration of ethical dilemmas

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly expository
Lack of visual elements to break up dialogue-heavy scenes

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is a bit stiff and unnatural.
The scene is a bit too long and could be shortened to improve pacing.
The scene lacks a clear purpose or goal, and the characters' actions and dialogue don't seem to lead to any meaningful resolution.
The scene doesn't do much to advance the plot or develop the characters.
The scene is a bit too exposition-heavy, and the characters spend too much time talking about things that have already happened or that the audience already knows.

General Suggestions

Revise the dialogue to make it more natural and engaging.
Consider shortening the scene to improve pacing.
Add a clear purpose or goal to the scene, and make sure the characters' actions and dialogue lead to a meaningful resolution.
Focus on developing the characters and advancing the plot.
Reduce the amount of exposition in the scene, and focus on using dialogue and action to convey information.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively conveys the tension and moral ambiguity surrounding Oppenheimer's work and personal relationships, keeping the audience engaged and intrigued.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's internal struggles, ethical dilemmas, and the impact of his scientific discoveries is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 7

The plot advances through the revelation of Chevalier's questionable actions and the implications for Oppenheimer's security clearance, adding depth to the narrative.

Originality: 8

The scene offers a fresh perspective on historical events, blending personal drama with political intrigue. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and layered, adding depth to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Chevalier, are well-developed and their interactions reveal layers of complexity and moral ambiguity.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer experiences a shift in his perception of Chevalier and the implications of his actions, leading to a deeper understanding of the complexities of loyalty and betrayal.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to navigate the ethical and moral dilemmas of his work, balancing scientific progress with potential consequences. He grapples with loyalty, trust, and the implications of his research.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to manage his relationships and reputation amidst political scrutiny and personal challenges. He must navigate loyalty, trust, and potential betrayal.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

The conflict between Oppenheimer's loyalty to his work, his colleagues, and his personal relationships creates a compelling and tense atmosphere.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is moderate, with interpersonal conflicts and ethical dilemmas providing obstacles for the characters. The audience is left uncertain about the characters' choices and the consequences of their actions.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes are evident in the potential consequences of Chevalier's actions for Oppenheimer's career and reputation, adding urgency and tension to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing new information about Chevalier's actions and their potential impact on Oppenheimer's security clearance, setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in its thematic exploration and character dynamics. While there are moments of tension and surprise, the overall narrative trajectory is somewhat expected.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of scientific advancements, the responsibility of scientists in wartime, and the tension between personal beliefs and societal expectations.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension to reflection, as the characters navigate complex moral dilemmas and personal relationships.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue is engaging and realistic, effectively conveying the tension and conflicting emotions of the characters in the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of personal conflict, historical context, and moral dilemmas. The dialogue and interactions between characters create tension and intrigue, keeping the audience invested.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension, revealing information, and developing character dynamics. The rhythm of dialogue and action keeps the audience engaged and invested in the unfolding drama.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene adheres to standard screenplay formatting, with clear scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting. The visual descriptions and action lines are concise and effective.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a traditional format for dramatic storytelling, with clear character motivations, rising tension, and thematic depth. The transitions between locations and interactions are well-paced.

INT./EXT. CAR DRIVING THROUGH LOS ALAMOS -- DAY (COLOUR)

I DRIVE Kitty and Peter through the 'town'... Kitty STARES at
the newly built BASIC WOODEN STRUCTURES...

KITTY
All it needs is a saloon.

INT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I stand in the hall, holding Peter, NERVOUS, as Kitty
inspects the house... she pokes her head back in-

KITTY
Robert. There’s no kitchen.

OPPENHEIMER
Really? We’ll fix that. Don’t
worry.

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I walk Bethe through the security gate.

BETHE
Barbed wire. Guns, Oppie.

OPPENHEIMER
We’re at war, Hans.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I step up to join Serber- throw up a slide. Condon,
Neddermeyer, Kistiakowsky, Donald, Tolman, Bainbridge and
Feynman, amongst other SCIENTISTS, are in attendance.

OPPENHEIMER
Halifax, 1917. A cargo ship
carrying munitions exploded in the
harbor...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 70.

INSERT CUT: WOOD AND CONCRETE FRAGMENTS FLY...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
A vast and sudden chemical
reaction...

INSERT CUT: A SHOCKWAVE DRIFTS ACROSS THE TOPS OF THE CHOPPY
WATER...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
The biggest man-made explosion in
history. Let’s calculate how much
more destructive it would have been
with a nuclear, not chemical,
reaction. Expressing power in terms
of tons of TNT-

BETHE
But it’ll be thousands.

OPPENHEIMER
Then, kilotons.

I switch the lights on, step down to let Serber-

SERBER
Using U-235, the bomb-

He sees me wave.

SERBER (CONT’D)
Sorry- the gadget will need a
thirty-three-pound sphere, about
this size...

Serber reaches below the table, brings up a GOLDFISH BOWL-

SERBER (CONT’D)
Or using plutonium, a ten-pound
sphere...
He puts a large BRANDY GLASS next to the aquarium.

SERBER (CONT’D)
Here’s the amount of uranium Oak
Ridge refined all of last month.

Serber drops THREE MARBLES into the bowl. The scientists
stare at the almost-empty goldfish bowl.

SERBER (CONT’D)
The Hanford plant made this much
plutonium...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 71.

He drops TWO MARBLES into the brandy glass.

SERBER (CONT’D)
If we can enrich these amounts...
we need a way to detonate them.

Teller is at the back folding a paper plane.

OPPENHEIMER
Are we boring you, Edward?

TELLER
(without looking up)
Yes.

OPPENHEIMER
May I ask why?

TELLER
We came into this room knowing a
fission bomb was possible. Let’s
leave it with something new.

OPPENHEIMER
Such as?

TELLER
A 'super' atomic bomb. Instead of
uranium, or plutonium, we use
hydrogen.

MURMURS of dissent-

TELLER (CONT’D)
(shutting them down)
Heavy hydrogen- deuterium. We
compact the atoms together under
great force and induce a fusion
reaction. Not kilotons... megatons.

A HUBBUB develops- I process quickly, then-
OPPENHEIMER
Hang on. How do you generate enough
force to fuse hydrogen atoms?

Teller smiles a self-satisfied smile.

TELLER
A small fission bomb.

GROANS all around...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 72.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, since you’re going to need
one, anyway... can we get back to
the business at hand?

Teller SHRUGS.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

SENATOR BARTLETT
Mr Strauss, the isotopes issue
wasn’t your most important policy
disagreement with Dr Oppenheimer.
It was the Hydrogen bomb, wasn’t
it?

STRAUSS
We did disagree about the need for
an H-bomb programme.

SENATOR BARTLETT
Tell us how that came to pass.

As Strauss REMEMBERS we hear a SIREN and we-

CUT TO:

EXT. NEW YORK STREET -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss is in a car, barreling along behind a POLICE ESCORT-

INT. HOTEL, NEW YORK -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss and his ASSISTANT rush down the corridor to a door-

INT. HOTEL CONFERENCE ROOM -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss enters- a table surrounded by AEC members-
Oppenheimer is slouched at the table, pipe blazing, Bush
presides... Strauss removes his overcoat, revealing a
tuxedo...

STRAUSS
What do we know?

BUSH
One of our B-29s over the north
Pacific picked up radiation.

Rabi uses a compass to indicate an area on the map...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 73.

STRAUSS
Do you have the filter papers?

OPPENHEIMER
There’s no doubt what this is.

STRAUSS
The White House says there’s doubt.

Oppenheimer begrudgingly slides them over to Strauss.

BUSH
Wishful thinking, I’m afraid.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s an atomic test.

STRAUSS
The Soviets have a bomb? We’re
supposed to be years ahead of them.
What were you guys doing at Los
Alamos? Wasn’t the security tight?

OPPENHEIMER
Of course it was- you weren’t NICHOLS (O.S.)
there, Lewis. Forgive me, doctor...
Strauss leans around the FLOWERS in the centre of the table
to see who is speaking- Nichols, now a civilian.

NICHOLS (CONT’D)
But I was there.

CUT TO:

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY (COLOUR)

Condon, Nichols and I watch cars pull up. Groves emerges.

OPPENHEIMER
Welcome back.

GROVES
Progress?

INSERT CUT: MARBLES DROP INTO THE GOLDFISH BOWL.

OPPENHEIMER
It’s nice to see you, too.

GROVES
Meet the British contingent.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 74.

SCIENTISTS emerge. A THIN YOUNG MAN offers his hand-

FUCHS
(German accent)
Dr Oppenheimer, Klaus Fuchs.

OPPENHEIMER
How long have you been British?

FUCHS
Since Hitler told me I wasn’t
German.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Bethe, Teller, Condon, Kistiakowsky, Donald, Bainbridge,
Fuchs and Feynman and other scientists listen to-

SERBER
I call it 'shooting'- we fire a
chunk of fissionable material into
the larger sphere with enough force
to achieve criticality.

INSERT CUT: A URANIUM "BULLET" IS FIRED INTO A SPHERE-

TOLMAN
I’ve been thinking about implosion.
Explosives around the sphere blast
inwards, crushing the material.

INSERT CUT: A SPHERICAL ARRAY OF EXPLOSIVES BLASTS INWARD-

NEDDERMEYER
I’d like to investigate that idea.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll talk to the Ordinance division-
we’ll get you blowing things up...

Genres: Drama, Historical, War
Tone: Tense, Informative, Serious, Intriguing

Summary Robert Oppenheimer gives a tour of Los Alamos to Kitty, Peter, and Hans Bethe, showcasing the basic structures and tight security. Kitty notes the missing kitchen in their new house. At a lecture, Robert discusses the Halifax explosion and the potential power of a nuclear reaction, while Serber demonstrates the small amounts of uranium and plutonium they have. Teller proposes a 'super' atomic bomb using hydrogen, causing dissent among the scientists. The scene ends with this tension, and there are undertones of conflict between Strauss and Oppenheimer regarding the Soviets' possession of an atomic bomb.

Strengths

Detailed scientific discussions
Tension-filled interactions
Ethical dilemmas portrayed effectively

Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Some characters may need further development

General Critique

The transition between the previous scene and this one is abrupt, as the last lines of the previous scene mention Robert Oppenheimer and his role in building Los Alamos, while this scene shifts the focus to Oppenheimer and his wife Kitty inspecting their new house in Los Alamos.
The dialogue between Kitty and Oppenheimer is somewhat flat and lacks depth. Kitty's observation that the house needs a kitchen could be expanded to provide more characterization or create a sense of domesticity.
The interaction between Oppenheimer and Bethe at the security gate is brief and could be developed further to establish their working relationship and the security measures in place at Los Alamos.
The lecture scene lacks a clear purpose and direction. Oppenheimer's presentation on the Halifax explosion is somewhat disjointed and doesn't seem to relate directly to the development of the atomic bomb.
The introduction of Teller and his proposal for a 'super' atomic bomb feels sudden and disrupts the flow of the scene. It might be more effective to introduce Teller earlier and gradually build up to his proposal.
The scene seems to jump between different topics and characters without a smooth transition, making it difficult for the reader to follow the narrative.
The historical context of the scene is not well-established, leaving the reader uncertain about the time period and the specific events being depicted.

General Suggestions

Connect the two scenes by showing the transition from Robert Oppenheimer's role in building Los Alamos to his arrival with his family at their new house.
Expand the dialogue between Kitty and Oppenheimer to include more personal details, such as their hopes and concerns about living in Los Alamos.
Add more context to the interaction between Oppenheimer and Bethe at the security gate, explaining the purpose of the gate and the security measures in place.
Revise the lecture scene to focus on a specific topic related to the development of the atomic bomb, such as the challenges of enriching uranium or the design of the bomb's core.
Introduce Teller earlier in the scene and establish his character and motivations before presenting his proposal for a 'super' atomic bomb.
Use transitions to connect the different topics and characters in the scene, such as a voice-over narration or a visual cue to indicate a change in perspective.
Provide more historical context at the beginning of the scene, such as the date and location, to help the reader understand the setting and events being depicted.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively captures the tension and high stakes of the Manhattan Project, providing valuable insight into the scientific and moral challenges faced by the characters.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of developing the atomic bomb and the scientific discussions around it are central to the scene, driving the plot forward and highlighting the ethical implications of such a project.

Plot: 8

The plot is engaging and moves forward through the scientific discussions and decisions made by the characters regarding the development of the atomic bomb.

Originality: 9

The scene showcases a fresh approach to the familiar topic of the development of the atomic bomb, presenting complex scientific concepts in a dramatic and engaging way. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 7

The characters are well-defined and their interactions reveal their differing perspectives and motivations, adding depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 6

There are subtle shifts in the characters' perspectives and relationships, particularly regarding their views on the atomic bomb and its implications.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate the ethical and moral implications of creating a weapon of mass destruction. This reflects their deeper need for understanding the consequences of their actions and the fear of the destructive power they are unleashing.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to successfully develop and test the atomic bomb to ensure the United States' victory in the war. This goal reflects the immediate circumstances of the war and the challenges of scientific innovation under pressure.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

There is a moderate level of conflict in the scene, primarily stemming from the differing opinions and approaches of the characters towards the development of the atomic bomb.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints on the development of the atomic bomb and the introduction of a new, more powerful weapon. The audience is left unsure of the outcome and the ethical implications of the characters' decisions.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high in the scene as the characters grapple with the potential consequences of developing the atomic bomb, both in terms of scientific advancement and moral responsibility.

Story Forward: 8

The scene significantly moves the story forward by showcasing the key decisions and developments in the Manhattan Project, setting the stage for future events.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected shift in the scientific discussion towards the development of a 'super' atomic bomb using hydrogen, challenging the protagonist's beliefs and introducing a new level of complexity to the narrative.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene is the debate between creating a fission bomb or a 'super' atomic bomb using hydrogen. This challenges the protagonist's beliefs about the ethical implications of their work and the potential for even greater destruction.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 6

While the scene is more focused on intellectual and ethical debates, there is some emotional impact, especially in the tense interactions between the characters.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is informative, reflecting the scientific and ethical debates surrounding the Manhattan Project. It effectively conveys the tension and complexity of the situation.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense scientific discussions, moral dilemmas, and high stakes of developing a weapon of mass destruction. The dialogue and pacing keep the audience invested in the characters' decisions and conflicts.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, with a balance of intense scientific discussions and character interactions that keep the audience engaged and invested in the plot.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene headings and descriptions that enhance the visual storytelling.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with clear transitions between locations and engaging dialogue that drives the plot forward.

EXT. "MAIN STREET", LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Condon, Nichols and I show Groves the GROWING TOWN...

OPPENHEIMER
School’s up and running. I thought
of a way to reduce support staff...

I open the door to the cabin containing my office-

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 75.

INT. OUTER OFFICE -- CONTINUOUS

Groves notices the YOUNG WOMAN working behind the desk-

INT. OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

I slump into my chair. Groves is perplexed-

GROVES
Is that...?

OPPENHEIMER
Mrs Serber. I’ve offered jobs to
all the wives. Admin, librarians,
computation. We cut down on staff
and keep families together.

GROVES
Are these women qualified?

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t be absurd. These are some of
the brightest minds in our
community.

CONDON
And they’re already security
cleared.

NICHOLS
I’ve informed General Groves you’ve
been holding cross-divisional open
discussions-

GROVES
Shut ’em down. CONDON
Compartmentalization is the It’s only the top men.
key to maintaining security-
NICHOLS
Who, presumably, communicate with
subordinates.

OPPENHEIMER
These men aren’t stupid, they can
be discreet.

GROVES
I don’t like it.

OPPENHEIMER
You don’t like anything enough for
there to be a fair test.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 76.

Groves shrugs. Gets up to leave. Nichols rolls his eyes.

GROVES
Once a week. Top men only.

OPPENHEIMER
I’d like to bring my brother here.

GROVES
No.

Groves and Condon leave- I corner Nichols-

OPPENHEIMER
I still haven’t heard that my
security clearance has been
approved.

NICHOLS
It hasn’t.

OPPENHEIMER
We’re going to Chicago tomorrow-

NICHOLS
You should wait.

OPPENHEIMER
You’re aware that the Nazis have a
two-year head start?

NICHOLS
Dr Oppenheimer, the fact that your
security clearance is proving
difficult to obtain is not my
fault. It’s yours.

OPPENHEIMER
It may not be your fault, but it’s
your problem. Because I’m going.

CUT TO:

INT. HOTEL CONFERENCE ROOM -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss reaches to the centre of the table to move the
flowers from between him and Nichols-

STRAUSS
How many people were in the open
discussions?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 77.

NICHOLS
Too many. Compartmentalization was
supposed to be the protocol.

OPPENHEIMER
We were in a race against the Nazis-

STRAUSS
Well, now the race is against the
Soviets.

OPPENHEIMER
Only if we start it.

Strauss holds up the filter papers.

STRAUSS
Robert, they just fired the
starting gun. What’s the nature of
the device they detonated?

OPPENHEIMER
The data indicates it may have been
a plutonium implosion device.

STRAUSS
Like the one you built at Los
Alamos?

Oppenheimer nods reluctantly...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
If the Soviets have a bomb, Truman
needs to know what’s next.

Bush nods. Oppenheimer looks incredulous-

OPPENHEIMER
What’s next? Arms talks. Obviously.

STRAUSS
(to Bush)
What about the Super? Does Truman
even know about it?

BUSH
Not specifically.

OPPENHEIMER
We still don’t know if a Hydrogen
bomb is technically feasible.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 78.

STRAUSS
My understanding is that Teller
first proposed it at Los Alamos.

OPPENHEIMER
His designs have always been wildly
impractical. You’d have to deliver
by ox-cart not airplane.

STRAUSS
If it could put us ahead again,
Truman needs to know about it. And
if there’s a possibility that the
Russians know about it from a spy
at Los Alamos... we’ve gotta get
going.

OPPENHEIMER
There’s no proof there was a spy at
Los Alamos.

Strauss holds up the filter papers, raises his eyebrows...

CUT TO:

EXT. FOOTBALL STADIUM, CHICAGO -- DAY (COLOUR)

Condon and I are led across the field by J. Ernest WILKINS...

CONDON
They put it under the football
stadium?

WILKINS
The field’s not in use, anymore.

OPPENHEIMER
Just as well.

INT. ATOMIC PILE, UNDERNEATH THE STADIUM, CHICAGO -- DAY

Wilkins shows us to SZILARD and FERMI. A scientist with
GLASSES takes notes. The group approaches the atomic pile...

FERMI
I hear you’ve got a little town.

OPPENHEIMER
Come and see.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 79.

SZILARD
Who could think straight in a place
like that? Everybody will go crazy.

OPPENHEIMER
Thanks for the vote of confidence,
Szilard.

I spot Glasses SCRIBBLING - I GRAB his pen- he FLINCHES-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
We really need that in the notes?
(to Fermi)
When are you going to try it out?

FERMI
We already did. The first self-
sustaining nuclear chain reaction.
Didn’t Groves tell you?

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Condon and I have just passed through-

HORNIG
Dr Oppenheimer! I tried personnel.

We turn to see a twenty-three-year-old young woman on the
other side of the barrier. This is Lilli HORNIG.

HORNIG (CONT’D)
They asked if I could type.

OPPENHEIMER
Can you?

HORNIG
Harvard forgot to teach that on the
graduate chemistry course.
I smile at this. Turn to Condon.

OPPENHEIMER
Put Mrs Hornig on the plutonium
team.

INT. CYCLOTRON BUILDING, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

Condon and I peer up at the equipment. Groves STORMS in-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 80.

GROVES
What the hell were you doing in
Chicago?!

CONDON
Visiting the Met Lab- GROVES (CONT’D)
Why?!
Condon looks at me. I say nothing. He turns to Groves-

CONDON (CONT’D)
You can’t talk to us like GROVES (CONT’D)
this. We have every right- You have just the rights I
give you! No more, no less.
CONDON (CONT’D)
This is ridiculous- we’re adults,
trying to run a project here.
(to me)
Tell him, Robert.

I look steadily at Groves.

OPPENHEIMER
Compartmentalization is the
protocol we agreed to.

CONDON
You’ve got to be kidding me. Enough
of this madhouse- nobody can work
under these conditions.
(to Groves)
You know what, Generalissimo? I
quit.
(to Oppenheimer)
Thanks for nothing.

Condon storms out. Groves turns to me.

GROVES
Better off without him.
OPPENHEIMER
Aren’t you more worried about his
discretion out there?

GROVES
We'll have him killed.
(off Oppenheimer’s look)
Kidding. He hates me, not America.

OPPENHEIMER
Not everyone has levers like mine
to pull.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 81.

GROVES
I don’t know what you mean.

OPPENHEIMER
You didn’t hire me despite my left-
wing past, you hired me because of
it. So you could control me.

GROVES
I’m not that subtle. I’m just a
humble soldier.

OPPENHEIMER
You’re neither humble, nor 'just' a
soldier. You studied engineering at
MIT.

GROVES
Guilty as charged.

OPPENHEIMER
Now that we understand each other,
perhaps you’ll get me my security
clearance, so I can perform this
miracle for you.

General Groves looks at me. Nods.

GARRISON (V.O.)
General Groves, were you aware of
Dr Oppenheimer’s left-wing
associations when you appointed
him?

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Serious, Confrontational

Summary General Groves visits Los Alamos and expresses concern over the open discussions and the employment of wives in the project. Oppenheimer defends their qualifications and the efficiency of the system. Groves agrees to allow top-level meetings once a week but refuses to let Oppenheimer's brother join the project. Oppenheimer confronts Nichols about his security clearance, which hasn't been approved yet. The scene ends with Oppenheimer and Condon discussing the Soviet bomb and the possibility of a hydrogen bomb, while Strauss suggests informing Truman about it. The main conflict in this scene is between Groves and Oppenheimer regarding the management of the project, specifically the open discussions and the employment of wives. The scene is tense and confrontational, with Groves expressing skepticism and concern over Oppenheimer's management decisions.

Strengths

Sharp dialogue
Tense atmosphere
Complex character dynamics

Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Some dialogue may be too expository

General Critique

The scene is too long and could be shortened by removing unnecessary dialogue and exposition.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and the characters speak in a way that is not believable.
The scene lacks focus and does not have a clear goal or purpose.
The plot is confusing and difficult to follow.
The scene ends abruptly, leaving the reader feeling unsatisfied.

General Suggestions

Shorten the scene by removing unnecessary dialogue and exposition.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and believable.
Add a clear goal or purpose to the scene.
Simplify the plot to make it easier to follow.
Add a satisfying ending to the scene.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is intense, filled with conflict, and moves the story forward significantly. The dialogue is sharp and impactful, revealing the complex dynamics between the characters.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of developing nuclear weapons during World War II and the ethical implications of such actions are central to the scene. The importance of security clearances and the race against other countries add depth to the narrative.

Plot: 9

The plot is engaging and drives the story forward by introducing new challenges and conflicts for the characters. The scene sets up important developments for the narrative.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on historical events by exploring the personal and philosophical conflicts within the scientific community working on the atomic bomb project.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters are well-developed and their interactions reveal their motivations and conflicts. Oppenheimer and Groves stand out as complex and compelling figures.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer challenges Groves and asserts his independence, showing a shift in their dynamic. This sets the stage for potential character growth and change in future scenes.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to assert his authority and vision for the project despite facing opposition from General Groves.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to obtain his security clearance and continue his work on the atomic bomb project.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer and Groves, as well as the larger conflict surrounding the development of nuclear weapons, creates a tense and dramatic atmosphere in the scene.

Opposition: 9

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting goals and power struggles that create uncertainty and tension.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as the characters discuss the development of nuclear weapons, security clearances, and the race against other countries. The decisions made in this scene will have far-reaching consequences.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly advances the plot by introducing new challenges, conflicts, and developments. It sets the stage for important events to come in the narrative.

Unpredictability: 8

The scene is unpredictable due to the shifting power dynamics and conflicting goals of the characters.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict is between Oppenheimer's belief in the importance of collaboration and openness in science versus Groves' emphasis on compartmentalization and secrecy for security purposes.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and concern, but the emotional impact is more intellectual than deeply emotional. The stakes are high, but the emotions are restrained.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, tense, and reveals the power dynamics between the characters. It effectively conveys the stakes and conflicts present in the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intense dialogue exchanges and the high stakes involved in the characters' interactions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, keeping the audience engaged in the characters' conflicts.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively builds tension and conflict between the characters.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Groves, in CIVILIAN CLOTHES, testifies. I watch...

GROVES
I was aware that there were
suspicions about him... I was aware
that he had a very extreme liberal
background.

GARRISON
In your opinion, would he ever
consciously commit a disloyal act?

GROVES
I would be amazed if he did.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 82.

GARRISON
You had complete confidence in his
integrity?

GROVES
At Los Alamos, yes, which is where
I really knew him.

ROBB
General, did your security officers
on the project advise against the
clearance of Dr Oppenheimer?

GROVES
Truer to say they could not and
would not clear him. Until I
insisted...

ROBB
You became pretty familiar with the
security file on Dr Oppenheimer?

GROVES
I did.

ROBB
General, there’s really only one
question we need answered here
today...

Groves shifts, knowing what’s about to be asked...

ROBB (CONT’D)
In the light of your experience of
security matters and knowledge of
the file...

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I greet Lawrence and Lomanitz as they get out of a car-
ROBB (V.O.)
...would you clear Dr Oppenheimer
today?

LAWRENCE
Physics and New Mexico, huh? But my
God, what a trek.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s why you need a liaison.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 83.

LAWRENCE
I’m appointing Lomanitz.

I pat Lomanitz on the shoulder.

OPPENHEIMER
You’re gonna be okay.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- LATER

As the group assembles, General Groves speaks to Lawrence.

GROVES
I’ll remind you what we talked
about in Berkeley, doctor.

LAWRENCE
Compartmentalization. I understand
completely.

Oppenheimer theatrically drops three marbles into the quarter-
full goldfish bowl, then ADDS TWO MORE- the room APPLAUDS.
Oppenheimer BOWS, steps down. Lawrence BOUNCES up-

LAWRENCE (CONT’D)
Greetings from Berkeley. I’m here
to update you on our progress and
solicit your input. To do so I will
be sharing many things that General
Groves has told me not to
(to Groves)
Well, General, I said I
'understood', not that I agreed.
So, to business...

Groves looks at me. I shrug. He leaves.

CUT TO:

INT. HOTEL CONFERENCE ROOM -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss places the filter papers back down on the table...

STRAUSS
There were rumours of OPPENHEIMER
espionage at Los Alamos- Unsubstantiated-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 84.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I’ve heard there were OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Communists on the project- We didn’t knowingly employ
were any of them involved any Communists.
with discussions of the
Super?
NICHOLS
I seem to remember you demanding
that your brother come to Los
Alamos.

OPPENHEIMER
He’d left the Party by then.

STRAUSS
And Lomanitz?

OPPENHEIMER
He was never employed at Los
Alamos, he was a liaison. Our
security was tight, as former
Colonel Nichols well knows.

NICHOLS
Our security was the tightest we
could make it given the
personalities involved. But
attempts were made. Doctor, we’ve
all read your file here. Do we need
to talk about Jean Tatlock? Or the
Chevalier incident?

Strauss watches Oppenheimer glare at Nichols.

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Tense, Reflective

Summary In this tense and serious scene, General Groves testifies about Oppenheimer's integrity and the security clearance process, while flashbacks reveal Oppenheimer's time at Los Alamos. The discussion revolves around compartmentalization, security, and past rumors involving Oppenheimer's associates. Groves expresses confidence in Oppenheimer, but Strauss brings up the Chevalier incident, leaving the issue of Oppenheimer's loyalty unresolved.

Strengths

Intense character dynamics
Sharp dialogue
Exploration of loyalty and integrity

Weaknesses

Limited emotional depth
Character changes could be more pronounced

General Critique

The scene starts with Groves testifying about Oppenheimer's background and integrity. This information is important but it is presented in a dry and monotonous way.
The dialogue between Garrison and Groves is stilted and unnatural. It sounds like a cross-examination in a courtroom rather than a conversation between two people.
The scene shifts to Los Alamos where Oppenheimer greets Lawrence and Lomanitz. This transition is abrupt and jarring. It would be helpful to have a brief transition shot or a dissolve to indicate the change in setting.
The dialogue in the lecture hall is technical and difficult to follow. It would be helpful to provide some visual aids or to break down the information into smaller chunks.
The scene ends with Strauss questioning Oppenheimer about rumors of espionage and communism at Los Alamos. This is a serious accusation and it is not given the weight it deserves. The scene ends abruptly, leaving the viewer with a sense of unresolved conflict.

General Suggestions

Start the scene with a more engaging hook. For example, you could show Oppenheimer being questioned by the FBI or testifying before a congressional committee.
Rewrite the dialogue between Garrison and Groves to make it more natural and conversational. For example, you could have them discuss Oppenheimer's work on the atomic bomb or his relationship with Groves.
Add a brief transition shot or dissolve to indicate the change in setting from the courtroom to Los Alamos.
Break down the technical information in the lecture hall into smaller chunks and provide some visual aids to help the viewer understand it.
Give the scene a more satisfying ending by having Oppenheimer respond to Strauss's accusations more fully. You could also have Oppenheimer confront Groves about his role in the security investigation.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is well-written, with a strong focus on character dynamics and the high stakes involved in the situation.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of loyalty, integrity, and security clearance is explored in depth, adding layers to the characters and the overall plot.

Plot: 7

The plot advances through the intense questioning and revelations about the characters' past actions and motivations.

Originality: 9

The scene demonstrates a high level of originality through its fresh approach to historical events, complex character relationships, and moral dilemmas. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth and complexity to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are complex and multi-dimensional, with conflicting loyalties and motivations driving their actions.

Character Changes: 7

There are subtle shifts in the characters' loyalties and perceptions, but more pronounced character changes could enhance the scene.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to navigate the complex web of loyalty, trust, and security in the world of scientific research and government secrecy. This reflects their deeper need for validation, acceptance, and moral integrity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to maintain their reputation and security clearance in the face of suspicion and scrutiny. This reflects the immediate challenge of defending their loyalty and integrity.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between loyalty to individuals and loyalty to the country creates tension and drama in the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting interests, hidden agendas, and moral dilemmas that create obstacles for the protagonist. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the characters will navigate the challenges they face.

High Stakes: 9

The high stakes of security clearance, loyalty, and potential espionage add urgency and importance to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing crucial information about the characters' past and their current dilemmas.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the shifting power dynamics, conflicting motivations, and moral dilemmas that keep the audience guessing about the characters' true intentions and loyalties.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the tension between individual freedom and government control, personal beliefs and societal expectations, and moral integrity and national security. This challenges the protagonist's values, beliefs, and worldview.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and reflection, but could have a stronger emotional impact with more character depth.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, tense, and reveals the inner thoughts and conflicts of the characters effectively.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its tense dialogue, complex character dynamics, and moral ambiguity. The audience is drawn into the characters' conflicts and motivations, eager to see how they navigate the challenges they face.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension, suspense, and emotional depth. The rhythm of the dialogue, character interactions, and scene transitions keeps the audience engaged and invested in the story.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of this scene follows the expected format for its genre, with proper scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting. The visual descriptions and scene directions are clear and concise.

Structure: 8

The structure of this scene follows the expected format for its genre, with clear transitions between locations, well-defined character interactions, and a coherent narrative flow.

INT. OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY (COLOUR)

SECRETARY
(over intercom)
That’s Lomanitz on one...

I pick up the phone-

OPPENHEIMER
Lomanitz? Okay, hang on, calm down.

INT. COLONEL NICHOLS’ OFFICE -- MOMENTS LATER

I stand at Nichols’ desk.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 85.

OPPENHEIMER
There’s been another screw-up-
Lomanitz just got drafted.

NICHOLS
We are at war, doctor.

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t be an asshole, Nichols. We
need this kid. Fix it, will you?

NICHOLS
It wasn’t a mistake. Your friend
Lomanitz has been trying to
unionize the Radiation Lab.

OPPENHEIMER
He promised to quit all that.

NICHOLS
Well, he hasn’t. The security
officer at Berkeley is concerned
about Communist infiltration
through that union- the... F-A...

OPPENHEIMER
(thinking)
F-A-E-C-T. I’m there next week,
maybe I’ll drop in to see him.

Nichols TOSSES a security pass across the desk.

NICHOLS
Your Q clearance came through. It’s
important you not maintain or renew
any questionable associations.

ROBB (V.O.)
Doctor, did you think social
contacts between a person employed
on secret war work and Communists
was dangerous?

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I testify, Kitty behind me...

OPPENHEIMER
My awareness of the danger would be
greater today.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 86.

ROBB
But it’s fair to say that during
the war years...

EXT. HOTEL, SAN FRANCISCO -- DAY

A TAXI pulls up. I get out, carrying a bag.

ROBB (V.O.)
...you felt that such contacts were
potentially dangerous?

I enter, without seeing a CAR FOLLOWING. The PASSENGER jumps
out, while the DRIVER checks the time, makes a note.

INT. HOTEL LOBBY, SAN FRANCISCO -- CONTINUOUS

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
Were conceivably dangerous.

I move to the elevators, watched by the passenger.

INT. CORRIDOR, HOTEL, SAN FRANCISCO -- CONTINUOUS

At the door to 805 I reach into my bag...

ROBB (V.O.)
Really? Known Communists?

...and remove a small BUNCH OF FLOWERS. I knock...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
Look, I’ve had a lot of secrets in
my head a long time. It doesn’t
matter who I associate with...

The door opens to reveal JEAN TATLOCK.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION - DAY

OPPENHEIMER (CONT'D)
I don’t talk about those secrets.

INT. ROOM 805, HOTEL, SAN FRANCISCO -- CONTINUOUS

Tatlock GRABS the flowers. As I follow her in, she DUMPS them
in the wastebasket...

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 87.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Robb refers to his papers- Kitty watches...

ROBB
You said in your statement you
'had' to visit Jean Tatlock in
1943...

INT. ROOM 805, HOTEL, SAN FRANCISCO -- NIGHT

Tatlock and I sit across the room from each other, naked.

TATLOCK
You left. Not a word. What did you
think that would do to me?

OPPENHEIMER
I wrote.

TATLOCK
Pages of nothing. Where’d you go?

OPPENHEIMER
I can’t tell you.

TATLOCK
Why not?

OPPENHEIMER
Because you’re a Communist.

ROBB (V.O.)
Why did you have to see her?

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Emotional, Serious

Summary In this scene, Oppenheimer learns that his friend Lomanitz has been drafted, which he suspects is due to Lomanitz's unionization efforts at the Radiation Lab. Colonel Nichols informs him about concerns over Communist infiltration through the union, and Oppenheimer is given his Q clearance while being warned not to maintain questionable associations. The scene concludes with Oppenheimer visiting Jean Tatlock, a known Communist, in his hotel room, creating a tense atmosphere and highlighting the main conflict of Oppenheimer's disagreement with Colonel Nichols about Lomanitz's draft and Communist infiltration concerns.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Complex character relationships
Tension and conflict

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly dramatic or cliched

General Critique

The scene begins with Oppenheimer receiving good news about the lack of risk for an uncontrolled nuclear reaction. He then discusses with Chevalier the lack of cooperation with allies in sharing research, and Chevalier mentions a chemist who can help pass on information through official channels. Oppenheimer warns him that it would be treason. The change to tension is abrupt, as the scene immediately shifts to Kitty interrupting their conversation.
The dialogue between Oppenheimer and Nichols is somewhat repetitive, with Oppenheimer repeating the phrase "fix it" and Nichols emphasizing that Oppenheimer's friend Lomanitz has been trying to unionize the Radiation Lab. This repetition could be more concise to enhance the pace of the scene.
Nichols' revelation that Lomanitz's draft is not a mistake but rather due to concerns about Communist infiltration through the union comes quite suddenly and could be better foreshadowed earlier in the scene or in the previous scene.

General Suggestions

Consider starting the scene with the discussion of Oppenheimer and Chevalier, then transitioning to the news about the lack of risk for an uncontrolled nuclear reaction. This will help establish the main conflict of the scene, which is Oppenheimer's struggle between loyalty to his country and friendship with Chevalier.
To improve the flow of the dialogue, consider having Oppenheimer phrase his request to Nichols in a more direct and assertive manner. For example, instead of repeating "fix it," he could say something like "I need you to help me resolve this situation with Lomanitz immediately."
To provide better foreshadowing, consider adding a line earlier in the scene, perhaps when Oppenheimer and Nichols are discussing the draft, where Nichols mentions that there are concerns about Communist infiltration through the union. This will help make the revelation later on less abrupt.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively conveys the emotional depth and conflict between the characters, keeping the audience engaged and intrigued.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring personal relationships, political ideologies, and the consequences of past actions is well-executed, adding depth to the narrative.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on the characters' personal struggles, secrets, and betrayals, driving the emotional intensity of the scene.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh take on historical events, blending personal drama with political intrigue and ethical dilemmas. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and engaging.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed, with complex motivations and emotional depth. Their interactions drive the tension and conflict in the scene.

Character Changes: 8

The characters undergo significant emotional changes and revelations in the scene, particularly in their relationships and personal beliefs.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate the moral and ethical challenges of his work on the atomic bomb project, while also dealing with personal relationships and political pressures.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to resolve the issue of his friend being drafted and maintain his security clearance amidst suspicions of Communist ties.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between the characters, their personal struggles, and the tension between personal relationships and political ideologies create a high level of conflict in the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting goals, moral dilemmas, and political pressures creating obstacles for the protagonist to overcome.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes in the scene revolve around the characters' personal relationships, political ideologies, and the consequences of their actions, adding tension and drama.

Story Forward: 7

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information about the characters' past, their relationships, and the conflicts they face, setting up future developments.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in terms of its overall narrative arc, but the characters' actions and decisions add a layer of unpredictability to the story.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the protagonist's loyalty to his work and country versus his personal relationships and political beliefs.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The emotional impact of the scene is significant, as it delves into the characters' inner turmoil, regrets, and betrayals, evoking strong emotions from the audience.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue effectively conveys the emotional turmoil and conflict between the characters, adding depth to their relationships.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intense dialogue, moral dilemmas, and political intrigue, keeping the audience invested in the characters' conflicts and decisions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is well-executed, balancing dialogue-heavy moments with action and tension to maintain the audience's interest and drive the story forward.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene is clear and concise, following industry standards for screenplay format.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a traditional structure for a dialogue-heavy, character-driven scene, effectively building tension and conflict.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I sit at the table, self-conscious, testifying...

OPPENHEIMER
She had indicated a great desire to
see me before we left. At that time
I couldn’t. But I felt that she had
to see me...

Kitty watches me testify. I am NAKED...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
She was undergoing psychiatric
treatment. She was extremely
unhappy.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 88.

ROBB
Did you find out why she had to see
you?

OPPENHEIMER
Because she was still in love with
me.

Kitty watches Tatlock, also naked, STRADDLE me, head on my
shoulder, facing Kitty...

ROBB
You spent the night with her didn’t
you?

As Tatlock GRINDS on me she locks eyes with Kitty...

OPPENHEIMER
Yes.

INT. ROOM 805, HOTEL, SAN FRANCISCO -- NIGHT

Tatlock studies me from across the room.

TATLOCK
You drop in and out of my life and
don’t have to tell me why. That’s
power.

OPPENHEIMER
Not that I enjoy. I’d rather be
here for you as you need.

TATLOCK
But now you’ve got other
priorities.

OPPENHEIMER
I have a wife and child.

TATLOCK
That’s not what either of us is
talking about.

OPPENHEIMER
Jean, you asked me to come. And I’m
glad I did. But I can’t come again.

TATLOCK
What if I need you?

I slowly shake my head.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 89.

TATLOCK (CONT’D)
Not a word?

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

All eyes on me, clothed and alone again...

ROBB
Did you think that consistent with
good security?

Behind me, Kitty’s face is stone...

OPPENHEIMER
It was, as a matter of fact. Not a
word.

ROBB
When did you see her after that?

INSERT CUT: HOT BATH RUNNING. PILL BOTTLE. DOWNTURNED HEAD IN
THE WATER. THE SOUND OF FEET STAMPING, STAMPING...

I JAM my eyes closed, shake off the image-

OPPENHEIMER
I never saw her again.

INT. SAME -- DAY

As the room breaks up, Kitty speaks privately to me through
CLENCHED TEETH as she gathers her things. No eye contact.

KITTY
I can make the last train back to
Princeton.

OPPENHEIMER
I said nothing that I hadn’t
already said to you, Kitty.

KITTY
Well, today you said it to history.

OPPENHEIMER
This is a closed hearing-

KITTY
If they don’t release a transcript,
you will!

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 90.

She DROPS her bag, spilling the contents. Garrison spots a
small FLASK as Kitty sweeps it into her purse. I CROUCH-

OPPENHEIMER
I was under oath.

KITTY
You were under an oath to me when
you went to see Jean.

She STANDS- I follow- she TURNS back- in my face-

KITTY (CONT’D)
You sit there, day after day,
letting them pick our lives to
pieces. Why won’t you fight?
I don’t answer. She leaves. Garrison steps up.

GARRISON
Robert, I’m not putting her up
there.

EXT. BERKELEY CAMPUS -- DAY

I stroll across the campus, enter an administrative building.

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- MOMENTS LATER

I knock. Johnson opens the door, SURPRISED.

JOHNSON
Dr Oppenheimer, it’s an honour.
Please, take a seat-

OPPENHEIMER
No need. I just wanted to check
whether I should talk to Lomanitz
while I’m here- given your
concerns.

JOHNSON
That’s up to you, really,
professor. But I’d be cautious.

OPPENHEIMER
Understood. Oh, and as far as the
union goes, I wanted to give you a
heads up on a man named Eltenton.

JOHNSON
A heads up?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 91.

OPPENHEIMER
He might merit watching, is all.

JOHNSON
I’d love to get more details-

OPPENHEIMER
I’ve got an appointment now, and I
leave early tomorrow-

JOHNSON
Come as early as you like. Since
you haven’t time now.

GROVES (V.O.)
You went back the next morning?

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

Groves sits opposite. I stare out the window.

OPPENHEIMER
I did. I had to, really.

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- MORNING

Johnson smiles, beckons me in. Indicates a SECOND MAN-

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
This time there was another man.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

I stare out the window. Groves sits opposite.

OPPENHEIMER
Said his name was Pash.

GROVES
Pash? You met Colonel Pash?

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Alone on the couch, I glance up, NERVOUS, as a man in uniform
walks past. As he sits, I study the back of his head.

ROBB
Colonel Pash, can you read from
your memo of June 29th, 1943?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 92.

PASH
'Results of surveillance conducted
on subject indicate further
possible Communist Party
connections. Subject met with and
spent considerable time with one
Jean Tatlock, Communist, the record
of whom is attached.'

ROBB
The subject being Dr Oppenheimer?

PASH
Yes.

ROBB
Whom you had not met?

PASH
Not then, but soon after...

Genres: Drama, Biography, Historical
Tone: Intense, Emotional, Confrontational

Summary In this tense scene, J. Robert Oppenheimer testifies before the Atomic Energy Commission about his past relationships, revealing he spent a night with his ex-lover Tatlock. This revelation leads to a confrontation with his wife Kitty, who accuses him of not fighting for their marriage. The scene ends with Oppenheimer meeting with Lieutenant Johnson and warning him about a man named Eltenton.

Strengths

Intense emotional drama
Complex character relationships
Revealing dialogue

Weaknesses

Potential for confusion with multiple flashbacks and timelines

General Critique

The dialogue is repetitive and redundant. For instance, Oppenheimer says "I saw her" and "I met with her" multiple times, and Tatlock says "You drop in and out of my life" and "You come and go" repeatedly.
The scene lacks a clear focus and direction. It starts with Oppenheimer testifying about spending the night with Tatlock, then jumps to a conversation with Tatlock about their relationship, then back to the testimony, and finally to another conversation with Tatlock about the consequences of his actions. This makes it difficult for the audience to follow the narrative and understand what is at stake.
The characters are not well developed. Oppenheimer is portrayed as a conflicted and indecisive man, but there is not enough depth to his character to make him relatable or sympathetic. Tatlock is even less developed, and she comes across as more of a plot device than a fully realized character.
The scene is too long and drawn out. The repetitive dialogue and lack of focus make it difficult for the audience to stay engaged.

General Suggestions

Strengthen the dialogue by making it more concise and focused. Avoid repeating the same information multiple times, and make sure that each line of dialogue contributes to the scene's overall goal.
Give the scene a clearer focus and direction. Decide what the main conflict or issue is, and then structure the scene around that. This will help the audience to follow the narrative and understand what is at stake.
Develop the characters more fully. Give them clear motivations and goals, and make them relatable to the audience. This will help the audience to connect with the characters and care about what happens to them.
Shorten the scene by cutting out unnecessary dialogue and action. This will make it more streamlined and easier for the audience to follow.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is emotionally charged, revealing deep-seated conflicts and personal turmoil, making it engaging and impactful.

Story Content

Concept: 7

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's personal relationships and inner turmoil during a pivotal moment in his life is compelling and adds depth to his character.

Plot: 8

The plot advances significantly as Oppenheimer's relationships with Kitty and Tatlock unravel, leading to potential consequences in his personal and professional life.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh and compelling take on themes of love, betrayal, and personal sacrifice. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and nuanced, adding depth to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters of Oppenheimer, Kitty, and Tatlock are well-developed and their interactions drive the emotional core of the scene.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes significant emotional turmoil and faces the consequences of his actions, leading to potential character growth.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate his complicated relationships with Kitty and Tatlock while dealing with personal and professional challenges. This reflects his desire for love, loyalty, and integrity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to maintain his reputation and integrity in the face of scrutiny and betrayal. He must navigate political and personal challenges to protect his career and personal life.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer, Kitty, and Tatlock is palpable and drives the tension in the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing difficult choices, moral dilemmas, and personal conflicts. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the characters will resolve their challenges.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's personal and professional reputation is on the line, with potential consequences for his career and relationships.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information about Oppenheimer's personal life and relationships, setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the characters' conflicting motivations, unexpected revelations, and moral dilemmas. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the characters will navigate their challenges.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around loyalty, honesty, and personal sacrifice. The characters must grapple with their beliefs and values in the face of difficult choices and consequences.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions from the audience, particularly in the portrayal of Oppenheimer's inner struggles and complicated relationships.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is intense and revealing, showcasing the complex emotions and conflicts between the characters.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense emotional drama, complex relationships, and moral dilemmas. The high stakes and character conflicts keep the audience invested in the story.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective, with a balance of dialogue, action, and character interactions. The rhythm and flow contribute to the scene's emotional impact and narrative progression.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected format for its genre, with proper scene headings, dialogue formatting, and action descriptions. The formatting enhances the readability and flow of the scene.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a coherent structure, with clear transitions between locations and character interactions. The pacing and rhythm contribute to the scene's effectiveness and emotional impact.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

OPPENHEIMER
He’s head of security for the
project, shouldn’t I know him?

GROVES
No, he should know you. I’d never
put you in a room with Pash.

OPPENHEIMER
Why not?

GROVES
When Pash first learned about
Lomanitz- he told the FBI he was
going to kidnap him, take him out
on a boat, interrogate him 'in the
Russian manner'...

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- DAY

Pash sits down next to me, opposite Johnson.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 93.

PASH
Dr Oppenheimer, this is a pleasure.
General Groves has placed a certain
responsibility in me, and it’s like
having a child, that you can’t see,
by remote control, so to actually
meet you... I don’t mean to take
much of your time...

The disarming friendliness of the truly dangerous.

OPPENHEIMER
Not at all. Whatever time you
choose.

PASH
Mr Johnson told me of your
conversation yesterday, in which
I’m very interested. It had me
worried all day...

OPPENHEIMER
I didn’t want to talk to Lomanitz
without authorization-

PASH
That’s not the particular interest
I have. It’s something a little
more, in my opinion, more
serious...

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

GROVES
When the FBI pointed out that such
information couldn’t be used in
court Pash made it clear that he
didn’t intend to have anyone left
to prosecute. The FBI talked him
down, but that’s the man you’re
dancing with.

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- DAY

PASH
I gather you’ve heard there are
other parties interested in the
work of the Radiation Lab...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 94.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, a man attached to the Soviet
Consul indicated, through
intermediate people, to people on
this project that he was in a
position to transmit information
they might supply.

PASH
Why would anyone on the project
want that?

OPPENHEIMER
Frankly, I can see there might be
arguments for the commander-in-
chief informing the Russians-
they’re our allies. But I don’t
like the idea of it going out the
back door- it might not hurt to be
on the lookout for it.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

GROVES
You said that to Pash?

OPPENHEIMER
I was trying to put it in the
context of... Russia’s not Germany.

GROVES
Boris Pash is the son of a Russian
Orthodox bishop. Born here but in
1918 he went back to Russia to
fight the Bolsheviks. This is a man
who’s killed Communists with his
own hands.

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- DAY

Pash spreads his palms...

PASH
I’m not the judge of who should or
should not get information. My
business is to stop it going
through illegally. Could you be a
little more specific?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 95.

OPPENHEIMER
There’s a man whose name was
mentioned to me a couple of times-
Eltenton. I think he’s a chemist
employed by Shell. He talked to a
friend of his who’s an acquaintance
of someone on the project. To go
beyond that would be to put names
down of people who are not only
innocent but were one hundred
percent cooperative.

Genres: Drama, Thriller
Tone: Suspenseful, Intense, Serious

Summary In this tense scene, General Groves warns J. Robert Oppenheimer about Boris Pash's aggressive tactics in dealing with suspected security leaks. Later, Oppenheimer meets with Pash and Lieutenant Johnson, where Pash expresses concerns about potential security breaches at the Radiation Lab. Oppenheimer hesitantly reveals that a man named Eltenton might be involved, but refuses to name others. The scene alternates between the train carrying Groves and Oppenheimer, and Johnson's office. The main conflict focuses on the security breach and Oppenheimer's reluctance to disclose further information, which remains unresolved as the scene concludes with Oppenheimer agreeing only to be more specific about Eltenton.

Strengths

Intense suspense
Sharp dialogue
Complex characters

Weaknesses

Some exposition-heavy dialogue

General Critique

The dialogue is too technical and filled with jargon, making it difficult for the reader to understand what is happening.
The scene lacks clear conflict or stakes, making it difficult to engage the reader.
The characters are not well-developed and their motivations are unclear.
The pacing is slow and the scene drags on without much happening.

General Suggestions

Simplify the dialogue and avoid using technical jargon.
Add a clear conflict or stakes to the scene.
Develop the characters and make their motivations clear.
Tighten the pacing and keep the scene moving.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is highly engaging, filled with suspense and intrigue as the characters navigate the complexities of security threats and espionage.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of security threats and espionage within the Manhattan Project is crucial to the plot and adds depth to the characters' motivations and actions.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by the revelation of security threats and espionage, creating tension and conflict that propels the narrative forward.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces a fresh perspective on Cold War espionage and security concerns, with nuanced character motivations and ethical dilemmas.

Character Development

Characters: 7

The characters are well-developed and their reactions to the security threats add depth to their personalities and motivations.

Character Changes: 6

The characters face new challenges and revelations that test their loyalties and beliefs, leading to subtle changes in their attitudes and actions.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to navigate the complex web of security threats and espionage while maintaining his integrity and moral compass.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to protect the project and its sensitive information from falling into the wrong hands, particularly those of Soviet spies.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict in the scene is intense and multi-layered, with security threats, espionage, and personal stakes all coming into play.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting interests, hidden agendas, and potential threats creating uncertainty and tension.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high in the scene, with the characters facing the threat of espionage, betrayal, and the potential compromise of the Manhattan Project.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by introducing new conflicts and dilemmas that will have repercussions on the characters and the plot.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the shifting power dynamics, moral ambiguity, and potential for betrayal.

Philosophical Conflict: 7

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical considerations of sharing information with allies and the potential risks of betrayal and espionage.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and concern, drawing the audience into the characters' struggles and dilemmas.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue is sharp and tense, reflecting the high-stakes nature of the situation and the characters' conflicting interests.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its tense atmosphere, complex character dynamics, and thematic depth.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension and suspense through dialogue and character interactions.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene headings and character cues.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format with clear dialogue exchanges and transitions between locations.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

Groves is staring at me like I just crapped my pants.

GROVES
You thought Pash would be satisfied
with that?

OPPENHEIMER
I was trying to give them Eltenton
without opening a can of worms. I
told him a cock-and-bull story.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I am up front. Robb questioning-

ROBB
Did you lie to General Groves, too?

OPPENHEIMER
No, I told him I’d lied to Pash.

INT. SAME -- DAY

Groves is on the stand, in civilian clothes-

GARRISON
Do you recall your conversation
with him about the Chevalier
incident?

GROVES
I’ve seen so many versions of it, I
wasn’t confused before, but I’m
certainly getting there now.

GARRISON
What was your conclusion?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 96.

GROVES
That he was under the influence of
the typical American schoolboy
attitude that there’s something
wicked about telling on a friend.
He did what he thought was
essential- disclosing Eltenton.

INT. SAME -- DAY

Pash is testifying.

PASH
The memo I wrote at the time states
'Dr Oppenheimer sought to provide
information to burnish his image as
loyal, clearly having heard of our
investigation at Berkeley. He is
not to be trusted on matters of
security.'

INT. LT. JOHNSON’S OFFICE -- DAY

Pash gazes, unblinking, into my eyes...

PASH
These other people you mentioned,
were they contacted by Eltenton
direct?

OPPENHEIMER
No.

PASH
Well now, could we know through
whom that contact was made?

OPPENHEIMER
It would involve people who ought
not be involved in this.

PASH
Is this person a member of the
project?

OPPENHEIMER
A member of the faculty, but not on
the project.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 97.

PASH
Eltenton made the approach through
a member of the faculty here at
Berkeley?

OPPENHEIMER
As far as I know- there may have
been more than one person involved.
If I seem uncooperative I think you
can understand that it’s because of
my insistence in not getting
innocent people into trouble.

Pash stares at me. I finally keep my mouth shut.

PASH
You see me as persistent-

OPPENHEIMER
You are persistent, and that is
your job. But my job is protecting
the people who work for me.

PASH
Instead of us going on certain
steps which may come to your
attention and be a little bit...
disturbing to you... I’d rather
discuss those with you first. I’m
not formulating any plans, I’m just
going to have to digest the whole
thing.

I nod at Pash. Get to my feet.

Genres: Drama, Thriller
Tone: Tense, Suspenseful, Confrontational

Summary In this tense and confrontational scene, the 'Chevalier incident' is examined through a series of testimonies and conversations among key Manhattan Project figures, including Oppenheimer, Groves, Pash, and others. The main conflict revolves around Oppenheimer's handling of the incident and the growing mistrust from Groves and Pash. Oppenheimer prioritizes protecting the project's members, causing tension with Pash, who remains skeptical of Oppenheimer's actions. The scene concludes with Oppenheimer's decision to protect those involved and Pash agreeing to consider the information before taking further steps.

Strengths

Intense dialogue
Complex character dynamics
High tension and suspense

Weaknesses

Potential for confusion with multiple characters and motivations

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is stilted and unnatural. It doesn't flow well and it's difficult to follow.
The scene is too long and drawn-out. It would benefit from being trimmed down to only the essential elements.
The characters are not developed enough. The audience doesn't get a sense of who they are or what they want.
The scene lacks tension and suspense. There's no sense of danger or urgency.
The ending of the scene is anticlimactic. It doesn't leave the audience with a sense of satisfaction or closure.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and easier to follow.
Trim down the scene to only the essential elements.
Develop the characters more by giving them clear goals and motivations.
Add tension and suspense to the scene by introducing a sense of danger or urgency.
Rewrite the ending of the scene to make it more satisfying and give the audience a sense of closure.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is highly engaging, filled with tension and suspense as Oppenheimer navigates the interrogation while trying to protect innocent individuals.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of loyalty, trust, and security in a high-stakes environment is well-executed, adding depth to the characters and plot.

Plot: 8

The plot advances significantly as Oppenheimer's loyalty and integrity are questioned, leading to potential consequences for the project.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh take on the historical events surrounding the development of the atomic bomb, offering a nuanced exploration of the ethical challenges faced by the characters.

Character Development

Characters: 7

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Pash, are well-developed and their conflicting motivations drive the scene forward.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer undergoes a subtle shift in his approach, balancing loyalty and protection in the face of interrogation.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to protect his team and maintain their trust in him, while also navigating the complex web of lies and secrets he has woven.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to navigate the interrogation and investigation process without incriminating himself or his colleagues.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer's desire to protect innocent individuals and Pash's relentless pursuit of security creates high tension throughout the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing difficult choices and moral dilemmas that challenge their beliefs and values.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's integrity and loyalty are questioned, potentially impacting the entire project and his relationships.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by revealing crucial information about loyalty, trust, and security within the Manhattan Project.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the shifting allegiances, moral complexities, and unexpected revelations that keep the audience guessing.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the balance between loyalty to friends and loyalty to the project's security. Oppenheimer must decide where his priorities lie and how to navigate the ethical dilemmas he faces.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes anxiety, defensiveness, and a sense of protection, drawing the audience into the characters' emotional turmoil.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, intense, and reveals the complex dynamics between the characters, adding depth to the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of the high stakes, moral dilemmas, and sharp dialogue that keep the audience invested in the characters' fates.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, keeping the audience engaged in the characters' interactions and revelations.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear transitions between locations and characters.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the tension and complexity of the characters' interactions.

INT. TRAIN, SANTA FE TO CHICAGO -- DAY

Groves takes in the story.

GROVES
You’re protecting a friend. But
who’s protecting you?

OPPENHEIMER
You could.

GROVES
If you gave me the name.

OPPENHEIMER
If you order me to, I’ll do it.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 98.

GROVES
You’re making a mistake, Robert. A
mistake that may haunt you. You
need to volunteer this name.

I turn to watch the scenery trundle past.

ROBB (V.O.)
And did he give you the name?

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

GROVES
He did.

ROBB
But not at that time.

GROVES
No.

ROBB
In fact, it was some months later,
wasn’t it?

Groves nods.

INT. SAME -- DAY

I study the back of Boris Pash’s head...

ROBB
And in the months between your
interview with Dr Oppenheimer and
his eventual naming of Chevalier,
did you expend resources trying to
find the identity of the
intermediary?

PASH
Considerable resources. Without the
name our job was extremely
difficult.

ROBB
When did you receive the name?

PASH
I was gone by the time Oppenheimer
offered it up.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 99.

ROBB
Gone?

PASH
They felt my time would be better
spent in Europe determining the
status of the Nazi bomb project.

ROBB
Who did?

PASH
General Groves. He transferred me
to London.

I lift my head at this.

INSERT CUT: MARBLES DROP INTO THE BOWL... THREE-QUARTERS
FULL...

EXT. LOS ALAMOS -- NIGHT

Serber and I walk down the street. Snow falling.

SERBER
Little early for a Christmas party.

OPPENHEIMER
Something’s up. Tolman’s been away.

SERBER
Where?

OPPENHEIMER
Ruth won’t tell.

We head towards Fuller Lodge...

INT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- LATER

A CHRISTMAS PARTY. DEBAUCHED. Kitty, in SANTA HAT,
serves/spikes the EGGNOG. Bethe, Teller, Charlotte Serber,
Neddermeyer, Kistiakowsky, Donald, Hornig, Bainbridge, Fuchs,
Feynman amongst the revelers. I have Ruth cornered, glancing
over at Kitty, who pretends she wasn’t looking at me and
GRABS at the nearest male arm- pushing eggnog...

RUTH
Compartmentalization, Oppie. What
makes you think I know, anyway?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 100.

I take her glass. Sip from it...

OPPENHEIMER
You do a good job of knowing where
Mr Tolman is... when it counts.

RUTH
Like now.

I turn- Tolman and Groves enter, brushing off snow...

GROVES
Atten-shun! We have an early
Christmas present for you...

They step aside to reveal... NIELS BOHR. I grin.

BOHR (V.O.)
The British pilots put me in the
bomb bay...

INT. SAME -- LATER

Bohr holds court. I listen at the back.

BOHR
...showed me the oxygen- of course
I messed it up. When they opened me
up in Scotland I was unconscious. I
pretended I’d been napping.

The crowd LAUGHS, loving it. Bohr peels off to talk to me.

BOHR (CONT’D)
Is it big enough?

OPPENHEIMER
To end the war?

BOHR
To end all war.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION -- LATER

I sip my drink, watching Bohr read the boards. Tolman,
Teller, Bethe and Serber sprawl, party hats, TINSEL
scarves...

BOHR
Heisenberg sought me out in
Copenhagen. It was chilling- my old
student, working for the Nazis.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 101.

BOHR (CONT’D)
He told me things to draw me out...
sustained fission reactions in
uranium...

TOLMAN
That sounds more like a reactor
than a bomb.

TELLER
Did he mention gaseous diffusion?

BOHR
He seemed more focused on heavy
water.

TELLER
As a moderator?

BOHR
Yes. Instead of graphite.

Serber and Tolman GRIN. I nod. Bohr notices us relax...

BOHR (CONT’D)
What?

OPPENHEIMER
He took a wrong turn. We’re ahead.
And with you here to help us...

Bohr turns to Teller and the others-

BOHR
Gentlemen, could you give us a
moment?

They shuffle out. Bohr looks at the MARBLES. Turns to me...

BOHR (CONT’D)
I’m not here to help, Robert. I
knew you could do this without me.
OPPENHEIMER
Then why did you come?

BOHR
To talk about after. The power
you’re revealing will forever
outlive the Nazis. And the world is
not prepared.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 102.

OPPENHEIMER
You can lift the rock without being
ready for the snake that’s
revealed.

BOHR
We have to make the politicians
understand- this isn’t a new weapon-
it’s a new world. I’ll be out
there, doing what I can- but you...
(points at me)
You’re an American Prometheus-
Father of the Atomic Bomb. The man
who gave them the power to destroy
themselves. They’ll respect that.
And your work really begins.

I take this in. Charlotte Serber enters-

CHARLOTTE
I’m sorry, Oppie, but there’s a
call. From San Francisco.

I look at my watch, surprised... look at Bohr, who nods 'Go.'

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Reflective, Serious

Summary General Groves questions Oppenheimer about his loyalty and the identity of a friend, who is later revealed to be Chevalier. This conflict is resolved when Oppenheimer eventually reveals Chevalier’s name. The scene then shifts to a Christmas party at Los Alamos, where Bohr makes a surprise appearance. Bohr and Oppenheimer discuss the power and implications of the atomic bomb, leaving Oppenheimer to contemplate the future.

Strengths

Rich character development
Nuanced dialogue
Exploration of complex themes

Weaknesses

Some scenes may require prior knowledge of historical context to fully appreciate

General Critique

The dialogue is a bit dry and technical. It could benefit from some more natural-sounding language and a bit more humor to lighten the mood.

General Suggestions

The scene would be more visually interesting if it were shot in a more dynamic way. For example, the camera could move around the room more and there could be more close-ups of the characters' faces.
The pacing of the scene could be improved by cutting out some of the unnecessary dialogue and action. This would make the scene more concise and easier to follow.
The scene could be more impactful if it ended on a stronger note. For example, the characters could come to a realization or make a decision that has a significant impact on the story.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is rich in character development, dialogue, and thematic depth, providing a compelling exploration of Oppenheimer's internal struggles and the ethical implications of his work.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of balancing personal relationships, ethical considerations, and the pursuit of scientific progress is central to the scene, offering a nuanced portrayal of Oppenheimer's moral quandaries.

Plot: 7

The plot advances through the interactions between characters and the revelations of past events, adding layers to the narrative and setting up future conflicts.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the historical events surrounding the development of the atomic bomb, presenting complex ethical dilemmas and interpersonal conflicts.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed and multi-dimensional, with Oppenheimer's internal turmoil and conflicting loyalties driving the emotional core of the scene.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes significant emotional and moral growth in the scene, grappling with difficult decisions and facing the consequences of his actions.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to navigate the moral and ethical dilemmas surrounding the development of the atomic bomb and its consequences. Oppenheimer struggles with his role in the project and the impact it will have on the world.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to manage the challenges and responsibilities of leading the atomic bomb project and dealing with the political and military pressures.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

The scene contains both internal and external conflicts, with Oppenheimer facing moral dilemmas, interpersonal tensions, and the pressure of wartime secrecy.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing moral dilemmas, political pressures, and personal conflicts that challenge their beliefs and values.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes of the Manhattan Project, personal relationships, and ethical dilemmas heighten the tension and drama of the scene, underscoring the gravity of Oppenheimer's choices.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the character dynamics, revealing key information, and setting up future conflicts and resolutions.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is unpredictable in terms of the characters' decisions and the moral dilemmas they face, adding tension and suspense to the narrative.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of developing and using the atomic bomb. Oppenheimer grapples with the idea of creating a weapon that could potentially end all wars but also has the power to destroy humanity.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension and introspection to empathy and moral questioning, engaging the audience on an emotional level.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is thought-provoking and reflective, revealing the characters' inner thoughts and motivations while exploring complex themes.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intense dialogue exchanges, moral dilemmas, and historical context, keeping the audience invested in the characters' decisions and conflicts.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, allowing for moments of introspection and character development.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the tension and drama of the characters' interactions and conflicts.

EXT. SNOWY WOODS, LOS ALAMOS -- DAWN

Kitty, on horseback, finds my horse, tied up. She dismounts,
moving into the trees... She finds me curled up at the base
of a tree in the SNOW, distraught.

KITTY
Robert?

She crouches, touches my shoulder- I look up, ASHAMED.

OPPENHEIMER
Her father called... they found her
yesterday... in the bath...

INSERT CUT: A WOMAN, FACE-DOWN IN THE BATH, A CUSHION
BELOW...

KITTY
Who?

OPPENHEIMER
She’d taken pills, left a note...
not signed... she took
barbiturates...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 103.

INSERT CUT: TATLOCK KNEELS IN THE BATH, POPPING PILLS. SINKS
SERENELY ONTO CUSHIONS UNDER THE WATER...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
But there was chloral hydrate in
her blood...

INSERT CUT: GLOVED HANDS HOLD TATLOCK’S STRUGGLING HEAD
UNDERWATER...

I SHAKE OFF the image...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
There was a note.
KITTY
Jean Tatlock?

INSERT CUT: OPPENHEIMER, NAKED, SHAKES HIS HEAD AT TATLOCK.

OPPENHEIMER
We were together- she said she
needed me... but I told her I
wouldn’t see her again. It was me.

Kitty SLAPS me in the face. I look up at her, bleary-eyed...

KITTY
You don’t get to commit the sin,
then have us all feel sorry for you
that it had consequences.
(rises)
Pull yourself together. People here
depend on you.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I vacantly preside over a shambles- the goldfish bowl is
FILLED with marbles. As is the glass tumbler... Donald,
Bainbridge, Feynman watch the others squabble-

HORNIG
Serber, I’m not quitting my job
because plutonium’s radioactive!

SERBER
We can’t know what it might do to
your reproductive system- Donald,
help me out, here-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 104.

DONALD
You’re on your own, pal. HORNIG
(to Serber)
Your reproductive system’s
more exposed than mine.
Presumably.

KISTIAKOWSKY
The implosion device is NEDDERMEYER
nowhere. You can’t rush everything,
Oppie.

KISTIAKOWSKY (CONT’D)
There’s rushing and there’s BETHE
getting on with it- pick one, Teller’s not helping- I’ve
will ya? been asking for calculations
on the implosion lenses for
weeks-

TELLER
The British can do it- Fuchs- FUCHS
Absolutely.

BETHE
It’s your job, Teller! TELLER (CONT’D)
I’m engaged in research-
BETHE (CONT’D)
On a Hydrogen bomb we’re not even
building!

Teller simply walks away. As he passes me-

TELLER
I won’t work for that man.

BETHE
Let him go. He’s a prima donna-

SERBER
I agree. He should leave Los
Alamos.

I sigh. RISE, clear and direct-

OPPENHEIMER
Kisty, you replace Neddermeyer.
Seth, I’m putting you on plutonium.
Lilli, go work for Kisty.
(off her look)
Because he needs you.
(to Fuchs)
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 105.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Fuchs, take Teller’s role- you’re
exclusively on the implosion
device.

I head for the door-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
And nobody is leaving Los Alamos.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Distraught, Tense, Emotional, Confrontational

Summary In the snowy woods of Los Alamos, Kitty finds a distraught Robert Oppenheimer, who reveals his ex-lover Jean Tatlock's suicide after a fight. Kitty slaps him and tells him to pull himself together. The scene shifts to a lecture hall where Robert reassigns tasks to his team, replacing Neddermeyer with Kistiakowsky and putting Seth on plutonium. The main conflict is Robert's emotional distress and the team's disagreements over tasks, resolved when Robert takes charge. The emotional tone is somber and serious, with key dialogue including Kitty's reprimand and Robert's reassignment of tasks. Visual elements include Robert's distraught appearance and the goldfish bowl filled with marbles.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Character development
Tension and conflict

Weaknesses

Complexity of relationships may be challenging for some viewers to follow

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is too exposition-heavy. Oppenheimer and Kitty are talking about a very emotional and difficult topic, but their dialogue is very clinical and factual. This makes the scene feel emotionally distant and uninvolving.
The scene lacks a clear conflict. Oppenheimer and Kitty are talking about Jean Tatlock's death, but there is no clear conflict between them. This makes the scene feel aimless and directionless.
The scene ends abruptly. Oppenheimer and Kitty are talking about the need to pull themselves together, but then the scene just cuts off. This leaves the audience feeling unsatisfied and unsure of what happened next.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to be more emotional and less factual. Oppenheimer and Kitty should be talking about their feelings about Jean Tatlock's death, not just the facts of her death.
Add a clear conflict to the scene. Oppenheimer and Kitty could disagree about how to deal with Jean Tatlock's death, or they could disagree about the future of their relationship.
Give the scene a more satisfying ending. Oppenheimer and Kitty could talk about their plans for the future, or they could simply hug each other and comfort each other.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is emotionally charged, with strong character interactions and revelations that deepen the narrative. The tension and conflict are palpable, keeping the audience engaged.

Story Content

Concept: 7

The concept of exploring the personal lives and emotional struggles of the characters within the high-stakes environment of the Manhattan Project is compelling and adds depth to the overall story.

Plot: 8

The plot advances significantly through character interactions and revelations, shedding light on the complexities of relationships and personal choices within the context of the project.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces a fresh approach to exploring themes of guilt, responsibility, and redemption in a historical context. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed and their emotions and motivations are portrayed effectively, adding layers to the narrative and driving the scene forward.

Character Changes: 8

Several characters undergo emotional changes and revelations in this scene, particularly Oppenheimer and Kitty, as they confront the consequences of their actions.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to come to terms with the guilt and shame he feels over the death of Jean Tatlock. This reflects his deeper need for redemption and forgiveness.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to maintain control and order within the scientific community at Los Alamos despite the challenges and conflicts that arise.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between the characters, their internal struggles, and the high-stakes environment of the Manhattan Project create a tense and emotionally charged atmosphere.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing internal and external conflicts that challenge their beliefs and values.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes of the Manhattan Project, personal relationships, and the characters' emotional well-being add intensity and urgency to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the character dynamics, revealing new information, and setting up future conflicts and resolutions.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected emotional outbursts, conflicts, and revelations that keep the audience on edge.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the protagonist's sense of responsibility and the consequences of his actions. It challenges his beliefs about duty and accountability.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The emotional impact of the scene is significant, evoking feelings of sadness, regret, anger, and resignation in the characters and the audience.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is impactful and reveals the inner turmoil of the characters, creating tension and conflict that propel the scene forward.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of the emotional intensity, moral dilemmas, and interpersonal conflicts that drive the narrative forward.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and emotional impact, keeping the audience engaged and invested in the characters' struggles.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene headings, action lines, and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with a clear setup, conflict, and resolution. The pacing and rhythm contribute to the effectiveness of the scene.

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Teller is held at the gate. I approach. We face off in the
'street' like gunslingers.

TELLER
They won’t let me leave.

OPPENHEIMER
I won’t let you leave. Forget Hans,
forget fission. Stay here and
research what you want. Fusion. The
Hydrogen bomb- whatever. We’ll meet
to discuss-

TELLER
You don’t have time to meet. You’re
a politician now, Robert. You left
physics behind long ago.

OPPENHEIMER
Once a week. One hour, you and me.

Teller considers this. Nods, turns to the GUARD-

TELLER
Now, raise that fucking barrier.

ROBB (O.S.)
So the Super was under development
on your watch at Los Alamos...

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

ROBB
...yet, after the war, you tried to
deny it was viable.

OPPENHEIMER
No. I pointed out technical
difficulties with it.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 106.

ROBB
Didn’t you try to kill it at the
AEC meeting after the Russian bomb
test?

OPPENHEIMER
No.

ROBB
But that was the recommendation the
AEC offered, was it not?

OPPENHEIMER
After hours of discussion...

INT. HOTEL CONFERENCE ROOM -- NIGHT (COLOUR)

Me, Bush, Nichols (CIVILIAN), Rabi, Fermi, Strauss and
others.

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
...about the best response.

BUSH
Truman has to do something...

Rabi opens his compasses wider...

RABI
An H-bomb would be one thousand
times the power of an A-bomb.

He draws a circle around Moscow...

RABI (CONT’D)
The only intended target would be
the largest cities.

And a circle around St Petersburg...
RABI (CONT’D)
It’s a weapon of mass genocide.

STRAUSS
Why don’t you draw some of those
circles on this side of the map?

He points at the USA...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Start here...
(gestures around them)
New York.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 107.

As I listen to them I hear the sound of FEET STAMPING...

FERMI
It’s a weapon of attack, with no
defensive value.

STRAUSS
Deterrence.

BUSH
Do we need more deterrence than our
current arsenal of atomic bombs?

I tense up as the STAMPING SOUND gets LOUDER and LOUDER...

RABI
Drown in ten feet of water or ten
thousand, what’s the difference? We
can already drown Russia, and they
know it.

INSERT CUT: DOZENS OF FEET STAMPING, FASTER AND FASTER...

STRAUSS
Now they can drown us.

INSERT CUT:... SO FAST THE FEET BREAK RHYTHM, CAUSING
CACOPHONY...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Gentlemen, I have to ask whether
your discussion should be more of a
technical one. Robert?

I JAM my eyes CLOSED, SHAKE OFF the image- the sound STOPS-

OPPENHEIMER
Teller’s designs are as impractical
as they were during the war.
LAWRENCE
The Hydrogen bomb can be made to
work, Oppie. You know that.

OPPENHEIMER
We can’t commit all our resources
to that chance.

STRAUSS
Then how would you have Truman
reassure the American people?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 108.

OPPENHEIMER
By limiting the spread of atomic
weapons through international
control of nuclear energy.

STRAUSS
World government?

OPPENHEIMER
The United Nations. As Roosevelt
intended.

STRAUSS
I asked what Truman should do. The
world’s changed. Communism
threatens our survival.

OPPENHEIMER
Lewis, if we build a Hydrogen bomb,
the Soviets would have no choice
but to build their own.

STRAUSS
Could they be working on it
already? Based on information from
a spy at Los Alamos?

OPPENHEIMER
There was no spy at Los BUSH
Alamos! Gentlemen, let’s not get
sidetracked.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I say we use this moment to gain
concessions from the Russians by
committing that we will not build
the Hydrogen bomb.

STRAUSS
Thereby revealing its existence.
OPPENHEIMER
Which you seem convinced they
already know.

BUSH
At this point I’d like the Advisory
Committee members to meet in
privacy to finalize our
recommendations.

Strauss nods. Rises. Much of the room follows suit, leaving.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 109.

STRAUSS
I’m not sure you want to go down
this road, Robert.

OPPENHEIMER
Lewis, we’re the Advisory
Committee. We’ll give them our
advice.

Strauss shrugs. As he, Lawrence and Nichols leave together,
Borden approaches.

BORDEN
Dr Oppenheimer? William Borden-
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy.

OPPENHEIMER
Oh, yes.

BORDEN
During the war, I was a pilot. One
night, flying back from a raid, I
saw an amazing sight- like a meteor-

INSERT CUT: BORDEN SPEEDS THROUGH THE NIGHT...

BORDEN (V.O.)
A V-2 rocket heading for England-

INSERT CUT: A ROCKET STREAKS PAST, RIPPING APART THE DARK...

BORDEN (V.O.)
I can’t help but imagine what it
will be for such an enemy rocket to
carry an atomic warhead...

INSERT CUT: A MISSILE RISES THROUGH THE CLOUDS...

I hear the sound of FEET STAMPING...

INSERT CUT: DOZENS OF FEET STAMPING FASTER AND FASTER...

I peer into the future...

INSERT CUT: HUNDREDS OF MISSILES RISE THROUGH THE CLOUDS...

I look at the map... Rabi’s circles EXPAND like raindrops in
a puddle...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 110.

OPPENHEIMER
Then let’s make sure we’re not the
ones to make that possible.

But that’s not the answer Borden wanted. He leaves. Fermi and
Bush remain. Rabi leans over to me.

RABI
Oppie, you don’t want to go up
against Strauss.

OPPENHEIMER
If we both speak, they listen to
me.

RABI
When you speak, they hear a
prophet. When Strauss speaks, they
hear themselves.

OPPENHEIMER
They’ll listen to a prophet.

RABI
A prophet can’t be wrong. Not once.

SENATOR MCGEE (V.O.)
Didn’t you accuse Oppenheimer of
sabotaging the development of the
Super?

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Confrontational, Reflective

Summary Teller is prevented from leaving Los Alamos, leading to a tense confrontation with Oppenheimer. Teller agrees to stay but only if he can meet with Oppenheimer weekly. The scene then shifts to a meeting of the Atomic Energy Commission where Oppenheimer is questioned about his involvement in the hydrogen bomb's development. The group discusses the potential dangers and implications of building such a weapon. The main conflict lies in Teller's desire to leave and the potential dangers of building the hydrogen bomb. The tone is serious and tense, with the characters all aware of the urgency and importance of the decisions being made.

Strengths

Intense dialogue
Exploration of moral dilemmas
Character dynamics

Weaknesses

Some repetitive dialogue
Lack of visual action

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is a bit too expository and lacks subtext. For example, when Oppenheimer says "I won’t let you leave. Forget Hans, forget fission. Stay here and research what you want. Fusion. The Hydrogen bomb- whatever. We’ll meet to discuss-", it's a lot of information to take in and it doesn't feel very natural.
The scene shifts between the past and the present too quickly, which can be confusing for the reader. For example, the scene starts in the present with Oppenheimer and Teller facing off at the gate, but then it quickly shifts to the past with Oppenheimer in the hotel conference room.
The scene doesn't have a clear focus. It starts off with Oppenheimer and Teller arguing, but then it shifts to a discussion about the hydrogen bomb, and then it ends with Oppenheimer talking to Borden about the threat of nuclear war. This lack of focus makes it difficult for the reader to follow the scene and understand what's happening.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to be more natural and less expository. For example, instead of having Oppenheimer say "I won’t let you leave. Forget Hans, forget fission. Stay here and research what you want. Fusion. The Hydrogen bomb- whatever. We’ll meet to discuss-", you could have him say something like "I need you to stay here, Edward. We have a lot of work to do."
Use transitions to help the reader follow the scene as it shifts between the past and the present. For example, you could start the scene with a flashback to the hotel conference room, and then use a transition like "Later that day" to move to the present.
Give the scene a clear focus. Decide what the main conflict is and stick to it. For example, you could focus on the conflict between Oppenheimer and Teller over the hydrogen bomb, or you could focus on Oppenheimer's struggle to deal with the threat of nuclear war.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is intense and thought-provoking, with deep moral and ethical dilemmas presented through the dialogue and interactions of the characters.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of developing the Hydrogen bomb and the ethical considerations surrounding it are central to the scene, driving the conflict and character dynamics.

Plot: 8

The plot advances as the characters debate the development of the Hydrogen bomb, revealing their conflicting perspectives and adding layers of tension to the narrative.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the historical events surrounding the development of nuclear weapons, presenting complex characters and ethical dilemmas in a compelling way.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters are well-developed and their differing viewpoints on the Hydrogen bomb create compelling conflicts and dynamics within the scene.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer experiences internal conflict and is challenged to confront his beliefs and values, leading to potential character growth and development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to maintain his moral integrity and prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons, despite pressure from his colleagues and political figures.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to convince his colleagues to prioritize international control of nuclear energy over the development of the Hydrogen bomb.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict in the scene is high, with opposing viewpoints on the development of the Hydrogen bomb leading to intense debates and confrontations.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints, moral dilemmas, and shifting alliances creating uncertainty and tension for the protagonist.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as the characters debate the development of a weapon with immense destructive power, impacting not only their personal lives but also the future of humanity.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by introducing the debate over the Hydrogen bomb, setting up future conflicts and decisions for the characters.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the shifting alliances, moral dilemmas, and unexpected twists in the characters' decisions and actions.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of nuclear weapons and the balance between deterrence and disarmament. It challenges the protagonist's beliefs in the necessity of international cooperation and moral responsibility.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of tension and introspection, with the characters grappling with weighty moral decisions and personal beliefs.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, intense, and thought-provoking, effectively conveying the moral and ethical debates surrounding the development of the Hydrogen bomb.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high emotional stakes, moral dilemmas, and intense conflict between characters, keeping the audience invested in the outcome.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, leading to a climactic moment that propels the story forward.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting adheres to the expected format for a screenplay, effectively conveying the dialogue and action sequences.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the tension and conflict between characters, building towards a climactic moment.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss shifts uneasily in his chair.

STRAUSS
I was never one of those who
bandied around terms like
'sabotage'.

SENATOR MCGEE
But Mr Borden was?

STRAUSS
As I understand it.

SENATOR MCGEE
How was Mr Borden able to put
together such a detailed
indictment?
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 111.

SENATOR MCGEE (CONT’D)
He was no longer a government
employee, and yet he appears to
have had unlimited access to Dr
Oppenheimer’s file. Might Mr
Nichols have given him access to
the file? Or someone else at the
AEC?

STRAUSS
Feelings ran high on these issues,
but that’s a very serious
accusation, Senator.

CUT TO:

EXT. LOS ALAMOS -- DAY (COLOUR)

RAIN. I ride my horse through the outskirts. Spot a FLIER
stapled to a telegraph pole, ink running: "THE IMPACT OF THE
GADGET ON CIVILIZATION - DISCUSSION, BLDG T31 SUNDAY, 11AM".

INT. CYCLOTRON BUILDING, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I enter to find forty scientists meeting. Hornig is speaking.

HORNIG
Germany’s about to surrender, the
Japanese are losing. It’s no longer
the enemy who are the greatest
threat to mankind- it’s us. Our
work.

Heads turn as they notice me.

OPPENHEIMER
Hitler’s dead. But the Japanese
fight on.

The audience is now turned my way...

HORNIG
Their defeat seems assured.

OPPENHEIMER
Not if you’re a GI preparing to
invade Japan. We can end this war.

MORRISON
How can we justify using this
weapon on human beings?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 112.

OPPENHEIMER
We’re theorists- we can imagine a
future, and our imaginings horrify
us. But they won’t fear it until
they understand it, and they won’t
understand it until they’ve used
it. When the world learns the
terrible secret of Los Alamos, our
work will ensure a peace mankind
has never seen. A peace based on
the kind of international
cooperation that Roosevelt always
envisaged.

Some of the scientists nod. Scattered applause...

INSERT CUT: THE GOLDFISH BOWL IS FULL OF MARBLES...

EXT. LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I walk down the main drag with Groves.

OPPENHEIMER
Progress.

GROVES
Two years and a billion dollars’
worth?

OPPENHEIMER
Hard to put a price on it.

GROVES
Not really. Just add up the bills.
(points)
'Rural free delivery'... Eighty
babies delivered the first year.
This year they’ve had ten a month.

OPPENHEIMER
Birth control’s a little out of my
jurisdiction, General.

Groves watches Kitty approach- she’s HEAVILY PREGNANT.

GROVES
Clearly.

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 113.

EXT. CANYON, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

An IMPLOSION DEVICE ROCKS the canyon. Groves, Fuchs and I
raise our heads- Kistiakowsky and Hornig rush to the device-

KISTIAKOWSKY
That’s the one!

I put my PIPE on the wall as we CLIMB out of the bunker...

GROVES
Two viable bombs. I need a date.

OPPENHEIMER
September-

GROVES
July-

Kistiakowsky waves a trail of ticker tape-

KISTIAKOWSKY
That’s the sweet spot, gentlemen!

OPPENHEIMER
August.

GROVES
July-

OPPENHEIMER
A test in July.

Fuchs hands me my pipe. I dust it off...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
But I need my brother.
(off his look)
Frank knows the desert. He left
politics behind- he’s been working
for Lawrence for two years.

INSERT CUT: FLYING OVER DESERT TO FIND FRANK STANDING BY A
JEEP WITH AN ARMY OFFICER.

GROVES
What do we call the test?

OPPENHEIMER
(thinking)
'Batter my heart, three-person’d
god.'

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 114.

GROVES
What?

OPPENHEIMER
Trinity.

INSERT CUT: A STEEL TOWER IS RAISED IN THE DESERT...

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

ROBB
So you insisted on bringing on your
brother, Frank, a known Communist-

OPPENHEIMER
Former Communist-

ROBB
You brought a known former
Communist onto America’s most
secret and important defence
project?

OPPENHEIMER
I knew my brother could be trusted
absolutely.

ROBB
And you feel your judgement was
sound on who on the team could be
trusted?

KISTIAKOWSKY (O.S.)
Fuchs! Head down!

EXT. BERM -- DAY

Behind a berm, Groves, Fuchs, Frank and I watch Kistiakowsky
and Hornig arm a detonator. Fuchs shuffles lower.

KISTIAKOWSKY
Everybody ready...?

Kistiakowsky triggers A VAST EXPLOSION, SPLINTERING THE
TOWER, SENDING A MASSIVE PLUME OF FIRE INTO THE AIR... the
SHOCKWAVE throws DEBRIS onto me and Groves...

GROVES
I hope you learned something.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 115.

FRANK
We learned we’re gonna need to be a
lot further away...

GROVES
Well, figure it out. Fast.
(to me)
We leave for Washington tomorrow,
and we’re going to give them a
date.

INT. HOTEL LOBBY, WASHINGTON, DC -- DAY

I walk across the lobby- someone GRABS my arm- Szilard, with
the Scientist with Glasses in tow. I glance out the window,
where Groves is getting into a car, waiting for me...

OPPENHEIMER
You’re a long way from Chicago,
Leo.

SZILARD
If we don’t act now, they’re going
to use this thing against Japan. We
booked a meeting with Truman, but
somebody killed it. You’re meeting
the Secretary of War-

OPPENHEIMER
Just because we’re building it-
doesn’t mean we get to decide how
it’s used.

SZILARD
History will judge us, Robert. In
Chicago we put together a petition-

Glasses holds out a paper- I PUSH it back- Glasses FLINCHES-

OPPENHEIMER
I’m not getting into that. Tell me
your concerns and I’ll relay them-

SZILARD
My concerns?! Germany’s defeated,
Japan’s not going to hold out alone-

OPPENHEIMER
How would you know? You got us into
this, you and Einstein, with your
letter to Roosevelt saying we could
build a bomb-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 116.

SZILARD
Against Germany.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s not how weapons manufacture
works, Szilard.

SZILARD
Oppie, you have to help.

OPPENHEIMER
Fermi’s in the meeting. And SZILARD (CONT’D)
Lawrence- They’re not you. You’re the
great salesman of science-
you can convince anyone of
anything. Even yourself.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Serious, Reflective

Summary In a Senate committee hearing, Strauss testifies about Borden's accusations against Oppenheimer, while in Los Alamos, Oppenheimer attends a meeting of scientists discussing the impact of the Gadget on civilization. Groves and Oppenheimer discuss the project's progress, and Kistiakowsky successfully tests an implosion device. Oppenheimer insists on bringing his brother, Frank, onto the project. Szilard and a scientist approach Oppenheimer to discuss their concerns about the use of the bomb. The scene ends with an explosion and Groves telling Oppenheimer they need to determine a date for the test.

Strengths

Strong character development
Compelling ethical dilemmas
Tension-filled dialogue

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly expository
Lack of resolution on certain plot points

General Critique

The scene begins with Strauss making a brief statement, but then quickly cuts to a flashback of a Senate committee hearing. This flashback is lengthy and somewhat confusing, as it is not immediately clear how it relates to the present-day scene. It would be helpful to provide more context for the flashback, or to integrate it more smoothly into the present-day scene.

General Suggestions

Consider starting the scene with a brief summary of the Senate committee hearing before cutting to the flashback.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively conveys the weight of the decisions being made by the characters, the internal conflict of Oppenheimer, and the high stakes involved in the development of the atomic bomb.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of the scene, focusing on the Trinity test and the ethical considerations surrounding the creation of the atomic bomb, is well-developed and thought-provoking.

Plot: 8

The plot of the scene is engaging and moves the story forward by showcasing the preparations for the Trinity test and the conflicting viewpoints of the characters.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the historical events surrounding the development of the atomic bomb, presenting nuanced character interactions and ethical debates that challenge conventional narratives.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer, Groves, and Szilard, are well-defined and their motivations and conflicts are effectively portrayed.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer experiences a significant internal change as he grapples with the moral implications of his work on the atomic bomb.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to grapple with the moral implications of his work on the atomic bomb and justify its use as a means to end the war.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to successfully conduct a test of the atomic bomb and convince the government of its effectiveness as a weapon.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both internal (Oppenheimer's moral dilemma) and external (the debate over the use of the atomic bomb).

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas that challenge the protagonist's beliefs and decisions, creating dramatic tension and uncertainty.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are extremely high in the scene, as the characters are on the brink of testing a weapon that could change the course of history.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by setting up the Trinity test and deepening the moral dilemmas faced by the characters.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable due to the characters' conflicting motivations and the uncertain outcomes of their decisions, creating suspense and tension.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical considerations of using the atomic bomb as a weapon of mass destruction, contrasting the necessity of ending the war with the moral implications of killing innocent civilians.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The scene evokes a strong emotional response from the audience, particularly in Oppenheimer's internal struggle and the ethical implications of the Trinity test.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue is impactful and conveys the tension and complexity of the situation, particularly in the conversations between Oppenheimer and Szilard.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense dialogue exchanges, moral dilemmas, and high stakes, keeping the audience invested in the characters' decisions and actions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, maintaining a sense of urgency and emotional intensity throughout.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene adheres to the expected formatting for its genre, effectively conveying the dialogue exchanges and scene transitions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively builds tension and conveys the protagonist's internal and external conflicts.

INT. SECRETARY OF WAR’S OFFICE -- DAY

I sit on a couch next to Fermi- Lawrence, Groves and Bush in
chairs. Secretary of War STIMSON presides. Military,
scientists and officials are scattered through the room.

STIMSON
The firestorm in Tokyo killed one
hundred thousand people. Mostly
civilians. I worry about an America
where we do these things and no one
protests.

MARSHALL
Pearl Harbor and three years of
brutal conflict in the Pacific buys
a lot of latitude with the American
public.

STIMSON
Enough to unleash the atomic bomb?

FERMI
In truth, the A-bomb might not
cause as much damage as the Tokyo
bombings.

STIMSON
What are we estimating?

BUSH
In a medium-sized city, twenty or
thirty thousand dead.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 117.

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t underestimate the
psychological impact of an atomic
explosion... a pillar of fire ten
thousand feet tall, deadly neutron
effects for a mile in all
directions... from one. Single.
Device. Dropped from a barely
noticed B-29... the atomic bomb
will be a terrible revelation of
divine power.

Groves carefully monitors my effect on the room...

MARSHALL
If that’s true it would be
definitive. World War II would be
over. Our boys would come home.

STIMSON
This could end the war.

OPPENHEIMER
This could end all war. If we
retain moral advantage.

Groves registers the pivot...

STIMSON
How so?

OPPENHEIMER
If we use this weapon without
informing our allies, they’ll see
It as a threat and we’ll be in an
arms race.

MARSHALL
How open can we be with the
Soviets?

BUSH
Secrecy won’t stop the Soviets
becoming part of the atomic world.

A politician, BYRNES, clears his throat politely-

BYRNES
We’ve been told they have no
uranium.

BUSH
You’ve been misinformed. A Russian
bomb is a matter of time.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 118.

LAWRENCE
To stay ahead, our programme has to
continue at full pace after the
war.

OPPENHEIMER
Secretary Stimson, if I may. Not
all the scientists on the project
agree. In fact, this might be a
moment to consider other opinions-

GROVES
The Manhattan Project’s been
plagued from the start by certain
scientists of doubtful discretion
and uncertain loyalty. One of them
just tried to get a meeting with
the President.

I say nothing. Groves looks directly at me.

GROVES (CONT’D)
We need them for now, but as soon
as is practical, we should sever
any such scientists from the
programme. Wouldn’t you agree,
doctor?

I meet Groves’ gaze. Stay silent... Nod.

MARSHALL
If a Russian bomb is inevitable,
perhaps we should invite their top
scientists to Trinity.

BYRNES
President Truman has no intention
of raising expectations that Stalin
be included in the atomic project.

STIMSON
Informing him of our breakthrough,
and presenting it as the means to
win the war need not make
unkeepable promises. But the
Potsdam peace conference in July is
the last chance for Truman to have
that conversation. Can you give us
a working bomb by then?

GROVES
Absolutely. We’ll test-fire before
the conference.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 119.

STIMSON
And Japan?

OPPENHEIMER
If the test works you’ll have two
bombs for August.

STIMSON
Military targets?

OPPENHEIMER
There aren’t any big enough.

CONANT
Perhaps a vital war plant, with
workers housed nearby.

FERMI
Could we issue a warning? To reduce
civilian casualties.

AIR FORCE OFFICER
They’d send up everything they have
against us, and I’d be in that
plane.

BUSH
If we announce it and it fails to
go off we’d scupper any chance of
Japanese surrender.

LAWRENCE
Is there no way to demonstrate the
bomb to Japan to provoke surrender?

GROVES
We intend to demonstrate it in the
most unambiguous terms. Twice. Once
to show the weapon’s power. A
second to show that we can keep
going until they surrender.

STIMSON
We have a list of twelve cities to
choose from. Sorry, eleven, I’ve
taken Kyoto off the list because of
its cultural significance to the
Japanese people.

Stimson senses the unease in the room...

STIMSON (CONT’D)
Let me make this simple for you,
gentlemen.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 120.

STIMSON (CONT’D)
The Japanese will not surrender
short of a successful invasion of
the home islands. Many lives,
American and Japanese, will be lost
in that invasion. The use of the
atomic bomb against Japanese cities
will save lives.

Genres: Drama, Historical, War
Tone: Serious, Tense, Contemplative

Summary In the Secretary of War's office, military officials, scientists, and politicians discuss the use of the atomic bomb. The potential damage, psychological impact, and the possibility of an arms race are considered. Groves proposes removing certain scientists from the project, and the group decides to test the bomb before the Potsdam peace conference and use it against Japanese cities if they do not surrender. The scene is marked by a serious and contemplative tone, with a sense of urgency and importance. The main conflict lies in the moral dilemma of using the atomic bomb and its potential consequences.

Strengths

Exploration of moral dilemmas
Tension-filled dialogue
High stakes and conflict

Weaknesses

Lack of resolution on certain character arcs
Limited exploration of personal relationships

General Critique

The dialogue is very technical and may be difficult for some viewers to understand. Consider simplifying the language or adding more context to help the audience follow along.
The scene is very long and may be difficult for some viewers to stay engaged. Consider breaking the scene up into smaller chunks or adding more visual interest to keep the audience engaged.
The characters are not very well-developed and may be difficult for some viewers to relate to. Consider adding more backstory or character development to help the audience connect with them.
The scene is very dark and may be difficult for some viewers to watch. Consider adding more light or color to the scene to make it more visually appealing.
The ending of the scene is very abrupt and may be difficult for some viewers to understand. Consider adding more closure or resolution to the scene to help the audience understand what happened.

General Suggestions

Add more context to the technical dialogue to help the audience understand what is being discussed.
Break the scene up into smaller chunks to make it more manageable for viewers.
Add more visual interest to the scene to keep the audience engaged.
Develop the characters more to make them more relatable to the audience.
Add more light or color to the scene to make it more visually appealing.
Add more closure or resolution to the scene to help the audience understand what happened.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively explores the complex themes of war, morality, and power, creating a tense and thought-provoking atmosphere.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of using the atomic bomb as a weapon of war and the ethical dilemmas surrounding its deployment are central to the scene, making it highly engaging.

Plot: 8

The plot revolves around the decision-making process regarding the use of the atomic bomb, with high stakes and conflicting viewpoints driving the narrative forward.

Originality: 8

The scene presents a fresh approach to the ethical considerations of using the atomic bomb, with authentic dialogue that reflects the complexity of the situation.

Character Development

Characters: 7

The characters are well-developed and their conflicting perspectives add depth to the scene, showcasing the internal struggles they face.

Character Changes: 7

Several characters undergo internal changes and moral dilemmas throughout the scene, adding depth to their development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to maintain moral integrity and ensure that the use of the atomic bomb is justified in the context of the war.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to end the war and bring American soldiers home.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict present in the scene, both internal and external, as the characters grapple with moral dilemmas and strategic decisions.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas that create tension and uncertainty.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are incredibly high in the scene, as the characters grapple with the decision that could have far-reaching consequences on a global scale.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by focusing on the pivotal decision-making process regarding the use of the atomic bomb.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because it challenges the audience's expectations and presents unexpected moral dilemmas.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the moral implications of using the atomic bomb and the potential consequences of its deployment.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension to reflection, as the characters navigate the weighty decisions before them.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is impactful and thought-provoking, effectively conveying the characters' emotions and the weight of the decisions being made.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because it presents a morally complex situation that keeps the audience invested in the characters' decisions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension and highlighting the urgency of the characters' decisions.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with a clear progression of dialogue and character interactions.

EXT. BASE OF STEEL TOWER, TRINITY TEST SITE -- DAY

Frank shows Groves and me the site plan...

FRANK
Ground Zero. Observation posts at
ten thousand yards north, south and
west.

OPPENHEIMER
Where do we trigger from?

FRANK
South ten thousand. Base camp is
ten miles south, here. And a
further observation point on this
hill twenty miles away.

I point to a crew digging a trench from the base of the
tower.

OPPENHEIMER
What’s that? The trigger lines went
in already.

FRANK
The air force requested a line of
lights for their B-29.

GROVES
What B-29? Our bomb’s on the tower.

FRANK
They want to use the test to
confirm the safe operating
distance.

OPPENHEIMER
Risky.

FRANK
Not as risky as dropping one over
Japan and hoping we were right
about the blast radius.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 121.

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t let them slow us down- we’re
firing on the 15th.

FRANK
The 15th?! That’s not- GROVES

The 15th!
Frank sees my expression-

FRANK (CONT’D)
The 15th.

INT. LECTURE HALL, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY
I show the plan to the division heads.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll be at the south observation
point with Frank and Kistiakowsky.
You’ll all be assigned to base
camp, far observation, or west
observation.

INSERT CUT: I ENTER A TENT AT THE BASE OF THE TOWER- THE
SILVER SPHERE OF THE BOMB IS SURROUNDED BY THE TEAM...

BETHE
Are those safe distances?

OPPENHEIMER
They’re based on your calculations.

RABI
Time to stand behind your science,
Hans. Literally.

INSERT CUT: THE BOMB IS HOISTED UP IN TO THE TOWER...

TELLER
What about the radiation cloud?

OPPENHEIMER
Without high winds it should settle
within two to three miles.
Evacuation measures will be in
place, but we need good weather for
visibility so it should be fine. We
go on the night of the 15th.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 122.

The team exchange looks-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
That’s a hard deadline, so if
anyone has anything... speak now.

BETHE
We need a final implosion test.

KISTIAKOWSKY
Couldn’t hurt.

OPPENHEIMER
Do it. Is there anything else that
might stop us?
A THUNDERCLAP takes us into-

EXT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

White sheets FLAP CRAZILY in the wind... through the window
we see Kitty put her drink down reluctantly. She comes out to
grab a sheet that has come loose from the line... notices a
JEEP idling at the gate, ARMED GUARDS patiently waiting.

I emerge from the house carrying an overnight bag. Kitty, one
hand on the washing line, turns to look at me, curious.

KITTY
It’s happening, isn’t it?

I watch the sheets flapping. Glance at the guards...

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll send a message. If it’s gone
our way... 'Take in the sheets.'

She nods. I head towards the waiting jeep.

KITTY
Robert?

I turn, looking at Kitty amongst the FLAPPING SHEETS...

KITTY (CONT’D)
Break a leg.

EXT. CANYON, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

A BANG as the final implosion test goes off... Kistiakowsky
and Fuchs raise their heads... Kistiakowsky shows Fuchs the
tape, grave.

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 123.

EXT. STEEL TOWER, TRINITY TEST SITE -- EVENING

I watch the last TECHNICIAN come down. I nod at the man, then
start my lonely climb... I stare at the silver sphere of the
first atomic bomb, its surface STUDDED with detonators, WIRES
DRAPED across it like spaghetti. Thunder RUMBLES. I watch the
approaching storm...

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- EVENING

Army tents. A WINDMILL SPINS FURIOUSLY...

INT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- EVENING

Fermi moves through the team, taking bets...

FERMI
Oppie’s taken a very modest three
kilotons... Teller’s in for forty-
five...

Rabi pulls out some bills-

RABI
Twenty.

FERMI
Twenty thousand tons of TNT... and
does anyone want the side action on
total atmospheric ignition?

The scientists groan and laugh. Soldiers look at each other:
'What the hell?' Groves corners the army WEATHERMAN.

GROVES
Are you saying we’ll have to delay?

WEATHERMAN
I’m saying it would be prudent.

OPPENHEIMER
Has this weather reached the site?

The weatherman gets on his radio. Kistiakowsky BURSTS in-

KISTIAKOWSKY
Oppie-

The phone rings -

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 124.

KISTIAKOWSKY (CONT’D)
Bethe’s calling you to tell you the
implosion test failed, but-

I have the phone to my ear -

OPPENHEIMER
Hans. Yes, he’s here. Yes.
(I hang up)
Is he wrong?

KISTIAKOWSKY
No.

OPPENHEIMER
So we’re about to fire a dud?
KISTIAKOWSKY
No.

GROVES
Explain.

KISTIAKOWSKY
I can’t. I just know the implosion
lenses will work.

OPPENHEIMER
If we fire those detonators and
they don’t trigger the reaction,
two years’ worth of plutonium will
be scattered across white sands.

KISTIAKOWSKY
(holds out his hand)
A month of my salary against ten
bucks says it lights.

I study Kistiakowsky. Take the bet.

WEATHERMAN
The wind’s picking up at Zero, not
the rain. Lightning circling.

THUNDER. Rabi calls over-

RABI
Hey, weatherman, you think it might
be time to get your men away from
the steel tower with the atomic
bomb primed to detonate via
electrical charge?

The weatherman laughs. Then GRABS the radio -

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 125.

WEATHERMAN
Pull ’em out.

OPPENHEIMER
(to Groves)
Let’s get to south observation.
Make our determination there.

Genres: Drama, Historical, War
Tone: Tense, Serious, Foreboding, Determined

Summary At the Trinity Test Site, Frank, Groves, and Oppenheimer discuss the site plan, placement of observation posts, and the B-29 plane's role in confirming safe operating distance. Oppenheimer urges the team to maintain momentum and fire on the 15th. In a lecture hall, Oppenheimer informs division heads, including Bethe, Kistiakowsky, and Teller, about their observation points. The team debates safety distances and radiation clouds. Amidst these discussions, Kitty, Oppenheimer's wife, shares her support and concern as he departs for the test site. Conflicts arise regarding safety, readiness, and potential radiation cloud impact, setting a serious and tense tone for the scene.

Strengths

Building tension
Technical authenticity
Character determination

Weaknesses

Limited character development
Heavy focus on technical details

General Critique

The scene is very technical and full of jargon, which may be difficult for some readers to understand.
The dialogue is stilted and unnatural, and it doesn't always flow well.
The scene is very focused on the technical details of the Trinity test, and it doesn't give much insight into the characters' emotions or motivations.
The scene is too long and could be cut down to make it more concise and engaging.
The ending of the scene is abrupt and doesn't give the reader a satisfying sense of closure.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and engaging.
Add more details about the surroundings to bring the scene to life.
Add more context to help the reader understand the stakes of the Trinity test.
Cut down on the technical jargon and make the scene more accessible to a wider audience.
Give the reader a more satisfying sense of closure by adding a few lines about the aftermath of the Trinity test.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene effectively builds tension and sets the stage for the climactic Trinity test, with a sense of urgency and impending danger.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of the Trinity test and the technical aspects of preparing for the detonation are well-executed, adding depth and authenticity to the scene.

Plot: 9

The plot advances significantly as the characters face challenges and make crucial decisions in the lead-up to the test, setting the stage for the climax.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces fresh situations and dilemmas related to the atomic bomb test, with authentic dialogue that reflects the historical context.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters show determination, concern, and a sense of duty as they prepare for the test, with their actions and dialogue reflecting their roles in the project.

Character Changes: 6

While there are no significant character arcs in this scene, the characters show resolve and determination in the face of challenges, reflecting their growth throughout the project.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to ensure the success of the atomic bomb test, reflecting his desire for scientific achievement and validation of his work.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to overcome obstacles and ensure the bomb test proceeds as planned, reflecting the immediate challenge of technical issues and weather conditions.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

There is a sense of internal conflict and external challenges as the characters face technical issues and the looming test date, heightening the tension.

Opposition: 9

The opposition in the scene is strong, with technical and weather-related obstacles threatening the success of the bomb test, creating uncertainty and conflict.

High Stakes: 9

The high stakes are evident in the preparations for the Trinity test, with the risk of failure and the potential consequences of the atomic bomb weighing heavily on the characters.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by setting up the final preparations for the Trinity test and highlighting the technical and emotional challenges faced by the characters.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the technical and weather-related obstacles that threaten the bomb test, creating tension and uncertainty.

Philosophical Conflict: 7

The philosophical conflict is between the risks of the bomb test and the potential consequences of failure, challenging Oppenheimer's beliefs about the necessity of the test for the war effort.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a sense of anxiety and anticipation, with the emotional impact stemming from the high stakes and the characters' dedication to their mission.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is focused on technical details, concerns about the implosion test, and the urgency of the situation, effectively conveying the tension and stakes involved.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its high stakes, moral dilemmas, and suspenseful atmosphere, keeping the audience invested in the outcome of the bomb test.

Pacing: 9

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, leading to a climactic moment with the implosion test failure revelation.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for a screenplay, with clear scene headings and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for a dramatic historical narrative, building tension and conflict towards the climax of the bomb test.

EXT. STEEL TOWER, TRINITY TEST SITE -- NIGHT

The last trucks drive away, lightning on the horizon. The
bomb sits there, impervious to peals of DRY THUNDER...

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- NIGHT

Groves, the weatherman and I watch rain LASH the desert...

OPPENHEIMER
The team hasn’t slept for two
nights. We stand down, make the
bomb safe, it’s weeks before we get
back here.

GROVES
Then we miss Potsdam.
(checks watch)
I need to get word to Truman by
seven.
(to the weatherman)
Our window’s closing. What’s it
doing?

WEATHERMAN
Raining. Blowing. Lightning.

GROVES
For how long, dammit?!

WEATHERMAN
It’s holding strong.

OPPENHEIMER
It’ll break before dawn.

GROVES
How could you know that?

OPPENHEIMER
I know this desert. The air cools
overnight. Just before dawn, the
storm breaks.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 126.

WEATHERMAN
He could be right. But schedule it
as late as possible.

OPPENHEIMER
Five thirty?

Groves considers this. Turns to the weatherman.

GROVES
Sign your forecast. If you’re
wrong, I’ll hang you.

INT. BUNKER, SOUTH OBSERVATION POST -- NIGHT

Groves and me, alone. Rain pelting down outside.

GROVES
Three years. Four thousand people.
Two billion dollars. If it doesn’t
go off we’re both finished.

OPPENHEIMER
I put my money on three kilotons.
Any less, they won’t get what it
is.

GROVES
What did Fermi mean by 'atmospheric
ignition'?

OPPENHEIMER
We had a moment where it looked
like the chain reaction from an
atomic device might never stop.
Setting fire to the atmosphere.

GROVES
Why’s Fermi still taking side bets
on it?

OPPENHEIMER
Call it gallows humour.

Groves takes this in. Picks the scab-

GROVES
Are we saying there’s a chance that
when we push that button... we
destroy the world?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 127.

OPPENHEIMER
Nothing in our research over the
last three years supports that
conclusion except as the most
remote possibility.

GROVES
How remote?

OPPENHEIMER
The chances are near zero.

GROVES
Near zero?

OPPENHEIMER
(smiling)
What do you want from theory alone?

GROVES
Zero would be nice.

I check my watch.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, in an hour and fifty-eight
minutes, we’ll know.

I listen-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It’s letting up...

EXT. TRINITY TEST SITE -- NIGHT

Searchlights settle on the gleaming steel tower. A line of
lights leading from the blackness of the night-time desert to
the tower comes on...

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Groves and I come out into gentle rain. The wind has fallen
off. Frank comes up to meet us.

FRANK
The arming party’s left Zero,
heading this way, throwing the
switches...
(to the soldiers)
Turn the cars, ready for emergency
evacuation...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 128.

EXT. SOUTH 1500 POST -- NIGHT

Kistiakowsky and military personal, including BAINBRIDGE, get
out of a truck. Kistiakowsky THROWS a SWITCH on the ground...

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Rabi, Fermi and Bethe come outside. A SOLDIER hands them
WELDER’S GLASS...

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- NIGHT

Kistiakowsky and Bainbridge get out of the truck and enter
the bunker.

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Bainbridge pulls out a key. UNLOCKS the arming switches.
Kistiakowsky nods, Bainbridge THROWS THE SWITCHES.

BAINBRIDGE
Twenty minutes.

EXT. TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

A SIGNAL ROCKET flares up into the air...

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Rabi, Fermi and the others watch the rocket go up-

FERMI
Twenty minutes!

EXT. HILLTOP DISTANT OBSERVATION POINT -- CONTINUOUS

A group of scientists, including Teller, Feynman and
Lawrence, watch the distant rocket sputter...

FEYNMAN
That’s twenty!

DARK GLASSES are handed out. Feynman refuses, jumping up into
the cab of a truck-

SOLDIER
Hey, Feynman-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 129.

Feynman TAPS the windshield-

FEYNMAN
The glass stops the UV.

Teller, in dark glasses, is APPLYING SUNSCREEN at night-

TELLER
But what stops the glass?

Feynman looks at Teller. Looks at the glass, shakes his head,
grinning...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Groves moves to me-

GROVES
I’m heading to base camp. Best of
luck.

Groves shakes my hand.

GROVES (CONT'D) (CONT’D)
Try not to blow up the world.

INT. SAME -- MOMENTS LATER

I watch Bainbridge take his place at the KILL SWITCH.

OPPENHEIMER
Watch that needle. If the
detonators don’t charge, or if the
voltage dips below one volt, you
abort.

Bainbridge nods, watching the meter of the X-unit like a
hawk. A nervous hawk.

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

A loudspeaker broadcasts the countdown-

LOUDSPEAKER
Two minutes to detonation...

The two-minute rocket goes up-

ARMY CAPTAIN
Everybody down!

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 130.

The observers lie on the ground, facing away from the site.

ARMY CAPTAIN (CONT’D)
Do not turn around until you see
light reflected on the hills. Then
look at the explosion only through
the welder’s glass...

LOUDSPEAKER
Ninety seconds...

EXT. DISTANT OBSERVATION POINT -- CONTINUOUS

Feynman TUNES the radio into the countdown relay-
RADIO
Sixty seconds...

Lawrence jumps in next to Feynman. The scientists peer into
the distance through the windshield... Teller, pale with
sunscreen, adjusts his dark glasses...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Bainbridge PEERS at the X-unit... Frank and I peer at the
tower... The electronic counter STARTS: 45, 44, 43, 42...

OPPENHEIMER
These things are hard on your
heart.

LOUDSPEAKER
Thirty seconds...

FOUR RED LIGHTS flicker on-

EXT. STEEL TOWER, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS
The bomb WAKES, detonators on its surface HUMMING...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

The NEEDLE on the X-unit SHOOTS to the right-

BAINBRIDGE
Detonators charged!

I pull on a pair of WELDER’S GOGGLES...

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 131.

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Rabi lifts his head to peek around, welder’s glass over his
eyes... Groves shakes hands with Bush...

LOUDSPEAKER
...eighteen, seventeen...

EXT. DISTANT OBSERVATION POINT -- CONTINUOUS

Feynman peers through the windshield. Teller studies the
horizon...

RADIO
...twelve, eleven...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

A GONG sounds at T-minus 10- Bainbridge peers at the needle,
which BOBBLES- his hand FLINCHES- the needle settles...

LOUDSPEAKER
Ten, nine, eight...

Frank and I peer through the holes in the concrete.

LOUDSPEAKER (CONT’D)
...seven, six, five...

Kistiakowsky SCRAMBLES out of the bunker-

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

-and up onto the embankment, eyes locked on the tiny glow of
the distant tower...

LOUDSPEAKER
...four, three...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

I stare straight ahead...

LOUDSPEAKER
...two, one...

Bainbridge watches the needle as the counter goes down to-
... zero.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 132.

My breath stops- an agonizing instant before- SILENT LIGHT.
FULL BRIGHT NOON SUNNY DAYLIGHT.

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Rabi sees SUDDEN DAYTIME- turns to the LIGHT, peers through
the welder’s glass at BLINDING SILENT WHITE...

EXT. DISTANT OBSERVATION POINT -- CONTINUOUS

Lawrence is stepping out of the car as Feynman SHUTS his eyes
against INSTANT DAYLIGHT... a HUSHED INTAKE OF BREATH from
the crowd of sunglasses-clad distant observers...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

All we can hear is my TREMULOUS BREATHING as the LIGHT
becomes less BLINDING, resolving into a FIREBALL, BRIGHT AS
THE SUN, BUT GIANT... I YANK off my goggles... watch the
ROILING PLASMA become more visible in its HELLISH
CONTORTIONS... CLIMBING into the sky like the DEVIL’S CLAW...

My PUPILS are PINPRICKS-

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
Now I am become Death, destroyer of
worlds...

And then- CRACK!!... !!!... !!!!... !!!!!...

I am hit by the WIND and DUST of the SHOCKWAVE-

THE THUNDER OF A THOUSAND STORMS ROLLS OVER, DEAFENING-

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Kistiakowsky is BLOWN OFF HIS FEET...

INT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

With the wave of DARK THUNDER, TERRIBLE BEAUTY GIVES WAY TO
FEAR... I TREMBLE as I watch the glowing cloud climb to its
full height, its inner fire dimming to a HELLISH SCARLET...
DUST CLOUD RISING, CRACKLING WITH PURPLISH ENERGY...

As the sound diminishes to a RUMBLE and night REGAINS the
desert floor, Frank turns to me-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 133.

FRANK
(quiet)
It worked.

I nod, awestruck...

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Startled murmurs, then a few claps... then CRAZY, CHEERING,
CLAPPING, DANCING... in the middle of it all Rabi tries to
understand what just happened...

EXT. SAME -- CONTINUOUS

ECSTATIC CHEERING... even Teller SMILES... Feynman pulls out
some BONGOS and hops onto the hood of the truck... people
DANCE to his PAGAN RHYTHM as the dawn CREEPS IN...

EXT. SOUTH OBSERVATION POST, TRINITY TEST SITE -- CONTINUOUS

Kistiakowsky GRABS me in a big HUG- steps back- holding out
his hand for payment. I pull out my wallet, frown- there’s
nothing in it-

OPPENHEIMER
I’m good for it.

Kistiakowsky GRINS-

KISTIAKOWSKY
Yes, you are! Yes, you are!

EXT. BASE CAMP, TRINITY TEST SITE -- MOMENTS LATER

Rabi, still amidst the celebration, watches a car pull up.

I get out, walking like GARY FUCKING COOPER- the crowd spots
me... goes NUTS.

Groves turns to an AIDE -

GROVES
Get me Potsdam. Right away.

I nod at Groves, move through the sea of congratulations to
find Serber...

OPPENHEIMER
Get a message to Kitty...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 134.

Serber’s face falls, perturbed-

SERBER
We can’t say anything-

OPPENHEIMER
Just tell her to bring in the
sheets.

Serber grins. I spot Groves on a FIELD TELEPHONE- then am
HOISTED ONTO JOYFUL SHOULDERS...

Genres: Drama, Historical, War
Tone: Tense, Dramatic, Intense, Emotional, Hopeful

Summary At the Steel Tower, Trinity Test Site, General Groves, J. Robert Oppenheimer, and other personnel prepare for the first nuclear test. Amidst stormy weather and tense discussions about the test's timing and implications, the arming party departs for the tower, and the countdown begins. The successful test brings celebration, relief, and a dramatic shift in tone, despite the potential catastrophic consequences.

Strengths

Building tension
Emotional depth
Realistic portrayal of historical event

Weaknesses

Limited character development for supporting characters

General Critique

The scene is very long and could be shortened to make it more impactful.
The dialogue is a bit repetitive, and some of the scientific jargon could be simplified to make it more accessible to a general audience.
The scene lacks a clear focus and could benefit from a stronger central conflict.
The characters are not particularly well-developed, and the audience may have difficulty relating to them.
The pacing is a bit slow, and the scene could benefit from some more action or suspense.

General Suggestions

Consider cutting some of the unnecessary dialogue and scientific jargon.
Focus the scene on a specific conflict or goal.
Develop the characters more by giving them clear motivations and backstories.
Add some action or suspense to the scene to keep the audience engaged.
Consider breaking the scene up into smaller, more manageable chunks.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly impactful, effectively building tension and emotion while providing insight into the characters' thoughts and fears.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of the Trinity Test and the potential consequences of the atomic bomb are central to the scene, driving the plot forward and setting the stage for the climax.

Plot: 9

The plot is engaging and well-developed, focusing on the preparations and execution of the Trinity Test, with high stakes and emotional resonance.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the historical event of the Trinity Test, exploring the personal and ethical dilemmas faced by the characters. The authenticity of the dialogue and actions adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters, especially J. Robert Oppenheimer, are well-defined and their inner struggles add depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 7

J. Robert Oppenheimer experiences a moment of realization and acceptance of the consequences of his work, leading to a subtle character change.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to ensure the success of the atomic bomb test and prove the viability of the project. This reflects their desire for scientific achievement and validation of their work.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to oversee the safe detonation of the bomb and communicate the results to the relevant authorities. This reflects the immediate challenge of managing the test and its aftermath.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

The conflict between the characters' fears and the necessity of the test creates tension and drama.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with the characters facing internal and external challenges that test their beliefs and values. The uncertainty of the bomb test outcome adds to the opposition and suspense.

High Stakes: 10

The stakes are incredibly high, as the success or failure of the Trinity Test will have far-reaching consequences for the characters and the world.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by showcasing the pivotal moment of the Trinity Test and its implications for the characters and the world.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is somewhat predictable in its outcome, as the historical context of the Trinity Test is well-known. However, the personal and ethical dilemmas faced by the characters add an element of unpredictability to the narrative.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of atomic weapons and the potential for catastrophic consequences. This challenges the protagonist's beliefs about the morality of their work and the impact it may have on the world.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions, including fear, awe, and anticipation, making it highly impactful.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue effectively conveys the tension and emotion of the moment, providing insight into the characters' thoughts and fears.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high stakes, dramatic tension, and emotional depth. The impending detonation of the bomb creates a sense of urgency and suspense that keeps the audience invested.

Pacing: 9

The pacing of the scene is expertly crafted, building tension and suspense leading up to the climax of the bomb detonation. The rhythm of the dialogue and action sequences contributes to the effectiveness of the scene.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for a screenplay, with clear scene headings, dialogue, and action descriptions. It is well-organized and easy to follow.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that builds tension and suspense leading up to the climax of the bomb detonation. It effectively conveys the sequence of events and character interactions.

INT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Kitty wrangles the kitchen phone while she feeds our baby
daughter and young son-

KITTY
Sorry. Yes, Charlotte, go ahead.

CHARLOTTE
(over phone)
Well, I don’t know, he just said to
tell you to bring in the sheets.

Kitty freezes, letting the phone come off her ear...

CHARLOTTE (CONT’D)
(over phone)
Kitty? Kitty?

Kitty smiles, tears forming. It is done.

FADE OUT.

FADE IN:

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY
I watch CRATES hoisted on trucks by the army...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
They musn’t drop it through cloud
cover-

INT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I am talking to the AIR FORCE OFFICER who is supervising the
crating of equipment-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 135.

OPPENHEIMER
If they detonate it too high in the
air, the blast won’t be as powerful-

AIR FORCE OFFICER
With respect, Dr Oppenheimer. We’ll
take it from here.

I lose sight of the bomb as THE CRATE IS CLOSED.

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Groves appears at my side, watching the loading...

OPPENHEIMER
Did Truman brief Stalin at Potsdam?

GROVES
'Brief' would be an overstatement.
He referred to a powerful new
weapon, Stalin said he hoped we’d
make good use of it against Japan.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s it?

GROVES
Robert, we’ve given them an ace.
It’s for them to play the hand.

Frustrated, I drop my cigarette and GRIND it out-

OPPENHEIMER
You’re aiming for the 6th?

GROVES
That’s up to the CO in the Pacific.

OPPENHEIMER
Should I come with you to
Washington?

GROVES
What for?

OPPENHEIMER
Well... you’ll keep me informed?

Groves turns to leave -

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 136.

GROVES
Of course.
(looks back)
As best I can.

I watch Groves leave, uneasy. A truck pulls out, REVEALING
TELLER. He crosses, watching the loaded truck move away...

TELLER
Would the Japanese surrender if
they knew what was coming?

OPPENHEIMER
I don’t know.

TELLER
Have you seen Szilard’s petition?

OPPENHEIMER
Yeah. What the hell does Szilard
know about the Japanese?

I look at Teller.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
You’re not signing it?

TELLER
A lot of people have.

OPPENHEIMER
Edward, the fact that we built this
bomb doesn’t give us any more right
or responsibility to decide how
it’s used than anyone else.

TELLER
But we’re the only people who know
about it.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ve told Stimson the various
opinions of the community.

TELLER
But what’s your opinion?

I watch another truck pull out...

OPPENHEIMER
Once it’s used, nuclear war, maybe
all war, becomes unthinkable.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 137.

TELLER
Until somebody builds a bigger
bomb.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Serious, Contemplative

Summary Kitty Oppenheimer is informed that the bomb is ready, while J. Robert Oppenheimer discusses its deployment details with an Air Force officer. General Groves shares that Truman only briefly mentioned the bomb to Stalin, causing Oppenheimer concern. Edward Teller reveals Szilard's petition against the bomb's use, highlighting a conflict between shared responsibility and unique knowledge. The scene ends with Oppenheimer expressing concerns about nuclear war, and Teller raising the possibility of an arms race.

Strengths

Strong character development
Compelling dialogue
Exploration of moral dilemmas

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be too expository
Lack of visual action

General Critique

The dialogue is a bit clunky and unnatural. For example, when Kitty is on the phone with Charlotte, she says, 'Sorry. Yes, Charlotte, go ahead.' This sounds like something someone would say in a business setting, not in a casual conversation with a friend.
The scene is a bit too short. It could be expanded to give the reader a better understanding of what is going on and why the characters are feeling the way they do.
The scene could be more visually interesting. For example, you could include more details about the setting or the characters' appearance.
The scene could be more emotionally engaging. For example, you could include more details about the characters' thoughts and feelings, or you could have them engage in a more intense conversation.

General Suggestions

Revise the dialogue to make it more natural and conversational.
Expand the scene to give the reader a better understanding of what is going on and why the characters are feeling the way they do.
Include more details about the setting or the characters' appearance to make the scene more visually interesting.
Include more details about the characters' thoughts and feelings, or have them engage in a more intense conversation to make the scene more emotionally engaging.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is well-written, engaging, and thought-provoking, with strong character dynamics and moral dilemmas that add depth to the story.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of the scene revolves around the ethical implications of developing and using the atomic bomb, as well as the personal struggles of the characters involved.

Plot: 7

The plot of the scene focuses on the decision-making process regarding the use of the atomic bomb and the tensions between Oppenheimer and Teller.

Originality: 8

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the ethical dilemmas of nuclear weapons development, with authentic character interactions and dialogue that feel true to the historical context.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters in the scene, particularly Oppenheimer and Teller, are well-developed and their conflicting viewpoints create compelling drama.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer and Teller experience internal conflict and growth as they confront their beliefs and values.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to grapple with the moral implications of creating the atomic bomb and the responsibility that comes with this knowledge.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to navigate the military and political pressures surrounding the use of the atomic bomb in World War II.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both internal and external, as the characters grapple with ethical dilemmas and personal beliefs.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas that challenge the protagonist's beliefs and values.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as the characters grapple with the decision to use a powerful and destructive weapon that could change the course of history.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by exploring the moral complexities of the atomic bomb project and setting up future conflicts and decisions.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is unpredictable in terms of the characters' decisions and the ethical dilemmas they face, keeping the audience on edge.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the ethical considerations of using nuclear weapons and the power dynamics between those who possess this knowledge.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension to contemplation, as the characters navigate difficult decisions.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, meaningful, and drives the conflict and character development in the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its high stakes, moral dilemmas, and compelling character interactions that keep the audience invested in the outcome.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, enhancing the impact of the characters' decisions and interactions.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting adheres to the expected format for a historical drama screenplay, enhancing the clarity and impact of the scene.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the tension and moral complexity of the situation.

INT. OPPENHEIMER HOUSE, LOS ALAMOS -- NIGHT

Kitty comes downstairs to find me sitting at the kitchen
table. The phone in front of me.

OPPENHEIMER
I thought they would call.

KITTY
It’s only the 5th.

OPPENHEIMER
In Japan it’s the 6th.

INT. OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I pace my office, agitated.

OPPENHEIMER
Charlotte? Try Groves again.

CHARLOTTE (O.S.)
Truman’s on the Radio- !

I BOLT into-

INT. FOYER, OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE -- CONTINUOUS

Charlotte is patching the PA to the radio-

TRUMAN
(over radio)
...Sixteen hours ago an American
airplane dropped one bomb on
Hiroshima and destroyed its
usefulness to the enemy...

INT. OFFICE, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

Frank is doing paperwork when the PA WHISTLES-

TRUMAN
(over PA)
That bomb had more power than
twenty thousand tons of TNT...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 138.

INT. CORRIDOR, T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

As Frank emerges, others DRIFT into the corridor, shocked...

TRUMAN
(over PA)
It is an atomic bomb. It is a
harnessing of the basic power of
the universe...

He hears BANGING and CHEERING- through the window SOLDIERS
BEAT on trash-can lids. Frank and the scientists try
uncertain smiles and handshakes...

INT. OPPENHEIMER’S OFFICE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I listen to the radio-

TRUMAN
(over radio)
The force from which the sun draws
its power has been loosed against
those who brought war to the Far
East...

CHARLOTTE (O.S.)
Groves on one!

I white-knuckle the phone...

GROVES
(over phone)
I’m very proud of you and all of
your people.

OPPENHEIMER
It went alright?

GROVES
(over phone)
Apparently it went with a
tremendous bang.

OPPENHEIMER
Everybody here is feeling
Reasonably good about it. It’s been
a long road.

GROVES
(over phone)
I think one of the wisest things I
ever did was when I selected the
director of Los Alamos.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 139.

I gently put down the phone...

TRUMAN
(over radio)
We have spent two billion
dollars...

EXT. LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

I walk in a relieved daze...

TRUMAN (CONT'D)
(over radio)
...on the greatest scientific
gamble in history and won.

Horns HONK, soldiers CHEER... people WAVE... I nod back...

INT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- NIGHT

A restless, excitable CROWD is packed into the bleachers,
like a HIGH-SCHOOL PEP RALLY...

INT. LOBBY, FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

Kitty reaches forward and adjusts my tie. We hear the sound
of DOZENS OF FEET STAMPING RHYTHMICALLY...

INT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

The impatient crowd is STAMPING IN UNISON...

INT. LOBBY, FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

Kitty nods at me, I take a breath and PUSH through the door-

INT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

As I walk past the rear bleachers I get a close view of
DOZENS OF FEET STAMPING IN UNISON... the STAMPING FEET GET
FASTER as I approach the stage...

The STAMPING GROWS OPPRESSIVE- FASTER and FASTER until RHYTHM
BREAKS, causing CACOPHONY which PEAKS as I step up...

I raise my hands in a theatrically victorious gesture- the
crowd CHEERS...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 140.

OPPENHEIMER
The world will remember this day.

LOUDER CHEERING...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It’s too early to determine what
the results of the bombing are...

Though the crowd is still CHEERING, their sound DIMINISHES...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
But I’m sure the Japanese didn’t
like it-

CHEERS. CHEERS. CHEERS. BUT NO SOUND. As I look out at the
EXCITED FACES I can hear my own BREATHING... I carry on-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I’m proud of what you
accomplished...

The crowd seems to go NUTS, but all we hear is the QUIET
CREAKING OF SEATS and SHUFFLE OF FEET as they REACT, HANDS
SILENTLY CLAPPING, MOUTHS SILENTLY JAWING... I try again-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I just wish we’d had it in time to
use against the Germans...

The CHEERING AND CLAPPING PEOPLE GET TO THEIR FEET in
MORTIFYING SILENCE...

I stare at them, straining to hear something, then-

PIERCING SCREAMS not cheers, as INSTANT DAYLIGHT POURS IN THE
WINDOWS- BRIGHTER AND BRIGHTER-

My eyes are pinpricks as I see CHEERING/SCREAMING MOUTHS
STRETCHED GROTESQUELY WIDE-
CRACK!!... !!!... !!!! ... THE THUNDER OF A THOUSAND STORMS
ROLLS OVER, DEAFENING-

I see FLESH RIPPED FROM THE SMILING YOUNG FACES... I see
PLASMA ROILING and the DEVIL’S CLAW reach into the night
sky... I see piles of ASHES where the young crowd was
cheering...

INT. SAME -- LATER

I DRIFT through a SILENT, KINETIC WHIRLWIND OF CELEBRATION
CLAPPED on the back, KISSED... NODDING and HOLLOW SMILES...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 141.

I see a YOUNG WOMAN LAUGHING... I STEP on something, look
down to see my foot inside a CHARRED CORPSE... I look up,
SHAKING OFF THE IMAGE... I see young people MAKING OUT under
the bleachers, a hand up a sweater... I see the young woman
again but NOW SHE JUST CRIES AND CRIES AND CRIES...

INT. LOBBY, FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

DRIFTING through... I see a young man sitting, back to the
wall, WEEPING, a woman trying to console him...

EXT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- CONTINUOUS

As I exit, REVELERS RUN PAST, JOYFUL... turning, I see a
young physicist at the wall, bent double...

As I pass, he looks up, DISTRAUGHT, VOMIT AROUND HIS MOUTH.

FADE OUT.

INT. LOBBY, OVAL OFFICE, THE WHITE HOUSE -- DAY

Relief. Gentle formality. I look at the coffee table: Time
magazine- me on the cover: "FATHER OF THE ATOMIC BOMB".

FEMALE VOICE (O.S.)
Dr Oppenheimer?

An AIDE on softly clicking heels, points at the magazine.

AIDE
Nice picture.

I look up at her. Blank.

AIDE (CONT’D)
President Truman will see you now.

INT. OVAL OFFICE -- CONTINUOUS

Truman comes from behind his desk to shake my hand-

TRUMAN
Dr Oppenheimer, it’s an honour.

OPPENHEIMER
Mr President. Secretary Byrnes.

Byrnes nods, sits. I take a seat. Truman leans on the desk.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 142.

TRUMAN
How’s it feel to be the most famous
man in the world?

I can’t think of an answer.

TRUMAN (CONT’D)
You helped save a lot of OPPENHEIMER
American lives. What we did And Nagasaki.
at Hiroshima was-
TRUMAN (CONT’D)
What?

OPPENHEIMER
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
TRUMAN
Obviously. Your invention let us
bring our boys home.

Your country owes you a great debt.

OPPENHEIMER
It was hardly my invention.

TRUMAN
It’s you on the cover of Time.
(indicates Byrnes)
Jim here tells me you’re concerned
about an arms race with the
Soviets.

OPPENHEIMER
Well, it’s that... now is our
chance to secure international
cooperation on atomic energy, and
I’m concerned-

TRUMAN
You know when the Soviets are gonna
have a bomb?

OPPENHEIMER
I’m not sure I could give a- TRUMAN (CONT’D)
Never.
I look at the President, incredulous...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Mr President, the Russians have
good physicists and abundant
resources-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 143.

TRUMAN
Abundant? I don’t think so.

OPPENHEIMER
They’ll put everything they have...

I taper off.

TRUMAN
I hear you’re leaving Los Alamos.
What should we do with it?

OPPENHEIMER
Give it back to the Indians.

Truman laughs. But I’m not joking. Truman looks to Byrnes for
help.

BYRNES
Dr Oppenheimer, if what you say
about the Soviets is true, we have
to build up Los Alamos, not shut it
down.

I WRING my hands, deeply uncomfortable...

OPPENHEIMER
Mr President, I feel that I have
blood on my hands.

Truman looks at me differently. Pulls the crisp white
handkerchief from his breast pocket and offers it-

TRUMAN
You think anyone in Hiroshima or
Nagasaki gives a shit who built the
bomb? They care who dropped it. I
did. Hiroshima isn’t about you.

Truman gestures to Byrnes, they both RISE. I get to my feet.
Awkward. As I leave I hear -

TRUMAN (CONT’D)
Don’t let that crybaby back in
here.

The door of the Oval Office CLOSES on me...

STRAUSS (V.O.)
Robert saw that hand-wringing got
him nowhere...
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 144.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Reflective, Emotional

Summary In this scene, J. Robert Oppenheimer waits for news of the atomic bomb test, only to learn of the bombing of Hiroshima. He announces the news to a crowd, who react with silence and horror. Oppenheimer meets with President Truman, expressing his concerns about the future of atomic energy, grappling with the moral implications of his creation. The scene takes place in various locations in Los Alamos, New Mexico, and the White House, over the course of a day. The main conflict is Oppenheimer's internal struggle with the morality of creating the atomic bomb and the consequences of its use.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Character development
Exploration of moral dilemmas

Weaknesses

Some scenes may be too intense for sensitive viewers

General Critique

This scene is a powerful and moving portrayal of the immediate aftermath of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It effectively conveys the horror and devastation of the events, as well as the complex emotions and reactions of those involved.
However, there are a few areas where the scene could be improved:
- **The dialogue could be more impactful and memorable.** The dialogue in this scene is largely functional in that it provides information about the events and characters involved. However, there are not many lines that truly stand out or linger in the memory.
- **The pacing could be more varied.** The scene is largely composed of a series of short, declarative sentences. This can make the scene feel monotonous and drag at times. A more varied pacing, with a mix of longer and shorter sentences, could help to create a more engaging and dynamic scene.
- **Oppenheimer is the focus of the scene, but adding some more description of the other characters can make the scene more visually interesting and provide more context.**
Overall, this is a strong scene that effectively conveys the horror and devastation of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. With some minor revisions, it could be even more powerful and engaging.

General Suggestions

Consider adding some more descriptive language to the scene, especially in the descriptions of the bombings and their aftermath.
Consider adding some more emotional depth to the characters. For example, you could explore Oppenheimer's feelings of guilt and responsibility more deeply.
Consider adding some more conflict to the scene. For example, you could have Truman and Oppenheimer clash over the decision to use the atomic bombs.
Consider reworking the dialogue to make it more impactful and memorable. For example, you could have Oppenheimer deliver a more powerful speech at the end of the scene.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is powerful, emotionally charged, and thought-provoking, effectively conveying the weight of the decisions made and the impact of the bomb's use.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of exploring the aftermath of the atomic bomb's detonation and the moral dilemma faced by the characters is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 8

The plot effectively showcases the emotional aftermath of the bomb's detonation and Oppenheimer's internal conflict, adding depth to the story.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the aftermath of the atomic bombings, delving into the personal and ethical consequences of scientific innovation. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed, especially Oppenheimer, whose internal struggle and emotional turmoil are palpable throughout the scene.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant emotional change, grappling with guilt, responsibility, and the consequences of his actions.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal is to come to terms with his role in the creation of the atomic bomb and the devastation it caused. He grapples with feelings of guilt and responsibility.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal is to navigate the political and ethical implications of the atomic bomb, including concerns about an arms race with the Soviets and the future of Los Alamos.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

The internal conflict within Oppenheimer, the moral dilemmas faced by the characters, and the emotional aftermath of the bomb's detonation create a high level of conflict.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas creating obstacles for the characters to overcome. The uncertainty of the characters' decisions adds to the tension and drama of the scene.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as the characters grapple with the moral implications of the bomb's use, their personal responsibilities, and the potential consequences of their actions.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by exploring the aftermath of the bomb's detonation, deepening the characters' arcs, and setting up future conflicts and dilemmas.

Unpredictability: 8

The scene is unpredictable in its emotional twists and turns, keeping the audience on edge and unsure of how the characters will navigate their dilemmas.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the moral responsibility of scientists and leaders in the use of powerful weapons. Oppenheimer's internal struggle reflects a clash between his scientific achievements and the human cost of those achievements.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions, particularly sadness, reflection, and a sense of moral weight, leaving a lasting impact on the audience.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue effectively conveys the characters' emotions, conflicts, and moral dilemmas, adding depth to the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its emotional depth, moral complexity, and intense character interactions. The high stakes and internal conflict keep the audience invested in the story.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and emotional impact, allowing for a gradual progression of events and character revelations.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting adheres to the expected format for its genre, allowing for clear and concise storytelling.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the emotional and narrative progression. The pacing and rhythm contribute to the scene's effectiveness.

INT. LOBBY, OVAL OFFICE, THE WHITE HOUSE -- CONTINUOUS

Walking past I notice my face staring back at me from the
cover of the magazine on the table...

STRAUSS (V.O.)
By the time I met him, he’d fully
embraced his 'father of the bomb'
reputation...

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss sits talking with the Senate Aide.

STRAUSS
He used his profile to influence
policy...

INSERT CUT: LIFE MAGAZINE- "OPPENHEIMER, NO. 1 THINKER ON
ATOMIC ENERGY"... OPPENHEIMER RUNS A GAUNTLET OF
FLASHBULBS... OPPENHEIMER AND KITTY ARE PHOTOGRAPHED AT OLDEN
MANOR...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
But all along- with McCarthy on the
rise- he knew he was vulnerable.
His brother was blacklisted by
every university in the country...

INSERT CUT: FRANK WORKS A RANCH IN COLORADO...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Lomanitz wound up working the
railroad, laying track...

INSERT CUT: LOMANITZ SWINGS A HAMMER...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Chevalier went into exile...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 145.

INSERT CUT: CHEVALIER CARRIES SHOPPING, STEPPING AROUND
CHICKENS IN A RURAL FRENCH ALLEY...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
But none of that stopped Robert
from om pushing the GAC to
recommend arms control instead of
the H-bomb.

INSERT CUT: STRAUSS MOVES THE FLOWERS ON THE TABLE IN THE
HOTEL CONFERENCE ROOM, WATCHING OPPENHEIMER...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
He was devastated when that didn’t
go his way...

INSERT CUT: HEADLINE: "TRUMAN ANNOUNCES H-BOMB PROGRAM"...

CUT TO:

INT. BALLROOM, PLAZA HOTEL -- NIGHT (COLOUR)

Drink in hand, I watch the room sing 'Happy Birthday' to
Strauss. Ruth Tolman is next to me, staring at the NEWSPAPER.

RUTH
I miss Richard more than I can
bear...

I turn to Ruth, sympathetic.

RUTH (CONT’D)
But part of me’s glad he didn’t
live to see where this is all
going.

I nod, understanding. She downs her drink and leaves.
STRAUSS (O.S.)
Robert, my son and his fiancée are
desperate to meet the father of the
atomic bomb...

Strauss is there with his adult children- I glance at them,
raise a glass, then turn away. Strauss stands there,
humiliated. The couple awkwardly moves off.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Is this a bad time?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 146.

OPPENHEIMER
What do you think, Lewis?

STRAUSS
I think it must have been a blow
for you-

OPPENHEIMER
For the world.

STRAUSS
The world? What does Fuchs mean to
rest of the world?

OPPENHEIMER
Fuchs? Klaus Fuchs?

Strauss looks at me with concern...

STRAUSS
You haven’t heard. Klaus Fuchs, the
British scientist you put onto the
implosion team at Los Alamos?

INSERT CUT: FUCHS HANDS OPPENHEIMER HIS PIPE...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Turns out he was spying for the
Soviets. The whole time. I’m sorry,
Robert, you must feel awful.
(gestures to bar)
Have another. On me.

Strauss moves off. I stand there. Frozen.

STRAUSS (V.O.)
After the truth about Fuchs came
out, they stepped up surveillance
on Robert. He knew his phone was
tapped-
CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical, Biographical
Tone: Serious, Reflective, Informative

Summary In this scene, Strauss and a Senate Aide discuss Oppenheimer's influence on policy and his vulnerability due to his brother's blacklisting. Meanwhile, Oppenheimer advocates for arms control at a hotel conference room. At a birthday party for Strauss, Oppenheimer is introduced to Strauss's adult children, but they move away awkwardly. Strauss then informs Oppenheimer about Klaus Fuchs, a British scientist who was spying for the Soviets, leaving Oppenheimer stunned. The scene is serious and contemplative, with moments of sadness and shock, and ends with Oppenheimer standing frozen after learning about Klaus Fuchs's spying.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Historical context
Character development

Weaknesses

Some exposition-heavy dialogue
Limited action

General Critique

The scene seems disjointed and lacks a clear focus. It jumps between different settings and time periods without providing a smooth transition or a logical connection between the events.
The dialogue is mostly expository and lacks subtext or emotional depth. The characters' interactions feel forced and unnatural, and they don't seem to have a genuine connection with each other.
The pacing of the scene is slow and tedious. The long stretches of exposition and the lack of engaging dialogue make it difficult for the reader to stay engaged with the story.
The scene doesn't contribute much to the overall narrative. It doesn't advance the plot or develop the characters in any meaningful way. It feels like a filler scene that could be easily removed without affecting the story.
The scene lacks visual interest. The setting is bland and uninspired, and there's nothing in the dialogue or action that would make it visually compelling on screen.

General Suggestions

Consider reworking the scene to give it a clearer focus and structure. Decide what the main purpose of the scene is and what you want to achieve with it, and then tailor the dialogue and action accordingly.
Strengthen the dialogue by making it more subtextual and emotionally resonant. Give the characters something to fight for or against, and let their motivations and desires drive the conversation.
Tighten up the pacing of the scene by cutting out unnecessary exposition and speeding up the action. Keep the dialogue concise and to the point, and use visual cues to convey information quickly and efficiently.
Make sure the scene contributes to the overall narrative by advancing the plot or developing the characters. If it doesn't serve a clear purpose, consider cutting it or rewriting it to make it more relevant to the story.
Add some visual interest to the scene by using more descriptive language and creating a more dynamic setting. Consider using lighting, color, and movement to create a visually engaging experience for the reader.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively delves into the emotional and political fallout of the atomic bomb project, with a mix of personal and historical elements.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring the repercussions of espionage and the development of the atomic bomb is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on the aftermath of the atomic bomb project and the revelation of espionage, adding depth to the characters and their relationships.

Originality: 9

The scene demonstrates a high level of originality through its fresh approach to historical events, nuanced character interactions, and ethical dilemmas.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters are complex and face moral dilemmas, especially Oppenheimer, as they navigate the consequences of their actions.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer experiences a significant emotional change as he learns about Fuchs' betrayal and faces the consequences of his actions.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to navigate the complex relationships and personal conflicts surrounding the legacy of the atomic bomb and its impact on his life.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to maintain his reputation and influence in the face of political and personal challenges.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 7

There is internal conflict within the characters as they grapple with the consequences of their actions, as well as external conflict related to espionage and political pressure.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting values, personal conflicts, and moral dilemmas that challenge the characters' beliefs and decisions.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as the characters grapple with the personal and political consequences of espionage and the development of the atomic bomb.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information about espionage, character relationships, and the aftermath of the atomic bomb project.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable due to the unexpected revelations, personal conflicts, and moral dilemmas that challenge the characters' beliefs and values.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the ethical implications of scientific advancements, personal responsibility, and the consequences of political decisions.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions of sadness, regret, and shock, especially with the revelation of espionage and its impact on the characters.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue is informative and reflective, revealing the characters' inner thoughts and conflicts.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its blend of personal drama, historical context, and moral dilemmas, keeping the audience invested in the characters' struggles.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, allowing for emotional resonance and character development.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene adheres to the expected format for its genre, effectively conveying the visual and emotional elements of the story.

Structure: 8

The structure of the scene follows a non-linear format, incorporating flashbacks and inserts to provide context and depth to the narrative.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

STRAUSS
He was followed everywhere...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 147.

INSERT CUT: OPPENHEIMER, DRIVING, CHECKS HIS REAR-VIEW
MIRROR, SPOTS A SEDAN FOLLOWING HIM...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
His trash picked through...

INSERT CUT: KITTY, FROM THE KITCHEN WINDOW, SPOTS A SUITED
MAN PICKING THROUGH THEIR TRASH...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
But it never stopped him speaking
his mind.

SENATE AIDE
A man of conviction?
STRAUSS
Sure. Or maybe he thought fame
could actually protect him. When
Eisenhower took over, Robert saw
one more chance. He took it...

INT. CORPORATE AUDITORIUM -- NIGHT (B&W)

Oppenheimer is lecturing... Strauss is in the crowd...

OPPENHEIMER
America and Russia may be likened
to two scorpions in a bottle, each
capable of killing the other, but
only at the risk of his own life.
There are various aspects of this
policy which I would like to
discuss but can’t. Follies that can
occur only when even the men who
know the facts can find no one to
talk about them, when the facts are
too secret for discussion, and thus
for thought. Candor is the only
remedy. Officials in Washington
have to start levelling with the
American people, and telling them
what the enemy already know about
the atomic armaments race.

Strauss notices two generals exchanging unfavorable looks.

STRAUSS (V.O.)
A lot of scientists blame me, but
how was I supposed to protect him?
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 148.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

STRAUSS
That was the last straw for
Robert’s enemies.

SENATE AIDE
So he had to lose his security
clearance.

STRAUSS
And with it, his credibility.

SENATE AIDE
But how could they do it? He was a
war hero- and he’d already told
everyone about his past...

STRAUSS
Borden dredged it all up again.

SENATE AIDE
But how could Borden get access to
Oppenheimer’s FBI file? Could it
have been Nichols?

STRAUSS
I can’t imagine he’d do that. But
whoever did unleashed a firestorm
that burned a path from the White
House right to my desk at the AEC.
You see them in there trying to
hang Oppenheimer around my neck.
I’ve worked my whole life to get
here- the Cabinet of the United
States of America- and now, in
front of the entire country, they
want to put me back in my place...
a lowly shoe salesman.

COUNSEL
Lewis, we can win this thing.

SENATE AIDE
I think we can make the Senate
grasp that you did your duty,
painful though it was. Will Hill’s
testimony back that up?

COUNSEL
Hill should be fine.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 149.

STRAUSS
I don’t really know him, but he was
one of Szilard’s boys in Chicago.
And they never forgave
Oppenheimer...

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Political, Historical
Tone: Serious, Tense, Reflective

Summary In a Senate office and corporate auditorium, the scene unfolds with Oppenheimer giving a lecture about the need for candor regarding atomic armaments, while Strauss, a Senate Aide, and Counsel discuss his situation. Oppenheimer's past is used against him, leading to the loss of his security clearance and credibility. The main conflict lies in the tension between his outspokenness and the surveillance he faces. The tone is serious and contemplative, with a sense of betrayal and political maneuvering. The scene ends with Strauss worried about being associated with Oppenheimer's downfall.

Strengths

Complex characters
Intriguing plot
Engaging dialogue

Weaknesses

Some scenes may be too dialogue-heavy

General Critique

The scene is a bit too long and could be shortened to make it more concise and engaging.
The dialogue is a bit stiff and unnatural, and could be rewritten to make it more conversational.
The scene could use more visual elements to make it more visually interesting.
The scene could be more impactful if it ended with a stronger conclusion.

General Suggestions

Shorten the scene by cutting out unnecessary dialogue and action.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more conversational and natural.
Add more visual elements to the scene, such as props, costumes, and lighting.
End the scene with a stronger conclusion, such as a cliffhanger or a powerful statement.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is well-written, engaging, and provides important insights into the character of Oppenheimer and the political climate surrounding him.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's downfall due to political machinations and personal choices is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 7

The plot is intricate and layered, focusing on Oppenheimer's security clearance issues and the fallout from his past relationships and associations.

Originality: 8

The scene introduces fresh perspectives on political power struggles and personal sacrifices, with authentic character actions and dialogue that reflect the complexities of the situation.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Strauss, are well-developed and complex, adding depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant emotional and professional change as he faces the consequences of his past actions.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to protect Oppenheimer and maintain his own credibility in the face of political attacks and personal doubts.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to defend himself and Oppenheimer against attacks on their credibility and security clearances.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict, both internal and external, driving the scene forward.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing personal and political challenges that threaten their credibility and security.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high for Oppenheimer, as his credibility, security clearance, and reputation are on the line.

Story Forward: 9

The scene moves the story forward significantly, setting up key conflicts and resolutions.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected twists in the plot, the shifting alliances between characters, and the unresolved conflicts that keep the audience guessing.

Philosophical Conflict: 7

The philosophical conflict revolves around the tension between truth and secrecy, as well as the consequences of speaking out against the government's policies.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension to sadness, adding depth to the narrative.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, revealing character motivations and conflicts effectively.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its tense atmosphere, sharp dialogue, and high stakes conflict that keeps the audience invested in the characters' fates.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension, revealing information at a steady pace, and maintaining the audience's interest in the unfolding drama.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions that enhance the visual storytelling.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with clear transitions between locations and engaging dialogue that drives the plot forward.

INT. LECTURE HALL, LOS ALAMOS -- NIGHT (COLOUR)

Serber and MORRISON lecture using slides we never see.

STRAUSS (V.O.)
...for not supporting their
petition against bombing Japan.

I watch as part of a large audience.

MORRISON
This was taken thirty-one days
after the bombing. Virtually
everyone in the street for nearly a
mile around was instantly and
seriously burned by the heat of the
bomb.

Serber changes the slide. I react slightly.

MORRISON (CONT’D)
The hot flash burned suddenly and
strangely.

SERBER
The Japanese told us of people who
wore striped clothing upon whom the
skin was burned in stripes.

Changes slide. I LOOK AWAY from the screen. I hear the sound
of FEET STAMPING as Morrison continues...
MORRISON
There were many who thought
themselves lucky, who crawled out
of the ruins of their homes only
slightly injured. But they died
anyway. They died days or weeks
later from the radium-like rays
emitted in great numbers at the
moment of the explosion.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 150.

EXT. T-SECTION, LOS ALAMOS -- NIGHT

I light my pipe. Teller comes up.

TELLER
Did you read this crap in the
papers? A British physicist saying
the atomic bombings weren’t the
last act of World War II but the
first act of this cold war with
Russia.

OPPENHEIMER
Which physicist?

TELLER
I think you knew him. Patrick
Blackett?

I remember-

INSERT CUT: BLACKETT TAKES A MOUTHFUL OF APPLE...

I smile to myself, rueful...

OPPENHEIMER
He may not be wrong. We bombed an
enemy that was essentially
defeated.

TELLER
Robert, you have all the influence
now.

I look at Teller.

TELLER (CONT’D)
Urge them to continue my research
on the Super.
OPPENHEIMER
I neither can nor will, Edward.

Teller looks at me. Hurt.

TELLER
Why?

OPPENHEIMER
It’s not the right use of our
resources.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 151.

TELLER
Is that what you really believe?

I say nothing.

TELLER (CONT’D)
J. Robert Oppenheimer. Sphinx-like
guru of the atom. Nobody knows what
you believe. Do you?

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
I hope that in years to come you
will look back on your work here
with pride...

EXT. FULLER LODGE, LOS ALAMOS -- DAY

I give my leaving address, Groves by my side. The THOUSANDS
of members of the Los Alamos community listen...

OPPENHEIMER
But today that pride must be
tempered with a profound concern.
If atomic weapons are to be added
to the arsenals of a warring
world... then the day will come
when people will curse the name of
Los Alamos and Hiroshima. The
peoples of this world must unite or
they will perish. The atomic bomb
has spelled out these words for all
men to understand.

THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE echoes around the mountains...

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- MORNING (B&W)
Strauss and Counsel drink coffee. The Senate Aide BURSTS in-

SENATE AIDE
Sorry, Admiral- I stopped off to
get this-

The Senate Aide holds up TIME MAGAZINE: Strauss is on the
cover- "THE STRAUSS AFFAIR, SENATE V. PRESIDENT".

SENATE AIDE (CONT’D)
It seems pretty favorable...

The Counsel looks over Senate Aide’s shoulder-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 152.

COUNSEL
There’s Oppenheimer. What’s the
caption?

SENATE AIDE
'J. Robert Oppenheimer- Strauss
fought him...
(pauses)
...and the US won.'

COUNSEL
That’ll work.

The Senate Aide is perturbed. Looks up at Strauss.

SENATE AIDE
Those are your words. From
yesterday.

STRAUSS
We needed to pivot.

SENATE AIDE
But how could you know what Time
magazine would write...?

STRAUSS
Henry Luce is an old friend.

The Senate Aide stares at Strauss, realizing...

SENATE AIDE
You’ve sat there and let me tell
you how this is done. But you’ve
been far ahead. All along...

STRAUSS
Survival in Washington is about
knowing how to get things done.

SENATE AIDE
You get things done. What was it
you said about Borden? Why get
caught holding the knife yourself?
I’m beginning to think that Borden
was holding the knife for you.

STRAUSS
Oh?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 153.

SENATE AIDE
As Chairman of the AEC, you had
access to Oppenheimer’s file...

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I sit there testifying. Robb checks his notes...

ROBB
In the years following the war,
would you say you exerted a great
influence on the atomic policies of
the USA?

OPPENHEIMER
I think 'great' would be an
overstatement.

ROBB
Really? If we look at the issue of
isotopes... were you not personally
responsible for destroying all
opposition to their export?

I think back to my congressional testimony...

INT. CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ROOM -- DAY

The room is all chuckles and smiles at my performance...

OPPENHEIMER
You can use a bottle of beer for
making atomic weapons, in fact, you
do... I’d say isotopes are less
useful for atomic energy than
electronic components, but more
useful than a sandwich. I’d put
them somewhere in between.

The room LAUGHS appreciatively. I lean over to Volpe -

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
How’d I do?

Volpe glances back at Lewis Strauss, eyes down, ENRAGED...

VOLPE
Maybe a little too well, Robert.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 154.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

OPPENHEIMER
I was the spokesman, but the
opinion was unanimous amongst
scientists.

GRAY
That will do for today. We’ll
reconvene tomorrow when we’ll hear
from Dr Isidor Rabi.

INT. HOTEL ROOM, WASHINGTON, DC -- NIGHT

I sit on the bed, Garrison and his team go over notes. Kitty
raids the mini-bar.

GARRISON
Rabi will help us. But it’s going
to come down to how much influence
Borden has been able to exert on
Teller-

Kitty is laughing as she opens a miniature with her teeth.

GARRISON (CONT’D)
Did I say something funny?

KITTY
Borden, Borden, Borden. We all know
it’s Strauss.

OPPENHEIMER
Kitty, Lewis brought me to
Princeton.

KITTY
And you humiliated him in front of
Congress.
OPPENHEIMER
That was six years ago.

KITTY
The truly vindictive are as patient
as saints.

GARRISON
Strauss claims to be neutral.

Kitty THROWS the miniature at me- it SMASHES into the wall-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 155.

KITTY
Wake up! It’s always been Strauss-
and you know it. Why won’t you
fight him, for Christ’s sake?!

She stalks into the bathroom, SLAMMING the door. Garrison
watches me clean up the miniature...

GARRISON
I’ve said it before, Robert. We
should not put her on the stand-

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Reflective, Tense

Summary Robert Oppenheimer attends a lecture at Los Alamos about the aftermath of the atomic bombing in Japan, followed by a conversation with Teller about the future of nuclear research and the Cold War. Oppenheimer then gives a speech to the Los Alamos community about the importance of uniting nations to avoid nuclear war. The following scene takes place in a senate office, where Strauss discusses Oppenheimer's influence and the Time Magazine cover featuring Oppenheimer.

Strengths

Exploration of moral dilemmas
Emotional depth
Character development

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly expository
Lack of visual elements in the screenplay

General Critique

The scene's focus shifts frequently between Oppenheimer's conversation with Teller and his address to the Los Alamos community, making it feel disjointed and lacking a clear narrative flow.
The dialogue between Oppenheimer and Teller is somewhat repetitive and doesn't advance the plot or character development significantly.
The transition to the address at Fuller Lodge lacks context and disrupts the flow of the scene, as it doesn't relate to the preceding conversation.
The use of voiceover during Oppenheimer's address is unnecessary and potentially confusing, as it adds an additional layer of narration that could be conveyed through the dialogue or visuals.
The scene ends abruptly with Oppenheimer's address, leaving the audience with little resolution or closure to the conversation with Teller.

General Suggestions

Consider streamlining the scene by focusing primarily on either the conversation with Teller or the address at Fuller Lodge, rather than attempting to combine them.
Expand on the dialogue between Oppenheimer and Teller to explore their perspectives and motivations more deeply, and to create a more engaging and dynamic exchange.
Provide more context for the transition to Oppenheimer's address by establishing the time and location of the event, and by showing how it relates to the preceding conversation.
Eliminate the voiceover during Oppenheimer's address and instead convey his message through the dialogue and visuals, such as his facial expressions and the reactions of the audience.
Add a brief resolution or closure to the scene after Oppenheimer's address, such as a reaction from the audience or a reflection from Oppenheimer on the significance of the event.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively conveys the emotional weight and ethical complexity of the characters' decisions, creating a tense and reflective atmosphere.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of grappling with the consequences of creating the atomic bomb and the moral implications of its use is well-developed and thought-provoking.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on the aftermath of the atomic bombings and the characters' internal struggles, providing depth and complexity to the narrative.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on the ethical implications of scientific advancements and the personal struggles of individuals involved in groundbreaking research. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters are well-developed and their internal conflicts are portrayed with depth and nuance, adding layers to the story.

Character Changes: 7

Several characters undergo internal changes and confront moral dilemmas, adding depth to their arcs and development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to reconcile his role in the development of atomic weapons with the devastating consequences they have caused. He grapples with his moral responsibility and the impact of his actions on humanity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to navigate the political and personal conflicts surrounding his work on atomic weapons, including facing opposition from colleagues and dealing with the repercussions of his actions.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of internal and external conflict present in the scene, adding tension and drama to the narrative.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, presenting conflicting viewpoints and challenging the protagonist's beliefs and decisions, creating a sense of uncertainty and tension.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes of moral responsibility, ethical dilemmas, and the impact of the atomic bomb on humanity create a sense of urgency and importance in the scene.

Story Forward: 7

The scene moves the story forward by exploring the aftermath of the atomic bombings and setting up future conflicts and dilemmas for the characters.

Unpredictability: 7

The scene is unpredictable in its exploration of moral ambiguity and ethical dilemmas, keeping the audience on edge with unexpected revelations and character interactions.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict revolves around the ethical implications of scientific advancements and the moral responsibility of scientists in creating destructive technologies. It challenges the protagonist's beliefs about the greater good and the consequences of his work.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The scene evokes a range of emotions, including sadness, concern, and reflection, making it emotionally impactful for the audience.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue effectively conveys the characters' emotions and conflicts, contributing to the overall tone and atmosphere of the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its emotional intensity, moral dilemmas, and interpersonal conflicts that draw the audience into the protagonist's internal struggles.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and emotional depth, allowing for moments of reflection and introspection while maintaining a sense of urgency and conflict.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene adheres to the expected formatting for its genre, utilizing visual cues and dialogue to create a compelling narrative.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the protagonist's internal and external conflicts, building tension and emotional depth.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- MORNING (B&W)

The Senate Aide stares at Strauss in morbid fascination...

SENATE AIDE
It wasn’t Nichols or Hoover STRAUSS
or one of Truman’s guys- it Borden didn’t take any
was you. You gave the file to convincing...
Borden... you set him on
Oppenheimer, convinced him to-

INT. NICHOLS’ OFFICE, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- NIGHT (B&W)

Nichols is behind the desk, but Strauss commands the room,
instructing Borden...

NICHOLS
Take your time, use the entire
file. Write up your conclusions and
send them to the FBI.

BORDEN
The material’s extensive- but it
isn’t new.

STRAUSS
Your conclusions will be. And
they’ll have to be answered.

NICHOLS
Hoover passes them to McCarthy?

STRAUSS
(shakes head)
Oppenheimer’s too slippery for that
self-promoting clown.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 156.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I’ve talked it over with Hoover-
he’ll hold McCarthy at bay while
you do this at the AEC.

NICHOLS
A trial?

STRAUSS
No trial. You can’t give
Oppenheimer a platform, you can’t
martyr him. We need a systematic
destruction of Oppenheimer’s
credibility so he can never again
speak on matters of national
security.

BORDEN
What, then?

STRAUSS
A shabby little room, far from the
limelight...

INSERT CUT: ROOM 2022 IS OPENED UP. DUSTED, TABLES
ARRANGED...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
A simple bureaucratic procedure-
his Q clearance is up for renewal.
(points at Borden)
You send your accusations to the
FBI...

INSERT CUT: BORDEN PULLS PAPER FROM HIS TYPEWRITER. HE SEALS
AN ENVELOPE...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Hoover sends them to the AEC...
(points at Nichols)
You’re forced to act. You write up
an indictment...

INT. FRONT HALL, STRAUSS RESIDENCE -- NIGHT (B&W)

Strauss opens the door to Oppenheimer...

STRAUSS (V.O.)
Tell Oppenheimer his security
clearance is not being renewed...

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 157.

INT. LIVING ROOM, STRAUSS HOUSE -- NIGHT (B&W)

Nichols hands the indictment to Oppenheimer, who sits and
reads. Strauss hands Oppenheimer a drink...

STRAUSS (V.O.)
But offer him the chance to appeal.

Oppenheimer looks up from the letter.

OPPENHEIMER
Can I keep this?

NICHOLS
No.

STRAUSS
As you can see, Robert, it’s not
yet signed. If you do decide to
appeal, they’ll have to send you a
copy...

Oppenheimer rises. In a daze. Strauss takes his arm...

INT. NICHOLS’ OFFICE, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- NIGHT (B&W)

STRAUSS
When he appeals, I appoint a
board...

INSERT CUT: THE GRAY BOARD TAKE THEIR SEATS IN ROOM...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
They will, of course, have counsel-

INSERT CUT: ROGER ROBB TAKES HIS SEAT...

NICHOLS
A prosecutor?

STRAUSS
In all but name.

NICHOLS
Who?

STRAUSS
Roger Robb.

NICHOLS
Ouch.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 158.

STRAUSS
Robb will have security clearance
to examine Oppenheimer’s file...

INSERT CUT: ROBB OPENS A MASSIVE BLACK BINDER...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
As will the Gray Board...

INSERT CUT: A BLACK BINDER IS PLACED IN FRONT OF EACH BOARD
MEMBER...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Defence counsel will not.

INSERT CUT: GARRISON, AT HIS TABLE IN ROOM 2022, LOOKS
COVETOUSLY AT THE BLACK BINDERS GRACING EACH PLACE BUT HIS...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
A closed hearing- no audience, no
reporters, no burden of proof.

NICHOLS
No burden of proof?

Strauss sips his drink. Smiles at Nichols...

STRAUSS
We’re not convicting, just denying.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (B&W)

Oppenheimer is seated at the witness table...

OPPENHEIMER
This answer is a summary of
relevant aspects of my life in more
or less chronological order...

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

The Senate Aide looks like he ate a bad nut.

STRAUSS
What is it you said? 'This is just
how it’s done'?

SENATE AIDE
Forgive my naïveté.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 159.

STRAUSS
Amateurs seek the sun and get
eaten, power stays in the shadows.

SENATE AIDE
(points to Time magazine)
You’re out of the shadows, now.

STRAUSS
That’s why this has to work.

SENATE AIDE
Well, Teller’s testifying this
morning - that’ll help, then Hill
is in the afternoon.

COUNSEL
Hill should help us, too.

CUT TO:

CLOSE ON: A LETTER- AEC LETTERHEAD- "DEAR DR OPPENHEIMER..."

STRAUSS (O.S.)
As you can see, it’s not yet
signed...

INT. LIVING ROOM, STRAUSS HOUSE -- LATER (COLOUR)

I look up from Nichols’ letter- SHELL-SHOCKED.

STRAUSS
If you do decide to appeal, they’ll
have to send you a copy...

I hand the letter back to Nichols. Strauss takes my arm...

EXT. STRAUSS HOUSE -- CONTINUOUS

Strauss gently guides me down the steps...

STRAUSS
Take my car and driver. I insist.

OPPENHEIMER
I’ll have to consult my lawyers.

STRAUSS
Of course. But don’t take too long,
I can’t keep Nichols at bay. I’m
sorry it’s come to this, Robert.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 160.

Strauss, like a parent, puts me into the back of his car.

INT. STRAUSS CAR -- NIGHT

I sit in the back, shadows flicking across my face...

OPPENHEIMER (V.O.)
Nichols wants me to fight so that
he can get it all in the record...

INT. VOLPE’S HOUSE -- NIGHT

Kitty and I sit with Joe Volpe.

OPPENHEIMER
Strauss thinks I should walk
away...

VOLPE
You could. Your security clearance
expires tomorrow. Just let it go.

KITTY
You’d be accepting the charges!
You’ll lose your job. Your
reputation, your place in history!
We’ll lose our house. Robert, we
have to fight.

I look at Kitty. Nod.

VOLPE
As AEC Counsel, I can’t represent
you. I’ll call Lloyd Garrison.

OPPENHEIMER
He’s good.

VOLPE
The best. But I have to warn you...

Genres: Drama, Political, Thriller
Tone: Suspenseful, Intense, Manipulative, Calculating

Summary In this tense and serious scene, Lewis Strauss reveals himself as the provider of the file that led to Oppenheimer's investigation. Nichols and Borden discuss the plan to use bureaucratic procedures to ruin Oppenheimer's reputation without a trial. Oppenheimer is informed that his security clearance will not be renewed, and he is given the chance to appeal. The Gray Board, with Roger Robb as prosecutor, will conduct a closed hearing without burden of proof. Teller and Hill will testify against Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer's wife, Kitty, encourages him to fight the charges, while others advise him to let it go. The scene ends with Oppenheimer and his wife discussing their options with Volpe, and Strauss urging Oppenheimer to make a decision quickly.

Strengths

Intriguing concept
Complex characters
Sharp dialogue
High level of conflict and tension

Weaknesses

Lack of visual elements
Heavy reliance on dialogue

General Critique

The scene is well-written and engaging, but it could be improved by adding more details to the setting and characters.
The dialogue is natural and believable, but it could be more concise and to the point.
The pacing is good, but the scene could be shortened by cutting out some of the unnecessary dialogue.
The overall tone of the scene is serious and suspenseful, but it could be lightened up with some humor.

General Suggestions

Add more details to the setting to help the reader visualize the scene.
Provide more backstory on the characters so that the reader can better understand their motivations.
Cut out some of the unnecessary dialogue to make the scene more concise.
Add some humor to the scene to lighten up the mood.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly engaging, filled with tension, and sets up a pivotal moment in the story. The manipulation and power dynamics add depth to the characters and plot.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of a bureaucratic procedure to discredit Oppenheimer without a trial is intriguing and adds layers to the narrative. It delves into the complexities of power and morality.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by the internal conflict and power struggle within the Atomic Energy Commission, setting the stage for Oppenheimer's future challenges. It advances the storyline effectively.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh approach to political intrigue and power plays, with a focus on behind-the-scenes manipulation and control. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and contribute to the authenticity of the world depicted.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed, with Strauss portrayed as a manipulative figure and Oppenheimer as a conflicted protagonist. Their interactions and decisions drive the scene forward.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant change as he faces the threat to his reputation and career. His decision to fight back shows his resilience and determination.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to maintain control and power over the situation involving Oppenheimer. Strauss wants to ensure that Oppenheimer's credibility is destroyed without giving him a platform to defend himself.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to orchestrate a systematic destruction of Oppenheimer's credibility without giving him a chance to defend himself.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer and the Atomic Energy Commission, as well as the internal power struggles, creates a high level of tension and suspense. The stakes are raised as the scene progresses.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting goals and power dynamics creating uncertainty and tension.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's career and reputation are on the line. The outcome of the bureaucratic procedure will have far-reaching consequences for him and the future of nuclear research.

Story Forward: 9

The scene significantly moves the story forward by setting up the conflict between Oppenheimer and the Atomic Energy Commission. It establishes the stakes and foreshadows future events.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the shifting power dynamics and the protagonist's manipulative tactics.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the ethics of manipulating information and denying someone the opportunity to defend themselves. It challenges the protagonist's beliefs about power and control.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from tension and anxiety to betrayal and determination. The characters' internal struggles and the moral dilemmas add depth to the emotional impact.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp and impactful, revealing the characters' motivations and the high stakes involved. It adds depth to the scene and enhances the tension.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its tension-filled dialogue, strategic plotting, and high stakes.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension and suspense, with strategic pauses and scene transitions.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with clear action lines and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with clear scene transitions and a focus on dialogue-driven interactions.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I watch Garrison scramble to make notes...

VOLPE (V.O.)
This won’t be a fair fight.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 161.

ROBB
During your interview with Boris
Pash in 1943, did you refer to
microfilm?

OPPENHEIMER
No.

Robb consults a paper in his black binder.

ROBB
You never said 'a man at the
consulate expert in the use of
microfilm'?

OPPENHEIMER
Not specifically.

GARRISON
I’d like to know what document Mr
Robb is quoting from, and if we
might be furnished with a copy.

ROBB
The document is classified.

GARRISON
Members of the board, we’re now
hearing some new account of the
interview... shouldn’t we get back
to firsthand information?

ROBB
This is first-hand.

GARRISON
How so?

Robb looks at Gray. Who nods.

ROBB
There’s a recording of the
interview.

Garrison is shocked. I shake my head.

GARRISON
You’ve let my client sit up here
and potentially perjure himself and
all this time you had a recording-?

ROBB
No one told your client to
misrepresent his former answers-

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 162.

GARRISON
Misrepresent? It was twelve years
ago!
(to the board)
Can we listen to this recording?

ROBB
Mr Garrison, you don’t have
clearance.

I SNAP at the absurdity-

OPPENHEIMER
But you’re reading it into the
transcript!

Garrison puts a calming hand on my arm-

GARRISON
Is this proceeding interested in
truth or entrapment? Because if
it’s truth...

Garrison points at the BLACK BINDERS in front of them all-

GARRISON (CONT’D)
Where’s the disclosure? Where’s the
witness list?

GRAY
Mr Garrison, this is not a trial-
as you’re well aware. Evidentiary
rules do not apply. We’re dealing
with national security.

GARRISON
How does national security prevent
the prosecution from providing us a
list of witnesses?!

Gray looks at Garrison, stony-faced.

GRAY
Perhaps a brief recess is in OPPENHEIMER
order! If I may? You gentlemen have
my words. If you say it’s
from a transcript then I’ll
accept it. I’ve already
explained that I made up a
cock-and-bull story.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 163.

ROBB
But not the level of detail. Why
would anyone present such an
elabourate fiction?

OPPENHEIMER
Because I was an idiot. I found
myself trying to give a tip to the
intelligence people, without
realizing that when you give a tip
you have to offer the whole story.
Asked for details, I went off on a
false pattern. There was no
microfilm, no consular attaché.
There weren’t three or more people
involved on the project. There was
one person involved. That was me.

ROBB
Why lie?

OPPENHEIMER
Clearly with the intention of not
revealing who was the intermediary.

ROBB
Your friend Haakon Chevalier. The
Communist.

OPPENHEIMER
Yes.

ROBB
Is he still your friend?

I look from smug Robb to the expectant board members...

OPPENHEIMER
Chevalier is my friend.

Robb backs down, SATISFIED.

Genres: Drama, Thriller
Tone: Tense, Confrontational, Defensive, Intriguing

Summary In Room 2022 of the Atomic Energy Commission, Garrison defends Oppenheimer amidst communist allegations. The prosecutor, Robb, reveals a recorded interview between Oppenheimer and Boris Pash, which contradicts Oppenheimer's previous statements. Oppenheimer admits to lying to protect his friend Haakon Chevalier, easing the tension. Despite the revelation, Garrison questions the fairness of the proceedings, while Robb and Gray defend their methods. The scene concludes with Oppenheimer admitting to his past lies, marking a significant turning point in the hearing.

Strengths

Intense dialogue
Compelling character interactions
High-stakes conflict

Weaknesses

Lack of visual elements
Heavy reliance on dialogue

General Critique

The dialogue is stilted and unnatural. The characters speak in a very formal and unnatural way.
The scene lacks action. The characters are just sitting around talking.
The scene is too long. It could be cut down by about a third and still convey the same information.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and conversational.
Add some action to the scene. The characters could be moving around, doing something, or interacting with each other in a more dynamic way.
Cut down the scene by removing unnecessary dialogue and exposition.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is highly engaging and intense, with well-developed characters and a strong focus on dialogue and conflict.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of an interrogation involving classified information and a recording of a past interview is unique and adds depth to the scene.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by the interrogation process, revealing new information and raising questions about Oppenheimer's past actions and relationships.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces a fresh take on legal drama by blending elements of government secrecy, national security, and personal integrity. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and engaging, adding to the scene's originality.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-defined and their interactions are compelling, especially Oppenheimer's defensive yet revealing responses.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer's character undergoes some changes as he reveals more about his past actions and relationships, showing vulnerability and defensiveness.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to uncover the truth and defend their client against potential perjury charges. This reflects their desire for justice and integrity in the face of deception and manipulation.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to navigate the legal proceedings and protect their client's interests in the face of government secrecy and national security concerns.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer and the board members, especially Robb, is intense and drives the scene forward.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting interests, moral dilemmas, and power dynamics at play. The audience is left uncertain about the outcome, adding to the tension and suspense.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's credibility and loyalty are questioned, with potential consequences for national security and his reputation.

Story Forward: 9

The scene moves the story forward by revealing new information about Oppenheimer's past and setting up future conflicts and developments.

Unpredictability: 8

The scene is unpredictable due to the shifting dynamics between characters, unexpected revelations, and moral ambiguity. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the conflict will resolve.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the tension between truth and national security. The protagonist's belief in transparency and accountability clashes with the government's need for secrecy and protection of classified information.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from anxiety to frustration, as Oppenheimer faces tough questions and accusations.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, tense, and reveals important information about the characters and their motivations.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its high stakes, moral dilemmas, and tense interactions between characters. The dialogue and pacing keep the audience invested in the unfolding drama.

Pacing: 9

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension and suspense, with well-timed reveals, character interactions, and escalating conflicts. The rhythm of the dialogue keeps the audience engaged and invested in the unfolding drama.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene's formatting adheres to the expected format for a screenplay, with proper scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format for a legal drama, with clear dialogue exchanges, character interactions, and escalating tension.

INT. CORRIDOR OUTSIDE ROOM 2022 -- DAY

Oppenheimer and Garrison take a break. Rabi approaches.

GARRISON
Dr Rabi, thanks for coming.

Garrison looks around to see Robb conferring with his team.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 164.

GARRISON (CONT’D)
(lowered voice)
Do you know anyone the prosecution
has called?

RABI
Teller, obviously.
(looks at Oppenheimer)
They’ve asked Lawrence.

OPPENHEIMER
What did he say?

RABI
He wasn’t going to help them...
OPPENHEIMER
But?

RABI
Strauss told him that you and Ruth
Tolman had been having an affair
for years. The whole time you lived
with them in Pasadena...

INSERT CUT: I SIP FROM RUTH’S DRINK AT THE CHRISTMAS PARTY.
RICHARD ENTERS, BANGING SNOW OFF HIS SHOULDERS...

RABI (CONT’D)
He convinced Lawrence that Richard
died of a broken heart.

OPPENHEIMER
That’s absurd.

RABI
Which part?

OPPENHEIMER
The broken heart. Richard never
found out.
Rabi tries not to smile. Shakes his head.

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Is Lawrence going to testify?

RABI
I don’t know.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Rabi is testifying.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 165.

GARRISON
Dr Rabi, what governmental
positions do you currently hold?

RABI
I’m Chairman of the General
Advisory Committee to the AEC,
succeeding Dr Oppenheimer.

GARRISON
And how long have you known Dr
Oppenheimer?

RABI
Since 1928. I know him quite well.

GARRISON
Well enough to speak on the bearing
of his character, loyalty and
associations?

RABI
Dr Oppenheimer is a man of
upstanding character, loyal to the
United States, to his friends and
to the institutions of which he is
a part. I’ve examined his security
file, and in spite of the
associations in there, I do not
believe Dr Oppenheimer is a
security risk, and that these
associations from the past should
bar him from continuing as a
consultant to the AEC.

EXT. CORRIDOR OUTSIDE ROOM 2022 -- DAY

I sit, exhausted. A segment of orange drops into my lap -

RABI
Eat.

I 'sip' at the orange. Rabi spots Lawrence coming down the
corridor- Rabi straightens to his full height- STARES DOWN
Lawrence, who looks from Rabi to me. Then TURNS and leaves.

OPPENHEIMER
What was that?

RABI
Nothing to worry about.
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 166.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- LATER

Robb cross-examines Rabi-

ROBB
Dr Rabi, after the Russian A-bomb
test did Dr Lawrence come to see
you prior to the GAC meeting?

RABI
You’d be better off asking him.

ROBB
I fully intend to. Did he come to
you about the Hydrogen bomb?

RABI
Yes. We all felt that after the
Russian explosion we had to do
something to regain our position.

ROBB
So you agreed with those who felt
we should launch a programme for
the Super at that time?

RABI
No. There were all kinds of
legitimate concerns about the
allocation of our resources.

GRAY
Would you say Dr Oppenheimer was
unalterably opposed to the H-bomb?

RABI
No. He thought a fusion programme
would come at the expense of our
awfully good fission programme.

ROBB
But that proved not to be the case?

RABI
In the event, both could be done.
Los Alamos, which Dr Oppenheimer
founded, rose to the occasion and
worked miracles, absolute miracles.

ROBB
May I ask one more question? A
purely hypothetical question.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 167.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Suppose this board should not be
satisfied that in his testimony
here Dr Oppenheimer had told the
whole truth... What would you say
then about whether or not he ought
to be cleared?

RABI
If you want to set me up on the
board then I’ll give you an answer.
But I’ve never hidden my opinion
that I think this whole proceeding
is a most unfortunate one.

ROBB
Why?

RABI
He’s a consultant- you don’t want
to consult the guy? Don’t. Why go
through all this against a man
who’s accomplished what Dr
Oppenheimer has? Look at his record-
we have an A-bomb and a whole
series of it, and we have a whole
series of Super bombs and what more
do you want, mermaids?

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Serious, Emotional

Summary Taking a break outside the hearing room, Rabi informs Oppenheimer about Lawrence's possible testimony against him due to an alleged affair with Ruth Tolman. In the hearing room, Rabi vouches for Oppenheimer's character, loyalty, and associations, but Robb cross-examines him about Oppenheimer's stance on the H-bomb. After the hearing, Rabi confronts Lawrence, who then leaves. The scene ends with Oppenheimer inquiring about the confrontation, maintaining a tense and dramatic atmosphere.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Character development
Tension and conflict

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be too expository

General Critique

The scene is a bit confusing and it's not clear what the stakes are for Oppenheimer.
The dialogue is a bit stilted and unnatural.
The scene doesn't really advance the plot or develop Oppenheimer's character.
The scene is too long and could be shortened without losing any important information.
The ending of the scene is abrupt and unsatisfying.

General Suggestions

Start the scene with a stronger hook that grabs the reader's attention and makes them want to keep reading.
Make the stakes for Oppenheimer more clear. What does he have to lose if he loses his security clearance?
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and believable.
Add more details to the setting to help the reader visualize the scene.
Give Oppenheimer a clear goal or objective in the scene.
Add more conflict to the scene. This could be internal conflict (Oppenheimer struggling with his own doubts or fears) or external conflict (Oppenheimer facing opposition from others).
End the scene with a stronger resolution that leaves the reader satisfied and wanting more.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is emotionally charged and reveals important information about the characters, adding depth to the story. The tension and conflict keep the audience engaged.

Story Content

Concept: 7

The concept of loyalty, betrayal, and personal history is well explored in this scene, adding layers to the characters and their motivations.

Plot: 8

The plot advances as new information is revealed about Dr. Oppenheimer's past and relationships, setting the stage for future conflicts and developments.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh approach to historical events and political intrigue, offering a unique perspective on the ethical dilemmas faced by the characters. The authenticity of the dialogue and character motivations adds to the originality of the scene.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed and their relationships are explored in depth, adding complexity and emotional depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 7

Dr. Oppenheimer undergoes a change as he learns new information about his past and relationships, leading to internal conflict and emotional turmoil.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to defend Dr. Oppenheimer's character and loyalty amidst accusations and suspicions. This reflects the protagonist's desire to uphold justice and truth in the face of adversity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to navigate the political and security challenges surrounding Dr. Oppenheimer's role as a consultant to the AEC. This goal reflects the immediate circumstances and conflicts the protagonist is facing.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both internal and external, as secrets are revealed and tensions rise among the characters.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints, hidden agendas, and moral dilemmas that challenge the characters' beliefs and values. The audience is left uncertain about the outcome of the conflicts, adding to the suspense and intrigue.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as Dr. Oppenheimer's reputation and future are on the line, and new information could have significant consequences for him.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing important information about the characters and their relationships, setting the stage for future conflicts and developments.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the shifting allegiances, hidden motives, and unexpected revelations that challenge the characters' beliefs and values. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the conflicts will be resolved.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the themes of loyalty, integrity, and justice. The protagonist's beliefs in truth and fairness are challenged by the political machinations and accusations against Dr. Oppenheimer.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene has a high emotional impact, as personal secrets and conflicts are revealed, adding depth and complexity to the characters and their relationships.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is engaging and reveals important information about the characters and their motivations. It also adds tension and conflict to the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high stakes, complex character dynamics, and moral dilemmas. The dialogue-driven interactions and subtle reveals keep the audience invested in the unfolding drama.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension and suspense gradually, allowing the conflicts and revelations to unfold naturally. The rhythm of the dialogue and character interactions enhances the emotional impact of the scene.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with proper scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting. The visual descriptions and scene directions enhance the reader's understanding of the setting and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with clear character introductions, conflict development, and resolution. The pacing and rhythm of the scene contribute to its effectiveness in building tension and suspense.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss watches with satisfaction as Teller testifies.

TELLER
...that’s why I’m here today. To
express the warm support for
science and scientists Mr Strauss
has shown over the years I’ve known
him.

CHAIRMAN
Thank you, Dr Teller. We’ll break
now, unless there’s any immediate
business.

STRAUSS
Senator, I’d like to once again
request that we’re furnished with a
list of witnesses.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 168.

CHAIRMAN
And I’ll remind the nominee that we
don’t always have that information
in advance. We do know that Dr Hill
will be here after lunch.

With that, the Chairman BANGS his gavel...

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

Robb addresses the board...

ROBB
Our next scheduled witness, Dr
Lawrence, has apparently come down
with... colitis...

I glance sideways at Garrison, who almost smiles-

ROBB (CONT’D)
So I’ll proceed instead with
William Borden.

I watch as Borden is sworn in.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Mr Borden, as a result of your
study of Dr Oppenheimer, did you
reach certain conclusions?

BORDEN
I did.

ROBB
Did there co me a time when you
expressed those conclusions in a
letter to Mr J. Edgar Hoover of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation?
BORDEN
That is correct.

ROBB
Prior to writing that letter, did
you discuss the writing of it with
anybody connected with the Atomic
Energy Commission?

BORDEN
I did not.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 169.

ROBB
Do you have a copy of the letter
with you.

Robb’s assistant distributes copies of the letter...

BORDEN
I have one in front of me.

ROBB
Would you be good enough to read
it?

GARRISON
A moment, please!

Garrison holds up a finger, FRANTICALLY reading ahead-

GRAY
What’s the purpose of the delay?
He’s simply going to read this.

GARRISON
Mr Chairman, this is the first
we’ve seen of this letter- and I
see statements, at least one, which
I don’t think anybody would be
happy to have go into the record-
accusations that have not before
been made and are not part of the
indictment from Nichols.

Garrison holds up the letter -

GARRISON (CONT’D)
Is it the opinion of the board that
these are matters into which
inquiry should now be directed?

I scan down the letter for what he’s seen. My face falls...
GRAY
Testimony of this witness is not in
any way going to broaden the
inquiry.

GARRISON
How can it avoid it, sir? Supposing
you should believe the witness? Mr
Robb is tasked by this board with
calling in witnesses, and he brings
in one to make accusations of a
kind that I don’t think belong
here.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 170.

ROBB
Mr Chairman, the witness wrote this
letter on his own initiative laying
out evidence which has already been
before the board. His conclusions
are valid testimony just like the
positive conclusions of friends of
Dr Oppenheimer. It cuts both ways.

GARRISON
How long has counsel been in
possession of the letter?

ROBB
Mr Garrison, I don’t think I should
be subject to cross-examination by
you.

GRAY
Mr Garrison, given that we on the
board have all read the letter,
isn’t it better to have it in the
record?

Garrison says nothing. He looks at me, frustrated.

GRAY (CONT’D)
Let’s proceed.

BORDEN
'Dear Mr Hoover, the purpose of
this letter is to state my opinion,
based upon years of study of the
available classified evidence, that
more probably than not J. Robert
Oppenheimer is an agent of the
Soviet Union.'

I turn the letter face down, staring at its blank
whiteness...
BORDEN (CONT’D)
'The following conclusions are
justified. One: Between 1929 and
1942, more probably than not, J.
Robert Oppenheimer was a
sufficiently hardened Communist
that he volunteered information to
the Soviets. Two: More probably
than not, he has since been
functioning as an espionage agent.'

I watch the STENOGRAPHER calmly type this into the record...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 171.

BORDEN (CONT’D)
'Three: More probably than not, he
has since acted under Soviet
directive in influencing United
States military, atomic energy,
intelligence, and diplomatic
policy.'

Devastated, I cannot meet the eye of anyone in the room.
Garrison gets up from his place. Sits down next to me.

GARRISON
I’m sorry, Robert.

OPPENHEIMER
Isn’t anyone ever going to tell the
truth about what’s happening here?

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Tense, Emotional

Summary Strauss is content with Teller's testimony, and the Chairman announces a break, mentioning Dr. Hill's upcoming testimony. However, Robb informs the board that their next witness, Dr. Lawrence, is replaced by William Borden due to illness. Borden's revelation of his letter to J. Edgar Hoover, accusing Oppenheimer of being a Soviet agent, leads to conflict among the board members. Garrison objects to the letter's introduction as evidence, citing its inflammatory nature and lack of relevance, while Robb and Gray argue for its validity. The scene ends with Oppenheimer looking devastated as his stenographer captures the damaging testimony.

Strengths

Intense emotional impact
High stakes
Compelling conflict

Weaknesses

Potential for confusion due to complex accusations and legal proceedings

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is very dry and technical, which makes it difficult to engage with the characters or the story.
The scene is very long and could be shortened without losing any of the important information.
The Borden character is very one-dimensional and could be developed more to make him more interesting and sympathetic.
The scene lacks any sense of tension or drama, which makes it difficult to keep the reader interested.
The ending of the scene is anticlimactic and does not leave the reader with a strong impression.

General Suggestions

Add more dialogue that is more personal and emotional.
Cut down on the technical jargon and make the dialogue more accessible to a general audience.
Develop the Borden character more by giving him more backstory and motivations.
Add more tension and drama to the scene by having the characters clash more directly.
Give the scene a more satisfying ending by having the characters come to some sort of resolution.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly impactful, emotionally charged, and crucial to the overall plot.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of betrayal, espionage, and the consequences of false accusations are central to the scene.

Plot: 9

The plot advances significantly with the introduction of the accusations and the impact they have on Oppenheimer.

Originality: 8

The scene presents a fresh approach to legal drama by exploring complex moral issues and ethical dilemmas.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are deeply affected by the accusations, showcasing their vulnerabilities and complexities.

Character Changes: 8

The characters undergo emotional turmoil and face significant challenges, leading to potential changes in their beliefs and relationships.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to uncover the truth and defend Dr. Oppenheimer against accusations of espionage.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to challenge the accusations made against Dr. Oppenheimer and ensure a fair hearing.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict reaches a peak with the accusations against Oppenheimer, creating tension and drama.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting viewpoints and moral dilemmas creating tension.

High Stakes: 10

The stakes are incredibly high, as Oppenheimer's reputation, career, and personal life are on the line.

Story Forward: 9

The scene propels the story forward by introducing a major conflict and setting the stage for the repercussions of the accusations.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable due to the unexpected accusations and moral dilemmas faced by the characters.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict is between the pursuit of truth and justice against the backdrop of Cold War paranoia and accusations of espionage.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 10

The emotional impact is profound, as the characters grapple with betrayal and the threat to Oppenheimer's reputation.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is intense, revealing, and drives the conflict forward.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its intense dialogue, moral conflicts, and dramatic tension.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension and suspense.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for a screenplay, with clear scene headings and character actions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for a legal drama, with clear dialogue exchanges and dramatic pacing.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss and his Counsel take their seats as the Chairman
calls to order. Strauss looks around the room, CHEERFULLY.

CHAIRMAN
We will now hear from Dr David
Hill.

Strauss peers at a FAMILIAR man in GLASSES, DAVID HILL-
Szilard’s note-taking scientist WHOSE PEN OPPENHEIMER
GRABBED...

CHAIRMAN (CONT’D)
Dr Hill, would you care to make a
statement?

HILL
Thank you. I have been asked to
testify about Lewis Strauss, a man
who has given years of service in
high positions of government and
who is known to be earnest, hard-
working and intelligent.

Strauss glances at Counsel, satisfied.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 172.

HILL (CONT’D)
The views I have to express are my
own, but I believe that much I have
to say will help indicate why most
of the scientists in this country
would prefer to see Mr Strauss
completely out of the government.

Strauss narrows his eyes...

SENATOR PASTORE
(friendly lob)
You’re referring to the hostility
of certain scientists directed at
Mr Strauss because of his
commitment to security, as
demonstrated in the Oppenheimer
affair?

HILL
No.

Hill takes a sip of water before continuing...

HILL (CONT’D)
Because of the personal
vindictiveness he demonstrated
against Dr Oppenheimer, and against
all those who have disagreed with
his official positions.

Counsel turns to Strauss, who is FIXATED on Hill. The Senate
Aide REACTS, surprised. MURMURS echo through the chamber...

HILL (CONT’D)
In my ten years observation of Mr
Strauss I have seen his incapacity
to change a position, the
subordination of his integrity to
the attainment of political goals
and an obsessive quest for popular
and professional approval...

The audience REACTS- Strauss SHAKES his head- the Chairman
BANGS the gavel-

CHAIRMAN
Order!

CUT TO:

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 173.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

Vannevar Bush is sworn in.

BUSH
It appears to most scientists
around the country that Oppenheimer
is now being pilloried and put
through an ordeal because he
expressed his honest opinions. The
written charges against him are in
a poorly written indictment which
the board should have rejected from
the outset.

EVANS
Dr Bush, I thought I was performing
a service to my country in hearing
this case.

BUSH
No board in this country should sit
in judgement of a man because he
expressed strong opinions. If you
want to try that case, you can try
me- I have expressed strong
opinions, often unpopular, many
times. I’m doing so right now. When
a man is pilloried for doing that,
this country is in a severe
state... excuse me, gentlemen, if I
become stirred, but I am.

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss fumes as Hill reads his statement.

HILL
From the standpoint of public
welfare, the most injurious
exercise of personal vindictiveness
in which Lewis Straus has engaged
was in the personnel security
prosecution of J. Robert
Oppenheimer, who had not hesitated
to disagree with Mr Strauss on
certain questions of fundamental
policy.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 174.

HILL (CONT’D)
Oppenheimer made mincemeat out of
Strauss’ position on the shipments
of isotopes to Norway, and Strauss
never forgave him this public
humiliation. Another controversy
between them centreed around their
differences in judgement on how the
H-bomb would contribute to national
security. Oppenheimer had
considerable influence and
prestige, and Strauss was able to
find a few ambitious men who also
disagreed with Oppenheimer’s
position, and envied him his
prestige in government circles.

Teller, in the audience, stares at Hill...

HILL (CONT’D)
Strauss turned to the personnel
security system in order to destroy
Oppenheimer’s effectiveness-

SENATOR PASTORE
But, Dr Hill, we’ve already heard
that Mr Strauss did not bring the
charges, or participate in the
hearings against Dr Oppenheimer.

HILL
I realize that Mr Strauss didn’t
sign the letter of charges, but I
think when all of the evidence is
viewed, it becomes highly plausible
that the Oppenheimer matter was
initiated and carried through
largely through the animus of Lewis
Strauss.

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Political, Historical
Tone: Accusatory, Serious, Confrontational

Summary In a Senate Committee Hearing Room, Dr David Hill testifies against Lewis Strauss, citing his personal vindictiveness and inability to change positions, particularly in the Oppenheimer affair. Meanwhile, in Room 2022 of the Atomic Energy Commission, Vannevar Bush is sworn in and expresses his support for Oppenheimer's right to express his opinions. Strauss fumes as he listens to Hill's statement, and the scene ends with the Chairman banging his gavel to restore order.

Strengths

Intense conflict
Sharp dialogue
Well-defined characters

Weaknesses

Lack of character development
Limited action

General Critique

The narration in the summary part of the scene is too long and unnecessary.
The scene lacks a clear focus and direction, making it difficult for the audience to engage with the content.
The dialogue is exposition-heavy, with characters simply stating facts and information rather than engaging in natural conversation.
The motivations and objectives of the characters are not well-established, making it difficult for the audience to understand their actions.
The scene lacks tension or conflict, making it dull and unengaging.
The pacing of the scene is slow and plodding, with long stretches of exposition and little action.

General Suggestions

Simplify the scene by removing unnecessary details and information.
Give the scene a clear focus and direction by establishing a central conflict or goal.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more natural and engaging, with characters interacting and expressing their emotions.
Establish the motivations and objectives of the characters early on.
Increase the tension or conflict in the scene by adding obstacles or challenges that the characters must overcome.
Tighten the pacing of the scene by cutting out unnecessary dialogue and action.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is intense, revealing deep-seated conflicts and power struggles within the characters. It keeps the audience engaged and invested in the outcome.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of personal vendettas, power struggles, and the impact of personal opinions on political decisions is well-developed and drives the scene forward.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on the trial-like atmosphere of the hearing, with accusations and defenses being thrown back and forth, adding tension and drama to the scene.

Originality: 9

The scene introduces fresh perspectives on political power dynamics and ethical dilemmas, presenting a nuanced portrayal of the protagonist's internal struggles and external challenges. The dialogue feels authentic and emotionally resonant, adding depth to the characters' motivations and conflicts.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-defined, with clear motivations and conflicts driving their actions. The dynamic between Strauss and Oppenheimer is particularly compelling.

Character Changes: 6

While there are no significant character changes in this scene, the dynamics between the characters evolve, revealing more about their personalities and motivations.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to defend his reputation and integrity against the accusations made by Dr. Hill. This reflects his need for validation, respect, and control over his public image.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to maintain his position of power and influence within the government. He wants to defend his actions and decisions in the face of criticism and opposition.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Strauss and Oppenheimer, as well as the larger conflict of personal vendettas and power struggles, is intense and drives the scene forward.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters challenging each other's beliefs, motivations, and actions. The audience is left uncertain about the outcome of the conflict, adding suspense and intrigue to the narrative.

High Stakes: 8

The stakes are high as the characters' reputations, integrity, and careers are on the line, adding tension and urgency to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the conflict between the characters and setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected revelations, shifting power dynamics, and moral dilemmas faced by the characters. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the conflict will unfold.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the clash between personal integrity and political expediency. Dr. Hill accuses Mr. Strauss of sacrificing his integrity for political gain, highlighting the ethical dilemmas faced by those in positions of power.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes a range of emotions, from anger to frustration to tension, keeping the audience emotionally engaged.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, confrontational, and reveals the underlying tensions and power dynamics between the characters. It adds depth to the scene.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense conflict, emotional stakes, and moral ambiguity. The audience is drawn into the characters' struggles and motivations, creating a sense of suspense and intrigue.

Pacing: 9

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension, escalating conflict, and maintaining the audience's interest. The rhythm of the dialogue and action sequences creates a sense of urgency and emotional impact.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for a screenplay, with proper scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting. The visual descriptions and action lines enhance the reader's understanding of the setting and character dynamics.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for a political drama, with clear character introductions, conflict escalation, and resolution. The pacing and rhythm of the dialogue contribute to the scene's effectiveness and emotional impact.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

Groves is testifying.

ROBB
General, would you clear Dr
Oppenheimer today?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 175.

GROVES
Under my interpretation of the
Atomic Energy Act, which did not
exist when I hired Dr Oppenheimer
in 1942... I would not clear Dr
Oppenheimer today if I were a
member of the commission.

ROBB
Thank you, General.

GROVES
But I’m not sure I could’ve cleared
any of those guys.

ROBB
That’s all.

GARRISON
General, Dr Oppenheimer had no
responsibility for the selection or
clearance of Klaus Fuchs, did he?

GROVES
No, not at all.

GARRISON
You wouldn’t want to leave with
this board even the remotest
suggestion that you’re here
questioning Dr Oppenheimer’s basic
loyalty to the United States in the
operation of Los Alamos?

GROVES
By no means. I hope I didn’t lead
anybody to think otherwise for an
instant.

GARRISON
Would you say that the revocation
of Dr Oppenheimer’s position would
be in the public interest?

GROVES
The revocation under such extreme
publicity I think would be most
unfortunate, not because of the
effect on Dr Oppenheimer- that I
leave to one side- but because of
the disastrous effect upon the
attitude of the scientists of this
country toward doing government
research.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 176.

GRAY
Thank you, General.

Groves gets up, walks past me with a formal nod.

INT. CORRIDOR OUTSIDE ROOM 2022 -- DAY

Garrison checks his watch.

OPPENHEIMER
She’ll be here.

GARRISON
Do you even want her here?

OPPENHEIMER
Only a fool or an adolescent
presumes to know someone else’s
relationship, and you’re neither,
Lloyd.

Kitty comes around the corner. Unsteady. I watch her walk
towards us, not entirely straight... she catches my eye-

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Kitty and I, we’re grown-ups. We’ve
walked through fire together. And
she’ll do fine.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

Kitty is at the witness table. From behind I can see her
fiddling distractedly with her purse...

GARRISON
Mrs Oppenheimer, you are no longer
a member of the Communist Party?

KITTY
No.

GARRISON
When would you say that you ceased
to be a member?

KITTY
When I left Youngstown in 1936.

GARRISON
Will you describe your views on
Communism as pro, anti, neutral.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 177.

KITTY
Very strongly against. I’ve had
nothing to do with Communism since
1936. Since before I met Robert.

GARRISON
That’s all.

HILL (V.O.)
The record demonstrates that
Oppenheimer was not interrogated by
impartial and disinterested counsel
for the Gray Board...

Robb gets up to cross-examine...

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Tense, Serious, Emotional

Summary In this tense scene, General Groves, the former director of the Manhattan Project, testifies against J. Robert Oppenheimer's clearance, expressing concerns about the potential impact on government research if Oppenheimer's position is revoked. Groves states that he wouldn't clear Oppenheimer today, further raising questions about Oppenheimer's loyalty. Kitty, Oppenheimer's wife, arrives to testify about her past involvement with the Communist Party, potentially adding to the challenges facing Oppenheimer's case. The scene ends with Kitty beginning her testimony before the Gray Board.

Strengths

Intense emotional depth
Compelling character dynamics
Tense dialogue

Weaknesses

Some repetitive dialogue
Slow pacing in certain moments

General Critique

The dialogue between Groves and Robb is a bit repetitive, with Robb asking multiple questions about Groves' willingness to clear Oppenheimer.
The transition from Groves' testimony to Garrison's questioning of Kitty is abrupt and could be smoothed out with a brief establishing shot of the courtroom or a dissolve.
Kitty's response to Garrison's question about her views on Communism is a bit vague and could be expanded to provide more detail about her current stance.
The scene ends abruptly with the start of Hill's voiceover, leaving the viewer with a sense of incompleteness.
The scene lacks a clear focus and seems to jump between different topics, making it difficult for the audience to follow.

General Suggestions

Consider combining some of Robb's questions to Groves to streamline the dialogue and make it more concise.
Add a transition shot between Groves' testimony and Garrison's questioning of Kitty to provide a visual cue for the audience.
Expand Kitty's response to Garrison's question about her views on Communism to give the audience a better understanding of her current stance.
Add a brief closing shot or dialogue exchange to provide a sense of closure to the scene.
Consider restructuring the scene to give it a clearer focus and flow.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene effectively captures the high stakes and emotional intensity of the situation, keeping the audience engaged and invested in the outcome.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's loyalty and credibility in the face of accusations and hearings is compelling and drives the narrative forward.

Plot: 7

The plot focuses on the Atomic Energy Commission hearing and the testimonies given, providing insight into the characters' motivations and conflicts.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh approach to exploring themes of loyalty, ethics, and political intrigue within a government setting. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and engaging.

Character Development

Characters: 8

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Kitty, are well-developed and their emotions and struggles are portrayed effectively, adding depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 7

Oppenheimer experiences a shift in perception and understanding of his situation, leading to personal growth and self-reflection.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal is to maintain their integrity and loyalty to their beliefs while navigating the political and ethical challenges presented in the scene.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to defend themselves and their loved ones against accusations of disloyalty and maintain their reputation in the scientific community.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between Oppenheimer's loyalty and the accusations against him creates a high level of tension and drama in the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing difficult ethical choices, political pressure, and personal challenges that test their beliefs and loyalties.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's reputation and future are on the line, adding urgency and tension to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information about the characters' motivations and conflicts, setting the stage for future developments.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable due to the shifting allegiances, ethical dilemmas, and unexpected revelations that challenge the characters' beliefs and loyalties.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the tension between personal beliefs and loyalty to the government, as well as the ethical implications of scientific research and national security.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 8

The emotional impact of the scene is significant, as the characters grapple with personal and professional challenges, evoking empathy and concern from the audience.

Dialogue: 7

The dialogue is tense and impactful, revealing the characters' inner thoughts and conflicts during the hearing.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging due to its high stakes, moral dilemmas, and sharp dialogue that keeps the audience invested in the characters' fates.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, allowing for moments of reflection and character development.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for a screenplay, with clear scene headings and dialogue formatting.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format for a dialogue-heavy government hearing scene, effectively building tension and conflict.

INT. SENATE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss watches Hill continue to answer questions...

HILL
...he was interrogated by a
prosecutor who used all the tricks
of a rather ingenious legal
background to try to trick
Oppenheimer into erroneous
statements, and he did succeed in a
few instances.

SENATOR SCOTT
You are charging now that the Gray
Board permitted a prosecution of Dr
Oppenheimer. Do you think, then,
that the members of the Gray Board
were unfair?

Hill takes a beat to consider this.

HILL
I can only say if I’d been on the
Gray Board, I would’ve protested
against the tactics of the man who
served in fact as a prosecuting
counsel- a man appointed not by the
board but by Lewis Strauss.

Strauss strokes his chin, feigning indifference.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 178.

SENATOR MCGEE
Who was this?

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

HILL (V.O.)
Roger Robb.

Robb tries to put himself in Kitty’s eyeline...

ROBB
Mrs Oppenheimer.

She will not meet his gaze.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Did you have a Communist Party
membership card?

KITTY
I, I’m not sure...

Kitty fiddles with her purse...

ROBB
Not sure?

KITTY
Well...

She FREEZES. The Board members look at her. Garrison looks at
me...

ROBB
Presumably the act of joining the
Party was sending some money and
receiving a card?
Kitty is focused on her purse...

ROBB (CONT’D)
No?

And then Kitty LOOKS UP at Robb, pure STEEL-

KITTY
It was so long ago, Mr Robb, wasn’t
it?

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 179.

ROBB
Not really- KITTY (CONT’D)
Long enough to have
forgotten.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Did you turn in the card or KITTY (CONT’D)
rip it up? The card whose existence I’ve
forgotten?

ROBB (CONT’D)
Your Communist Party KITTY (CONT’D)
membership card- I haven’t the slightest idea.
ROBB (CONT’D)
Can a distinction be made between
Soviet Communism and Communism?

KITTY
In the days when I was a member I
thought they were definitely two
things-

Garrison and I hang on her every word...

KITTY (CONT’D)
I thought the Communist Party of
the United States was concerned
with our domestic problems. I now
no longer believe this. I believe
the whole thing is linked together
and spread all over the world. I’ve
believed this since I left the
Party sixteen years ago.

ROBB
But- KITTY (CONT’D)
Seventeen years ago. My
mistake.

ROBB (CONT’D)
But you- KITTY (CONT’D)
Sorry, eighteen. Yes,
eighteen years ago.
Robb sighs patiently.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Were you familiar with the fact
that your husband was making
contributions to the Spanish Civil
War as late as 1942?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 180.

KITTY
I knew that Robert gave money from
time to time, yes.

ROBB
Do you remember whether he gave
money on a regular or periodic
basis?

Kitty smiles sweetly-

KITTY
Do you mean regular, or do you mean
periodic, Mr Robb?

ROBB
(annoyed)
I mean... regular.

KITTY
He did not.

ROBB
Were you aware that this money was
going into Communist Party
channels?

KITTY
Don’t you mean 'through'?

ROBB
Pardon?

KITTY
I think you mean 'through Communist
Party channels'.

ROBB
Yes. KITTY (CONT’D)
Yes.
ROBB (CONT’D)
Would it be fair to say that this
meant that by 1942 he had not
stopped having anything to do with
the Communist Party? I don’t insist
that you answer yes or no. You can
answer any way you wish.

KITTY
I know that. Thank you. But the
question isn’t properly phrased.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 181.

ROBB
Don’t you understand what I KITTY (CONT’D)
am trying to get at? Yes, I do.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Why don’t you answer it that KITTY (CONT’D)
way? I don’t like the phrase
'having anything to do with
the Communist Party' because
Robert never had anything to
do with the Communist Party
as such. I know he gave money
for Spanish refugees. I know
he took an intellectual
interest in Communist ideas-
ROBB (CONT’D)
Are there two kinds of Communists?
An intellectual Communist and a
plain ordinary Commie?

Kitty laughs the laugh of the free.

KITTY
I couldn’t answer that one.

EVANS
(delighted)
I couldn’t either.

Gray shoots a look at Evans. CHUCKLES around the room.
Garrison looks at me. Nods. She did good.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Intense, Confrontational

Summary In this tense and confrontational scene, set during a Senate committee hearing, Hill testifies against Strauss and the Gray Board's unfair prosecution of Oppenheimer. Kitty Oppenheimer skillfully handles Robb's questioning about her and her husband's past Communist Party membership and donations, causing laughter in the room and Garrison's approval. The scene is depicted in black and white, with a later cut to Room 2022, Atomic Energy Commission, shown in color. The main conflicts include the tension between Strauss and Hill and the Gray Board's accusations against Oppenheimer, as well as Kitty's clever responses to Robb's questioning.

Strengths

Sharp dialogue
Character dynamics
Tension building

Weaknesses

Some repetitive questioning

General Critique

The scene is well-written and captures the tension of the hearing room. However, the dialogue could be more engaging and the characters could be more developed.
The scene focuses too much on the legal proceedings and not enough on the human drama of the situation. The characters are not well-developed and their motivations are not clear.
The scene could be more visually interesting. The use of black and white and color could be more effective in creating a sense of contrast and tension.

General Suggestions

Add more details to the characters. Give them more backstory and motivation. This will help the reader to connect with them and to understand their actions.
Rewrite the dialogue to make it more engaging. Use more active verbs and shorter sentences. This will help to keep the reader's attention.
Use more visual description to create a sense of atmosphere. This will help the reader to imagine the scene and to feel the tension of the moment.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is highly engaging and intense, with strong dialogue and character dynamics that keep the audience on edge.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of interrogating Kitty Oppenheimer about her past involvement with the Communist Party and her husband's activities is compelling and adds depth to the character.

Plot: 7

The plot advances as Kitty is questioned, revealing more about her character and the tensions surrounding the Oppenheimer affair.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh approach to the interrogation genre by exploring the moral ambiguity of political beliefs and the impact of societal pressure on individual autonomy. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Kitty Oppenheimer, are well-developed and their interactions drive the scene forward.

Character Changes: 7

Kitty Oppenheimer's character is challenged and revealed through the interrogation, showing a shift in her demeanor and responses.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to maintain composure and assert their innocence while being interrogated about their political beliefs. This reflects their desire to protect their reputation and integrity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to navigate the interrogation process and avoid incriminating themselves. This reflects the immediate challenge of defending their beliefs and actions under scrutiny.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

There is a high level of conflict in the scene, both in the dialogue and the underlying tensions between the characters.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing difficult questions, moral dilemmas, and societal pressure that challenge their beliefs and values.

High Stakes: 8

The high stakes of the interrogation, including the potential impact on Oppenheimer's reputation and career, add tension to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by providing crucial information about the characters and their motivations.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the characters' shifting allegiances, moral dilemmas, and unexpected revelations that challenge the audience's expectations.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict evident in this scene is the clash between individual freedom of belief and the societal pressure to conform to political norms. This challenges the protagonist's values and beliefs about personal autonomy and political ideology.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 7

The scene evokes tension and unease, but also reveals deeper emotions and motivations.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is sharp, tense, and reveals the power dynamics at play during the interrogation.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high stakes, tense interactions, and moral complexity that keep the audience invested in the characters' fates.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene contributes to its effectiveness by building tension, maintaining suspense, and allowing for character development and emotional impact.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene follows the expected format for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and dialogue formatting that enhance the readability and impact of the script.

Structure: 8

The structure of the scene follows the expected format for its genre, with a clear progression of tension and conflict leading to a dramatic climax.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY

I watch Teller testify.

ROBB
Is it your intention to suggest
that Dr Oppenheimer is disloyal to
the United States?

TELLER
I do not want to suggest anything
of the kind. I have always assumed,
and now assume, that he is loyal to
the United States. I believe this,
and I shall believe it until I see
very conclusive proof to the
opposite.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 182.

ROBB
Now, a question which is a
corollary of that... do you or do
you not believe that Dr Oppenheimer
is a security risk?

TELLER
In a great number of cases I have
seen Dr Oppenheimer act in a way
which for me was exceedingly hard
to understand. I thoroughly
disagreed with him in numerous
issues, and his actions, frankly,
appeared to me confused and
complicated. To this extent, I feel
that I would like to see the vital
interests of this country in hands
which I understand better and
therefore trust more.

GRAY
Thank you, doctor.

Teller gets up from the table, as he walks past me he holds
out his hand...

TELLER
I’m sorry.

I shake his hand.

KITTY (V.O.)
You shook his fucking hand?!

INT. DINING ROOM, OLDEN MANOR, PRINCETON -- NIGHT

KITTY (CONT'D)
I would’ve spat in his face!

GARRISON
I’m not sure the board would’ve
appreciated that.

KITTY
Not gentlemanly enough? You’re all
being too goddamn gentlemanly.

VOLPE
Gray must see what Robb is doing-
why doesn’t he shut him down?

Garrison shrugs.

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 183.

KITTY
(to me)
And you? Shaking Teller’s hand- you
need to stop playing the martyr.

EXT. OLDEN MANOR, PRINCETON -- NIGHT

Garrison drives off. Volpe turns to me...

VOLPE
Robert, you can’t win this thing.
It’s a kangaroo court with a
predetermined outcome. Why put
yourself through more of it?

OPPENHEIMER
I have my reasons.

Volpe shrugs. Embraces me. Gets in his car.

EINSTEIN (O.S.)
He has a point, you know.

I turn. Einstein steps into the light.

EINSTEIN (CONT’D)
You’re a man chasing a woman who
doesn’t love him any more- the
United States Government.

OPPENHEIMER
I’m not sure you understand,
Albert.

EINSTEIN
No? I left my country, never to
return. The German calamity of
years ago repeats itself- people
acquiesce without resistance and
align themselves with the forces of
evil. You’ve served America well,
and if this is the reward she has
to offer perhaps you should turn
your back on her.

OPPENHEIMER
Dammit, I happen to love this
country.

Einstein considers this. Nods slowly.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 184.

EINSTEIN
Then tell them to go to hell.

CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Serious, Intense, Reflective

Summary In this scene, Robert Oppenheimer observes Edward Teller testify at the Atomic Energy Commission hearing, where Teller expresses mistrust in Oppenheimer's character despite acknowledging his loyalty to the US. Parallel discussions among Kitty, Garrison, and Volpe reveal frustration towards Oppenheimer's friendly demeanor with Teller. The scene takes a dramatic turn as Albert Einstein appears to Oppenheimer, advising him to resist the government's accusations and even leave the country. The scene concludes with Einstein's encouragement for Oppenheimer to stand up to the government, setting the stage for potential defiance.

Strengths

Complex characters
Intense conflict
Emotional depth

Weaknesses

Some dialogue may be overly expository

General Critique

The scene starts with a quote from Teller and the scene immediately ends with a quote from Einstein. This can make the main character Oppenheimer appear passive.
The two quotes at the beginning and end of the scene are very similar in that they both express an opinion about Oppenheimer. This can make the scene feel repetitive and lack depth.
The scene is very short and does not give the reader much time to connect with the characters or the situation.
The dialogue is a bit dry and doesn't do much to advance the plot or develop the characters.

General Suggestions

Start the scene with a description of the setting or with a character doing something. This will help to ground the reader and give them a better sense of the context of the scene.
Add more details to the dialogue. This will help to make the characters more relatable and give the reader a better understanding of their motivations.
Add more conflict to the scene. This will help to make the scene more interesting and give the reader a reason to care about what happens next.
Consider adding some humor to the scene. This will help to lighten the mood and make the scene more enjoyable to read.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is emotionally charged, thought-provoking, and pivotal in the narrative.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of loyalty, patriotism, and moral integrity in the face of government persecution is compelling and well-executed.

Plot: 7

The plot advances significantly as Oppenheimer faces intense scrutiny and betrayal.

Originality: 8

The scene offers a fresh perspective on historical events and characters, presenting them in a morally ambiguous light. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth and complexity to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are complex, with conflicting loyalties and motivations, adding depth to the scene.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes internal turmoil and faces external challenges that lead to significant character development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to navigate conflicting loyalties and personal beliefs while facing external pressure and scrutiny. This reflects their deeper need for validation, acceptance, and moral integrity.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal is to defend their actions and decisions in the face of questioning and criticism from others. This reflects the immediate challenge of maintaining their reputation and credibility in a high-stakes situation.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict is intense and multi-layered, adding depth to the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing internal and external challenges that test their beliefs, values, and loyalties. The audience is left uncertain about the characters' fates and decisions.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer's reputation, loyalty, and future are on the line.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key conflicts and character dynamics.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the characters' conflicting motivations, shifting allegiances, and moral ambiguity. The audience is kept on edge, unsure of how the situation will unfold.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict evident in this scene is the tension between personal integrity and loyalty to one's country. The characters grapple with questions of patriotism, moral responsibility, and the consequences of their actions on a national scale.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions and challenges the audience to reflect on complex moral issues.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is impactful, revealing inner conflicts and tensions among the characters.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high stakes, emotional intensity, and moral complexity. The dialogue and character interactions draw the audience in and create a sense of suspense and intrigue.

Pacing: 9

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension, creating suspense, and highlighting key moments of conflict and revelation. The rhythm of the dialogue and action sequences enhances the scene's impact.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene follows the expected formatting for its genre, with proper scene headings, dialogue formatting, and action descriptions.

Structure: 8

The scene follows the expected structure for its genre, with a clear setup, conflict, and resolution. The pacing and rhythm contribute to the scene's effectiveness.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss BURSTS in, fuming...

STRAUSS
This has become a trial about a
trial!

SENATE AIDE
It’s not a good thing that he’s
telling them that you initiated the
hearings.

STRAUSS
He can’t prove that I gave the file
to Borden.

SENATE AIDE
He doesn’t have to. We’re not in
court, there’s no burden of
proof...

Strauss realizes. Shakes his head at himself.

STRAUSS
They’re not convicting. Just
denying.

The Senate Aide nods.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Why would Hill come here to tear me
down? What’s his angle?

SENATE AIDE
Do people need a reason to do the
right thing?

Strauss GLARES at the Senate Aide.

SENATE AIDE (CONT’D)
I mean, as he sees it.

STRAUSS
I told you Oppenheimer poisoned the
scientists against me! Right from
that first meeting...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 185.

INSERT CUT: STRAUSS WATCHES OPPENHEIMER HAND EINSTEIN HIS HAT
AS THEY SPEAK DOWN AT THE LAKE...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
I don’t know what Oppenheimer said
to him that day, but Einstein
wouldn’t even meet my eye...

INSERT CUT: AS STRAUSS APPROACHES, EINSTEIN WALKS PAST
WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING HIM, CLEARLY UPSET...

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
Oppenheimer knows how to manipulate
his own. At Los Alamos he preyed on
the naïveté of scientists who
thought they’d get a say in how we
used their work... but don’t ever
think he was that naïve himself...

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I am back at the witness table. Robb squares up.

ROBB
Doctor, in your work on the
Hydrogen bomb at Los Alamos and in
the years following, were you
deterred by any moral qualms about
the development of this weapon?

OPPENHEIMER
Of course.

ROBB
But you still got on with the work,
didn’t you?
OPPENHEIMER
Yes, because this was work of
exploration. It was not the
preparation of a weapon.

ROBB
You mean it was just an academic
excursion?

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 186.

OPPENHEIMER
No. It’s not an academic thing
whether you can make a Hydrogen
bomb. It’s a matter of life and
death.

ROBB
Beginning in 1942 you were actively
pushing the development of the H-
bomb, weren’t you?

OPPENHEIMER
'Pushing' is not the right word.
Supporting and working on it, yes.

ROBB
When did these moral qualms become
so strong that you opposed the
development of the Hydrogen bomb?

OPPENHEIMER
When it was suggested that it be
the policy of the United States to
make these things at all costs,
without regard to the balance
between these weapons and atomic
weapons as part of our arsenal.

ROBB
(theatrical confusion)
What did moral qualms have to do
with that?

OPPENHEIMER
(struggling)
What did moral qualms have to do
with it?

ROBB
Yes.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss is pacing now...

STRAUSS
Oppenheimer wanted to own the
atomic bomb. He wanted to be the
man who moved the earth.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 187.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
He talks about putting the nuclear
genie back in the bottle- well, I’m
here to tell you that I know J
Robert Oppenheimer and if he could
do it all over he’d do it all the
same. He’s never once said he
regrets Hiroshima- he’d do it all
over because it made him the most
important man who ever lived...

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I struggle to find an answer for Robb...

OPPENHEIMER
We freely used the atomic ROBB
bomb. In fact, doctor, you assisted
in selecting the target for
the drop of the atomic bomb
on Japan?
Now I can hear the sound of FEET STAMPING...

OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Yes. ROBB (CONT’D)
You knew, did you not, that
the dropping of that atomic
bomb on the target you had
selected would kill or injure
thousands of civilians, is
that correct?
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Not as many as turned out...

ROBB
How many were killed or injured?

The feet are stamping FASTER and FASTER...
OPPENHEIMER
Seventy thousand.

ROBB
Seventy thousand? At both OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
Hiroshima and- One hundred and ten thousand
at both.
ROBB (CONT’D)
On the day of each bombing.

OPPENHEIMER
Yes.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 188.

ROBB
And in the weeks and years after?

OPPENHEIMER
It’s been put at between fifty and
one hundred thousand...

ROBB
Two hundred and twenty thousand
dead? At least?

I nod.

ROBB (CONT’D)
Did you have moral scruples about
that?
OPPENHEIMER
Terrible ones.

ROBB
But you testified the other day
that the bombing of Hiroshima was
very successful?

OPPENHEIMER
Well, it was technically ROBB (CONT’D)
successful. Oh, technically.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
It’s also alleged to have helped
end the war.

The stamping feet are LOUDER and FASTER...

ROBB
Would you have supported the
dropping of a Hydrogen bomb on
Hiroshima?

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Intense, Confrontational, Reflective

Summary Lewis Strauss bursts into a Senate office, frustrated about the hearings' focus on the trial itself. He discusses the implications of Oppenheimer's statements with a Senate Aide. Simultaneously, at the Atomic Energy Commission, Oppenheimer is questioned about his moral qualms regarding the Hydrogen bomb and his involvement in selecting the target for the atomic bomb drop on Japan. The scene is filled with tension, interrogation, and accountability, ending with Oppenheimer's account of the atomic bomb's casualties.

Strengths

Intense character dynamics
Thought-provoking dialogue
Emotional depth

Weaknesses

Potential for heavy exposition
Complex themes may be challenging for some viewers to follow

General Critique

The scene is well-written and effectively captures Strauss's anger and frustration. However, the dialogue between Strauss and the Senate Aide is a bit too on-the-nose. It would be more effective if Strauss's frustration was conveyed more subtly, through his actions and expressions.
The scene is also a bit too long. It would be more effective if it were trimmed down to focus on the most important moments.
The scene does not advance the plot in any meaningful way. It is more of a character study than a plot point.
The scene is somewhat repetitive. Strauss repeats his belief that Oppenheimer poisoned the scientists against him several times.

General Suggestions

Rewrite the dialogue between Strauss and the Senate Aide to be more subtle. For example, instead of having Strauss say, "This has become a trial about a trial!" have him say something like, "This is getting out of hand."
Trim down the scene to focus on the most important moments. For example, cut the part where Strauss watches Oppenheimer hand Einstein his hat.
Add a plot point to the scene. For example, have Strauss discover something new about Oppenheimer that could be used against him in the hearings.
Vary Strauss's dialogue so that he doesn't repeat himself as much. For example, instead of having him say, "Oppenheimer poisoned the scientists against me!" several times, have him say something like, "Oppenheimer turned the scientists against me. He made them believe that I was the enemy."

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly impactful, delving deep into the ethical complexities of Oppenheimer's actions and beliefs, as well as the intense conflicts and power dynamics at play.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's moral struggles and the political machinations surrounding him is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by the intense questioning of Oppenheimer's actions and beliefs, leading to a deeper understanding of his character and the stakes involved.

Originality: 9

The scene explores the moral complexities of developing nuclear weapons during World War II, offering fresh perspectives on historical events and ethical dilemmas. The characters' actions and dialogue feel authentic and thought-provoking.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Strauss, are complex and well-developed, showcasing their conflicting ideologies and motivations.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant internal struggle and revelation about his past actions and beliefs, leading to potential character growth.

Internal Goal: 8

Strauss's internal goal is to defend his reputation and prove his innocence in the face of accusations. This reflects his need for validation and fear of being seen as guilty.

External Goal: 7

Strauss's external goal is to navigate the political and ethical challenges of the hearings and maintain his position of power and influence.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The scene is filled with intense conflicts, both internal and external, driving the narrative forward and heightening the emotional stakes.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with characters facing ethical dilemmas and conflicting beliefs that challenge their values and decisions. The audience is left uncertain about the characters' fates and choices.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high, involving moral responsibility, personal reputation, and the future of nuclear research and warfare.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by deepening the audience's understanding of Oppenheimer's character and the conflicts surrounding him.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the characters' conflicting beliefs and actions, creating tension and uncertainty about the outcome of the hearings.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the moral implications of developing and using nuclear weapons. Oppenheimer and Strauss have differing views on the ethical considerations of their actions.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions, from regret and moral dilemma to anger and power struggles, leaving a lasting impact on the audience.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, confrontational, and thought-provoking, revealing the inner conflicts and tensions of the characters.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its intense dialogue, moral dilemmas, and ethical conflicts that keep the audience invested in the characters' fates and decisions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene effectively builds tension and suspense, keeping the audience engaged in the characters' dialogue and moral dilemmas. The rhythm of the scene enhances its emotional impact.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene's formatting adheres to the expected format for its genre, with clear scene descriptions and character actions. The use of black and white visuals adds to the atmosphere of the scene.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a structured format that effectively conveys the characters' conflicts and motivations. The dialogue is well-paced and engaging, driving the narrative forward.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss TURNS on the Senate Aide-

STRAUSS
But he wanted all the glory and
none of the responsibility. So he
needed absolution. He needed to be
a martyr. To suffer, and take the
sins of the world on his shoulders.
To say 'no, we cannot continue on
this road' even as he knew we’d
have to...

8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 189.

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I search for an answer- the FEET STAMPING ever LOUDER-

OPPENHEIMER
It would make no sense at all.

ROBB
Why?

OPPENHEIMER
The target is too small.

ROBB
Supposing there had been a target
in Japan big enough for a
thermonuclear weapon, would you
have opposed dropping it?

OPPENHEIMER
This was not a problem with ROBB (CONT’D)
which I was confronted. I’m confronting you with it
now, sir. Would you have
opposed the dropping of a
thermonuclear weapon on Japan
because of moral scruples?
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I believe I would, sir.

ROBB
Did you oppose the dropping of the
atom bomb on Hiroshima because of
moral scruples?

OPPENHEIMER
We set forth our- ROBB (CONT’D)
I’m asking you about it, not
'we'.
OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
I set forth arguments against
dropping it. But I did not endorse
them.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss PACES the room, FURIOUS-

STRAUSS
He knew he’d have to be seen to
suffer for what he did. It was all
part of his plan.
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 190.

STRAUSS (CONT’D)
He wanted the glorious insincere
guilt of the self-important to wear
like a fucking crown. And I gave it
to him...

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

Robb gets right in my face, incredulous-

ROBB
You mean having worked night and
day for three years to build the
bomb, you then argued it shouldn’t
be used?

OPPENHEIMER
No. I was asked by the Secretary of
War what the views of scientists
were- I gave the views against and
the views for.

ROBB
You supported the dropping of OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
the atom bomb on Japan, What do you mean 'support'?
didn’t you?
ROBB (CONT’D)
You helped pick the target, didn’t
you?

OPPENHEIMER
I did my job- I was not in a policy-
making position at Los Alamos- I
would have done anything that I was
asked to do-

ROBB
You would have made the H-bomb too
wouldn’t you?
OPPENHEIMER
I couldn’t.

The STAMPING breaks rhythm to become CACOPHONOUS...

ROBB
I didn’t ask you that, OPPENHEIMER (CONT’D)
doctor! I would have worked on it,
yes. But to run a labouratory
is one thing, to advise a
government is another.
THE LIGHT OF A THOUSAND SUNS POURS IN THE WINDOW...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 191.

ROBB (CONT’D)
And the GAC report, which you co-
authored, following the Russian
atomic test said that a Super bomb
should never be produced, did it
not!

OPPENHEIMER
What we meant- what I meant- was
that it would be a better world if
there were no Hydrogen bombs in it.

LIGHT STABS THROUGH CRACKS IN THE WALL...

ROBB
Wouldn’t the Soviets do anything to
increase their military strength?

OPPENHEIMER
If we did it, they’d have to do it.
Our efforts would fuel their
efforts- just as it had with the
atomic bomb!

PLASTER BREAKS AWAY AS LIGHT POURS INTO THE ROOM... I JAM my
eyes closed, MORE AND MORE EXPOSED...

ROBB
'Just as with the atomic bomb.'
Exactly. No moral scruples in 1945,
plenty in 1949...

The sound STOPS. The light is gone.

GRAY
(gentle)
Dr Oppenheimer, when did your
strong moral convictions develop
with respect to the Hydrogen bomb?

I open my eyes, exhausted...
OPPENHEIMER
When it became clear to me that we
would tend to use any weapon we
had.

Silence.

Genres: Drama, Historical
Tone: Intense, Confrontational, Reflective

Summary In a Senate office, Lewis Strauss criticizes J. Robert Oppenheimer's actions and motivations related to the atomic bomb. In contrast, the Atomic Energy Commission room displays Oppenheimer sharing his views on the bomb's use and his moral scruples about the hydrogen bomb with Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper and Commissioner Thomas E. Murray. The scene concludes with Gray's thoughtful question about the development of Oppenheimer's moral convictions regarding the hydrogen bomb.

Strengths

Intense dialogue
Complex characters
Exploration of moral dilemmas

Weaknesses

Potential for dialogue to become overly didactic or heavy-handed

General Critique

The scene is well-written and engaging, but it could be improved by adding more detail and context to some of the dialogue.
For example, when Oppenheimer says "I believe I would, sir," in response to Robb's question about whether he would have opposed dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima because of moral scruples, it would be helpful to know more about his reasoning.
Additionally, the scene could be improved by adding more visual elements to help the reader visualize the setting and the characters' actions.
For example, when Strauss is pacing the room, furious, it would be helpful to describe his body language and facial expressions in more detail.
Overall, the scene is well-written and engaging, but it could be improved by adding more detail and context to some of the dialogue and by adding more visual elements to help the reader visualize the setting and the characters' actions.

General Suggestions

Add more detail and context to some of the dialogue, such as when Oppenheimer says "I believe I would, sir," in response to Robb's question about whether he would have opposed dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima because of moral scruples.
Add more visual elements to help the reader visualize the setting and the characters' actions, such as when Strauss is pacing the room, furious.
Consider adding a brief description of the characters' motivations and goals at the beginning of the scene.
Consider adding a brief description of the setting at the beginning of the scene.
Consider adding a brief description of the conflict between the characters at the beginning of the scene.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is highly impactful, delving deep into Oppenheimer's character and the weight of his decisions. The intense dialogue and confrontational tone create a gripping atmosphere.

Story Content

Concept: 9

The concept of exploring Oppenheimer's moral struggles and the consequences of his actions is compelling and thought-provoking.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by Oppenheimer's internal conflict and external pressures, leading to a tense and dramatic confrontation.

Originality: 9

The scene presents a fresh approach to the ethical debate surrounding the development and use of nuclear weapons, exploring the moral dilemmas faced by scientists and policymakers during the Cold War era. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth and complexity to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer, are well-developed and complex, with their motivations and struggles laid bare in the dialogue.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes a significant internal struggle and reflection, leading to a deeper understanding of his character and motivations.

Internal Goal: 8

Oppenheimer's internal goal in this scene is to defend his moral convictions and justify his actions regarding the development and use of nuclear weapons. This reflects his deeper need to reconcile his scientific work with his ethical beliefs.

External Goal: 7

Oppenheimer's external goal in this scene is to navigate the intense questioning and accusations from Robb regarding his involvement in the development of nuclear weapons. This reflects the immediate challenge of defending his actions and decisions.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 8

The conflict between Oppenheimer's moral convictions and the external pressures he faces creates a high level of tension and drama.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with intense questioning and accusations that challenge the protagonist's beliefs and decisions, creating uncertainty and conflict that drive the narrative forward.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high as Oppenheimer grapples with his moral convictions, the consequences of his actions, and the impact of his decisions on the world.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key aspects of Oppenheimer's character and the challenges he faces, setting up future conflicts and resolutions.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected twists and turns in the characters' dialogue and actions, as well as the moral ambiguity and conflicting viewpoints that challenge the audience's expectations.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict evident in this scene is the debate between the moral implications of developing and using nuclear weapons for military purposes. Oppenheimer's belief in a better world without Hydrogen bombs clashes with Robb's pragmatic view of military strength and deterrence.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions, particularly empathy and introspection, as Oppenheimer grapples with his decisions and their consequences.

Dialogue: 9

The dialogue is intense, thought-provoking, and reveals the inner turmoil of the characters, particularly Oppenheimer.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of the intense conflict, emotional depth, and moral complexity of the characters' interactions. The high stakes and ethical dilemmas create a sense of suspense and intrigue that keeps the audience invested in the outcome.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is effective in building tension and suspense, with well-timed reveals and confrontations that keep the audience engaged and invested in the characters' dilemmas.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene adheres to the expected format for its genre, with clear scene headings, character names, and dialogue formatting that enhance readability and clarity.

Structure: 8

The structure of the scene follows the expected format for its genre, with clear transitions between locations and well-paced dialogue that advances the plot and character development.

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss has stopped...

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 192.

STRAUSS
J. Robert Oppenheimer- the martyr.
I gave him exactly what he wanted.
To be remembered for Trinity, not
Hiroshima, not Nagasaki. He should
be thanking me.

SENATE AIDE
Well, he’s not.

Strauss looks at the Senate Aide’s neck, wondering if he
could get one hand all the way around it.

STRAUSS
(speaking softly)
Do you still have enough votes, or
is the crowning moment of my career
about to become the most public
humiliation of my life?

The Senate Aide looks down at his buck slip, counts his
tally.

SENATE AIDE
You’ll scrape through.

Strauss looks at the Senate Aide. He smiles.

STRAUSS
Then gather the press.

CUT TO:

INT. ROOM 2022, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION -- DAY (COLOUR)

I sit with Garrison and listen to Gray pass judgement...

GRAY
J. Robert Oppenheimer, this board,
having heard testimony from you and
many of your current and former
colleagues, has come to the
unanimous conclusion that you are a
loyal citizen...
(MORE)

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 193.

GRAY (CONT’D)
However, in the light of your
continuing associations and
disregard for the security
apparatus of this country, together
with your somewhat disturbing
conduct in relation to the Hydrogen
bomb and the regrettable lack of
candor in certain of your responses
to this board, we have voted two to
one to deny the renewal of your
security clearance.

I barely hear the rest...

GRAY (CONT’D)
A full written opinion, with a
dissent from Mr Evans, will be
issued to the AEC in the coming
days...

The board rises, aides start collecting files. Still dazed, I
take the phone from Garrison-

GARRISON
It’s Kitty.

KITTY
(over phone)
Robert? Robert?

I take a breath. Not trusting my voice...

OPPENHEIMER
Don’t... don’t... don’t... take in
the sheets.

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)
We hear the press gathering behind the doors. Strauss checks
his tie in the mirror. Smooths his hair. The Senate Aide
enters, buck slip in hand.

STRAUSS
Is it official?

SENATE AIDE
I’m afraid there were a couple of
unexpected holdouts.

Strauss freezes, absorbing the impact.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 194.

STRAUSS
I’m denied?

The Senate Aide leaves him hanging for a beat.

SENATE AIDE
I’m afraid so, sir.

Strauss doesn’t know what to do or where to look.

STRAUSS
Who were the holdouts?

SENATE AIDE
There were three, led by the junior
senator from Massachusetts. Young
guy, trying to make a name for
himself. Didn’t like what you did
to Oppenheimer.

STRAUSS
What’s his name?

The Senate Aide checks his tally...

SENATE AIDE
Uh... Kennedy. John F. Kennedy.

CUT TO:

EXT. OLDEN MANOR, BACK GATE OVERLOOKING THE INSTITUTE -- DAY
(COLOUR)

I approach Kitty, who’s been crying.

KITTY
Did you think if you let them tar
and feather you the world would
forgive you? It won’t.

OPPENHEIMER
We’ll see.

CUT TO:

INT. SENATE OFFICE -- DAY (B&W)

Strauss listens to the hungry press pack beyond the door. He
TURNS on the Senate Aide-

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 195.

STRAUSS
Goddamn it! You told me I’d be
fine!

SENATE AIDE
Well, I didn’t have all the facts,
did I?

STRAUSS
I did what was right for this
country. They don’t want me in the
Cabinet Room? Maybe they should
just invite Oppenheimer instead.

SENATE AIDE
Perhaps they will.

STRAUSS
He turned the scientists against
me. One by one. Starting with
Einstein. I told you about that?
About Einstein, by the pond?

The Senate Aide picks up Strauss’s hat and coat...

SENATE AIDE
You did. But, you know, sir, since
nobody knows what they said to each
other that day, is it possible they
didn’t talk about you at all? Is it
possible they spoke about
something...

Hands Strauss his hat and coat...

SENATE AIDE (CONT’D)
...more important?

Strauss looks at the Senate Aide like he wants to kill him.
The Senate Aide OPENS the office door and the FLASHBULBS EAT
STRAUSS ALIVE as we-
CUT TO:

Genres: Drama, Political, Biographical
Tone: Tense, Dramatic, Confrontational, Defiant

Summary In this somber and tense scene, Lewis Strauss is denied a cabinet position due to his role in the Atomic Energy Commission's denial of J. Robert Oppenheimer's security clearance renewal. The scene transitions between a Senate office and Room 2022, Atomic Energy Commission, highlighting the consequences of Strauss's actions. Oppenheimer's wife expresses disappointment in his actions, while Strauss faces humiliation and anger when denied the cabinet position. The scene ends with Strauss facing the hungry press pack beyond the door, as the conflicts remain unresolved.

Strengths

Intense conflict and emotional drama
Compelling character dynamics
Sharp and confrontational dialogue

Weaknesses

Some elements of the plot may be complex and require prior knowledge of the characters and their relationships

General Critique

The dialogue in this scene is somewhat stilted and unnatural. It does not flow well and does not sound like the way real people would speak.
The scene lacks action and is mostly just characters talking. This can be tedious for the reader and make it difficult to stay engaged.
The characters in this scene are not well-developed. The reader does not get a good sense of their motivations or personalities.
The scene does not advance the plot in any meaningful way. It is mostly just a rehash of what has already happened.
The scene does not end with a strong hook or cliffhanger. This makes it difficult for the reader to want to continue reading.

General Suggestions

The dialogue in this scene could be improved by making it more natural and conversational. The characters should speak in a way that is consistent with their personalities and motivations.
The scene could be made more engaging by adding some action or conflict. This could involve having the characters interact with each other in a more dynamic way.
The characters in this scene could be developed more by giving them more backstory and motivation. The reader should be able to understand what drives them and what they want.
The scene could be advanced by having the characters make some kind of decision or take some kind of action that will move the plot forward.
The scene could be ended with a stronger hook or cliffhanger by leaving the reader with a question or a sense of suspense.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 8

The scene is highly engaging and impactful, with strong emotional and dramatic elements that keep the audience invested in the characters and their conflicts.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of power struggles, personal vendettas, and the consequences of standing up for one's beliefs is effectively portrayed and adds depth to the narrative.

Plot: 8

The plot is driven by the intense conflict between characters, the revelation of betrayals, and the consequences of taking a stand against the establishment.

Originality: 9

The scene offers a fresh perspective on historical events and political power struggles, presenting complex characters and ethical dilemmas in a compelling and engaging way. The authenticity of the dialogue and interactions adds depth and realism to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters are well-developed and their motivations, conflicts, and relationships are compelling, adding layers to the narrative.

Character Changes: 8

The characters undergo significant emotional and psychological changes, particularly Oppenheimer, as they face the consequences of their actions and beliefs.

Internal Goal: 8

Strauss's internal goal is to maintain his reputation and power in the face of potential humiliation and defeat. He is driven by a desire for recognition and success, as well as a fear of public failure.

External Goal: 7

Strauss's external goal is to secure his position and influence within the government, particularly in relation to the decisions being made about security clearances and political alliances.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 9

The conflict between characters is intense, with high stakes and personal vendettas driving the tension and drama of the scene.

Opposition: 8

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting goals and motivations driving the characters' actions and decisions, creating suspense and uncertainty about the outcome.

High Stakes: 9

The stakes are high for the characters, with reputations, careers, and personal relationships on the line, adding tension and urgency to the scene.

Story Forward: 8

The scene moves the story forward by revealing key information, escalating conflicts, and setting up future developments in the narrative.

Unpredictability: 8

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected twists and turns in the characters' decisions and interactions, keeping the audience on edge and unsure of the outcome.

Philosophical Conflict: 7

The philosophical conflict in this scene revolves around the tension between personal ambition and ethical responsibility. Strauss's actions and decisions are driven by his desire for power and recognition, even at the expense of others' reputations and well-being.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene evokes strong emotions in the audience, with themes of betrayal, sacrifice, and resilience resonating deeply.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is sharp, confrontational, and emotionally charged, effectively conveying the tensions and conflicts between the characters.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its high stakes conflict, emotional intensity, and moral complexity, drawing the audience into the characters' struggles and decisions.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is well-executed, with a balance of tension-building moments, emotional beats, and character interactions that maintain the audience's interest and investment in the story.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The scene's formatting is consistent with the expected format for its genre, with clear scene headings, dialogue formatting, and descriptive elements that enhance the visual and emotional impact of the story.

Structure: 8

The scene follows a clear and engaging structure, with well-paced dialogue and narrative development that keeps the audience invested in the characters' conflicts and decisions.

EXT. LAKESIDE, INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY, PRINCETON -- DAY
(COLOUR)

I approach the figure by the lake. The figure’s hat BLOWS
off, releasing a mass of GREY CURLS. Strauss watches from the
doorway as I scoop up Einstein’s hat...

EINSTEIN
Robert. The man of the moment.

(CONTINUED)
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 196.

I hand him his hat. He looks out at the lake.

EINSTEIN (CONT’D)
You once had a reception for me at
Berkeley. Gave me an award. You all
believed I’d lost the ability to
understand what I’d started. So
that award wasn’t for me... it was
for all of you.

Einstein turns to me.

EINSTEIN (CONT'D) (CONT’D)
Now it’s your turn to deal with the
consequences of your achievements.
And one day... when they’ve
punished you enough...

INT. CABINET ROOM, WHITE HOUSE -- DAY

Dozens of formally attired GUESTS. Kitty by my side. Many
faces, now older, are there - Rabi, Lawrence, Frank,
Jackie...

EINSTEIN (V.O.)
They’ll serve salmon and potato
salad, make speeches, give you a
medal...

LYNDON JOHNSON places a MEDAL around my neck. I SMILE and
shake the President’s hand. Kitty BEAMS as she, in turn,
shakes Johnson’s hand... Frank comes up to me, gives me a
quick embrace-

FRANK
You’re happy, I’m happy...

OPPENHEIMER
Then I’m happy you’re happy.
Lawrence claps me on the shoulder, smiling affectionately...

EINSTEIN (V.O.)
Pat you on the back and tell you
all is forgiven...

Teller approaches, I smile and take his offered hand...

EINSTEIN (V.O.)
Just remember. It won’t be for
you...

(CONTINUED)
8FLiX.com FYC SCREENPLAY DATABASE 20230904
Gadget 2023-04-21 FINAL Shooting Script 197.

Teller turns to Kitty, offering the same smile and
handshake...

EINSTEIN (V.O.)
...it’ll be for them.

Kitty STARES Teller down, letting his hand hang in the air
like a WILTING PLANT... and we-

CUT TO:

EXT. LAKESIDE, INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY, PRINCETON -- DAY

Einstein TURNS to leave. Up the hill, Strauss approaches...

OPPENHEIMER
Albert? When I came to you with
those calculations?

Einstein pauses. I watch raindrops make circles on the
surface of the pond

OPPENHEIMER (CONT'D) (CONT’D)
We were worried that we’d start a
chain reaction that would destroy
the entire world...

EINSTEIN
I remember it well. What of it?

OPPENHEIMER
I believe we did.

Einstein PALES. TURNS, passing Strauss without a word. The
sound of FEET STAMPING...

CLOSE IN ON: my staring eyes as I visualize THE EXPANDING
NUCLEAR ARSENALS OF THE WORLD... THE FEET, FASTER AND FASTER-

When I can take it no longer, I JAM my eyes CLOSED and we-
CUT TO BLACK.

CREDITS.

END.

Genres: Drama, Biography
Tone: Reflective, Emotional, Contemplative

Summary Robert Oppenheimer meets Albert Einstein by a lake, where Einstein compares a past reception for him to Oppenheimer's current situation. Oppenheimer receives a medal from President Lyndon Johnson in a formal setting at the White House. The conversation turns to past calculations, leading to a revelation about the consequences of their work. The scene is contemplative and nostalgic, with a hint of melancholy, and ends with a cliffhanger for the next scene.

Strengths

Emotional depth
Character development
Reflective tone

Weaknesses

Lack of external conflict
Pacing may be slow for some viewers

General Critique

The scene is a powerful and moving conclusion to the film, but it could be improved by adding more visual details to the description of the setting and the characters' actions.
For example, the description of the lakeside could be expanded to include details about the trees, the water, and the sky.
The description of Einstein's appearance could also be expanded to include details about his clothing, his hair, and his facial expression.
These details would help to create a more vivid and immersive scene for the reader.
Additionally, the scene could be improved by adding more dialogue between Einstein and Oppenheimer.
This dialogue could explore their relationship in more depth and provide more insight into their thoughts and feelings about the consequences of their actions.
Finally, the scene could be improved by adding a more specific and meaningful conclusion.
The current ending is somewhat abrupt and leaves the reader with a sense of uncertainty about what will happen to Oppenheimer and Einstein.

General Suggestions

Add more visual details to the description of the setting and the characters' actions.
Expand the description of Einstein's appearance to include details about his clothing, his hair, and his facial expression.
Add more dialogue between Einstein and Oppenheimer.
Explore their relationship in more depth and provide more insight into their thoughts and feelings about the consequences of their actions.
Add a more specific and meaningful conclusion.

Ratings

Overall

Overall: 9

The scene is emotionally impactful, thought-provoking, and provides closure to Oppenheimer's character arc. It effectively conveys the weight of his actions and decisions throughout his career.

Story Content

Concept: 8

The concept of reflecting on past achievements, facing consequences, and seeking forgiveness is well-executed in the scene. It adds depth to Oppenheimer's character and explores complex themes.

Plot: 8

The plot focuses on Oppenheimer's interactions with key figures and his internal reflections, moving the story towards a resolution. It ties up loose ends and provides closure to his character arc.

Originality: 9

The scene demonstrates a high level of originality through its exploration of historical figures, ethical dilemmas, and personal introspection. The authenticity of the characters' actions and dialogue adds depth and complexity to the narrative.

Character Development

Characters: 9

The characters, especially Oppenheimer and Einstein, are well-developed and their interactions are emotionally resonant. The scene showcases their growth and relationships effectively.

Character Changes: 8

Oppenheimer undergoes significant emotional growth and reflection in the scene, leading to a deeper understanding of his character. The interactions with other characters also contribute to his development.

Internal Goal: 8

The protagonist's internal goal in this scene is to come to terms with the consequences of their achievements and the impact of their work on the world. This reflects their deeper need for validation, acceptance, and understanding of their role in history.

External Goal: 7

The protagonist's external goal in this scene is to navigate the recognition and accolades they receive for their work, while also grappling with the potential destructive consequences of their actions.

Scene Elements

Conflict Level: 4

While there is emotional conflict and tension in the scene, it is more focused on resolution and reflection rather than external conflicts. The conflict is primarily internal and emotional.

Opposition: 7

The opposition in the scene is strong, with conflicting values, moral dilemmas, and emotional stakes that challenge the protagonist's beliefs and decisions. The uncertainty of the outcome adds tension and suspense to the narrative.

High Stakes: 6

While the stakes are not as high in terms of action or external conflict, the emotional stakes for Oppenheimer and his relationships are significant. The scene explores the personal consequences of his actions.

Story Forward: 7

The scene moves the story forward by providing resolution to Oppenheimer's character arc and tying up loose ends. It sets the stage for the conclusion of his journey.

Unpredictability: 7

This scene is unpredictable because of the unexpected revelations, moral dilemmas, and emotional conflicts that arise between characters. The uncertainty of the protagonist's choices and the consequences of their actions keep the audience on edge.

Philosophical Conflict: 9

The philosophical conflict evident in this scene is the tension between personal success and societal responsibility. The protagonist must reconcile their desire for recognition with the ethical implications of their scientific advancements.

Audience Engagement

Emotional Impact: 9

The scene has a high emotional impact, evoking feelings of nostalgia, regret, and hope. It resonates with the audience and leaves a lasting impression.

Dialogue: 8

The dialogue is poignant, reflective, and adds depth to the characters' emotions and motivations. It enhances the emotional impact of the scene and conveys important themes.

Engagement: 9

This scene is engaging because of its emotional depth, moral complexity, and historical significance. The interactions between characters, the introspective dialogue, and the symbolic imagery captivate the audience and invite reflection.

Pacing: 8

The pacing of the scene is well-executed, with a balance of introspective moments, emotional beats, and dramatic tension. The rhythm of the dialogue and action sequences enhances the scene's effectiveness and maintains audience engagement.

Technical Aspect

Formatting: 8

The formatting of the scene adheres to the expected format for its genre, with clear scene headings, character actions, and dialogue cues that enhance readability and visual clarity.

Structure: 8

The structure of the scene follows a non-linear narrative, shifting between past and present events to explore the protagonist's internal and external conflicts. This format adds depth and complexity to the storytelling.

Oppenheimer

Overview

Unique Selling Point

AI Verdict & Suggestions

Story Facts

Script Level Analysis

Screenplay Insights

Story Critique

Characters

Emotional Analysis

Goals and Philosophical Conflict

Themes

Logic & Inconsistencies

Scene Analysis

Scene Level Percentiles

Other Analyses

Unique Voice

Writer's Craft

Memorable Lines

Tropes

World Building

Correlations

Loglines

Unique Voice

Writer's Craft

Memorable Lines

Tropes

World Building

Correlations

Loglines

Recommend

Executive Summary

Screenplay Insights:

Screenplay Story Analysis

Oppenheimer - Score: 83/100

Role

Personality

Scenes

Character Analysis Overview

Foundational Definition 9/10

Complexity And Depth 8/10

Arc Or Purposeful Stasis 7/10

Dialogue And Voice 8/10

Behavior And Choices 7/10

Relationship Dynamics 8/10

Scene Impact 9/10

Role Fulfillment 9/10

Thematic Plot Integration 9/10

Emotional Resonance 9/10

Score: 9

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 8

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 7

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 8

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 7

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 8

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 9

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 9

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 9

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

Score: 9

Suggestions

Follow-up Questions

MBTI: intj