Fat Man and Little Boy
Despite the combined star power in front of and behind the camera, Fat Man and Little Boy is a largely tepid retelling of the history of the Manhattan Project, the atomic testing project that led to the U.S. bombing of Japan during World War II (said bombs were dubbed “Fat Man” and “Little Boy”). The Nevada-based project is headed by General Leslie R. Groves (a testy Paul Newman) and scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer (Dwight Schultz of the TV series The A-Team), who later regretted his cooperation in the project. The problem with the film lies not with the acting, which includes solid performances by Bonnie Bedelia, Laura Dern, John Cusack, and future U.S. Senator Fred Dalton Thompson, but with the script by director Roland Joffé and Bruce Robinson (Withnail and I and Joffé’s The Killing Fields). A subject as morally complex as the creation of a supreme weapon requires a strong and thoughtful script, but Fat Man and Little Boy never gets further than establishing that indeed, atomic power is something to reckon with. Joseph Sargent’s 1989 made-for-TV film Day One, with Brian Dennehy as Groves and David Straithairn as Oppenheimer, covers the same story with twice the depth and avoids the pitfall of a romantic subplot (Oppenheimer’s dalliance with a communist played by Natasha Richardson), which this film stumbles into. Cusack’s doomed scientist is actually a combination of two real-life physicists, Harry Daghlian and Louis Slotkin, who died from radiation poisoning, albeit long after V-J Day. –Paul Gaita
Rating:  List Price: $ 9.98 Price: $ 16.89 Find More Dvd Products[/random] |
(out of 35 reviews)
Review by Dan Edwards for Fat Man and Little Boy
Rating:
As much as I admire Paul Newman, this film is so terribly flawed that even his presence can’t salvage it. The Manhattan Project is such a critical juncture in recent history that I think it’s very important that the story be told realistically. This film is 90% Hollywood formula and 10% history. Only in the broadest brushstrokes does this movie give the viewer any kind of concept of that monumental undertaking. Do yourself a BIG favor; watch the far superior (and very accurate) “Day One” instead. In all respects, it is a much better account and much more interesting film. The main characters are presented as scientists, engineers, and military officers, not goofballs and nutty professors, as they are in “Fat Man and Little Boy.”
Review by Tony for Fat Man and Little Boy
Rating:
Yes, there was a Manhattan Project and people named Groves, Oppenheimer and Szilard and yes Leo Szilard did like to spend as much time in the bath tub as possible (thinking) but other than that, this film was largely fictional. I was bothered by the historical inaccuracies including: 1. Groves met Szilard at the University of Chicago along with the rest of the scientists that worked there, not in a bathroom in Szilards hotel with Szilard in a tub and Groves on a toilet. 2. The Manhattan Project was much bigger than Los Alamos and Groves dealt with two other major groups that are mostly not even depicted. 3. Groves and Oppenheimer had a very different and more cooperative relationship than is depicted in the movie. 4. Groves was not subject to temper tantrums like Newman’s depiction. He was actually very quiet, but extremely sarcastic, socially awkward, pear shaped and somewhat arrogant. He was also smart as a tack, having attended both MIT and West Point, where he was fourth in his class. He created three cities that are now major cities in their states and an industry bigger than the U.S. Automobile industry in just over three years. This was no dummy.A more accurate movie is “Day One”, at least as far as the plot goes, but even that fails to grasp the Manhattan Project’s scope. The best film on it, which unfortunately no longer exists, was “The Beginning or the End” which was made in 1946 (Brian Donlevy played Groves). The main people on the project served as technical advisors for that one. Unfortunately, that was never put on video and probably rotted away in some warehouse.
Review by Science Geek for Fat Man and Little Boy
Rating:
I and other science teachers like to use this movie with our high school students. We usually include it with a unit on atomic theory. I explain to the students that of course, the producers have taken liberties with historical facts in order to make the movie more exciting, but they seem to take it in stride. I think it gives them a sense of what it might have really been like to be involved in the nuclear race. I highly recommend it.
Review by Kenneth Scheffler for Fat Man and Little Boy
Rating:
Overall, I found this to be a fairly good movie, but I just can’t stand it when fictitious characters (ie, Michael Merriman (played by John Cusack)) are worked into a plot–usually in an effort to create a love-interest aspect–in order to make the movie more palatible to a general audience. Sorry, but this is a fascinating story in its own right and shouldn’t be marred in this way. Fortunately, the complexities of the issues surrounding the creation on The Bomb are addressed, but I think the treatment what the motivations for the individual scientists were left much to be desired.
Review by thecableguy for Fat Man and Little Boy
Rating:
“Fat Man and Little Boy” (a.k.a. “Shadow Makers”) is a highly fictionalized account of the super secret Manhattan Project. I wish I had known that beforehand, since the reason I found the film so engaging is that I thought I was watching a painstakingly researched retelling — something that preserves a moment in history for use as a cautionary tale for future generations of scientists and laymen. Then I find out they made the majority of this stuff up. I guess with Dwight Schultz, the guy who played Murdoch from “The A-Team” doing Robert Oppenheimer I should’ve known better. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt — Tom Hanks used to be on “Bosom Buddies” and he went on to do “Apollo 18,” which was a fairly faithful account of a real-life event, but such isn’t the case here.
I give the film four stars for the good performances and the further research it inspired.