That looks like a google or rotten tomato review (or similar) which i never find any use as so much depends on the person watching the film. Feedback from people I have some knowledge of are helpful. Or reviewer that I have followed for some time.
No idea what sort of films Shiba’s son likes, so him not liking this is interesting but is not massively revealing
You might well think that… but getting 3.9 out of 5 isn’t bad… and it’s interesting to note what folk liked or didn’t like… I simply gave you a small idea… 
There are other review sites with similar reports from lots of people…
Most say the same…
It’s the story of the man… and most agreed it was marvellously done…
You’ll be able to judge for yourself and let us know what you think. 
I usually watch films for the subject rather than the film making craft.
However, this new Oppenheimer one was made by the same director, Christopher Nolan, who made the recent Dunkirk film with that short Shakespearean actor once married to Emma Thompson whose name escapes me. Nolan likes slow, long shots with beautiful music and evocative sets. Expect more of the same, which is lovely if you like those qualities but like watching paint dry if you do not.
That said, I did try watching the latest Guy Ritchie production ‘The Covenant’ because it was by Guy Ritchie and I enjoyed Snatch and Sherlock. Turned it off after 15 minutes. Quite enough war and darkness in the world without calling it entertainment.
Have you seen "The Gentleman "? Recommended if you like Guy Ritchie films, Hugh Grant, whom I’m not usually a fan of, is brilliant.
Thank you! On my list. Again 
Kenneth Branagh
Looks like a love/hate reaction.
He’s aging very nicely and having the courage to do more challenging work - he was superb as Jeremy Thorpe (A Very English Scandal).
Out of 2695 reviews… the average was 3.9 marks out of 5(top marks)… so hardly cut and dried love/hate…
Seems to me far more people liked it a lot… than the few who didn’t…
and that’s certainly what many other Reviews are saying as well …
Our daughter usually see films long before we get round to the dvd… I await her comments
In this instance the average is not that useful - the shape of the graph tells us more - highest number of ratings 5. Next highest number of ratings 1, I stand by my love/hate comment. 
Fair comment… although from the “hate” reviews… I think the film was not what they were expecting…
It was a story which was not “entertaining” in the way some folk prefer… but the real-life wasn’t “entertaining” either…
difficult one to decide upon I reckon…
There are one or two films with which I’ve not been over-thrilled first time around, yet thoroughly enjoyed on a second viewing quite some time later…
I went to see 1917 solely because the cinematographer was Roger Deakin (and the long takes did give it a particular feel). The story itself was overblown and unbelievable to my mind.
Very sweet of you Stella, but I am a film buff!! A google review is really not where I take information from 
Much more insightful comment, thank you. I often love “paint dry” type films.
One I can recommend where every single frame shot is composed and dressed to artistic perfection is the 2009 ‘A Single Man’ directed by Tom Ford.
Careful! I may start to recommend films from Peter Greenaway’s canon…
… and Derek Jarman’s
Now you’re talking 
I saw it on Thursday. For me, it was a superb film, and it didn’t really feel like 3hr long. I already knew some of the story, as it starts in the film, when he is being persecuted for his views. I’ve also read a few books about the Manhatten Project. The film jumps back and forth between two timelines. The first starts before WW2 when Oppenheimer is a student and the other after WW2 when he is struggling with his conscience about nuclear weapons, speaking out and his enemies try to silence him. The two timelines I think contrast each other with the earlier Oppenheimer having a purely scientific outlook on the possibility and then realisation of a nuclear weapon. The other Oppenheimer is deeply disquieted and guilty about his part and his lack of foresight. I thought the acting was superb with the exception of Tom Conti as Einstein who thankfully only had a few, short scenes.
I shall be expecting an interesting report on this film after you’ve watched it…
Sadly, I offered you the Google review thingy instead of a more worthy source… albeit most sources gave similar replies…
but I shall know better in future…
However, reading my way through all the reviews has got me interested enough to ask my daughter to go and see it asap
Something I would add/repeat here is that some, if not most, beautifully and carefully crafted movies are made to be enjoyed on the big screen in a darkened cinema, not sadly the little iPhone 13 Mini I am using. I realise I am losing much pleasure of experience but this is my only choice other than to not see films at all.
I used to visit the cinema at least once, usually twice a week. Some weekdays my dear late uncle and I had the whole theatre to ourselves and sat right in the middle. Saturday afternoon with my husband was a regular. In HK the cinema was clean, the huge chairs wonderfully comfortable, the sound excellent, wide screen sharp as we sat in air conditioned splendour. There was also the option of glasses of wine delivered to our seats.
Now I live in France, watch movies 2” x 4” with two dogs panting like hair dryers beside me.
That’s a shame! We have a wonderful local cinema that is categorised ‘art et essai’ so has great programming thanks to gov’t support. Shows standard films - animation, american stuff - most of the time but has slots for world cinema and for films either on avant premiere or first release.
A restored 70’s cinema which still has the lights and so on, and about 200 comfortable seats. More than enough for the films we go to see which attract very small numbers. And all for €5!
Do check there’s nothing hidden away near you. I agree big screen makes so much difference.
Sounds wonderful… lucky you !
