Dear Mr. Nolan,

Congratulations on the success of Oppenheimer.

I know, it’s been a year. But since it is the awards season, I thought this was a good time to bring up your very first Oscar. To say that the movie has done well is an understatement. Accolades started pouring in right at the Golden Globes when the movie bagged five BEST awards for all significant categories – picture, director (That’s You Mr. Nolan, actor, supporting actor and original score). The success was repeated both at BAFTA and at the king of all awards the Oscars where your magnum opus repeated the success of the Golden Globes plus two—and walked away with best cinematography and best film editing.

Oppenheimer is among the most decorated films of recent years. To put it lightly, every award season, each director will hope for a success that Oppenheimer has brought you.

The whole world knows how well the movie did at all the awards. So why am I sharing this? Simply to remind you of the power and reach of your work. Oppenheimer will be discussed in film schools for decades to come. Images and sounds from the movie will remain in the global cultural memory for ever.

Although, I think you took the easy route of neither showing the aftermath of the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nor ever showing the Japanese people. I personally think that the movie should have been made in such a way that the names ‘Hiroshima’ and ‘Nagasaki’ were plastered in every viewer’s memory. However, we barely heard the names of those two doomed cities.

There was another major creative faux paus, which raised many an eyebrow. News stories were written about it, it was discussed on podcasts and it hurt many of your fans, especially in India.
I say ‘creative’ because it was purely a decision that you took as a director. That scene does not appear in the book that you claim the movie is based on. Yes, I am referring to the scene where Florence Pugh’s character, in all her nudity, asks Oppenheimer to read a line from the Bhagwad Gita. What was the purpose of juxtaposing sacred Sanskrit along with an intimate act, while in real life Oppenheimer used that sentence in his interviews?

Given your reputation as a meticulous filmmaker, every element in your films is carefully chosen and deeply considered. It would be disingenuous to claim that the placement of this sacred text in such a context was accidental or arbitrary. Even if you were initially unaware of its sanctity, the filmmaking process, which involves extensive research and consultation, should have brought it to your knowledge.

What is curious is that in one of your interviews (at 20:16) , while referring to Sergei Eisenstein’s editing style you explained that you were influenced by his idea of ‘Shot A + Shot B=Thought C’ – that a shot can be more than the sum of its parts. What thought were you trying to put in the minds of the viewers when you had a naked Florence Pugh make a naked Oppenheimer read a sentence from the Bhagwad Gita, one of the most sacred books for the Hindus?

Further, in the same interview (at 20:40), when the interviewer expressed his disappointment for not seeing any carnage in the movie, you explained that you wanted to remain true to “Oppenheimer’s experience” and yet, you acknowledge that the movie is a rendering of your perception.

So allow me to ask again, what was your reasoning behind juxtaposing two naked people reading a text that is considered the essence of Hinduism. Frankly speaking, it feels like either you were abusing your power as a director and simply mocking a religion that has survived onslaughts from Abrahamic faiths and colonization or you have no understanding of what Bhagwad Gita is, or what it means to the Hindus. Something, that as a director, you should have (at least) tried to familiarize yourself with.

Let me share a few facts about the book and explain, at a very rudimentary level, what the book is about. Bhagwad Gita, means The Song of God. The book is a part of the Mahabharata, the longest epic in the world. At 200,000 verses and 1.8 million words the epic is nearly six times longer than the Bible, to just give you a rough idea. The Bhagwad Gita alone has 25,000 words in its eighteen chapters. The most striking part about the book (the Song) is that it takes place in the middle of the greatest war ever fought in India. Between cousins. If you think about it, it is a metaphor for our world.

While those who do not know the context consider it a book where Lord Krishna urges his friend Arjuna to fight a war, in reality, the war was not the choice of the side where Lord Krishna stands. War happened after exhausting all options for peace. The one sentence that Oppenheimer is associated with, “I am become death’ should be considered in the context of Dharma and Karma. All too complex to be explained here. But let us just say that all births and deaths happen due to a combination of human karma and divine will. The gods cannot simply wave their wands and create peace, nor can they create war if the humans work for peace. It is a reminder for us Hindus to reflect on our actions before complaining or blaming.

In the Gita, Lord Krishna, teaches Arjuna about duty (Dharma), righteousness, devotion (Bhakti), knowledge (Jnana), and selfless action (Karma Yoga). It is regarded as one of the most important texts in Hindu philosophy and has influenced many thinkers across the world.

So let me ask you again, what thought C were you attempting to achieve by putting together shot A (two naked people) + shot B (reading from the Bhagwad Gita)?

Mr. Nolan, both you and I know that almost everything in movie making business is a choice, whether we call it creative liberty, instinct, or logistics.

I am sure you heard about the controversy around the scene and how the movie hurt Hindu sentiments. Sadly, we never heard a word from you explaining your choice, or so much as an apology for hurting the sentiments of a country that generates generous revenue for your movies.

May be if you had read the Song of God, may be if you had focused on its wisdom, you would neither be afraid of showing carnage, nor shirk away from mentioning names of the cities that were pulverized on December 6, 1945. For God is both birth and death, sadness and gladness. The wisdom of Song of God clearly states that life and death are happening simultaneously.

In the end, it felt like the you were relieving Oppenheimer of his guilt for the bombing of the Japanese cities. In an industry where movies never shy away from showing gratuitous violence in the name of peace, your movie did not show the suffering of the Japanese or even mention the names of the cities that were bombed. Equally important, it insulted another Asian civilization, by mocking its most sacred text. But, we learnt that Mr. Oppenheimer was “kinda” not guilty.

Cinema, as an art form, wields immense influence, and creative freedom is invaluable. However, with such freedom comes the responsibility to respect cultural and religious sensitivities. I would appreciate a response that provides clarity on this decision and the thought process behind it.

Or, you could simply ensure that the scene is cut out from the movie, or you could simply write a piece on what your intentions were behind including the controversial scene.

I urge you to consider the broader implications of using sacred texts in a context that might be perceived as sensationalism. It does not suit a director of your repute. Let us strive for a cinematic landscape that fosters understanding and appreciation of diverse cultures, promoting harmony rather than inadvertently contributing to division, confusion, and mockery.

Charu Uppal