It’s almost
impossible to debate or overstate the scientific achievements of Stephen
Hawking. He was, and still remains, a true genius. A film about his life most
definitely seemed warranted to me, and I held off a long while before I finally
got around to watching The Theory of Everything the other day. I was excited to
see it, and as the first half an hour unfolded I was impressed with what I was getting.
But as it went on, I felt the narrative peaked and troughed, ultimately leaving
me wanting a little bit more out of both the story and characters.
The first
act of the film finds Stephen enrolled as a student at Cambridge, one of the
most prestigious universities in the world, along with its twin, Oxford. Having
been a resident of Oxford myself now for 4 years, I strongly related to the aesthetic
environment of the first part of this film. Towering cathedrals, archaic
brickwork, smoky pubs, bars and halls. Grandeur left, right and centre. You
immediately get the sense that Stephen is unusual and oddly eccentric, but
somehow slots perfectly into the microcosm of Cambridge and its social
structures. We learn early on that Hawking was a bit sporadic and undisciplined
when it came to his work as an undergraduate, yet clearly by far the most
talented student in his class. I enjoyed watching this early persona and it
reminded me a bit of Good Will Hunting – a young person of unimaginable
intellect who requires a bit of wisdom and experience in order to fully realise
his potential.
Right from
the get go its clear that this is not going to be a film focussed on Hawking’s
intellectual prowess though, and we are introduced to the next most pivotal
figure in the film in the first 3 minutes, Jane Wilde Hawking, played by
Felicity Jones. A rather typical ‘falling in love’ sequence then occupies a
good half hour of the film, culminating in the two kissing under a firework
display at a collegiate ball. All very romantic, but to me it lacked an
emotional punch and all felt a bit idealistic.
As the film
moves into its middle third, it switches in tone. This is mainly due to Stephen
being diagnosed with motor neuron disease, sending him into a spiral of
depression and anger. I like the nuance of how this revelation was explored,
both in relation to Stephen and Jane, who are both clearly going to suffer
greatly at the hand of this disease. Hawking’s feelings seem to switch
dramatically between total acceptance and flat out rage and helplessness. This
part of the movie was the high point for me. As the reality of it all sets in,
big decisions begin to be made by both characters. Jane’s defiance is touching,
yet in the background there is a perpetual feeling of doubt that might end up
being the film’s main theme.
The story
only really glances over Stephen’s absolutely fascinating work as a physicist,
which I really take issue with. I understand that director James Marsh wanted
to focus the energy on his personal life, but unfortunately I don’t think it
stays interesting for 123 minutes. A more even balance between personal and
academic happenings would have satisfied me much more. The times where the film
did delve (albeit simplistically) into what Hawking was trying to work out was
gripping and engaging. His relationship with fellow Cambridge students and professors
like Dennis Sciama, played brilliantly by David Thewlis, should have been
explored so much more.
Ultimately
the film settles into a story basically about Jane, and her struggles dealing
with her relationship. Her mother suggests she tries singing in a church choir,
which she takes up. Predictably the choir master is a handsome, well
intentioned, single man looking for love. There is a bit of ambiguity throughout
this part of the film as to who Jane really loves, but not enough to make it suspenseful.
All that’s really there is doubt and adulterous thoughts. This almost obscenely
nice choir master, Jonathon Jones, gets involved with the Hawking family,
becoming very friendly with not just Jane, but her kids and Stephen himself,
who by this point is almost unable to move or talk. Its obvious that this is
problematic, a time bomb waiting to detonate. The last half of the film is
mostly centred around this dynamic, and to be honest I found it a bit dull.
Eventually
the two go their separate ways, with Stephen also finding an adoring admirer in
Maxine Peake. There were several clichéd moments that I really didn’t care for.
The worst being when Hawking has a seizure and almost dies at the exact moment
Jane is about to sleep with Jonathan, as if their souls were intertwined. I
found this all too scripted and like the director was trying to make us overly
sympathise with Jane, when it was she who was massively in the wrong. This sums
up my main gripe with The Theory of Everything – its not about the theory of
everything. Its about Jane’s struggle to deal with Stephen’s illness. Although
I definitely had admiration for what she did in caring for Hawking, I can’t
help but feel the story was too nice to both of the lead characters. It painted
Hawking as emotionally dissonant after his diagnosis, laughing off genuinely heart-breaking
moments, and Jane as someone acting only out of love.
Eddie
Redmayne did as a good a job as he could depicting Hawking with the script he
was given. His acting as Stephen with the disease was very convincing, yet I
must reiterate that I don’t think nearly enough screen time was given to him or
his work. I can’t take anything away from Felicity Jones either, she clearly
put her absolute all into the part. I think the principal issue was the script
and narrative. Whilst it had its great moments, it had its equal share of poor
ones. Ultimately I think it lacked a clear objective, instead trying to be
everything at once (no pun intended). It didn’t respect its audience enough to
give more attention to the science, which is its main flaw. This could be why
many were calling the movie ‘Oscar bait’, and although I disagree with such a
sweeping classification, I can see where people are coming from. I mean, it succeeded,
didn’t it? No, I don’t think Redmayne deserved the Oscar, but I don’t think it’s
a great injustice either. By all means watch this film, its an enjoyable and
easy experience, but far from the best 2014 had to offer.
Acting: 75
Narrative:
50
Visuals: 65
Music: 60
Overall:
63/100
No comments:
Post a Comment