The Theory of Everything

This film is highly recommended.

You can certainly tell it's Oscar time when all the more dignified and personal projects inundate the movie houses in hopes of capturing the gold. For most of the other nine months, we get lesser efforts and big blockbuster spectacles to fill-in until late October arrives. Then, it's time to get serious about our cinema choices. The Theory of Everything is one such film. It carries its pedigree with style and class, even if it is a rather conventional biopic in disguise, with its main character suffering through a debilitating disease while finding the stamina to go on.

With a very literate screenplay by Anthony McCarten and accomplished direction by James Marsh, the film tells the story of famed scientist Stephen Hawking and his battle with ALS. It also concentrates on his relationship with his supportive and loving wife, Jane.

Love will conquer all. Or so it should. But the horrors of this disease and the hardships they face seem unsurmountable. We see the couple meet, fall in love, marry, have children, and grow weary of each other. Stephen achieves adoration, fame, and fortune while Jane takes a back seat to her caregiver role and bringing up the family, amid the tears and frustration they face on a daily basis. One immediately empathizes with these characters due to their tragic situations.

The two leads are splendid and their acting is peerless. Felicity Jones plays Jane. Her role may be less showy and far more understated, but the actress is perfect at showing Jane's endurance and strength in the subtlest of ways. Eddie Redmayne is Stephen Hawking and his performance is literally trans-formative. (He must have learned his craft from tons of research about Hawking and creative influence from Daniel Day Lewis.) This is an impressive physical performance, from his black horn rimmed glasses to his walking cane and distorted posture. Both will receive well-earned accolades for their memorable work. Fine supporting work by Charlie Cox as Jonathan, their loyal friend, and Simon McBurney as Stephen's father add more clarity to the film.

As with most biographical films, one sees the rise and fall of the protagonist before it arrives. This film follows that tries-and-true formula. But Marsh's direction compensates for the linear structure and predictability of the story. The director relies heavily on his actors' subtle actions to tell more about their characters than the mere words they speak. He also wisely shows Hawking's point of view by angling the camera range from a lower stance or keeping it stationary to reinforce the characters' immobility. The final scene, recapping Hawking's life in reverse, beautifully sums up Stephen's life full circle in the most visual of terms.

But The Theory of Everything is foremost a love story. The film desperately wants to be a crowd-pleaser with an uplifting message of inspiration, even when the reality and truth of their actual lives is bleaker than it appears on screen. The film glosses over some factual content to play up the human drama of this pair of young lovers. It skillfully manipulates its audience to wallow in the heartbreak. Director Marsh successfully capture the pangs of young love and bittersweet romance in this emotionally involving film.

The Theory of Everything is an immensely satisfying film with stand-out acting and skilled direction. The proof is right there on the screen, even if the facts are slightly askew. GRADE: B+

Visit my blog at: www.dearmoviegoer.com

ANY COMMENTS: Please contact me at: jadepietro@rcn.com

FIRST: Let us FOCUS on the Title´s Content and Context.....

Quite Literally.... Expecations are EVERYTHING! And I must say that mine were SKY HIGH... Before viewing!

And although I tried my very best to keep them in check, when I sat down to watch this, unfortunately, my expectations were just like what I mentioned earlier! Perhaps, just a tad TOO high...

PLEASE Don't get me wrong! EVERYTHING is both an exquisitely well-made film and a rather delicious, interesting and quite entertaining experience! Here, I will make my very best effort to explain exactly why this is the case.

EVERYTHING jump starts itself by introducing us to a rather soft-spoken, nerdy (what else?) young Physics doctoral candidate: One Stephen Hawking! Within minutes, we are inserted into the stop-motion bloom of Stephen and Jane's surprisingly intense and, yes, sweet relationship!

In its early minutes, we also get some foreshadowing of Stephen's ominous deteriorating health, which, obviously, in and of itself, will not prove to be the least bit surprising to anyone watching the film. EVERYTHING is clearly Stephen Hawking from his first wife, Jane's perspective. Considering that the movie is based on her book, could it have been anything else? As a logical result, what we get here is a focus on Stephen Hawking the man, the husband; his private persona, much more than his public and professional persona!

Will this emphasis on his relationship with Jane and his prolonged struggle with ALS and its debilitating effects, leave some people feeling somewhat shortchanged? Undoubtedly, there will be some. EVERYTHING isn't completely devoid of moments that underscore Hawking's scientific mindset and insight, however...They're just not nearly as many as one might expect, particularly in light of exactly who he is and what he has done to achieve fame! I prefer not to go into any more detail, because we wouldn't want any SP**LERS.... now would we?

An interesting personal anecdote in relation to Mr. Hawking: For many years, I naturally assumed that he was an American...Why? Well, as I'm sure perhaps millions of you have noticed, when he speaks, using what has come to be considered his trademark computerized voice, he clearly speaks with an American accent! To my chagrin, just a few years back, did I discover that it was simply a case of AMERICAN technology determining to use its own voice!

EVERYTHING's only real shortcoming? Quite honestly, the movie seems to do a lot of "Reelin In the Years!" during its last three-quarters of an hour, or so. To clarify that a bit, the movie constantly skips forward a few years at a time, briefly shows us a new son or daughter, for example, in a couple scenes, then jumps forward a couple years and repeats this process! Perhaps the sheer volume of detailed events in Hawking's life would have been better served by presenting them in a four or six hour mini-series? Just a parting opinion!

8********.... ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!

Any comments, questions or observations, in English o en ESPAÑOL, are most welcome!

We are all familiar with the story and with Steven Hawking. His groundbreaking work 'A brief History of Time' and devastating disabilities propelled him irrevocably into the public consciousness and immortal fame.

But few of us could understand the complexities of his personal life and the shocking divorce in 1990 from his long sacrificing wife of more than 25 years. Indeed that episode served to darken his reputation in the minds of many, including myself, who felt ill at ease with anyone who could leave a partner who had done so much for him just at the long awaited moment when international fame and recognition finally arrived.

This wonderful production, so well scripted and paced throughout, serves to explain that vital anomaly in Hawking's life. And it is made all the more poignant as it is based upon the account written by his wife who has borne so much.

But it is the breathtaking performance of Eddie Redmayne as Hawking that simply blasted this film into an extraordinary level. It is difficult enough to mimic so famous a person as Hawking and it is even more difficult to portray so accurately the debilitating and gradually increasing effects of Motor Neuron Disease. But to transmit so clearly the profound emotions and inner suffering that Hawking must have experienced in his agonizing journey was a performance that left me quite speechless and at times in uncontrollable tears.

It would be a travesty of the industry if Eddie Redmayne is not nominated for an Oscar after this performance. And to my mind it was a work of art that simply cannot be equaled let alone beaten.

Have a good handkerchief ready to hand.

One might think that this movie would be about esoteric theories that are beyond the capacity for most people.

You would be so wrong!

This was probably the best love story I have ever seen. I was on the edge of my seat watching Jane Hawking (Felicity Jones) as she did more and more amazing acts of love for Stephan Hawking (Eddie Redmayne). I cannot imagine anyone that fits the definition of love more than she did.

Redmayne was brilliant as Hawking.

Anthony McCarten took Jane Hawing's book and wrote a screenplay that was a thrill to watch.

I've read scientists are turned off by this film for its omissions, simplifications, falsities, and other failures to explain Prof. Hawking's theories. I can understand that, being a law specialist who can't watch law dramas. But if you're not a cosmologist or a physicist you should not be discouraged by the film's failure to give you enough detail for a two credit course. It's a good drama of people, a bit schmaltzy as befits the facts, and in that regard I understand it's pretty accurate, and is definitely well acted and directed. Also a nice glimpse of what Oxbridge life was like in the 1950s. As they say, the male lead is Oscar bait.