From the outset there are tensions as their differing ideologies play a role in both bringing them together and tearing them apart. However Jane’s enduring idealism overcomes this hurdle, a theme that is continued when she fights for their future despite Stephen’s crushing ALS diagnosis.
Her desire to see him triumph stirs him to surmount odds not
at first afforded to him. As the film lays the groundwork for their bond, it
also pulls at its foundation by making it clear there are chasms from the
start.
Adapted from Jane Wilde Hawking’s book “Traveling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen”, screenwriter Anthony McCarten treads lightly on the details as Redmayne and Jones are tasked with portraying the subtle deterioration of the Hawkings’ marriage with little textual provocation to back them up.
In this regard, the movie asks more questions than it answers, which is a tad frustrating. The subtle hinting at big moments is so timidly explored that it makes one wonder why it was ever acknowledged in the first place. You can feel the silk gloves grasp around the story’s every move, as the camera pans away when things turn too candid.
Adapted from Jane Wilde Hawking’s book “Traveling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen”, screenwriter Anthony McCarten treads lightly on the details as Redmayne and Jones are tasked with portraying the subtle deterioration of the Hawkings’ marriage with little textual provocation to back them up.
In this regard, the movie asks more questions than it answers, which is a tad frustrating. The subtle hinting at big moments is so timidly explored that it makes one wonder why it was ever acknowledged in the first place. You can feel the silk gloves grasp around the story’s every move, as the camera pans away when things turn too candid.
Benoit Delhomme’s stunning cinematography gives the film a
crisp golden feel that plays like a vintage home movie, imbuing the proceedings
with a behind-the-scenes feel. “The Theory of Everything” can be a bit too
quite at times, giving way to further uneasiness in unexplained moments, which
is a shame given Johann Johannson’s original score is positively magnificent.
As time marches on or rather stands still, it swirls without distinct measure with only the age of the Hawking children serving to mark its passing, events unraveling without any perspective.
As time marches on or rather stands still, it swirls without distinct measure with only the age of the Hawking children serving to mark its passing, events unraveling without any perspective.
The triumph of the film rests with the performances of
Redmayne and Jones, who shoulder the film with remarkable nuance. Redmayne utterly
disappears into the skin of Hawking, in an all consuming performance that
masters Hawking’s physicality and speech patterns to impressionistic genius.
An actor’s greatest tool is their physical self and as that is slowly stripped away; Redmayne consistently finds a way to convey Hawking elsewhere, whether it be in the smallest glance or gesture.
He is equally matched by his co-star
Felicity Jones who portrays Jane’s ferocity, quiet resolve and romanticism with
a staggeringly understated vulnerability that steers the role away from any
hint of melodrama. She’s refined and complicated, distant without ever seeming
cold.
Together, Jones and Redmayne hold the film together, exceeding every emotional beat they have to play. Elsewhere, Charlie Cox handles his tricky role as a well-meaning, incidental interloper with a pivotally believable decorum.
Together, Jones and Redmayne hold the film together, exceeding every emotional beat they have to play. Elsewhere, Charlie Cox handles his tricky role as a well-meaning, incidental interloper with a pivotally believable decorum.
“The Theory of Everything” motivates one to investigate
further and in doing so creates a response far more powerful than spoon fed
details might have rendered. In remaining unconventionally withdrawn, it lets one
know this isn’t the full story.
Where other biopics have given the appearance of answering every titillating detail, they have given the viewer a false perception that they have learned the raw truth about its subjects and “The Theory of Everything” never does that.
It is not a pretender; it is politely secretive without being deceptive and provocative enough to make one mighty curious. It is an approach that in the end, serves it well.
Where other biopics have given the appearance of answering every titillating detail, they have given the viewer a false perception that they have learned the raw truth about its subjects and “The Theory of Everything” never does that.
It is not a pretender; it is politely secretive without being deceptive and provocative enough to make one mighty curious. It is an approach that in the end, serves it well.
As a film it is moving, tender and poignant without seeming weepy. It is dignified and knowingly inspirational, while avoiding the
underlying potential to portray its subjects as saints. These are two real-life
people who found themselves in extraordinary circumstances, both rising and
falling to the occasion, their story a breathtaking tip of the hat to humanity’s
vast capacity for resilience. Rating:
7.8/10
Comments
Post a Comment