The Theory of Everything (2014)

500 character mini-reviews cramping your style? Share your thoughts in full in this forum!
MmzHrrdb
Your TCI: na

The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by MmzHrrdb »

Despite its warm critical reception and awards attention, The Theory of Everything has had quite a lot of detractors. On one hand, it's not hard to see why. Director James Marsh's romantic drama about the life of Stephen Hawking is a calculated and precise film. The Theory of Everything is delivered with pin-point accuracy in order to produce maximum effect in audiences and Academy voters. This is Oscar bait at its most blatant. Nonetheless, the proceedings are not chilly, nor without human touch. It's a bio-pic that entertains and satisfies, providing a clear and easy-going narrative through the life of Stephen Hawking.

The Theory of Everything is not a difficult film to like. The cinematography (by Benoît Delhomme) is gorgeous, and Anthony McCarten's screenplay is injected with just enough humor to keep things light, but with enough gravitas to provide significant depth. Of course, the film's real jewel are its two leads, Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones.

Some would argue that the performances are strong enough to recommend the film by their own merits. Detractors might argue that the performances are the only reason to see The Theory of Everything at all. If nothing else, everyone agrees: the two leads are excellent. Eddie Redmayne garnered the most attention for his turn as Stephen Hawking. The performance is extremely showy, as the British actor is given the opportunity to physically transform the way he walks, talks, and looks. But the subtle things are not glazed over. Redmayne gets the right balance between lovable and pitiful. And he's careful not to overplay the character, thus making him a tangible, believable character. It could be said that Redmayne's Oscar win for this role re-affirms that the "white person with a serious disease" character will always win the award. Yet, when the character is played as brilliantly as this, I personally see no reason to complain.

Felicity Jones easily holds her own as Hawking's wife, Jane. The deterioration of Stephen Hawking is actually portrayed more clearly through Jones' performance than Redmayne's. The struggles of dealing with her young children and her borderline invalid husband is delivered with surprising understatement. Redmayne and Jones also share some real chemistry that makes the proceedings all the more engaging.

Jóhann Jóhannsson's score is as emotionally immersive as one would hope. While its modern flourishes may bother some, the score has a big heart, but is careful not to drown the audience in its syrupy emotions. An effective score that elevates the picture.

Every frame of the movie could have just as easily had a "For Your Consideration" watermark with big capital letters, and the film wouldn't have changed. But for all its awards ambitions, it never comes across as pretentious. It's a polished production that engages to the last minute of its 123 minute runtime. It's probably not great, and the cynical will be unmoved, but The Theory of Everything remains a largely likable motion picture.

Score: 7/10

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by ShogunRua »

As I have mentioned before, "The Theory of Everything" is also the name of an incredible 2013 album by Ayreon, which is almost the same length as the movie,









So when I hear the title, I just start listening to the album again. There are no breaks; each song transitions straight into another, with no choruses, all telling the same story. But this one is especially good;


Suture Self
Posts: 545
2709 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 7:30 am

Re: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by Suture Self »

lol prog rock

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by ShogunRua »

Suture Self wrote:lol prog rock


I'm not even sure it can be called "prog rock" anymore; it's far stranger and more unique. This album sounds utterly different than their previous efforts, too. I also think most prog rock sucks.

I'm way more interested in talking about Ayreon than a lousy Hollywood movie about Hawking, though. I'm not even very interested in talking about Hawking's scientific work; when he visited my alma mater each winter, he gave lectures after which his old friend Kip Thorne (who is a much greater physicist in every way) had to protect him and moderate questions, or else any of our physics grad students would have ripped him apart.

CMonster
Posts: 689
1444 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:22 am

Re: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by CMonster »

You're gonna be hard pressed to convince me (or anybody for that matter) that this isn't prog rock.

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Post by ShogunRua »

CMonster wrote:You're gonna be hard pressed to convince me (or anybody for that matter) that this isn't prog rock.


You can call it whatever you like; prog rock, prog metal, classical music, folk music, or operatic rock, all with over half a dozen vocalists. Point is, it's fucking great.

Post Reply