The sad and frustrating irony of “The Theory of Everything” lies in the fact that it tells the story of one of the most brilliant individuals in history, Stephen Hawking, who was renowned for his bold and innovative thinking. However, the film itself adopts the safest and most conventional approach possible. This irony becomes even more pronounced when considering the director, James Marsh, who won an Academy Award for his thrilling and clever documentary “Man on Wire” in 2008. The documentary was so well-crafted that it left audiences with the sensation of actually witnessing Philippe Petit’s tightrope walk between the World Trade Center Towers. Despite the absence of actual film footage, Marsh’s skillful use of photographs and reenactments made the experience incredibly convincing.
In this instance, the director has created a film that is well-acted and visually appealing, but ultimately lacks excitement and satisfaction. It falls into the common pitfall of many biopics by simply highlighting the key moments in the author’s life without delving deeper or taking risks. Everyone involved in the production does their job well, resulting in a film that is decent but not exceptional.
Undoubtedly, Hawking’s story is inspiring, as he has battled motor neuron disease for the past 50 years and defied the odds by not only surviving but thriving. Eddie Redmayne, in his portrayal of Hawking, successfully captures both the gradual physical deterioration and the sharpness of his intellect that has defined his important work. Redmayne’s previous performances did not suggest that he possessed this level of complexity, making his portrayal all the more impressive. However, it is a shame that such talent is not utilized in a stronger storyline.
Screenwriter Anthony McCarten adapted “Travelling to Infinity: My Life With Stephen,” the memoir by Hawking’s first wife, Jane, to create the film “The Theory of Everything.” The overall tone of the movie exudes a sense of tastefulness, as if everyone involved wanted to show utmost respect towards the individuals portrayed and their lives. This emphasis on respect comes at the expense of potentially revealing or thought-provoking moments that may have seemed inappropriate or startling.
Jane Hawking’s unwavering love and support are portrayed tirelessly in the film. Felicity Jones brings a fresh-faced portrayal of Jane, showcasing her as a woman of both grace and strength. The challenges she faced in caring for Stephen while raising their three children and pursuing her own intellectual endeavors must have been incredibly draining and often disheartening. It is evident that these struggles threatened to consume her entirely. However, the film offers only glimpses of these hardships. Instead, it presents Jane as a saint-like figure.
The initial interactions between Redmayne and Jones are truly electrifying. A spark is immediately ignited when they catch sight of each other from opposite ends of a packed room during a gathering at Cambridge in 1963. He is awkwardly charming and humorous, while she exudes beauty and cheerfulness. He delves into cosmology, while she delves into medieval Spanish poetry. He identifies as an atheist, whereas she is a devoted member of the Church of England. Despite their differences, they share a mutual curiosity and bring out the best in each other. Their early days together involve a romantic moment that revolves around the lesser-known qualities of Tide laundry detergent.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.