The film is about theoretical
physicist Professor Stephen Hawking and his wife Jane Wilde. The couple met at Cambridge,
shortly before Hawking was diagnosed with motor neuro disease. They decided to
get married, despite the uphill battle their relationship faced, with Hawking
getting worse and losing more of his normal bodily function. They each achieved
PhDs in their fields, but the film focuses more on Hawking’s work and Wilde’s
struggle to keep herself together while having to dedicate herself to taking
care of Hawking.
The Theory of Everything works on
two narrative levels. On one hand, it is a very touching love story about two
people who take the bad with the good to make a life together – and eventually
part as friends. On the other hand, it is a character drama focusing on how
each other them cope with the circumstances they face. For Hawking, he must
face a life filled with moments of loss, as little by little, he will lose
parts of himself (the ability to walk, speak and so on). For Wilde, she must
face a life in which she becomes less of a wife and more of a caretaker,
sacrificing in many ways her own life for his.
Director James Marsh does a
good job with both of these narrative devices, structuring the film to take advantage
of each. As a romantic drama, Marsh plays with the big moments in their
relationship, focusing on their courtship. When Hawking was diagnosed (in the mid-1960s),
he was given two years to live. Wilde seems to have been a big reason for him
to not give up and keep going, even encouraging him to pursue his work and a
full life. She is his strength. Marsh does a great job conveying that while
their relationship is not perfect (but really, whose is) it is their deep
friendship, beyond romantic love, that kept them together, despite the great obstacles
they faced. Their love and friendship saved Hawking (or so the film might
suggest).
On a character level, Marsh
devotes a lot to developing these two characters, allowing the audience to see
things from their perspectives, to feel what they feel. Hawking just wants to
be normal (something that is very relatable), while Wilde gets worn down and
just needs a life of her own. As Hawking’s condition worsens, raising the family
and taking care of him fall solely on her. Plus, she does not have help of any
kind for many years (professional or otherwise). Marrying Hawking she knew she is
making a sacrifice and she goes into fully aware of what she is taking on, but
time can and will wear down any resolve.
What I like about the film is
that Marsh does not focus only on Hawking and his accomplishments, persevering in
spite all the challenges he faced (and faces). It would have been easy for the
film to take this narrative perspective. Hawking is, after all, the known
entity. Instead, Marsh devotes just as much time to Wilde. Her emotional
struggles and triumphs are given just as much dramatic weight. One might say
watching this film that Hawking achieved what he has because Wilde was there to
support him. Without her, he might not have done the things he has. It is a
narrative theme that is not often explored in cinema – the importance of those
behind the more famous people who achieve great things, especially when it
comes to homemakers.
The Theory of Everything is a
beautiful film because the audience is right there with the characters, feeling
what they feeling, wanting what they want, and rooting for their success. Marsh
structures the film to play to its dramatic strengths, which is emotionally manipulative
even boarding on melodramatic at times, but in service of the narrative. The
film is inspiring and charming.
Technical,
aesthetic & acting achievements: James Marsh is a very good director
of documentaries, most notably Man on Wire
(which is brilliant) and Project Nim. With
his fictional feature films, he has not had as much success. The best of which
prior to The Theory of Everything is probably his directed chapter of the Red
Riding Trilogy (he directed Red
Riding: In the Year of Our Lord 1980). With The Theory of Everything, he
combines his talent for telling true-life stories and garnering strong
performances. It is his best feature film to date.
Aesthetically, The Theory of
Everything has a lot going on. Composer Johann Johannsson’s
score is wonderful. It plays beautifully with the love story elements as well
as the inspiring moments of the narrative. It is uplifting. Benoit Delhomme’s
cinematography is excellent as well. Here, Delhomme and Marsh maneuver the look
of the film to fit the emotions at play in the moment. Sometimes the film is
overblown with light, everything appearing radiant, and in other moments the
lighting is rather dreary and dark – echoing the highs and lows of Hawking and
Wilde’s relationship and personal struggles. John Paul Kelly’s
production design grounds the film in a realistic feeling world, in some ways
counter balancing the extremes of the photography. Kelly does a great job signaling
the passage of time in the changing of décor, costumes and hairstyles.
The cast in the film is superb. Adam Godley,
Christian
McKay, Simon
McBurney, and Emily Watson
are all very good in small supporting roles. David Thewlis
is also very good in the smaller supporting role, playing Dennis Sciama. Thewlis
often at his very best in a mentor-like role (see Harry Potter
and the Prisoner of Azkaban and to some extent Kingdom
of Heaven – or conversely, as a complete bastard in Naked). Charlie Cox
plays family friend to the Hawkings, Jonathan Jones. Cox uses his naturally
friendly face to portray the man as being incredibly nice and understanding,
and in many ways just what they needed. It is one of Cox’s best performances. Felicity Jones
is fantastic as Jane Wilde. She has a lot of emotion to get through in the
film, exhibiting the struggles that Jane faced and her strength. Jane (as a
character) is in the difficult position of having to eventually leave Hawking
but still remain likable (which is true to life, but could be somewhat hard to
get across to an audience). Jones is excellent, as she woos the audience,
expresses her character’s pain and needs, but also her warmth and fight. Jones
is completely likable, throughout. Eddie Redmayne
is incredible as Stephen Hawking, giving an extraordinarily physical performance
(unmatched by anything else I have seen this year so far). Redmayne perfectly
captures Hawking’s mischievous wit, compassion, ambition, and his physical tendencies.
It is remarkable piece of acting.
Summary
& score: The Theory of Everything could have been overly sappy, far
too rigid a biopic or unfair to the people it portrays. In most cases, it would
have been these things in lesser hands. Yet, as it is, the film presents full
characters and even more important fully realized and powerful emotions, portrayed
through excellent performances. 8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment