“THEORY OF EVERYTHING”, OR “THEORY OF NOTHING”?
Stephen Hawking is undoubtedly the one of the greatest minds of these times. The living legend who has changed the modern science, while also struggling with his crippling disease. This man deserves an outstanding biopic right enough, however Hollywood seems to disappoint us by making rather dull love story.
The film directed by James Marsh charts Hawking’s life between middle 60’s when he was a nerdy wonder boy till the late 90’s. The thing is that even though film lasts 2 hours, it’s even hard to say exactly what happened during this time. First of all, the director doesn’t introduce us to main character’s childhood or adolescence. We hardly know anything about his parents and how he became the genius son. Moreover, the movie doesn’t deepen or expand the most important thread, which are the Hawking’s brilliant ideas about time and space. For instance, the scene where Stephen is watching a fire and suddenly it visually transforms into explosion of black hole in his eye. Boom, and his perfect theory is ready, isn’t it too cliché for such a great mind?
What about actors then? Eddie Radmayne and Felicity Jones are in fact the best what could happen to “Theory of Everything”. Two young actors defended the movie with their high-end acting. Eddie who plays Hawking has made an amazing performance. Every single detail from halting walk to broken glasses makes him so believable that we can almost truly feel Stephen’s struggle. Felicity definitely did a great job in personating loving but exhausted Hawking’s wife; nevertheless we could expect more dramatic tension from her.
In conclusion, the “Theory of everything” is a well made movie, but nothing more. Sad fact is that such an interesting and unforgettable history is shown very forgettable. Maybe filmmakers by showing “Theory of Everything” forgot that sometimes everything means nothing.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document