Ensign Lestat's Oscars Countdown, 28/01/2015
The Theory of Everything
Nominations - Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor (Eddie Redmayne), Best Actress (Felicity Jones), Best Original Score
It's 1963, and young Stephen Hawking (Eddie Redmayne) has but one concern - his PhD subject. He has a brilliant mathematical mind, one that will eventually settle on writing about Time, Black Holes and expanding Quantum Physics.
In 'The Theory of Everything' we see Hawking primarily through the eyes of his beloved and later wife, Jane Wilde (Felicity Jones). She falls in love with him despite their many differences. But what's in store for them is beyond imagining.
At 21, Hawking is diagnosed with motor neuron disease and given two years to live. Despite this revelation, Jane insists on marrying him, and they soon start a family of three children. As we all know, the doctors were well off-base with that two year figure.
The film is based on Jane's revised memoir 'Travelling to Infinity' - she rewrote her original memoir after her relationship with Hawking improved following his second divorce. But, this is a film, so there's a lot to take with a pinch of salt. There's also a lot to enjoy and dwell on.
Geniuses are rotten people, apparently Hawking was no different. If you immerse yourself in the world of the film, however, you will feel differently. Hawking is reticent, intelligent and later resigned to his fate. He's supported, once his illness gets the better of him, wholly by his wife. She's stoic and caring throughout. We see many snippets of happy family life despite their circumstance.
Director James Marsh employs several filters and stealth cameras to provide the candid, home documentary feel to some of the family's more intimate moments. Well, he's known for his documentaries, so what do you expect. And all of this is set to the fairy-light, jovial-with-an-undertone-of-melancholy score by Jóhann Jóhannsson, which is up for an Oscar, might I add. My bet's on Hans Zimmer winning the category, but, of course I'd say that.
The film foregoes the science part in favour of the love part. This, right here, is a romantic drama wrapped up in a serious biopic. This year, I've come to realise, is full of biopics. This one is no different - well it is, but you get what I mean.
We don't delve into the scientific theories that Hawking is best known for. We don't know where his ideas come from, how he establishes them and what their relevance is to us. The only science that is thrown in is used for dramatic effect, another moment to applaud Hawking's triumph over his disease. The entire film is an assumption that we know exactly what Hawking's theories are all about. We know what they're about, but we want to explore the beginnings of these theories, to understand them, to see them reach their fruition. This doesn't happen. We do have to keep in mind that the film is based off a memoir by a person not in the scientific field, and that her focus wasn't to expand her scientific thinking (given her circumstances).
The film's brilliance lies in its performances. I scoffed at Eddie Redmayne's casting, and subsequent award sweeps. But, let's be honest, you don't play a role like this and not get recognition. It helps that he's phenomenal as Hawking. Yes, I concede, phenomenal. I didn't like the role, or love it, but I couldn't not commend his brilliance. It's not the weight loss; it's not even the strained motor movements - it's his speech patterns. Emulating that voice and the lip movements is what won me over. Yes, my heart still pines for David Oyelowo's star-making turn as Martin Luther King Jr., and there's a fare few other performances I haven't come across yet, but this won is worthy of its nomination and most likely its eventual win. It felt natural, which is a testament to the effort put in by the actor. Considering how young Redmayne is, this could be his first step to Daniel Day-Lewis famedom.
I'm the first to tell you that I intensely dislike Felicity Jones and rolled my eyes when I came across her nomination. This is a very diverse category, and most of the ladies are sole nominees for their films. I haven't seen the majority of the roles (the one that I have, didn't sit well with me), but I'm sure they're going to be better than Jones'. Having said that, Jones is accomplished as the put-upon, but brave Jane, soldiering on in the life she's chosen for herself. She was subtle, giving a nuanced performance. She doesn't let her character get overshadowed, even though her life revolves around a man. I was pleasantly surprised by her. This just means we'll be seeing lots more of her - which cannot be a good thing.
This is a heart-felt, tear-jerker of a Best Picture nominee. It's all heart and determination. But it fails its science and those of us interested in the science. For a film about physics, we are not catapulted into the mysteries of it. The closest we get to anything science-y are the end credits, which is a serious cop-out.
I would have avoided this film like the plague had it not been for the Oscars (that's a recurring theme with me and Oscar season), but this is an accomplished project, which rounds out far too many of Hawking's edges, while doing a slight disservice to the author of the memoir. But on the backs of its stars, it radiates brilliance. What it will win, only time will tell.
Comments