The Theory of Everything is the story of the most brilliant and celebrated physicist of our time, Stephen Hawking, and Jane Wilde the arts student he fell in love with whilst studying at Cambridge in the 1960s. Little was expected from Stephen Hawking, a bright but shiftless student of cosmology, given just two years to live following the diagnosis of a fatal illness at 21 years of age. He became galvanized, however, by the love of fellow Cambridge student, Jane Wilde, and he went on to be called the successor to Einstein, as well as a husband and father to their three children. Over the course of their marriage as Stephen’s body collapsed and his academic renown soared, fault lines were exposed that tested the lineaments of their relationship and dramatically altered the course of both of their lives.
Genre : Biography/Drama/Romance
Country : UK
Eddie Redmayne : Stephen Hawking
Felicity Jones : Jane Hawking
David Thewlis : Dennis Sciama
Director : James Marsh
“What are you ?
I’m a cosmologist
What’s that ?
It’s a kind of religion for intelligent atheists.”
I must admit that I’ve seen this film a few weeks ago. Probably the fact that Eddie Redmayne was nominated for an Oscar, prompted me to see if he was a worthy contender for the coveted golden statuette. And the only thing I can say is that he totally deserved to win with his magnificent performance. I love to watch a biographical movie now and then. The only drawback is that I’m always a little bit disappointed about the subject covered in such a biopic and that the emphasis lies on something I wasn’t looking for. In “jOBS” I missed the philosophy this visionary had about the Apple phenomenon and the development of the applied interface (which is currently perfectly normal for everybody). The clash between Jobs and Gates was cited as a fait divers, whereas that interested me. Also in “The Theory of Everything” the focus was on other facets of Hawking’s life. What applies to both these films is the fact that the protagonists physically look an awful lot like the corresponding character. It’s creepy to see how they both manage not only to capture the emotional part, but also to match the characteristics and physical traits of these famous people. “The Imitation Game” is obviously also a biopic which, however, had a more adventurous twist rather than being a purely biographical sketch.
Which theories the brilliant mind of Hawking produced in that cripple body, isn’t explained in detail. Here and there black holes, big bangs and the concept of time is mentioned, but eventually I was wondering what exactly Stephen Hawking’s ultimate contribution was to mankind. What Jobs achieved you can discover in any computer shop. And from Turing we know that he has broken the Enigma code. But what abstract evidence Hawking delivered, wasn’t clear to me. From one moment to the other he’s a celebrity and a much sought-after guest speaker. That a woman who lives together with a paralyzed person can’t really enjoy a thrilling,romantic life and that she’s actually the person who’s responsible for all practical matters in a marriage, is of course obvious. And that’s the central theme of this biopic: a loving relationship slowly falling apart because of a fatal disease, the awareness of limitations and the danger to seek solace in someone else’s arms. So it’s mainly a biopic about the wife of Hawking, instead of about Hawking himself. An insight into the life of mathematical genius, who could explain the mystery of the origin of the universe by using his phenomenal intellectual brain, is thus transformed into an ordinary dime novel about an unhappy woman who feels abandoned by her ever loving husband. And that’s something I wasn’t waiting for.