Confession: physics is my least favorite science. (Least favorite. I do like science. Consider, I’ve my minor degree in biology.) But physics….eh. Add “astro” to it, and it doesn’t improve. Black holes. Eh. These are things I do not understand, and I again confess: I don’t really care to. And Stephen Hawking? Well, I didn’t know who he was until a few years ago. I may have even learned more about him from The Big Bang Theory than from anywhere else (continuing this confession theme here). But fortunately for me and my Oscar-season-movie-watching self, The Theory of Everything is not really at all about physics and much more about relationships.
The film flies through Hawking’s life from the mid60s when he was a grad student (and when he met first wife Jane) to near-present. And although Hawking did not lose use of his voice until the mid80s, much of Hawking’s story is not really revealed through deep conversations. Instead, much more comes through with the little looks; the twitch of his fingers; the body language; the flirty movement of Hawking’s eyebrows that convey a great, epic, tragic, beautiful love story. But along with the love story, the fierce resolve of Hawking comes through.
I wondered, as I watched, just what gave him his determination. Was it that love—the love of a woman who signed up for only two years (the time he was diagnosed as having remaining to live when initially diagnosed in the 60s) in this difficult role? And what if he had not had that? What if he’d not had his disease? Would he have contributed more? Or maybe actually less?
I wondered too about denial. How long did Hawking have symptoms that he ignored? Did he hide them or did he ignore them? And what of those around him: did they see the changes? Did they talk behind his back? What lengths do we all go through to hide from our own health when it begins to slip? How good are we at convincing ourselves—and those around us—that all is okay? Where is it vanity, and when does that cross the line to denial?
The movie itself is good, but I cannot say it’s great. Remember, it’s not so much about physics or Hawking the scientist or professor or just what he contributed to the world of astrophysics as it is about his story and more so, the formulaic Hollywood tale of a love story. Yes, it felt formulaic, even though I knew, while watching, it was supposed to be biopic. But I’m not sure how much creative license was taken with the telling of the tale (recall, I know little about Hawking); there does seem to be a good deal of sugar-coating. And at times, that sugar feels more like saccharine, with just that hint of bitter that bites at the end.
Still, it is a pretty movie. And it doesn’t dwell on anything too long. It allows one to wonder about what’s happening in Stephen’s and Jane’s lives while at the same time understanding too much.
Most of that, though, comes from the cast members, who elevate this movie from a mundane tale of a man with a devastating illness who has the strength and love of a faithful woman who helps him focus on his success – – – to a film genuinely worth seeing. Eddie Redmayne, who plays Hawking, makes one believe at times a film crew was with Hawking rather than this being an actor portraying him on screen. Felicity Jones likewise brings a wonderful warmth to her role as Jane. Without these actors, the movie would be flat, as the story doesn’t do enough for me. But maybe that’s because I don’t get the physics side of it. ; )