Einstein and Eddington

This is a superb drama, combining a well-presented scientific and historical explication of Albert Einstein's theory of relativity alongside a gripping portrait of the moral dilemmas that scientists have to struggle with as they try to reconcile the demands of country and conscience.

The twin leads –British scientist Arthur Eddington (David Tennant) and Einstein (Andy Serkis) – lead very different lives but face not only similar scientific opposition and derision but also similar pressures to back their country's efforts to win the First World War. Tennant shakes off the Dr Who expectations in pointing up the problems of a gay pacifist Quaker who tries to prove the new-fangled theories of 'enemy' scientist Einstein – a theory especially dangerous because it undermines the ordered view of the universe created by English scientist Isaac Newton. Einstein's complicated private life is compounded by his revulsion at fellow scientists' work in developing poison gas. Both Tennant and Serkis get right into the skin of their characters - two brilliant actors on top form.

The drama brings over very effectively the transition from the comfortable life of the scientists in pre-war Cambridge and Switzerland to the tragedies of war. Jim Broadbent as Sir Oliver Lodge and Donald Sumpter as Max Planck lead the scientific establishments in Cambridge and Berlin as they pervert their scientific beliefs to condone mass killing on a scale never before seen. The main female roles have rather less to do, but Rebecca Hall as Eddington's sister, Lucy Cohu as Einstein's abandoned wife and Jodhi May as his mistress all add an extra warmth to the production and help to avoid the danger of focusing only on clever men using symbols and formulae to bemuse their colleagues (and the audience).

The settings – Cambridge, Berlin and West Africa, where Eddington photographed a total eclipse of the sun to prove the Einstein's theory was right – provide a powerful backdrop to the human drama, making it all the more believable. All in all, a very successful and informative BBC and HBO drama that maintains tension and excitement throughout.

While most of the reviews here are spot on, there is always someone who had to take a contrary view based on 'their' grasp of science. NO ONE SAID THIS IS A DOCUMENTARY! It is though a very well made film, with a great cast, a good period piece, and the science is correct enough! Any movie that educates the general public - an IOTA - is doing its job. We should all expand our knowledge of the world around us, it is surprising how many people today know nothing of Einstein and role he played in shaping the 'modern' world. An enjoyable movie that takes some very hard to understand theories and makes them understandable and entertaining.

Although this was easy and enjoyable to watch, the characters all lacked depth and the script in general was rather superficial, simplistic and ultimately unsatisfying. It could have been so much more, given the fascinating setting and the magnitude of the underlying facts. The science itself was almost completely omitted or dumbed down. It was disappointing that there was a rather cheap and unconvincing attempt at a religious 'miracle' as well as some one-dimensional and unnecessary politics. On the positive side, Cambidge university in the WWI era made for a pleasing backdrop and the actors' performances were decent on the whole.

The fine ensemble of actors never seemed to gel and had zero chemistry. Einstein was portrayed as a joke, when he wasn't working, that is. They tried to drag too many dramatic elements which muddled things. They should have picked two and stuck to those. Nowhere it say, that I have found, that Eddington was gay. He might have been, but he never came out. As many people view movies based on history as history itself, this was a cheap ploy to resemble A Beautiful Mind, and further muddled the plot (why hire an actor to play the object of his affections, for two very short scenes?). Tennant, a fine actor, played Eddington over the top and his glasses magnified his eyes in a very distracting and strange way. What was the director thinking??? Give him clear lenses and contacts.

The "history" in this movie is not even close, except that Einstein did indeed solve this puzzle. Eddington did not help him or pose the question. Einstein already had the question. They left out key life milestones. Einstein did marry his 1st cousin, right after his divorce from his 1st wife came through, as it had taken a long time (the only thing this got right). The whole Africa thing didn't happen like this nor did the scene where Eddington proved Einstein's theory, and it wasn't in public. I don't expect any movie based on history to be a documentary, but at least get half of it right, not 10%.

The writing was bad TV movie worthy. I cringed for the actors often. The music was just embarrassing. I almost turned it off after the overly majestic opening, as I thought it was a kid's movie. The composer copied the ET score, if not in notes, in theme, mood, and dynamics. And not near as good as the ET score. I am glad that Andy Serkis got a nice leading role after being known as Gollum for so long. But like the other actors, he never got to really shine. He managed the situation better than most of the male ensemble, though. The women did very well, however.

What an extraordinary experience!

Both Einstein and Eddington wrote numerous books for the general public, and I read most of them when I was young. I was familiar with the famous 1919 astronomical expedition to test Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by measuring the position of Mercury during an eclipse, and even read old newspaper accounts from the archives, including the comments by Alfred North Whitehead. And I have read books on the history of science.

Yet I never knew about the context in which General Relativity was developed, both historical and personal. Now, in light of this program, it seems obvious: General Relativity was published in 1916, during the first World War. The Eddington expedition to measure Mercury occurred in 1919, shortly after the war ended. And yet, when we learn about science we assume that it rises above politics and conflicts like war and national pride, as though existing in another world.

What we see in Einstein and Eddington is that it does not. Politics and national pride played central roles, and it is only through individuals resisting social pressure that it does, actually, rise above transient political bias. Specifically, Britain's national pride was closely tied with Newtonian physics. Germany's national pride could be enhanced by having a scientist of their own overthrow Newton, namely Einstein. But both Eddington -- who, as director of the Cambridge Observatory was viewed as a protector of Newton's law of gravity -- and Einstein believed loyalty to scientific truth transcended national chauvinism.

These principles were put to the test as much as Einstein's theories because of the ongoing war between Britain and Germany. In Eddington we have a Quaker and true pacifist, and in Einstein we have a not terribly devout Jew who also does not believe in war, and wrote pacifist essays later in life. However, to say Einstein did not believe in God is mistaken, just not the anthropomorphic, personal God. This film brings out the curious parallels between the two scientists.

According to the film, it was a letter from Eddington prodding Einstein to use his Theory of Special Relativity to explain the anomalous orbit of Mercury that put Einstein on the road to writing his Theory of General Relativity, published in 1916. An examination of the dates of publication of his works in the intervening years suggests this is probably misleading -- say a literary device, though I am not sure; the chronology of events in the movie are vague. By 1911 he had already calculated that light from a star would be bent by the sun's gravity -- which was proved correct by Eddington's 1919 expedition. At any rate, Eddington should have had several other journal articles by Einstein to read.

This simplification of the story can be forgiven because the film does such a good job of conveying for the layman several concepts of relativity, particularly gravity bending space. An intelligent person should be able to follow this film. But a little more scientific context would have been helpful for novices.

There are many layers to this film, one being the invention of weapons by German scientists, which outrages both Einstein and Eddington's British colleagues. Yet, Einstein's General Relativity laid the foundation for the ultimate weapon.

I'm not sure the film precisely captures the character of the young Einstein, but it comes close. More recent biographies have told about Einstein's relations with women, and that he was sometimes, shall we say, manipulative. So it is good to show him as a human being. He was always a non-conformist, especially in his later years, when he could afford to be. The bit at the end with him going before the press looking disheveled was silly, and the shot of him sticking out his tongue was from many decades later. But chalk it up to literary license.

I was also annoyed by the snide comment about Eddington's irrelevancy at the end of the film. Eddington did solid, respected science and was very famous, the Carl Sagan of his time. It's been a century since the period presented in this film, and few scientists remain household names that long. Eddington was an early astrophysicist and one of the first cosmologists, so he was a pioneer who laid the groundwork for so much that we read about in the press today. It is a fine thing this film brought him back into public view.

It would have been nice if the actors could have pronounced Max Planck's name correctly. And why do the British kill animals on screen so often? It's very disturbing, especially for children.

What really bugged me about Einstein and Eddington was the goofy camera work by Julian Court. I can see hand holding the camera outside while moving, but inside while the actors are sitting at a table talking? If you can't hold a camera steady, put it on a tripod! It sure looked like they were jerking the camera up and down unnecessarily during static scenes, unless the camera had Parkinson's. This is not MTV or youtube; it is not even one of those wacky National Geographic documentaries.

This is an historical science drama, and it should have been treated with the appropriate polish. The jerky camera movement was distracting from the concentration needed to follow the ideas being presented. Aside from that, this docudrama really held my interest throughout. So one point off for the camera work, one point off for killing animals; otherwise, a 10.

Many of the works that Eddington and Einstein wrote for the layman are still worth reading today, and do not require prior science courses. Eddington's honest examination of philosophical questions related to science, particularly between consciousness and the physical universe, are still relevant. Eddington was among the best at explaining science and cosmology to the general public, and I think he would have been delighted by this film.