La figlia di un matematico brillante ma mentalmente disturbato, recentemente scomparso, cerca di fare i conti con la sua possibile eredità: la sua follia.La figlia di un matematico brillante ma mentalmente disturbato, recentemente scomparso, cerca di fare i conti con la sua possibile eredità: la sua follia.La figlia di un matematico brillante ma mentalmente disturbato, recentemente scomparso, cerca di fare i conti con la sua possibile eredità: la sua follia.
- Premi
- 4 vittorie e 6 candidature totali
- Limo Driver
- (as Tobiacz Daszkiewicz)
- University Friend
- (as C Gerod Harris)
- American Student
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Wake Guest
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
This is story about mathematics, actually about mathematicians which is much, much better. "Beautiful Mind" was repellent in a few ways; one was in the cartoonish way mathematical imagination was shown. Another was the way history was bent away from a truly interesting story to be palatable for film audiences. Math at that level requires the juice of life that he took in large gulps from both sexes. And he was such a glutton for mindbending adventure that he bent his own mind. I do not believe he suffered from some genetic disease, nor did he.
This movie repairs some of that. Its clear I think that the Nash phenomenon is at work here: minds powerful enough to break themselves, possibly leaving some mathematical residue, possibly not. The focus on primes may be accidental, but it is apt. As time goes on, they become increasing rarer and infinitely more fascinating, all apparently random but with some hint of unseen order. They don't interest me so much...
In fact, selecting films to build into your life (perspectives and stories to live) is a lot like choosing the types of problems to work on and how. The proof of being in a way is that the selection is made deliberately, based on your weaknesses, not your strengths. Only weak mathematicians and souls work on problems they understand. No life comes from the undaunting. No magic ever comes alone or from peace.
Hopkins isn't obnoxious here. Its clear that he is acting and that the lines are those of a stage character. But he doesn't grandstand; he's gently broken and there are some sweet moments (only two, but central) where he seems to completely have second-guessed where his daughter is going and lucidly makes key suggestions. Hopkins understood those moments and gives then some significance.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
This is a compelling portrayal of the mathematical obsession. It's not as flashy or romantic as cinema tries to dress up math sometimes. It is a bit sad. Paltrow does great work following Hopkins. She shows that she's not simply a romantic lead. It's a compelling character study.
She inhabits her character so fully, I was pulled in and so completely entranced the entire time. In fact, certain words or phrases are reused and have an uncanny allusion to when they were previously said. The effect as that you experience and follow the moments, and the thoughts of the characters, even though they are so deeply imbedded within. I credit Gwyneth and the director with making this work so well. I've never experienced such an organic link between phrases separated in time in a movie before. Wow!
This is a movie about how a daughter, her sister, and a grad student deal with the passing of a great mathematician. While there may be similarities with 'A Beautiful Mind' and even 'Good Will Hunting', knowing there are any such links didn't help me with this movie and I think actually does a dis-service. This movie stands on its own. Ignore any such comparisons.
Acting-wise, there were strong performances all around with Anthony Hopkins giving a top-notch performance. Jake Gyllenhaal's was strong, but perhaps not to the level of his rather awesome performance in Brokeback Mountain.
Good things aside, the one thing that irked me about this film, was that given the strong link to mathematics, how unbelievable some of the dialogue was regarding the 'math. While Gwyneth's and Hopkins' characters pulled off a sense of mathematical intelligence, Jake's character hardly said anything mathematically competent and even came across as flustered in expressing himself mathematically leaving me feeling cheated. In my view, this is chiefly the fault of the screenplay but to a lesser extent in the actor's portrayal. Ignore this rather small point, and this movie passes with flying colours. Q.E.D.
I only have two quibbles. One, there was not enough mathematics in the movie OR the play. Everyone has studied advanced math, so why not challenge the audience a little more and let us in on what the proof is actually about. It is kind of like watching a movie about a musician and not letting the audience hear any of the music! Two, it is not believable that in a crucial scene towards the end of the movie, that neither Catherine and especially the more materialistic Claire would not care what ultimately happens to the proof, especially when being told of its possible value.
Aside from these flaws, if you are looking for intelligent fare and a break from mindless action films and the mostly unfunny comedies of the past summer, you owe it to yourself to see this film. The theater I saw it in was almost empty, so I fear it is not doing too well. Remember that every ticket you buy is a vote for more of that kind of film being made. Let's hear it for more stimulating and mature films like this one!
In the end, this film is all about Gwyneth Paltrow.
She is on screen at least 80% of this film. Her character dances between mourning, anger, remorse, confusion, fear, vulnerability, sadness, and just a little bit of love. There are very dramatic changes in emotion from moment to moment, and Paltrow pulls it off brilliantly.
Sir Anthony Hopkins role, while relatively small, is crucial to the film. His performance was good, but not great. But it didn't really matter, as Proof is all about Paltrow. Hope Davis and Jake Gyllenhaal also gave solid performances, but their as with Hopkin's role were really nothing more than support Paltrow.
The biggest disappointment for me was the almost total lack of any 'real' mathematics. For a film that revolves around brilliant mathematical proofs, there's an almost painful scarcity of and real math in the film. There are shots of seemingly random equations scrawled across paper or a blackboard, and the odd conversation making reference to some known mathematical law or theorem, but I would have liked more.
IF you want a happy film, go see something else. If you want a mindless film, go see something else. If you want a typical love story, go see something else. If you want an intelligent well written and presented story of substance involving a a character experiencing a roller-coaster of emotions, Proof may be for you.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAccording to the clues of Hal, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, the proof can be the proof of Riemann hypothesis. He says "a very important proof, of a mathematical theorem about prime numbers, which mathematicians are trying to prove; it's historic; you can publish it, give press conferences; all newspapers in the world will talk to the person who have found it." It's one of the Millennium Problems.
- BlooperThe daughter talks about how the father was looking for a message from aliens in the Dewey decimal call numbers on the books from the University of Chicago library. The University of Chicago uses Library of Congress call numbers, which begin with letters, not numbers.
- Citazioni
Catherine: [Reading Robert's Notebook] "Let X equal the quantity of all quantities of X. Let X equal the cold. It is cold in December. The months of cold equal November through February. There are four months of cold, and four of heat, leaving four months of indeterminate temperature. In February it snows. In March the Lake is a lake of ice. In September the students come back and the bookstores are full. Let X equal the month of full bookstores. The number of books approaches infinity as the number of months of cold approaches four. I will never be as cold now as I will in the future. The future of cold is infinite. The future of heat is the future of cold. The bookstores are infinite and so are never full except in September..."
- ConnessioniFeatured in The 63rd Annual Golden Globe Awards 2006 (2006)
- Colonne sonoreEl chocha loca
(2002)
Written by Claudio Quattrocchi
Performed by Loca
Published by Big Tiger Music (BMI)
Courtesy of Lovecat Records
By Arrangement with Ocean Park Music Group
I più visti
- How long is Proof?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Proof
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 20.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 7.535.331 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 193.840 USD
- 18 set 2005
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 14.189.860 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 40min(100 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1