Dark Matter

This film is NOT based on actual events. It is very loosely based on the events of Iowa University graduate student Gang Lu, who suffered from an array of psychological disorders in addition to being a very gifted student in physics. The character portrayed in this film is completely fictitious on a number of different levels. One can dismiss the Nobel Prize angle immediately. Neither the real life Gang or this film character would have been nominated. The Nobel Prize committee never accepts a grad student as a candidate. Also, this is not really a prestigious school; most of the better students in the area of the physical sciences either attend an Ivy League graduate program, Stanford, or MIT, not Iowa University. So in these two instances, the film is not realistic in its screenplay. It is still good fiction, however, and should be judged for its emotional content and ability to keep you glued to your seat. It was tragic what happened to both Gang and to the protagonist in this film, but it is just a movie, and not real life. Winning a minor $2500 prize at a second-rate university is not the same as being nominated for the Nobel Prize. Making comparisons to Gang is not being honest; this character had a sweet and loving personality with no visible signs of mental illness, while Gang was just the opposite. That this person would commit the same acts that Gang committed with the upbringing and personality traits that Liu Xing has in the film is highly unlikely. Another university (hopefully one far more prestigious) would have snapped him up in a New York minute for their research staff. That is assuming his material was accurate as displayed in the film. Major universities get larger federal grants based on their researchers in many instances, so he would have been a sought-after commodity at several top schools. The writers of the screenplay do not seem to understand the mechanics of the American graduate school system and how it relates to research and funding. But despite that, the story, acting and production values still make this a worthwhile film to view.

I started watching this film with the IMDb reviews in mind. Nothing could prepare me to what I have seen. Definitely a great director. The story is told with subtlety, depression is painted with soft strokes, one almost doesn't even know what caused it. A story of minimal events that makes a life. Strangely, and I feel sorry to say that, it is the first Chinese film I have seen that embraces foreign culture, and in such a way. The only thing that is bad in this film are the title credits and the end which is maybe too dramatic, but beautiful. Watch it. Yes, I am watching the end right now, too dramatic, and the end credits look like the start one. Great film.

DARK MATTER is a film that will polarize audiences: for those who seek understanding of the clashes between science and 'religion' and the matrix from which tragedy grows the film will appeal, and for the audiences who demand tidy stories with happy resolutions the film will not please. Apparently 'based on true events', this story has many layers that invite discussion and reveals some facts about the American Academia that many would rather not know.

Liu Xing (Ye Liu) comes from a poor family in Beijing, but rises to hopeful heights due to his exceptional scientific intelligence and is invited to a prestigious university to study with Cosmology professor Jacob Reiser (Aidan Quinn), the author of the Reiser String Theory - the entire universe is tied into a compact single ball of cosmic wax. Liu Xing encounters initial success not only academically but also as a fresh young student, barely able to speak English, who is taken under the wing of the kind matron of Chinese culture, Johanna Silver (Meryl Streep). Liu Xing develops his own theory that the universe is united by massive amounts of unseen Dark Matter. When the student's theory conflicts with Reiser's theory, the negative results begin to affect each of the characters: Liu Xing sees his dream of earning a PhD in Cosmology and winning the Nobel Prize for his theory destroyed by the powers of academia and as he watches his fellow Chinese students succeed, he is plagued with low self esteem as he attempts to support his family in Beijing with money earned selling cosmetics door to door. The downfall of a simple genius destroyed by the inner workings of academia leads to unimaginable tragedy.

Billy Shebar's screenplay tinkers with the story's credibility with a heavy dose of sentimentality at times, but director Shi-Zheng Chen keeps the story moving by allowing the audience to witness frequent glimpses of Liu Xing's humble Beijing home life. The star of the film is the very talented Ye Liu, but Streep and Quinn carry their rather minor roles with great dignity and understatement. This is a moving story, too frequently repeated in our campuses to overlook. There is much more to this film than first viewings reveal. Grady Harp

I watched this with several friends and it was interesting to see who was surprised by the ending and who wasn't. Let there be no doubt, there is a great subject for a plot here. Forget that its based on a true story because its not - that's just marketing and fodder for pointless forum discussions.

What really hurt this movie were the pointless special effects and overly exaggerated sentimental shots, mostly featuring Meryl Streep, interspersed throughout the movie - typically after a scene where the protagonist experiences success or failure. There are only a handful of these shots and they only last seconds – but they are schmaltzy in an otherwise very believable movie. If you're watching even somewhat closely, they give away the movie very quickly.

I'll bet Shi-Zheng Chen goes on eventually to make a truly great movie. This one is about half way there.

For a film based on a true story, it could have been much better, much deeper, much more involving. This movie is overly simplistic, too straightforward. Everything is black or white, good or bad. Reality is never like this. A pity really, the premise is actually fascinating. The screenplay should have stuck much more to the truth, to actual events, they should have tried to portrait the characters faithfully, without trying to 'simplify' things for the viewer, to make the film more 'stylistically viable'.

Oh yes, and this is one of the few movies (if not the only one) where Merryl Streeps presence was totally unnoticeable, if not unnecessary.