La teoria del tutto

The Theory of Everything tells the uphill struggle that world renowned genius Stephen Hawking went through when dealing with his, now, infamous disease and trying to maintain his relationship with his loving wife, Jane. The strengths of this film rely solely on Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones. These two actors are absolutely, one hundred percent, PHENOMENAL in these two roles. Stephen Hawking is the role that Redmayne was born to play. Hawking is portrayed as a charming and intellectually superior individual that behaves just like any one else. After a bit, we start to wonder what was every so amazing about him...then the heartbreak starts. Jane Hawking is a sweet, loving and determined person that will go to the lengths of the universe to make sure her husband, Stephen can survive. I get chills just thinking about certain scenes, some of which will most definitely be requiring a large box of Kleenex. The truth is, anything that I say here about these performances, no matter what it is, is still criminally underselling the sheer brilliance of them. Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones are simply incredible and I'd be even willing to go to the extreme to say that both actors will not only be nominated, but I'd be surprised if they didn't win the Oscar gold. Now, with that being said, this film's structural issues are severely hampering this film's chances at being a classic. I wasn't completely sold on the structural integrity of the film. It showed enough of the relationship aspect behind Stephen and Jane but it very briefly touched base on Hawking's intellectual discoveries and I thought that if it was a bit more balanced in that respect, it would be a near perfect film. One plot point that I did find utterly enthralling is the idea that Hawking struggles throughout the film to do simple things. These scenes are, by far, the most heart wrenching scenes to watch. James Marsh directs his actors effortlessly and can evoke the type of emotional response out of his audience through them, but when left with telling a story, Marsh falters. Marsh, known for 2012 IRA drama, Shadow Dancer proves that he is an actor's director. He cares about human drama over anything in a tangible sense, which benefits this film greatly but also harms it in the way of progression. Despite these minor infractions, The Theory of Everything is a film that everyone can enjoy and turns into a real audience movie. It is a film that will have you laughing one minute and crying the next, no easy feat for any film, and this one does it effortlessly.

One might think that this movie would be about esoteric theories that are beyond the capacity for most people.

You would be so wrong!

This was probably the best love story I have ever seen. I was on the edge of my seat watching Jane Hawking (Felicity Jones) as she did more and more amazing acts of love for Stephan Hawking (Eddie Redmayne). I cannot imagine anyone that fits the definition of love more than she did.

Redmayne was brilliant as Hawking.

Anthony McCarten took Jane Hawing's book and wrote a screenplay that was a thrill to watch.

But it does tell an inspiring story about Stephen Hawking's personal struggle with his illness that's very uplifting.

The story of Stephen Hawking and his then wife Jane, apparently based on a book she wrote about it, which probability explains why there was not much science in the movie, not that I'm complaining, as it was a well played film about a difficult relationship.

I didn't known Stephen and his wife actually met around the same time as he began to suffer from Lou Gehrig's Disease. Makes the whole concept that Hawking has three kids with this woman more interesting (something was working). Felicity Jones did a great job playing such a strong, patient, and compassionate woman, all well narrated in this movie. The difficulty Jane Hawking had being with a man getting trapped in his own body, played by Eddie Redmayne.I have herd of Hawking's surprisingly positive personality, not because of his condition, but because I expected his condition would make it hard to express any emotion. Redmayne did his research to express the struggle of Hawking on camera nicely (I keep forgetting The Hawking is a Brit).

This movie turned out to be a great one about the time span of a relationship. Done more romantically than borderline soft-core flicks like Blue is the warmest color and 9 songs, and it was not as depressing as Blue Valentine. it was just a true take on a complex relationship taking it's toll, well performed by some brilliant actors.

If your looking to watch this movie to hear some science talk, that's not what the movie is really about, unless ironically convincing the world of his theories on time was really as easy as the movie makes it out for Hawking. Overall very enjoyable.

FIRST: Let us FOCUS on the Title´s Content and Context.....

Quite Literally.... Expecations are EVERYTHING! And I must say that mine were SKY HIGH... Before viewing!

And although I tried my very best to keep them in check, when I sat down to watch this, unfortunately, my expectations were just like what I mentioned earlier! Perhaps, just a tad TOO high...

PLEASE Don't get me wrong! EVERYTHING is both an exquisitely well-made film and a rather delicious, interesting and quite entertaining experience! Here, I will make my very best effort to explain exactly why this is the case.

EVERYTHING jump starts itself by introducing us to a rather soft-spoken, nerdy (what else?) young Physics doctoral candidate: One Stephen Hawking! Within minutes, we are inserted into the stop-motion bloom of Stephen and Jane's surprisingly intense and, yes, sweet relationship!

In its early minutes, we also get some foreshadowing of Stephen's ominous deteriorating health, which, obviously, in and of itself, will not prove to be the least bit surprising to anyone watching the film. EVERYTHING is clearly Stephen Hawking from his first wife, Jane's perspective. Considering that the movie is based on her book, could it have been anything else? As a logical result, what we get here is a focus on Stephen Hawking the man, the husband; his private persona, much more than his public and professional persona!

Will this emphasis on his relationship with Jane and his prolonged struggle with ALS and its debilitating effects, leave some people feeling somewhat shortchanged? Undoubtedly, there will be some. EVERYTHING isn't completely devoid of moments that underscore Hawking's scientific mindset and insight, however...They're just not nearly as many as one might expect, particularly in light of exactly who he is and what he has done to achieve fame! I prefer not to go into any more detail, because we wouldn't want any SP**LERS.... now would we?

An interesting personal anecdote in relation to Mr. Hawking: For many years, I naturally assumed that he was an American...Why? Well, as I'm sure perhaps millions of you have noticed, when he speaks, using what has come to be considered his trademark computerized voice, he clearly speaks with an American accent! To my chagrin, just a few years back, did I discover that it was simply a case of AMERICAN technology determining to use its own voice!

EVERYTHING's only real shortcoming? Quite honestly, the movie seems to do a lot of "Reelin In the Years!" during its last three-quarters of an hour, or so. To clarify that a bit, the movie constantly skips forward a few years at a time, briefly shows us a new son or daughter, for example, in a couple scenes, then jumps forward a couple years and repeats this process! Perhaps the sheer volume of detailed events in Hawking's life would have been better served by presenting them in a four or six hour mini-series? Just a parting opinion!

8********.... ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!

Any comments, questions or observations, in English o en ESPAÑOL, are most welcome!

I've read scientists are turned off by this film for its omissions, simplifications, falsities, and other failures to explain Prof. Hawking's theories. I can understand that, being a law specialist who can't watch law dramas. But if you're not a cosmologist or a physicist you should not be discouraged by the film's failure to give you enough detail for a two credit course. It's a good drama of people, a bit schmaltzy as befits the facts, and in that regard I understand it's pretty accurate, and is definitely well acted and directed. Also a nice glimpse of what Oxbridge life was like in the 1950s. As they say, the male lead is Oscar bait.