Une merveilleuse histoire du temps

Encompassing all the best parts of films like A Beautiful Mind by Ron Howard but creating its own signature and style to the biopic genre, James Marsh's gorgeous and beautifully compelling The Theory of Everything, the true story of Stephen and Jane Hawking, is a sensitive piece of filmmaking that stands as one of the finest movie efforts of the year. Starring Eddie Redmayne as Stephen and Felicity Jones as Jane, the two develop a masterful and sonorous dynamic that behaves as a naturalistic relationship that inhabits qualities of both love and sadness. They're a match made in heaven. Also acting as a morality tale, screenwriter Anthony McCarten puts forth intriguing questions regarding love in the shadow of someone's disability. Do you really know what is asked of you when you vow to love someone in sickness and in health? What happens when disability doesn't allow you to love the way you want? Are you better off just breaking free if you have the chance?

The film acts as a moving oil painting. Benoît Delhomme shoots to utter perfection. Intimate in scenes requiring the viewer's undivided attention, and taking the liberty to capture the essence of the time where the innocence of love offers many possibilities. The scenes ultimately feel as if we're in a dream sequence, sleeping silently as these two lives play out in our minds.

You don't get any tears or moving feelings without the bravura score of Jóhann Jóhannsson. Criminally overlooked last year in the grand scheme of things for his work on Prisoners, the composer orchestrates his best score of his career. Very likely not just my favorite score of the year so far but one of mine in the last few years. From the opening credits, Jóhannsson puts his stamp with heavy violins and beautiful piano playing. In the end credits, you can sit and marvel as the names cross the screen with the music that accompanies it.

When it comes to biopics, people tend to automatically give credit to makeup and body language when talking about a performer. Past winners like Jamie Foxx in Ray have always felt empty as a performance but people were so tied in with the mannerisms that he brought to the role, which he often did in his stand up comedy routines. In Eddie Redmayne, we get a fully realized and tender performance. The first twenty minutes of the film, prior to the diagnosis of Hawking's disease, Redmayne utilizes all the quick wit and charm to show what his Stephen loved the most of his work and his woman. Obviously going through the physical transformation must be rewarded. Contorting his body and learning the physical tics that Stephen Hawking has displayed in real life all ring true. Since his breakout work in Les Miserables, a role that should have landed him a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, I was wary to believe I'd revisit a praising session with the young actor so soon. It's one of the best things offered this year.

When it comes to Felicity Jones, the emotional backbone of the entire process has to be awarded to her. With stunning works in Like Crazy under her belt, Jones takes upon a daunting and heavily emotional character, never afraid to have the audience dislike or be disappointed in what she's doing. Marsh directs her to astonishing resolve. As a leading lady, Jones ignites such fiery and compelling questions not necessarily asked before in a biopic such as this. Complex and staggering in the way she decides to portray the brave Jane, Jones allows her character to grow, and both live and learn inside of her. What's most remarkable about Jones is she makes everything seem so effortless. She's not faking anything, she's really feeling and becoming Jane. She locates all the emotions required of her to execute successfully. It's a turn I wouldn't be surprised to see runaway with the Academy Award for Best Actress.

The supporting players are no shortage of talent, though secondary to this type of story. Charlie Cox was just as good in his screen time. As Jonathan, Cox lays it all out on the table, heart on sleeve, and soul bared for all of us to see. David Thewlis, Emily Watson, and Simon McBurney are all solid but brief.

Production Designer John Paul Kelly and Costume Designer Steven Noble should be commended for their meticulous craft in bringing the time period to the screen. An Oxford University dormitory along with a dozen outfits worn by all the characters can easily be taken for granted in a film like this.

Screenwriter Anthony McCarten adapts his script from the book "Travelling to Infinity: My life with Stephen" which was written by Jane Hawking. Audiences like their fair share of love stories, but some of them, rather most of them, don't like the ugly that goes with it. In real life, people make mistakes, and do things that can make some cringe. I believe some of the more questionable and controversial things during the Hawkings marriage was merely glossed over to not paint them negatively, even though the world is well aware of what went on. I'll be honest, I knew next to nothing about Stephen Hawking and his work prior to sitting for the movie. I knew the robot voice and that's where it about ended. If anything, the film inspires me to learn more about Stephen's work and theories presented. All of those things are definitely given a back seat to a film that doesn't really require them. The Theory of Everything is not about the equations or the mathematics. It's essentially about us. It's about love, and not just in the form of marriage. We as humans learn to love ourselves, our families, and our children. They are placed in our lives but I'm not sure how much we realize what goes into maintaining those relationships. The movie makes you think of those things.

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!

We are all familiar with the story and with Steven Hawking. His groundbreaking work 'A brief History of Time' and devastating disabilities propelled him irrevocably into the public consciousness and immortal fame.

But few of us could understand the complexities of his personal life and the shocking divorce in 1990 from his long sacrificing wife of more than 25 years. Indeed that episode served to darken his reputation in the minds of many, including myself, who felt ill at ease with anyone who could leave a partner who had done so much for him just at the long awaited moment when international fame and recognition finally arrived.

This wonderful production, so well scripted and paced throughout, serves to explain that vital anomaly in Hawking's life. And it is made all the more poignant as it is based upon the account written by his wife who has borne so much.

But it is the breathtaking performance of Eddie Redmayne as Hawking that simply blasted this film into an extraordinary level. It is difficult enough to mimic so famous a person as Hawking and it is even more difficult to portray so accurately the debilitating and gradually increasing effects of Motor Neuron Disease. But to transmit so clearly the profound emotions and inner suffering that Hawking must have experienced in his agonizing journey was a performance that left me quite speechless and at times in uncontrollable tears.

It would be a travesty of the industry if Eddie Redmayne is not nominated for an Oscar after this performance. And to my mind it was a work of art that simply cannot be equaled let alone beaten.

Have a good handkerchief ready to hand.

What a wonderful accomplishment of a film by James Marsh (Man on Wire) who brings such depth and beauty to the life/love story of Stephen and Jane Hawking. The film is adapted from her novel on their life and brings forth much of the love and tenacity necessary to care for and love someone going through great physical struggles over time. Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones give fantastic and intimate portrayals of Stephen and Jane during their courtship and lives together. My vote for best film at this year's Toronto International Film Festival. In Q&A after film James Marsh told a great story about Stephen Hawking's reaction to the film where he gave the response that it was in "largely genuine"... and Eddie Redmayne said that Stephen Hawking after viewing the film allowed them to use his actual "voice" instead of their approximation for the film that they had produced. The most touching was that Hawking had tears to be wiped away after viewing which will give to you a sense of how genuine this film is.

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.