Read Mixed User Reviews for The Theory of Everything

4

benuttyNov 16, 2014

It's curious how a film about a man who wrote his graduate thesis on time manages to treat time with such disregard--Marsh flutters through this man's extraordinary life with utter disregard for cause & effect, showing us the end results of aIt's curious how a film about a man who wrote his graduate thesis on time manages to treat time with such disregard--Marsh flutters through this man's extraordinary life with utter disregard for cause & effect, showing us the end results of a number of events in Hawking's life without showing us how he got there or what it means to him when he does. Surely the central romance is important to his work, but it's a shame Marsh isn't able make the connection in a more intriguing way.

And enough with the glow effect on the lens. ENOUGH.… Expand

4 of 4 users found this helpful40

All this user's reviews

6

grandpajoe6191Aug 25, 2015

"The Theory of Everything" tells the story of acclaimed professor Steven Hawking and his relationship between his wife Jane as she helps him fight through his illness till the very end. Although well crafted with some memorable scenes here"The Theory of Everything" tells the story of acclaimed professor Steven Hawking and his relationship between his wife Jane as she helps him fight through his illness till the very end. Although well crafted with some memorable scenes here and there, I did find the movie to lack the love chemistry between the main characters; I mean, isn't this the kind of romance movie you'd watch with your girlfriend? If so, get ready to get bored out of your mind.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

AkashVijayJan 21, 2015

A terrific performance by Redmayne in a decent movie. But this movie just feels too neatly tied and a bit too angelic. Everyone in this movie is so perfect. There are no character flaws whatsoever. Even when Stephen and Jane separated, JaneA terrific performance by Redmayne in a decent movie. But this movie just feels too neatly tied and a bit too angelic. Everyone in this movie is so perfect. There are no character flaws whatsoever. Even when Stephen and Jane separated, Jane just fell on her knees and said "I'm sorry I wasn't of better service to you. I did my best". That's just manipulative and mawkish beyond belief. It was an insult to the audiences' intelligence. But that being said, the movie does balance Stephen Hawking's marriage, his illness and his work very well. But it's disappointing to see this film following the quintessential trite, mundane and conventional biopic formula, given that it's about a truly unconventional and exceptional man.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

nicholasbertJan 26, 2015

Apart from excellent acting performances (and I daresay Felicity Jones's one is better than Eddie Redmayne's), The Theory of Everything does nothing to pull the audience into a subtler, less clichéd story. Those of you who expected scienceApart from excellent acting performances (and I daresay Felicity Jones's one is better than Eddie Redmayne's), The Theory of Everything does nothing to pull the audience into a subtler, less clichéd story. Those of you who expected science can stop watching immediately - unfortunately, the love story that is the substitute central plot element is not interesting enough to draw the attention of romantic-movie fans.

The Theory of Everything makes Hawking's disabilities basically the only thing worth mentioning, flying over his achievements and even his general way of picturing the world - and rather focusing on his wife and his love story, despite the lack of the amount of drama this would require to be effective.

In general, a clumsily edited picture with no pretenses and presented as an unfortunate series of clichés about scientists, handicap and extramarital relationships, in this order.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

david23Feb 16, 2015

First things first: if you watch this movie expecting the focus to be on Stephen Hawking and his work - like I did - then you will likely be greatly disappointed (like I was).
So much screen time is spent upon his then-wife, Jane, and theirFirst things first: if you watch this movie expecting the focus to be on Stephen Hawking and his work - like I did - then you will likely be greatly disappointed (like I was).
So much screen time is spent upon his then-wife, Jane, and their relationship that, on the few occasions that we actually see him presenting his theories, you feel completely disconnected from those accomplishments because absolutely none of the work behind them is portrayed on-screen. So we end up with a few odd scenes (amongst all the love-stuff) where Stephen speaks to a room full of people about his theories and then everyone stands up and starts applauding him and how brilliant he is. But, for the unintelligent people in the cinema like me who don't have a clue what he's on about because the movie doesn't provide a single iota of the background work or thoughts then went into these theories, you're left feeling like he may as well have said 'Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah'. And everyone still would have stood up and cheered, because the Movie Director needed a few uplifting moments.
And, boy, does it need those uplifting scenes in amongst the grey, depressing story of a man diagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease. Yes, Stephen Hawking has accomplished a great deal in his lifetime so far but so much of this movie focuses on the struggles of his wife, Jane, to cope with looking after him as his condition worsens that the film ends up feeling more informative than entertaining (and what do we go to the cinema/movie theatre for if not to be entertained?)
My other issue with the movie is that, especially when you find out that it's based on a book by Jane, it feels distinctly like it glosses over the foibles of his then-wife and yet highlights the flaws of others. Her being unfaithful garners five seconds of screen time but when Elaine (Maxine Peake) shows up later in the movie to help Stephen, she's portrayed as something like a naughty nurse from a 'Carry On' movie who tries (in several scenes) to undermine Jane. It's these things that - especially when considering whose book this movie is based upon - make it feel like it may be a slightly biased version of events.
However, there are positives about the movie that need to be highlighted. There are some greatly funny moments and these are often provided by Stephen's university room-mate Brian (played wonderfully by Harry Lloyd). He brings some much-needed laughter to a sometimes otherwise dreary movie.
Of course, the main highlight of the film is the performance of Eddie Redmayne as Stephen Hawking. As I write this review, he is Oscar-nominated for it and I would be shocked if he does not win the award. Without such an outstanding job by the leading actor, I feel that 'The Theory of Everything' would have fallen completely flat but his outstanding performance is absolutely spot on.
Overall, if you're interested in Stephen Hawking then - by all means - you may find 'The Theory of Everything' worth watching. Otherwise, there's not much to be gained here other than seeing a tired, generic love story in a different setting.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

hotfromcauldronNov 17, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What orbits around Redmayne’s stellar performance sucks the air out of this Hawking’s biopic. Hairdos change, couples swap, time passes- but nothing happens. Until a touching two minute reverse recap at the very end. Even if love is the answer- the question remains- why is this movie relatively mediocre.… Expand

6 of 7 users found this helpful61

All this user's reviews

4

LamontRaymondNov 9, 2014

I'd never recommend this movie. I'd read that the emphasis would be on Hawking's school life and his romance with his first wife. Unfortunately, that only comprises the first half of the film. The second half is entirely too slow. TheI'd never recommend this movie. I'd read that the emphasis would be on Hawking's school life and his romance with his first wife. Unfortunately, that only comprises the first half of the film. The second half is entirely too slow. The sequences of Hawking struggling to pull himself up his staircase - looking at his son at the top of the stairs - mirrored many of the people in our theater struggling to get to the end of this film. Sure, Redmayne is awesome, but when he gets into his "My Left Foot" mode, that's no longer acting, in my opinion. I'd much rather award an actor for subtle, true moments - not pretending like he or she is physically disabled. Seems far too easy. Pandering. The movie simply needs editing. And I would have loved to hear more about the Quantum Physics vs. Astro Physics relationship that they merely touch upon.… Expand

6 of 15 users found this helpful69

All this user's reviews

6

jeremypNov 30, 2014

As a made for TV biopic it would be passable but as a movie it's insistence on pursuing a pastel course makes it tame stuff indeed. Redmayne does yeoman work with the physicality, but has little else to do. Is there a personality under thatAs a made for TV biopic it would be passable but as a movie it's insistence on pursuing a pastel course makes it tame stuff indeed. Redmayne does yeoman work with the physicality, but has little else to do. Is there a personality under that shell? Or just a brain. Far too much is left for the imagining, almost as if getting deeper into the reality of Hawking's life would detract from the hagiography.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

ScribeHardDec 28, 2014

If the acting tandem of Redmayne and Jones is the film’s irresistible force, then the fading presentation of the story of The Theory of Everything is the immovable object that that force has the unfortunate circumstance to meet. I don’t knowIf the acting tandem of Redmayne and Jones is the film’s irresistible force, then the fading presentation of the story of The Theory of Everything is the immovable object that that force has the unfortunate circumstance to meet. I don’t know the outcome of a meeting like that in the realm of physics, but in the realm of film, it isn’t pretty.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

aaronbartuskaJan 12, 2015

Redmayne and Jones, two of the best young actors working today, give admirable performances. However, that is about the only compliment I can give this film. It doesn't do the story of Hawking justice and feels sort of lazy as a result.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

DukeJonFeb 28, 2016

This film could have been so much more. Instead we get a surprisingly uninvolving story with little chemistry between the actors. Hawking's work isn't stressed strongly enough so I found that he came across to be quite unlikeable. MaxineThis film could have been so much more. Instead we get a surprisingly uninvolving story with little chemistry between the actors. Hawking's work isn't stressed strongly enough so I found that he came across to be quite unlikeable. Maxine Peake the nurse is too attractive for the viewer to believe she would be interested in Hawking, they should have cast someone else. We never really get any background on Hawking's children either. A big pile of "meh"… Expand