The Theory of Everything

[NobodyReally]

I do favor intelligence in science and math has a "smarter" type of intelligence than someone who can write a good essay. But thats not really what I was getting at. When I called the masses dumb I was referring to the fact that Hollywood is so afraid of over-intellectualizing a movie, that they will simplify a script to ensure it can be related to a greater audience. So my criticism is really with Hollywood. I dont think the masses are dumb, but I think Hollywood treats us like we're dumb.



Whether or not you are interested in the subject matter I think his work is essential to his life story. He's brilliant and he's famous. People also think he has a God-like complex, and he's an a$$hole. So that kinda ties into the type of relationships he had with his wives...at least thats what Jane said in her book.

I'll use A Beautiful Mind as an example. John Nash's personal story also transcended his work. That movie was also built around his relationship with his wife. Yet they actually showed how brilliant he was, without the film coming off as a math lesson. A similar, but much better movie.

Fair enough. I do think Hollywood dumbs down movies. I didn't feel like this one was condescending though, perhaps because I'm not a science person. Its funny you mention A Beautiful Mind, because I thought this movie was on par with that one in terms of impact.

 

[FlyRy]

I completely agree with @andre patton

To me the film was bland and boring and i don't feel like i know anything more about hawking after 2 hours.

I much prefer A Beautiful Mind

 

[NobodyReally]

I completely agree with @andre patton

To me the film was bland and boring and i don't feel like i know anything more about hawking after 2 hours.

I much prefer A Beautiful Mind

 

[FlyRy]

don't worry breh, @andre patton and i are in the minority..critics and fans seem to like it

 

[joeychizzle]

Simply put, it was a good film. It managed to keep you in your seat and genuinely root for the protagonist, which you don't get too much of these days. I personally would've preferred more science over personal relationships and religion though.

 

[StraxStrax]

This is a standard biopic with 2-3 great acting moments, nothing more. I hate when movies set in 19XX have a film grain just because photos and video from that era are grainy, like the world wasn't in HD until 2004. I'm also willing to bet any amont of money the writer of the movie had Hawking riding a bike and laughing in the first scene just so he could write "Hawking rides a bike down a street and laughs with his friends". Most of the acting is ruined for me by the film cutting to a close up whenever Hawking has trouble doing something with his hands or legs. I know not everybody knows Hawking but c'mon.

Given the praise in here I'm shocked its not in @NobodyReally top 10.

 

[pickles]

I really have the face reading these comments. You nikkas want a movie about astrophysics? :whatthehell?:
This movie was not about Stephen Hawkings, it was about the relationship between him and his wife and this movie was based of the book his wife wrote.

This was a great movie, I really hope Redmayne wins the Oscar for this. He looks exactly like Stephen Hawkings. Great performance. Even the actress that plays his wife was amazing.

I still don't understand what you guys wanted from this movie, Stephen has ALS, a motor neuron disorder that is gradual in its progress. Breh was confided to a wheelchair for the majority of his life. And no breh wasn't paralyzed from the waist down, he can have children because sexual function is part of another system (sympathetic and parasympathetic) so he can have erections and ejaculations.

One of the best movies of 2014.

ETA: I really hope Eddie Redmayne is the new breakout star for 2015.

Also, for the brehs talking about a Beautiful Mind, there was a whole bunch of shyt that movie left out, like Nash got arrested for masturbating in public etc.

 

[StraxStrax]

For me it's simple. Would I've enjoyed this if I had not idea who Stephen Hawking is? And that's a big fat NO

 

[NobodyReally]

This is a standard biopic with 2-3 great acting moments, nothing more. I hate when movies set in 19XX have a film grain just because photos and video from that era are grainy, like the world wasn't in HD until 2004. I'm also willing to bet any amont of money the writer of the movie had Hawking riding a bike and laughing in the first scene just so he could write "Hawking rides a bike down a street and laughs with his friends". Most of the acting is ruined for me by the film cutting to a close up whenever Hawking has trouble doing something with his hands or legs. I know not everybody knows Hawking but c'mon.

Given the praise in here I'm shocked its not in @NobodyReally top 10.

I really loved this movie, but I loved a lot of movies last year. It was a really great year, so it didn't crack my top 10.

 

[jeh]

I liked it.

 

[Wise]

I only seen this film and Foxcatcher from the Best Actor nominees and I could see how Redmayne won. Did an amazing job, Felicity Jones was great too.

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

Yeah u could tell the movie was told from the wife's perspective. It had some good moments and the acting was good, just not enough going on to make it great or even something I would watch again. HAWKING was a pimp tho, knocking up his wife still and leaving her for the nurse like a playa. We need a hawking smiley.

 

[semicko82]

Just watched the movie, and Eddie Redmayne deserved his Oscar. Brilliant technical peformance. He captured all the stages of ALS so well. Bravo

 

[Big Dick]

Great acting by eddie redmayne...but this movie fukking sucks big time dikk.

 

[semicko82]

Great acting by eddie redmayne...but this movie fukking sucks big time dikk.

Yeah as far as the movie goes it was mediocre at best. Eddie Redmayne performance is worth the watch, one for the ages