*Disclaimer: While I make a nod in this review to the discomfort of an ablebodied actor playing a character with a disability, I don’t say it forcefully enough. I have a bad habit of going easier on actors I like when they make problematic choices, and as great as Benedict Cumberbatch is, this wasn’t really an appropriate role for him.*
Films
about someone with a disability can be dicey, especially if they’re about real
people and especially if they star
able-bodied actors. The plots can grow
overly maudlin, and the performances risk self-indulgence. For the most part, though, Hawking avoids these pitfalls.
This
British TV film follows Stephen Hawking’s graduate work at Cambridge, from just
before his diagnosis of motor neuron disease to just after his revelatory
thesis. I’ll cop to not knowing much about Hawking – rather
embarrassingly, I hadn’t even known he was British – but the film is an
interesting and engaging story of a man eager to leave his mark before his time
runs out.
Stephen’s
disease is felt throughout the film, of course; at just 21, about to start grad
school, he’s told he may have only two years left to live. The knowledge sometimes defeats him,
sometimes drives him, but it’s never far from his mind. As he contemplates his mortality and endures
losing control of his body, his chief respite is knowing that his brain will
remain unharmed.
This is the window into Stephen. He’s a young man with a degenerative disease,
yes, but he’s also a brilliant student who sees what others don’t. He can be shy, dejected, self-impressed,
desperate, afraid, raging, arrogant, and elated. His curious mind yearns for answers, glittering
flashes of insight. He’ll cheerfully
spend an entire night on an equation, use the theory of relativity as a pickup
line, or scribble in chalk on the pavement when his ideas flow too quickly to
reach a blackboard. There are times when
the camera lingers a bit too tragically on Stephen’s clumsy fingers or his
shuffling feet, but Hawking is always
the story of a man, not an illness.
Maybe
this is an odd note but, given the film’s frequent references to the theory of
relativity, I kept expecting a metaphoric line about how Stephen was trying to
go (i.e., work) incredibly fast in the hopes of slowing down time (the
progression of his illness.) I was
genuinely surprised that we never got it.
I don’t know if it’s a brilliant parallel the screenwriter missed or a
cheesy comparison he wisely avoided, but I thought I’d mention it all the
same. For better or worse, it’s probably
what I would have done.
Benedict
Cumberbatch is stellar in this early performance. He really sells Stephen’s intellect, anguish,
and fervor; his expressions are map to Stephen’s mind. Though it’s a different sort of performance,
the physicality he uses for Stephen’s failing body reminds me of his Creature
in Frankenstein. I’m not sure the film would do so well
without his earnest, unflinching portrayal.
I’m
showing my ignorance again, but the film’s debate between the Big Bang and
Steady-State Theories interests me. Fascinating
that believers in Steady-State (the theory of the time, that the universe has
Always Been) dismissed the Big Bang as fanciful because a universal beginning
left room for a Creator. I had no idea
that the Big Bang Theory was ever deemed too religious!
Warnings
Some
drinking, a few sexual references, and thematic elements.
No comments:
Post a Comment