← Back to Reviews
in
#106 - Hawking
Philip Martin, 2004
Based on the story of Stephen Hawking, the famed astrophysicist who contracted motor neurone disease at the age of 21.
Apparently the first ever biopic about Hawking, even if I hadn't already watched The Theory of Everything I'd still think that Hawking was hampered by a number of issues (although watching it second meant I was at least aware of how many details carried over to the later film). Hawking seems extremely focused on relaying the man's most noteworthy discovery, that of the theory that time has a beginning, but it's at the expense of the rest of the film. The film adds in a sub-plot involving a pair of scientists discussing their Nobel-winning breakthrough on television but it doesn't add anything of interest to the main plot, not even as a loose Greek chorus about Hawking's own narrative. If anything, it feels like it was added in so as to pad out this very thin telemovie to 90 minutes. Meanwhile, the film covers the time between him first being diagnosed with MND and him making his first major discovery. By focusing on him before his disorder becomes too much of an obstacle, the film does avoid making the film about him overcoming his disorder, but then the main conflict just becomes Hawking devising his theory, which just shifts his narrative from one lot of clichés to another (and the other set are quite simply boring). There are the older academics who think he might be on to something, the even older academics who scoff at his theories, his patient and understanding love interest, etc. Hawking struggles with his work except when he has conveniently sudden epiphanies and so on and so forth.
The filmmaking on offer is understandably pedestrian and unremarkable given the film's status as a BBC made-for-TV production so it's hardly worth commenting on. The acting isn't much chop - Benedict Cumberbatch doesn't do much of note in the title role aside from the occasional fumble, stumble or slur to remind you that, yes, you are watching a movie about Stephen Hawking and not just any English physicist. Nobody else in the film comes across as even remotely memorable. I can understand why the makers wouldn't want to do a film that focused primarily on Hawking's disability, but the fact that the film frames the main conflict as Hawking trying to complete his work before succumbing to his disease fails to set up any urgency whatsoever. This race-against-time narrative is not the kind of approach you want to take with a film about Hawking, no matter how rooted in truth it may be.
Philip Martin, 2004
Based on the story of Stephen Hawking, the famed astrophysicist who contracted motor neurone disease at the age of 21.
Apparently the first ever biopic about Hawking, even if I hadn't already watched The Theory of Everything I'd still think that Hawking was hampered by a number of issues (although watching it second meant I was at least aware of how many details carried over to the later film). Hawking seems extremely focused on relaying the man's most noteworthy discovery, that of the theory that time has a beginning, but it's at the expense of the rest of the film. The film adds in a sub-plot involving a pair of scientists discussing their Nobel-winning breakthrough on television but it doesn't add anything of interest to the main plot, not even as a loose Greek chorus about Hawking's own narrative. If anything, it feels like it was added in so as to pad out this very thin telemovie to 90 minutes. Meanwhile, the film covers the time between him first being diagnosed with MND and him making his first major discovery. By focusing on him before his disorder becomes too much of an obstacle, the film does avoid making the film about him overcoming his disorder, but then the main conflict just becomes Hawking devising his theory, which just shifts his narrative from one lot of clichés to another (and the other set are quite simply boring). There are the older academics who think he might be on to something, the even older academics who scoff at his theories, his patient and understanding love interest, etc. Hawking struggles with his work except when he has conveniently sudden epiphanies and so on and so forth.
The filmmaking on offer is understandably pedestrian and unremarkable given the film's status as a BBC made-for-TV production so it's hardly worth commenting on. The acting isn't much chop - Benedict Cumberbatch doesn't do much of note in the title role aside from the occasional fumble, stumble or slur to remind you that, yes, you are watching a movie about Stephen Hawking and not just any English physicist. Nobody else in the film comes across as even remotely memorable. I can understand why the makers wouldn't want to do a film that focused primarily on Hawking's disability, but the fact that the film frames the main conflict as Hawking trying to complete his work before succumbing to his disease fails to set up any urgency whatsoever. This race-against-time narrative is not the kind of approach you want to take with a film about Hawking, no matter how rooted in truth it may be.