The best part of James Marsh’s (Man on a Wire, Shadow Dancer) Stephen Hawking biopic The Theory of Everything is the stunning performances of Eddie Redmayne (My Week With Marilyn, Les Miserables) and Felicity Jones (The Invisible Woman, Like Crazy). Both performers have been on the scene for quite some time, but this movie will open some doors for years to come. Redmayne is a shoo-in for Best Actor, and based on what I’ve seen so far, he’s the leader to win. I do believe that his lead will be short-lived, though. I plan on seeing Foxcatcher this weekend, and I think that Steve Carell will give the performance of his career and be the clear-cut favorite heading into awards season. However, I don’t think I’ve been more disappointed in any other year than I have been with the movies of 2014. I feel as if nothing, thus far, has exceeded expectations and that only a few films (Nightcrawler, Kill the Messenger) have even met expectations. There have been a couple of movies (most notably The Lunchbox and The Drop) that had little fanfare surrounding them beforehand and ended up being pleasant surprises. But for the most part, 2014 has been a massive letdown. This year still has potential, but with each passing week and average movie, that hope is slowly but surely dwindling. So it might seem like I wasn’t overly impressed or was even disappointed with The Theory of Everything. However, that’s not necessarily true. It was a good movie and one that I recommend seeing.

The movie tells the story of Stephen Hawking (Redmayne), starting with his days at Cambridge University when he was first diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Hawking was best known for his novel A “Brief History of Time,” He explored broad topics like How did the universe begin? What made the start of the universe possible? Does time always flow forward? Is the universe unending? Are there other dimensions in space? What will happen when it all ends? The New York Times #1 best-seller wasn’t published until 1988, close to 25 years after Hawking began researching these issues. We meet Hawking as a carefree and funny procrastinator who compensates for his sub-par work ethic with his unique brain. He’s an awkward young man who knows it, but it is an endearing characteristic. His friends and family adore him. He has a penchant for beautiful women and is smitten by Jane (Jones) just before his diagnosis. While it does have some technical geek speak, this movie is a relationship movie more than anything. This is by no means a sob story. I never felt overly emotional one way or the other because there are far more ups in this movie than there are downs. This movie is about determination and overcoming difficult circumstances. It is difficult watching Hawking first lose his ability to walk and then lose his ability to speak. But I think most of us knew that going. And most of us know that, despite his circumstances, Hawking’s life is a triumph. This story is his story, Jane’s story, and their story. This story is about falling in love, falling out of love, and salvaging a loving relationship. And while the story may not have played out exactly the way in wish we would have liked; it remained true to its roots. All of us are dealt with circumstances in our lives that we are ill-prepared for. Some of these things knock us down and never let us back up, while others allow us to step back, reevaluate, and tackle life differently. Had he not developed ALS, who knows how life with Jane might have been? Jane is as much of this story as Stephen is. While he was the one who was going through this debilitating illness, it was her who was the caretaker. Having witnessed a similar situation firsthand in my own family, I’m unsure which situation is more challenging. Is it worse to be the person going through a life where each new day is physically worse than the previous? Or is it worse being the person who loves that person the most who must witness and deal with all of this firsthand? There is no right or wrong answer here. There is no answer at all. It’s just the unpredictability we call life. Redmayne and Jones did a fantastic job conveying these emotions and the day-to-day struggles each endured.

Hawking received an initial diagnosis of just two years to live, and we all know he is still alive some 50 years later. But he did what most of us would probably do when first given sure dire news. He went into a deep depression. Now it’s almost impossible to convey how long and dark that depression was, given that a 25-year story needed telling for over two hours. But what is made evident is that Jane’s commitment to the man she loved was enough to shed some light on his situation and get him moving in the right direction. One of the things she said was that “Whatever time we have together is worth it for me.” And just like with any two people, the relationship changed over the years.

A pleasant surprise in this movie was Jonathan Jones (Charlie Cox – television’s Daredevil, television’s Boardwalk Empire). A widower, Jonathan, meets Jane when it is suggested she join a church choir to have something to do as a recreational activity and a break from caring for Stephen. Quickly Jonathan and Jane strike up a friendship. Jane was very religious growing up, and this is an integral part of her being, even if it is not for Stephen. As an audience, we are hesitant to like Jonathan. Jonathan is a good-looking, non-disabled person, and we suspect he will prove to be the story’s antagonist. There is an instant,  unspoken attraction between Jonathan and Jane. And as much as we want to dislike Jonathan, we can’t help but like him. He keeps his feelings to himself and goes out of his way to help the Hawking family. And while we believe it is so he can be close to Jane; we quickly learn that he wants to help because he has no commitments and wants to make his free time more worthwhile so that he can feel better about himself. Soon he becomes a person that the Hawkings needs in their everyday life. And we all know how intelligent Stephen is. He’s smart enough to put two and two together. The dynamics between the three adults are unique, and it is an integral part of the movie. Again, I find it interesting because had Stephen not become ill, Jane and Jonathan would probably never have met. It leads to the idea of survival of the fittest. It forces us to evaluate our relationships. What if we get sick and cannot care for our partner in the way that they need to be cared for? Will that person look for comfort in others? What would we do in a similar situation? As strong as the relationship between Stephen and Jane is, we can see small cracks forming along the way. It makes you both sad and happy to see how this aspect of the story resolved itself. I will say that Jones is worthy of the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award. He did a great job as a likable guy you just wanted to hate.

Ultimately, I think this movie will be remembered for its acting more than its story. Will it be nominated for Best Picture? I think it probably will be based on the new voting format. If only five movies could have received a nomination for Best Picture, I don’t think this would have been a finalist. However, with ten potential nominations, I think this gets a nod. I do believe Redmayne will receive a nomination for Best Actor. If this isn’t one of the five best lead acting performances, I don’t know what is. People have discussed Michael Keaton’s performance in Birdman as the leading candidate. That performance was above average, but it had nothing on Redmayne’s portrayal of Hawking. I thought that his performance was flawless. He nailed the mannerisms perfectly. I thought his performance was stunning early on and got even better when Stephen lost the ability to communicate verbally. Likewise, Jones should be nominated for a Best Actress Academy Award. Her reactions to all of Stephen’s setbacks were honest and believing, and I loved how she tried to stay true to Stephen while also staying true to herself. Something had to give along the way, and I think Jones’s portrayal of Jane divides the audience, which is what it was designed to do. And Cox was perfectly cast as Jonathan and is worthy of a nomination.

I thought the score for this movie was excellent as well. This and Interstellar (the last two films I’ve seen) have had my two favorite scores of 2014. I think each deserves an Academy Award nomination.

I recommend this movie for all to see. It was nearly perfect. The performances are worth the price of admission alone.

Plot 9/10
Character Development 9/10
Character Chemistry 10/10
Acting 10/10
Screenplay 9/10
Directing 9/10
Cinematography 8.5/10
Sound 10/10
Hook and Reel 9.5/10 (slow-building, but never dull…a little long, but you wouldn’t want it to be any shorter)
Universal Relevance 9/10
93%

Movies You Might Like If You Liked This Movie

• Blue is the Warmest Color
• Still Alice
• Away From Her
• A Beautiful Mind
• The Imitation Game