|
|
Rating:  - ...or should that be "A Beautiful Mind"?
Like "A Beautiful Mind", "Proof" attempts to create drama out of mathematicians who are losing their minds.
Jake Gyllenhaal is excellent as a "nice-guy" grad student digging through the notes of a recently dead mathematician (Anthony Hopkins) looking for any mathematical nuggets - the so-called "proofs". Gwyneth Paltrow playing the mathematician's fragile daughter, struggles with a character whose motivations and actions are simply not credible.
"Proof" betrays its stage origins in its overwrought speechifying and artifice. The revelation in the third act is not that big-a-deal and the denouement is abrupt. "Proof" has high-minded pretensions but is ultimately unsatisfying.
Rating: - well acted adaptation
***1/2
Superb acting is the chief selling point of "Proof," the generally interesting film version of the David Auburn play, adapted by Auburn and Rebecca Miller and directed by John ("Shakespeare in Love") Madden.
Anthony Hopkins plays an aging math genius whose career was cut tragically short when he fell victim to some form of mental illness in his late 20's. In the years since, he has been little more than a shell of his former self, reduced to shuffling around the house in his bathrobe while filling up endless notebooks - originally intended for brilliant mathematical proofs and formulas - with incoherent messages and doodling. Gwyneth Paltrow, in one of her most demanding roles, portrays Catherine, his equally bright younger daughter, who is firmly convinced that she is succumbing to the same mental illness that has claimed her father. Hope Davis is her older sister, Claire, who left their Chicago home to make a new life for herself in New York, but who, now, on the death of their father, has returned with the express purpose of bringing Catherine back home with her in order to "care" for her. The fourth main character is Hal (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young math professor who admires the work of the once-great Robert and who, as both a friend and potential romantic interest, really doesn't believe that Catherine is losing her mind at all.
In thematic terms, "Proof" makes us ponder where exactly that fine line is that separates sanity from insanity and how we can ever really know if and when we are crossing over it. As embodied by Paltrow, Catherine becomes a fascinatingly complex character, one whom we seem to be looking at as through a shattered mirror or fractured lens, never quite sure whether each image at any given moment is a true reflection of who she is or a mere illusion. Paltrow slides in and out of Catherine's many moods with such precision and conviction that she makes us aware of the scary and literally maddening nature of her character's predicament. As Claire, Hope Davis delivers a beautifully insightful performance as a woman of practicality and reason who apparently has no means of understanding or coping with the certifiable insanity of her father and the possible insanity of her sister. In the fairly small but pivotal role of the deceased genius, the always reliable Hopkins appears entirely in flashbacks and in scenes depicting Catherine's imagination. Finally, Gyllenhaal brings an earnestness and intensity to the part of Hal, a character that could have fallen into callowness in less capable hands.
The filmmakers have certainly "opened up" the play to the point where it never feels theater-based or stage bound. The dialogue is literate and incisive, for the most part, although there are times when the movie comes across more as an intellectual exercise than a fully convincing drama about real people. That`s where, lucky for us, the actors step in to perform their magic.
Rating:  - "Proof" adds up perfectly
Based on David Auburn's Pulitzer Prize-winning play, "Proof" revolves around Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow), the daughter of a brilliant, recently deceased mathematician (Anthony Hopkins). Although Catherine has inherited her father's mathematical genius, she fears that her knowledge might come with a heavy price. Her father had a history of mental illness for many years, and Catherine is worried that the disease has been passed on to her. To make matters more complicated, Catherine's pushy sister (Hope Davis) returns to town for her father's funeral and is intent on bringing Catherine back to New York City to stay with her. However, when Catherine shares a breakthrough mathematical proof with her new lover, who also happens to be her father's former graduate strudent (Jake Gyllenhaal), tensions arise as the authorship of the proof is questioned. Did Catherine's father write this amazing proof before his death, or is Catherine its true author?
I thought this film was an excellent adaptation of Auburn's play. Paltrow gives an outstanding performance as a young woman coping with the death of her father, her own personal regrets, and mental instability. Hopkins also delivers a great performance as the delusional father figure, although I wish he had a bit more screen time. The only performance I was slightly disappointed with was Gyllenhaal's, who is kind of a putz. However, his character is a bit of a putz, too, so I guess I can't hold it against him too much.
"Proof" is an excellent movie about family obligations, mental illness, and self-discovery. Put this one on your must-see list.
Rating:  - Very nice
I enjoyed the movie. The math is just window dressing but who would expect anything else? Just good characters and a nice way to spend 90 minutes.
Rating: - Not bad at all.
Proof (John Madden, 2005)
Okay, so by now it's pretty well known that I will watch anything with Jake Gyllenhaal in it. I mean, I actually watched The Day After Tomorrow all the way through. (For which I still have not received my medal, Mr. Emmerich.) So when I found out Gyllenhaal would be one of the principals in John Madden's adaptation of David Auburn's engaging play Proof, I was pretty much champing at the bit. And I was not disappointed.
Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow) and Claire (Six Degrees' Hope Davis) are sisters, the daughters of Robert (Sir Anthony Hopkins), a disturbed mathematician. Claire moved away years ago and made a name for herself in the financial world; Catherine stayed at home to take care of her father and follow in his footsteps. Gyllenhaal plays Hal, a graduate student of Robert's. The main thrust of the play centers around a complex mathematical proof Catherine claims she wrote; neither Claire nor Hal believe her. We get to sit back and watch the fallout as these three characters ride the emotional rollercoaster, intercut with flashback scenes giving us pieces to the puzzle of whether Catherine or Robert was the actual author of the proof.
"Nakedly manipulative" is the most tactful way I can put the mystery portion of the whole thing. Auburn (who also wrote the screenplay) knows exactly how to keep the viewer confused, but still thinking he's got a handle on things. To his credit, he does it very, very well. The present-day scenes didn't need a script, really; if you put three actors of this caliber in the same room and hand them a one-sheet scenario, you'd be able to film the improvisation and come up with something worth watching. If the movie's got a dark spot, acting-wise, it's Paltrow, who comes off as shrill and unlikeable at times. Still, that's a minor point here; there's a great deal of good in this film. ***
|
|