 |
| (Amazon UK link) |
We were captivated from the start. Gwyneth Paltrow is wonderful as a young woman in her twenties, Catherine, who is the daughter of Robert, a mathematical genius (Anthony Hopkins). At least, he was once a genius, but in his late twenties his mind started to go. It’s not clear exactly what the problem was - it’s described as ‘crazy’ in the film; the balance of his mind was very disturbed, anyway.
But it’s quickly clear that Robert has just died, and that Catherine is herself quite disturbed. She is also a brilliant mathematician and is worried that her mind is going to start going, too. She imagines her dead father talking to her; it’s easy to think she might be going a bit crazy too, though she could be hallucinating due to exhaustion and stress.
Much of the film happens in flashback form; we see Robert working, and apparently recovering a few years before the film starts. Catherine went off to study but kept coming up with new ideas rather than doing the exercises she was supposed to do. And then, when she doesn’t hear from her father for a few days, she drives back to find him writing frantically, seated outside in the snow…
Back in the present day, we’re introduced to one of Robert’s former students, Hal (Jake Gyllenhaal). He wants to work his way through Robert’s many journals, as he’s sure that there must be something significant there. He’s not found anything just yet - we don’t learn what it is that he’s found until rather later in the film - but he’s passionate about maths and hopes to find an important proof.
Hal is also a drummer in a rock band, trying to break out of the ‘geek’ stereotype, and he’s rather taken with Catherine…
Catherine’s sister Claire (Hope Davis) arrives for the funeral. She is about as different from her sister as possible; she admits that she doesn’t have any mathematical talent, but she’s an excellent organiser. She dresses smartly, with make-up and heels, contrasting with Catherine’s scruffy jeans and sweatshirts. Claire cares about looking good, and being seen to look good. She’s also very concerned about doing her duty.
Catherine admits more than once that she doesn’t like her sister, and doesn’t get along with her. And Claire can be aggravating and condescending. But Claire does seem to care for Catherine and wants to help her out of her confusion and depression, even if her methods are rather blunt and unhelpful.
It’s a very well-made film, apparently based on a play; that explains why there are really only four significant characters, although there are plenty of extras in the film. The mathematical part is almost a sideline; it’s not specified what the proof is for, though it apparently relates to prime numbers. And we only see brief notes of complex equations. Instead, it’s a film about family relationships, and about trust.
It’s quite emotionally draining to watch, though we didn’t realise it until the end. There’s no humour to lighten the tension, and Gwneth Paltrow’s acting is so good that we were totally drawn into her character, feeling her stress with her sister, and then with her own need to prove herself.
The rating is 12A; I’d have thought 15 would be more appropriate, though there’s no actual nudity, and the one bedroom scene is fairly mild. There’s some ‘strong’ language, but it’s not excessive and no violence. But the theme is one that is unlikely to be of any interest to young teenagers anyway.
Definitely recommended if you would like a very well-produced drama that’s a bit different from most. We didn’t know how it was going to end - it’s not clear at all until the final scenes.
There are three deleted scenes as extras, and some interesting commentary on the making of ‘Proof’ which we watched afterwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment