Tuesday 9 March 2010

Anthony Hopkins - anthony hopkins, torture


Proof of a mathematical equation and proof of madness are the two driving forces in John Madden's film. Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow) who cared for her brilliant mathematician father Robert (Anthony Hopkins) is afraid that she's inherited his other "gift"-mental illness. Catherine cared for her father Robert during the end. When Claire (Hope Davis) Catherine's sister arrives home for the funeral she expresses concern for Catherine's mental state. Catherine begins to doubt her own teetering sanity. Robert's assistant Hal (Jake Gyllenhaal) rummages around Robert's papers the night before and after the funeral trying to find an important equation her father was working on before he died. Featuring a group of strong performances, "Proof" is a compelling drama about grief, madness and emotional seclusion. Although Madden's drama suffers from the stage origins of the play but the emotional high wire act the cast performs makes it worthwhile. Whether or not there's "proof" of this film being a "great" film is based on how drawn into the drama you are by the appealing cast. A warning about some of the other reviews here--there good reviews but some of them have spoilers that give away a lot of the plot of the film. If you want to be surpised and enjoy the ride then I'd suggest you skip reading these reviews.



"Proof" looks extremely good here with natural skin tones, sharp image quality and nice definition. The 5.1 audio isn't exactly designed for the format since this a dialogue driven film but there is nice ambient sounds evident in the other speakers.



A clinical but interesting commentary track by John Madden is interesting to listen to but would have been enlightened by the cast's contribution. We also get deleted scenes none of which are revelations "From Stage to Screen" covers the adaptation of the stage play to film. One of the challenges was staying true to the stage roots while opening up the player and making it less stage bound. Producer Allison Owen makes an interesting comment-she imagined the film as the type of film that would have been made in the 70's where moving and powerful drama was still king in theaters. The cast and Madden discuss their characters and what attracted them to the project. Madden comments that many audience members thought that the play was like watching a movie which is a bit unusual but that was because of the fact that the play was told from a variety of different points of view and the staging.



A fine film that touches on madness, emotional isolation and the fear of what lies down the road for anyone; "Proof" is a fascinating drama that works amazingly well due to the strong performances. Madden who worked with Paltrow in "Shakespeare in Love" clearly connects with Paltrow and Anthony Hopkins. Proof

It's interesting that most people tend to have a problem with the screenplay for this movie, when it is almost word for word the stage play, which is renowned for its elegance and simplicity. Perhaps the issue comes up in the flashbacks and the ending, both of which disagree with the play. Still, as a stage adaptation to film, Proof does the job beautifully. The characters remain true to their original 2-dimensionality; it is the apparent lack of emotion that actually lends itself to intense feelings from the viewer.

PROOF is one of those rare films that transfers a superb play directly to the screen without losing a bit of the power of the play, but enhancing the story with the advantages of the camera. With a tough story like this one it takes a brilliant cast and director to fine-tune the work and in this instance it all works to perfection.



The story is well known from all the PR of the theatrical screening: recounting it in a review does not add or subtract the importance of the film or the experience of the viewer. The premise, mathematician Robert (Anthony Hopkins) and his caretaker daughter Catherine (Gweneth Paltrow) who also is an uncommonly bright 27-year-old mathematics mind and has spent the glowing years of her youth caring for her recently deceased father. They converse in flashbacks, a means of realizing the closeness of their bond emotionally, mentally, and probably parallel mental illness proclivities. Robert left notebooks filled with thoughts and clues to a complex mathematical proof and Hal (Jake Gyllenhaal), a devoted admirer of Robert's genius, is organizing the thoughts and deciphering the meanings of Robert's scribblings. Catherine's estranged sister Claire (Hope Davis) arrives to 'settle' the matters left by Robert's demise and becomes the camera that brings focus to the fact that Catherine has inherited not only her father's genius but his mental fragility as well. How this quartet - Robert, Catherine, Hal, Claire - serve to unravel the findings of Robert's (and Catherine's) legacy is the essence of this gripping tale.



A more powerful group of actors for this film would be difficult to find. One expects the brilliance of Paltrow's performance since she had time with the character on the stage, and Hopkins can toss these bizarre characters off with grace and aplomb. But it is the pleasure of seeing Davis and Gyllenhaal rise to the same level of expertise that makes the film glow. This is an example of ensemble acting of the highest form and director Madden conducts the performance with sensitivity and momentum. The result is a treasureable, intelligent, powerful film that challenges the mind while entertaining all the senses. Highly recommended. Grady Harp, February 06

John Madden, who directed Shakespeare in Love (1998), and David Auburn, who wrote the script (adapted from his play), have put together a moving story about mathematical genius admixed with mental instability much in the manner of the life of John Nash who was the subject of A Beautiful Mind (2001).



Nash was a paranoid schizophrenic who was tormented by voices in his head warning him of dangers and conspiracies that didn't exist. Like Nash, Robert (Anthony Hopkins) is a brilliant mathematician who, having done spectacular work in his early twenties, goes crazy. Unlike Nash he is never able to regain control of "the machinery," as he calls his mind, and is never able to do any worthwhile work again.



Or is he? As he is taken care of by his mathematically astute daughter, Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow in a most affecting and beguiling performance) he fills scores of notebooks with intense writings. At one point he seems in remission and at another point Catherine rushes home to find him in out in the backyard in the middle of a snowy night fired with enthusiasm about his latest work. At another point, he and Catherine work together on a project. And herein lies the crux of the matter. As we discover, this project turns out to be a proof of a difficult mathematical theorem or conjecture that will be internationally celebrated if it is correct.



Jake Gyllenhaal plays Hal, one of Robert's students who is going through his mentor's papers in the hope of discovering something wonderful. Catherine tells him that among the 103 notebooks that her father filled during his days of mental instability there is not a single one that has anything of value in it. But when Hal wins her heart she produces a notebook that was locked away in a drawer. It turns out that this notebook contains that most amazing proof mentioned above. And it is here that Catherine says--in line that is so very well set up that her expression fairly takes your breath away--"I wrote it."



Well, did she or didn't she? Because the work seems to be in her father's handwriting and seems to be well beyond her abilities, her sister Claire, played in that clever but somewhat annoying style that Hope Davis has so perfected (About Schmidt; American Splendor), claims that Catherine is deluded and couldn't have written it. To Catherine's grievous disappointment Hal reluctantly agrees, and this seeming lack of faith in her sends Catherine toward the precipice of insanity. This is the key question of the plot. Who wrote the proof? Its resolution will be the denouement of the story.



Clearly Claire believes that Catherine is so like her father that she is about to go crazy herself. So she tells Catherine she wants to sell the house now that their father is dead and bring Catherine to New York where she lives so that she can take care of her.



Will Catherine go or will she trust her heart and begin a life with Hal?



This movie does not play well with some audiences I think because the wonderment that some of the characters feel--the absolute awe that transfigures them when they behold a great mathematical proof, is not entirely appreciated by the average person. Madden makes sure that Catherine, Hal and one of the mathematicians form on their faces an expression something akin to a religious enthrallment when they understand the thrilling logic of the proof. I suspect that for many viewers something was lost in the translation. Consequently, although many others, including myself, believe this to be one of the outstanding movies of 2005 it only rates a 7.0 at IMDb and was not nominated for any Academy Awards. Paltrow won the Best Actress Oscar for her performance in Shakespeare in Love, also directed by Madden (he seems to bring out the best in her), and that award was richly deserved. But here in Proof I believe she was every bit as good (in a different way) although she was only nominated for a Golden Globe award and did not win.



Another thing about this movie is that it is strangely affecting emotionally. You might find yourself misting up a bit as you watch. I know I did.



See this for Gwyneth Paltrow, a gifted actress giving one of her best performances, and for John Madden, a director who makes beautiful movies with style and finesse. - Murder Mystery - Crime Suspense - Torture - Anthony Hopkins'


Detail Products
Detail Reviews
Click here for more information


Anthony Hopkins - anthony hopkins, torture torture Anthony Hopkins - anthony hopkins, torture