Long-known events are able to keep the attention in a new reading.
The movie can get you to watch it through to the end. In many ways, this is the merit of the main actor, he is very pleasant in appearance. The accents in the film are quite trivial, but this does not irritate the perception. The bitterness of this film event is added only after watching the fact that, unfortunately, the entire plot, all the tricks and “twists” are cleanly removed from the movie “Mind Games”. If you compare these two pictures, you will suddenly find that you are watching the same movie, with the only difference being that Descent also touches on the subject of God. I hope not to stumble upon a third (or fourth) film in the future about a brilliant scientist who sees dead people, but overcomes himself and his paranoid beginnings.
Today, the name of the British naturalist scientist Charles Darwin can be safely put on a par with Galileo, Copernicus, Newton. After all, his scientific work "The Origin of Species" (1859) Darwin not only made a discovery in science, he literally changed the public consciousness of society, challenging the usual view of God as the creator of living nature. Of course, in addition to the followers of the scientist, there were also opponents (including among agnostics and atheists) who did not believe that man descended from an ape. But, nevertheless, Darwin made a huge contribution to the development of evolution with his book. However, Charles Darwin was not very popular in cinema for a long time. And only a feature film John Emiel"Origin", timed to the 200th anniversary of the scientist's birth, became the first biopic about him.
The focus of this picture was the history of the creation of the treatise “Origin of Species”. Why did Darwin, who studied theology but gave his life to science, come to such thoughts as the monkey - the ancestor of man? How did friends and relatives of the scientist react to the idea of writing a book? All of this, in principle, is said in the picture.
The main role in the film was played by Paul Bettany, and his on-screen wife – Jennifer Connelly (who is also in reality the wife of Bettany). I have to admit that it was not a bad choice, because Bettany himself played a wonderful leading role, and with Connelly he had a wonderful alliance. Moreover, it is enough to look at the portraits of young Charles and Emma to see the resemblance to the actors who played them.
Also worth noting is Martha West, who played Charles Darwin’s daughter Annie. But let me be clear: I don’t mean the girl’s acting. Rather, it is about the importance of the character in the plot of the picture. Those familiar with Darwin's biography know that Annie's death in 1851 was the impetus for the very book that changed the course of history. I didn’t like the way this character was used. At first, it was unclear where the flashback with Darwin and his living daughter, and where the conversations of Charles with the ghost of a girl visiting his father. And this is entirely the fault of the director and screenwriter, confused the audience.
Another pleasant surprise was the appearance in the film Benedict Cumberbatch and Toby Jones. Today, these actors are quite top-of-the-line (especially with the advent of the TV series Sherlock - by the way, also created by the Air Force, as well as Origin). So seeing them in an 8-year-old movie is no more than a nice bonus. The only thing that bothered me was how little time they were given (especially to Jones). So it turns out that their characters were, in fact, “for the tick.”
Sadly, I expected more from Origin because I wasn’t very impressed with what was in the film. And the main character, tormented because he wants to sit on two chairs, trying to go in the name of the truth to the end, but does not want to quarrel with loved ones because of his beliefs. And supporting characters who are either not remembered or play the role of human functions. And the temporite, suffering from sharp jumps from the past in 1859. And although I can’t help but mention the scene of Darwin’s communication with a monkey in a cage, which is a reference to Michelangelo’s famous fresco The Creation of Adam, this is extremely small to be considered a great film. However, this does not prevent it from being just a good film that you can watch once.
7 out of 10
For the heart, not for the mind. The most religious film about the scientist
I haven’t seen a Darwin movie yet, so it’s a great movie. I don’t like watching American biographies, where real people are smeared with sweet pathos before nausea. But then - thinking Englishmen, and even the all-enlightening BBC. In general, rubbed hands in anticipation.
Science, like a scalpel, reveals the abscess of delusions and pus must necessarily flow out, but believers pinch the wound, not releasing pus, fearing that without it they will die. It seems that the picture shows us the mental confusion before the break of templates, the pain of abandoning the spiritual chains acquired by centuries, the difficulty of the first step and the fear of being crucified by the crowd, but all this is so drowned in Darwin’s mental soreness, his glitches in the form of a dead daughter appearing throughout the film, that with a magnifying glass one must search for a second bottom. In general, there is a feeling that the film was shot by people of faith, as clearly shows the shaky foundation of science and the firmness of faith.
The religion in the film is represented by a local priest-friend and a God-fearing wife of Darwin, who are steadfast in their faith and unflappable as a rock. Science is represented by two bubbly friends who are trying to push the scientist to take an important step. But the scientist was too soft, he is afraid to offend his wife and friend, while inevitably conflicting with them, which makes him even more tormented and self-flagelled, looking at the background of believers standing firmly on their feet as a lost sheep. Again, these moments are drowned in endless suffering over the death of his daughter.
Darwin was married to a cousin, and in the light of his discoveries, he begins to understand what such marriages lead to, how they affect offspring. But this point is touched only slightly, in between, so not everyone will see. It is difficult to see anything at all, because Darwin is constantly looming dead daughter Annie, he tells some stories, depresses, cries, freaks out, and by the middle of the film it is all very sick.
In the end, wanting to show us the scientist as a person, the filmmakers overdid and showed almost nothing more. Science here is like a melting trail of glowing plankton, stretching in the night after the dark Beagle. And this is very unforgivable, since films about disturbed personalities are filmed an enormous number, but educational films that popularize science among the laziest segments of the population are extremely few!
In 2011, I was interested in the figure of Charles Darwin not only in scientific terms (by this time I had already read the Origin of Species and his autobiography), but also in purely everyday, I became interested in what kind of person he was, before that from what I read I knew only that he was very modest.
Not long after searching the Internet, I came across 'Creation'. After viewing this grandfather from the portrait in the biology office, which I stared at as soon as it was about evolution became quite real for me, because when they talk about genius you imagine God or a saint, but in fact behind this halo hides flesh, blood and bones.
This film should be watched only in order to truly understand and even feel the physical sensu lato nature of genius and only for that.
If you want to see the exact details of his biography in this film, it is not for you. No, this is not an accurate biographical documentary, but the sensations that Darwin experienced after the death of Annie, the pain that his work caused him, are absolutely accurate.
Fortunately, to understand his thoughts (which is more important) need not movies, and books, now it is not difficult and honestly admitted to me only one (M. Chertanov “Darwin”, 2013). Reading other sources about Darwin, you will find many mistakes and inaccuracies in this film, you will understand how polemical the details of the biography, but I think that this is even good, because in addition to the detected errors in the head, the image of not a saint, but an ordinary person with a lot of different and not simple life problems will be fully formed.
8 out of 10
Before I saw the movie Origin, there were only two things I knew about Charles Darwin: he was always a bearded old man (the thing is, I only saw a picture of him once in my life) and what he suggested about the origin of man from apes. All my knowledge of the life of a scientist ended there. And what a surprise I was when I found a film that talked about the family and social difficulties faced by a great man.
Minus: They are not, except that sometimes the moments telling about the hallucinations of the hero seemed a little protracted.
Pluses: For starters, this is a great acting and striking outward resemblance of Paul Bettany to the young Darwin. The plot surprised me that it mainly rested on the life of a scientist. After all, we do not even suspect that behind the invention of an ordinary light bulb there may be a long history, what can we say about writing a book that turned the world around! It was really interesting to see how, wading through the misunderstanding of people, the alienation of his wife and the death of his daughter, the main character decides to finish his work. Darwin wrote not only about monkeys, but also about the consequences of same-blood marriage, about natural selection and about evolution.
In general, if you want to watch a film about the life of a person while writing a book that changed a person’s idea of creating a world in seven days, in which there is love, friendship, and science, then this film is for you!
9 out of 10
Charles Darwin. This name has been familiar to everyone since school. His work “The Origin of Species” turned people’s worldview into religion, into a person as a living being.
The Air Force has long established itself as an unsurpassed master of documentary and biographical films. And this film is not only made by the British, but also shows the period of life of one of the most famous Britons in the world.
This film is very complex emotionally, psychologically and even philosophically. Negative reviews often mention that the film is boring. Sorry, this is primarily a biography. There will be no action or thriller. Especially the screened time - the middle of the 19th century. The atmosphere of that time is quite accurately shown: the beginning of the division into opposing camps - believers and religious people against scientists and irreconcilable researchers. Darwin was in the middle. On the one hand, his observations and judgments, the works of other scientists, facts and proofs. On the other hand, people’s view of the world, faith and religion, the church and God is rooted in generations. On the one hand, he is his wife. But that changed his daughter's death. He had no faith in God’s goodness. He no longer goes to church or prays before eating. He's writing a book.
The cast is flawless. Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly are married in life and on screen. They showed difficult relationships, all the experiences of their heroes. Martha West played (for her age) Darwin’s daughter Annie. The episodes starred Benedict Cumberbatch and Toby Jones.
The composer received separate applause. The music of Christopher Young made a great contribution to the atmosphere of the picture. So are costumers and decorators. And unsurpassed landscapes and the background of the film - from the forest at different times of the year to the cold and stony sea shore. The operator worked well.
Very high-quality film, filmed biography, told story. Deep-minded.
Films based on biographical books or real stories are always fun to watch. They show life in all its splendor and not only...
For me personally, this film is not about creating the greatest work that has shaken the foundations of humanity. For me, this is the story of its creator, who found himself in a very difficult situation.
There is a huge gap between Charles Darwin (Paul Bettany) and his wife Emma (Jennifer Connelly). It would seem that a common tragedy should unite the spouses. But it wasn't like that at all. Each of them sought salvation on their own. He's in science and she's in religion. Now they're on opposite sides of the barricades. Without trust, you cannot build a strong union, and it is dead in this family.
Our whole life is a state of choice between something or someone. And our hero finds himself in a difficult situation to choose between his family and science. He cannot be silent about his discovery, but he cannot betray the love of his life. We see him, exhausted, sick, not only physically, but also spiritually. The blame for what happened in the past is on the heart. Life is divided into before and after. And we can see these two lives of one person. This torment drives the scientist crazy. He is merciful, he is merciful, he is merciful to his children. And yet he makes a decision. For Charles, this book, this discovery is literally "suffering," hellish work. But when the job is done, Charles feels relieved. He's free! And now he is sure he should have done it... But what about Emma? His love? Trust returns ... and with it, the heroes learn the right way.
The Bettany/Connelly duo were originally destined to succeed! In real life, they are also spouses. And they had no trouble conveying the relationship between the Darwinians so vividly. Great game!
The movie looks in one breath. Very little is written about it in any Internet sources, which can give the impression of a boring, uninteresting film. But that's not the case. Just a brilliant game of actors, clearly conveying all the experiences, moods reigning in this difficult time for the scientist and his family.
My assessment
To some extent, I want to argue with the authors of negative reviews.
As far as American is concerned, I don’t think it’s correct to apply this term to a film made in the UK in the best traditions of the Air Force. I didn’t see anything like Hollywood or American cinema in general. Movies are made in a similar way.
I want to talk about the Air Force. I can’t judge their films objectively, because I’ve recently fallen in love with them. This company specializes in the production of films about science and scientists. And everyone likes them. Because the pictures are alive and clear. You could read about Darwin in a textbook, an encyclopedia, you could see a funny movie about how good he was and how he came up with monkeys so well. But the Air Force always makes movies about the event from the inside out. What you don’t know is what lies between the lines of encyclopedias. What will change the viewers' perception of facts known since school. The delusions of the scientist, hallucinations, pain, fear and doubt, at the same time, moments of revelation, illumination are also shown. Genius descends to the common man, but this only exalts him.
I think it's a beautiful movie. It's not a stretch. If you want to know the story in 15 minutes, don’t watch it. Don't watch anything from the Air Force. Read the summary of books and Wikipedia. Films are made to feel, to understand.
To all thoughtful and patient viewers, especially fans of English cinema, I wish you a pleasant viewing.
9 out of 10
