31 reviews
Its a long time since A Beautiful Mind that another biographic movie of scientist is made. And this movie, in fact is about 2 scientists, is a great work! The inclusion of Eddington is a good choice by the director. He could have made just a movie about Einstein, but the role of Eddington help to add different point of view but also show how, in real life, scientists collaborate to achieve a common goal. He has made this movie a true account for scientists in general . It is a well-made period movie. The emotional and social impacts ( of the war and the transitions of the era) upon the characters are expressed accordingly. Hence, this movie manages to balance the science side and the human side of the lives of both einstein and eddington. In fact it is probably the first movie about scientists that makes the subject look pretty human, and a character than the audience could actually relate to
What an extraordinary experience!
Both Einstein and Eddington wrote numerous books for the general public, and I read most of them when I was young. I was familiar with the famous 1919 astronomical expedition to test Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by measuring the position of Mercury during an eclipse, and even read old newspaper accounts from the archives, including the comments by Alfred North Whitehead. And I have read books on the history of science.
Yet I never knew about the context in which General Relativity was developed, both historical and personal. Now, in light of this program, it seems obvious: General Relativity was published in 1916, during the first World War. The Eddington expedition to measure Mercury occurred in 1919, shortly after the war ended. And yet, when we learn about science we assume that it rises above politics and conflicts like war and national pride, as though existing in another world.
What we see in Einstein and Eddington is that it does not. Politics and national pride played central roles, and it is only through individuals resisting social pressure that it does, actually, rise above transient political bias. Specifically, Britain's national pride was closely tied with Newtonian physics. Germany's national pride could be enhanced by having a scientist of their own overthrow Newton, namely Einstein. But both Eddington -- who, as director of the Cambridge Observatory was viewed as a protector of Newton's law of gravity -- and Einstein believed loyalty to scientific truth transcended national chauvinism.
These principles were put to the test as much as Einstein's theories because of the ongoing war between Britain and Germany. In Eddington we have a Quaker and true pacifist, and in Einstein we have a not terribly devout Jew who also does not believe in war, and wrote pacifist essays later in life. However, to say Einstein did not believe in God is mistaken, just not the anthropomorphic, personal God. This film brings out the curious parallels between the two scientists.
According to the film, it was a letter from Eddington prodding Einstein to use his Theory of Special Relativity to explain the anomalous orbit of Mercury that put Einstein on the road to writing his Theory of General Relativity, published in 1916. An examination of the dates of publication of his works in the intervening years suggests this is probably misleading -- say a literary device, though I am not sure; the chronology of events in the movie are vague. By 1911 he had already calculated that light from a star would be bent by the sun's gravity -- which was proved correct by Eddington's 1919 expedition. At any rate, Eddington should have had several other journal articles by Einstein to read.
This simplification of the story can be forgiven because the film does such a good job of conveying for the layman several concepts of relativity, particularly gravity bending space. An intelligent person should be able to follow this film. But a little more scientific context would have been helpful for novices.
There are many layers to this film, one being the invention of weapons by German scientists, which outrages both Einstein and Eddington's British colleagues. Yet, Einstein's General Relativity laid the foundation for the ultimate weapon.
I'm not sure the film precisely captures the character of the young Einstein, but it comes close. More recent biographies have told about Einstein's relations with women, and that he was sometimes, shall we say, manipulative. So it is good to show him as a human being. He was always a non-conformist, especially in his later years, when he could afford to be. The bit at the end with him going before the press looking disheveled was silly, and the shot of him sticking out his tongue was from many decades later. But chalk it up to literary license.
I was also annoyed by the snide comment about Eddington's irrelevancy at the end of the film. Eddington did solid, respected science and was very famous, the Carl Sagan of his time. It's been a century since the period presented in this film, and few scientists remain household names that long. Eddington was an early astrophysicist and one of the first cosmologists, so he was a pioneer who laid the groundwork for so much that we read about in the press today. It is a fine thing this film brought him back into public view.
It would have been nice if the actors could have pronounced Max Planck's name correctly. And why do the British kill animals on screen so often? It's very disturbing, especially for children.
What really bugged me about Einstein and Eddington was the goofy camera work by Julian Court. I can see hand holding the camera outside while moving, but inside while the actors are sitting at a table talking? If you can't hold a camera steady, put it on a tripod! It sure looked like they were jerking the camera up and down unnecessarily during static scenes, unless the camera had Parkinson's. This is not MTV or youtube; it is not even one of those wacky National Geographic documentaries.
This is an historical science drama, and it should have been treated with the appropriate polish. The jerky camera movement was distracting from the concentration needed to follow the ideas being presented. Aside from that, this docudrama really held my interest throughout. So one point off for the camera work, one point off for killing animals; otherwise, a 10.
Many of the works that Eddington and Einstein wrote for the layman are still worth reading today, and do not require prior science courses. Eddington's honest examination of philosophical questions related to science, particularly between consciousness and the physical universe, are still relevant. Eddington was among the best at explaining science and cosmology to the general public, and I think he would have been delighted by this film.
Both Einstein and Eddington wrote numerous books for the general public, and I read most of them when I was young. I was familiar with the famous 1919 astronomical expedition to test Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by measuring the position of Mercury during an eclipse, and even read old newspaper accounts from the archives, including the comments by Alfred North Whitehead. And I have read books on the history of science.
Yet I never knew about the context in which General Relativity was developed, both historical and personal. Now, in light of this program, it seems obvious: General Relativity was published in 1916, during the first World War. The Eddington expedition to measure Mercury occurred in 1919, shortly after the war ended. And yet, when we learn about science we assume that it rises above politics and conflicts like war and national pride, as though existing in another world.
What we see in Einstein and Eddington is that it does not. Politics and national pride played central roles, and it is only through individuals resisting social pressure that it does, actually, rise above transient political bias. Specifically, Britain's national pride was closely tied with Newtonian physics. Germany's national pride could be enhanced by having a scientist of their own overthrow Newton, namely Einstein. But both Eddington -- who, as director of the Cambridge Observatory was viewed as a protector of Newton's law of gravity -- and Einstein believed loyalty to scientific truth transcended national chauvinism.
These principles were put to the test as much as Einstein's theories because of the ongoing war between Britain and Germany. In Eddington we have a Quaker and true pacifist, and in Einstein we have a not terribly devout Jew who also does not believe in war, and wrote pacifist essays later in life. However, to say Einstein did not believe in God is mistaken, just not the anthropomorphic, personal God. This film brings out the curious parallels between the two scientists.
According to the film, it was a letter from Eddington prodding Einstein to use his Theory of Special Relativity to explain the anomalous orbit of Mercury that put Einstein on the road to writing his Theory of General Relativity, published in 1916. An examination of the dates of publication of his works in the intervening years suggests this is probably misleading -- say a literary device, though I am not sure; the chronology of events in the movie are vague. By 1911 he had already calculated that light from a star would be bent by the sun's gravity -- which was proved correct by Eddington's 1919 expedition. At any rate, Eddington should have had several other journal articles by Einstein to read.
This simplification of the story can be forgiven because the film does such a good job of conveying for the layman several concepts of relativity, particularly gravity bending space. An intelligent person should be able to follow this film. But a little more scientific context would have been helpful for novices.
There are many layers to this film, one being the invention of weapons by German scientists, which outrages both Einstein and Eddington's British colleagues. Yet, Einstein's General Relativity laid the foundation for the ultimate weapon.
I'm not sure the film precisely captures the character of the young Einstein, but it comes close. More recent biographies have told about Einstein's relations with women, and that he was sometimes, shall we say, manipulative. So it is good to show him as a human being. He was always a non-conformist, especially in his later years, when he could afford to be. The bit at the end with him going before the press looking disheveled was silly, and the shot of him sticking out his tongue was from many decades later. But chalk it up to literary license.
I was also annoyed by the snide comment about Eddington's irrelevancy at the end of the film. Eddington did solid, respected science and was very famous, the Carl Sagan of his time. It's been a century since the period presented in this film, and few scientists remain household names that long. Eddington was an early astrophysicist and one of the first cosmologists, so he was a pioneer who laid the groundwork for so much that we read about in the press today. It is a fine thing this film brought him back into public view.
It would have been nice if the actors could have pronounced Max Planck's name correctly. And why do the British kill animals on screen so often? It's very disturbing, especially for children.
What really bugged me about Einstein and Eddington was the goofy camera work by Julian Court. I can see hand holding the camera outside while moving, but inside while the actors are sitting at a table talking? If you can't hold a camera steady, put it on a tripod! It sure looked like they were jerking the camera up and down unnecessarily during static scenes, unless the camera had Parkinson's. This is not MTV or youtube; it is not even one of those wacky National Geographic documentaries.
This is an historical science drama, and it should have been treated with the appropriate polish. The jerky camera movement was distracting from the concentration needed to follow the ideas being presented. Aside from that, this docudrama really held my interest throughout. So one point off for the camera work, one point off for killing animals; otherwise, a 10.
Many of the works that Eddington and Einstein wrote for the layman are still worth reading today, and do not require prior science courses. Eddington's honest examination of philosophical questions related to science, particularly between consciousness and the physical universe, are still relevant. Eddington was among the best at explaining science and cosmology to the general public, and I think he would have been delighted by this film.
Einstein and Eddington is a very entertaining TV movie: well written, with decent cinematography and above average acting. David Tennant and Andy Serkis give really good performances as the younger Eddington and Einstein respectively and the remainder of the cast are outstanding. That said, I would like to comment on the misconceptions about Eddington's sexual preference and the ongoing debate about that. What sex has to do with the storyline is a mystery. Perhaps the homosexuality hinted at in the movie is there to gain a wider audience. In any event, the movie's intimation about Eddington's sexuality and the subsequent debate needs to be addressed.
Everything I have read or was told about Arthur Stanley Eddington indicates that he was a painfully shy, genteel, devout Quaker and an active pacifist whose sexual preferences are UNKNOWN. To suppose that Eddington, or any other male for that matter, is a homosexual because they never married or died young, is an exercise in jackass fallacy; probably the most stupid deduction I have ever heard proposed. Such logic would also make every woman who never married or died young a lesbian. This is really dumb thinking, folks.
Other posters and commentators have jumped on dialogue from the movie e.g., Eddington saying to his sister: "I really loved him!" as being prima facie evidence that Eddington admitted to his sister that he was a homosexual. First, for a person to declare that they love someone of the same sex, does not presume they are in a homosexual relationship with that person or that they are homosexual lovers. Second, people forget that these words were never said by Eddington himself and that they are actually just words put into an actor's mouth by a writer or a director. The fact is Eddington's sexual preference is UNKNOWN. It was never mentioned, indicated or hinted at by Eddington, his sister, his other family members, his friends or his colleagues at any time before, during or after his death. I don't understand the logic or rationale that because he never mentioned it, confirms he must be a homosexual. If Eddington was a homosexual it would be most unusual for him not to indicate this in his personal papers because homosexuals almost always leave behind some clear indication, or even proof, of their sexual preference. I cannot think of one homosexual who didn't. And Eddington didn't. Claiming Eddington is a homosexual sounds like just a lot of homosexual wishful thinking to me.
Sadly, this inference in the movie and subsequent debate really deters from the terrific story of Eddington's (definitely heterosexual and academic) relationship with Einstein and the problems he encountered trying to prove Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. This movie would have been more dramatic if the makers had pursued Eddington's (and Einstein's) endeavours to find a repeatable scientific method experiment which would prove the Theory of General Relativity supersedes Newton's Theory of Gravity, as well as providing greater detail of the reactions of the German and English scientists and their inter-relationships with Eddington and Einstein. Eddington's battle with the Royal Society was monumental and went on for many years. Details of the science and the scientific debate would have made a more exciting and interesting movie and far more satisfying than having Eddington's character race his bicycle along a road next to a train, with a strange expression on his face, in order to bid farewell to his (undeclared) lover. It's just silly. While the movie clearly hints at Eddington's alleged homosexuality, it glosses over the Einstein's heterosexual aberration in his courting and marrying his first cousin - she was a first cousin his mother's side and a second cousin on his father's side of the family, a double whammy which gives new meaning to Einstein's relativity! Then again, I'm thankful because it really doesn't belong nor does it add to the real story. If the drama of the scientific debate had been followed more vigorously, instead of raising the homosexuality red herring, this movie would have been better for it and far more interesting. People seem to focus more on Eddington's sexual preferences than his (and Einstein's) genius and their scientific breakthroughs and achievements. And that is a tragedy.
Nevertheless, this is a very good movie that I enjoyed very much despite these shortcomings. Enjoy!
Rating: 4/5 stars
Everything I have read or was told about Arthur Stanley Eddington indicates that he was a painfully shy, genteel, devout Quaker and an active pacifist whose sexual preferences are UNKNOWN. To suppose that Eddington, or any other male for that matter, is a homosexual because they never married or died young, is an exercise in jackass fallacy; probably the most stupid deduction I have ever heard proposed. Such logic would also make every woman who never married or died young a lesbian. This is really dumb thinking, folks.
Other posters and commentators have jumped on dialogue from the movie e.g., Eddington saying to his sister: "I really loved him!" as being prima facie evidence that Eddington admitted to his sister that he was a homosexual. First, for a person to declare that they love someone of the same sex, does not presume they are in a homosexual relationship with that person or that they are homosexual lovers. Second, people forget that these words were never said by Eddington himself and that they are actually just words put into an actor's mouth by a writer or a director. The fact is Eddington's sexual preference is UNKNOWN. It was never mentioned, indicated or hinted at by Eddington, his sister, his other family members, his friends or his colleagues at any time before, during or after his death. I don't understand the logic or rationale that because he never mentioned it, confirms he must be a homosexual. If Eddington was a homosexual it would be most unusual for him not to indicate this in his personal papers because homosexuals almost always leave behind some clear indication, or even proof, of their sexual preference. I cannot think of one homosexual who didn't. And Eddington didn't. Claiming Eddington is a homosexual sounds like just a lot of homosexual wishful thinking to me.
Sadly, this inference in the movie and subsequent debate really deters from the terrific story of Eddington's (definitely heterosexual and academic) relationship with Einstein and the problems he encountered trying to prove Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. This movie would have been more dramatic if the makers had pursued Eddington's (and Einstein's) endeavours to find a repeatable scientific method experiment which would prove the Theory of General Relativity supersedes Newton's Theory of Gravity, as well as providing greater detail of the reactions of the German and English scientists and their inter-relationships with Eddington and Einstein. Eddington's battle with the Royal Society was monumental and went on for many years. Details of the science and the scientific debate would have made a more exciting and interesting movie and far more satisfying than having Eddington's character race his bicycle along a road next to a train, with a strange expression on his face, in order to bid farewell to his (undeclared) lover. It's just silly. While the movie clearly hints at Eddington's alleged homosexuality, it glosses over the Einstein's heterosexual aberration in his courting and marrying his first cousin - she was a first cousin his mother's side and a second cousin on his father's side of the family, a double whammy which gives new meaning to Einstein's relativity! Then again, I'm thankful because it really doesn't belong nor does it add to the real story. If the drama of the scientific debate had been followed more vigorously, instead of raising the homosexuality red herring, this movie would have been better for it and far more interesting. People seem to focus more on Eddington's sexual preferences than his (and Einstein's) genius and their scientific breakthroughs and achievements. And that is a tragedy.
Nevertheless, this is a very good movie that I enjoyed very much despite these shortcomings. Enjoy!
Rating: 4/5 stars
- SpitfireIXB
- Mar 27, 2010
- Permalink
While most of the reviews here are spot on, there is always someone who had to take a contrary view based on 'their' grasp of science. NO ONE SAID THIS IS A DOCUMENTARY! It is though a very well made film, with a great cast, a good period piece, and the science is correct enough! Any movie that educates the general public - an IOTA - is doing its job. We should all expand our knowledge of the world around us, it is surprising how many people today know nothing of Einstein and role he played in shaping the 'modern' world. An enjoyable movie that takes some very hard to understand theories and makes them understandable and entertaining.
- kenfromcanada
- Jul 30, 2016
- Permalink
This is a superb drama, combining a well-presented scientific and historical explication of Albert Einstein's theory of relativity alongside a gripping portrait of the moral dilemmas that scientists have to struggle with as they try to reconcile the demands of country and conscience.
The twin leads British scientist Arthur Eddington (David Tennant) and Einstein (Andy Serkis) lead very different lives but face not only similar scientific opposition and derision but also similar pressures to back their country's efforts to win the First World War. Tennant shakes off the Dr Who expectations in pointing up the problems of a gay pacifist Quaker who tries to prove the new-fangled theories of 'enemy' scientist Einstein a theory especially dangerous because it undermines the ordered view of the universe created by English scientist Isaac Newton. Einstein's complicated private life is compounded by his revulsion at fellow scientists' work in developing poison gas. Both Tennant and Serkis get right into the skin of their characters - two brilliant actors on top form.
The drama brings over very effectively the transition from the comfortable life of the scientists in pre-war Cambridge and Switzerland to the tragedies of war. Jim Broadbent as Sir Oliver Lodge and Donald Sumpter as Max Planck lead the scientific establishments in Cambridge and Berlin as they pervert their scientific beliefs to condone mass killing on a scale never before seen. The main female roles have rather less to do, but Rebecca Hall as Eddington's sister, Lucy Cohu as Einstein's abandoned wife and Jodhi May as his mistress all add an extra warmth to the production and help to avoid the danger of focusing only on clever men using symbols and formulae to bemuse their colleagues (and the audience).
The settings Cambridge, Berlin and West Africa, where Eddington photographed a total eclipse of the sun to prove the Einstein's theory was right provide a powerful backdrop to the human drama, making it all the more believable. All in all, a very successful and informative BBC and HBO drama that maintains tension and excitement throughout.
The twin leads British scientist Arthur Eddington (David Tennant) and Einstein (Andy Serkis) lead very different lives but face not only similar scientific opposition and derision but also similar pressures to back their country's efforts to win the First World War. Tennant shakes off the Dr Who expectations in pointing up the problems of a gay pacifist Quaker who tries to prove the new-fangled theories of 'enemy' scientist Einstein a theory especially dangerous because it undermines the ordered view of the universe created by English scientist Isaac Newton. Einstein's complicated private life is compounded by his revulsion at fellow scientists' work in developing poison gas. Both Tennant and Serkis get right into the skin of their characters - two brilliant actors on top form.
The drama brings over very effectively the transition from the comfortable life of the scientists in pre-war Cambridge and Switzerland to the tragedies of war. Jim Broadbent as Sir Oliver Lodge and Donald Sumpter as Max Planck lead the scientific establishments in Cambridge and Berlin as they pervert their scientific beliefs to condone mass killing on a scale never before seen. The main female roles have rather less to do, but Rebecca Hall as Eddington's sister, Lucy Cohu as Einstein's abandoned wife and Jodhi May as his mistress all add an extra warmth to the production and help to avoid the danger of focusing only on clever men using symbols and formulae to bemuse their colleagues (and the audience).
The settings Cambridge, Berlin and West Africa, where Eddington photographed a total eclipse of the sun to prove the Einstein's theory was right provide a powerful backdrop to the human drama, making it all the more believable. All in all, a very successful and informative BBC and HBO drama that maintains tension and excitement throughout.
I am not a scientist, I have no scientific bent. Nor have I ever studied the odd couple pairing of Einstein and Eddington. I simply have the greatest of respect for David Tennant as an actor, and so watched this film with an eye to Mr Tennant's performance. However, my expectations were more than met with this tribute to an early 19th century event, which changed the course of science as it had been known before. Evidently, Einstein, a German born scientist with 'crazy' ideas, had moved to Switzerland to marry and raise a family, while Arthur Eddington, a gay, Quaker, pacifist, was just finishing up his years at Cambridge. Lauded as an heir to Sir Isaac Newton, Mr. Eddington had a seat at Cambridge, despite his being a pacifist, much frowned on by the many Lords and gentlemen who had donated a son to the 1st World War. Especially as the battle of Ypres raged, and 15,000 were lost to chlorine gas, Mr. Eddington's passivity rubbed raw the sensibilities of a nation against Germany in particular. Meanwhile, Einstein had been lured to Berlin, in hopes that his theories would provide war capable weapons. As it happened, Einstein was against the war, and did not wish that his theories be used as weapons. And so, given his 'relinquishment' of his German residency, as a 'Citizen of the World', his life was reigned in by the German powers, and he became unable to have a voice in his community, be it scientific or personal. And of course, during World War 11, he was excoriated as a Jew, and barely fled with his life. The US wanted his knowledge, and of course, eventually, the atomic bomb was invented, based on his theory of relativity. But that was many years after this moment in time. Arthur Eddington discovered a variation in the known elipse of Mercury, and with the help of a German family he had rescued from a violent English protest, sent a translated letter to Einstein explaining his new theory. Einstein was unable to answer him, due to the German soldiers denying his entrance to his only post box. However, Eddington and his scientific companion convinced Cambridge University to pay for a trip to Africa, in order to prove a new theory on the relationship of the stars to the sun, during a total eclipse. Einstein, of course, went on to incredible fame and notoriety. Eddington, however, did not pursue fame, and faded into obscurity. This is a wonderful film, and trust me - you needn't know science to understand what this adventure is all about. Enjoy!
Although this was easy and enjoyable to watch, the characters all lacked depth and the script in general was rather superficial, simplistic and ultimately unsatisfying. It could have been so much more, given the fascinating setting and the magnitude of the underlying facts. The science itself was almost completely omitted or dumbed down. It was disappointing that there was a rather cheap and unconvincing attempt at a religious 'miracle' as well as some one-dimensional and unnecessary politics. On the positive side, Cambidge university in the WWI era made for a pleasing backdrop and the actors' performances were decent on the whole.
There are not too many films which accurately depict the personal lives of historical figures. Try as they may, secret human peculiarities which are more readily acceptable or at least tolerated in our present age, are seen as huge obstacles in years past. Case in point, this film called " Einstein and Eddington " is only now surfacing to the American public and according to this reviewer, has done a masterful job. The story itself centers on two men of Genius who lived at the beginning of the Tweneith century. The first is Arthur Eddington (David Tennant) the British Mathematician and astrophysicist and German scientist Albert Einstein (Andy Serkis, superb characterization). This film captures both the social and a bit of their personal lives before they became known to the world. Einstein is seen searching for answers to his theories concerning gravitational phenomenon and it's relationship to light. Eddington is captivated by the scientific contradictions of the Planet Mercury and Newtons calculations of its orbit. The result is the communication between The Englishman and the Swiss scientist, both of whom shrug off their nationalities in lieu of scientific truth. With Eddington dealing with his personal emotional ties to his secret admiration and love for his dear friend William Marston, (Patrick Kennedy), Einstein, deals with his wife Malava who confronts him with divorce, due to his illicit affairs. Both men are seen in their moments of contentment as well as dealing with their doubts and tragedies. All in all, the movie is a great triumph for both actors and a notable milestone for their accomplishment. Easilly recommended to anyone who would like to peek into the personal lives of two men who shook the world. ****
- thinker1691
- Mar 30, 2010
- Permalink
- Speedwheels1718
- May 23, 2015
- Permalink
The best historical drama since Longitude, Einstein and Eddington not only reveals the extraordinary political and emotional drama of a break through moment in history, but shows that scientists are uniquely human. It is science and art that elevate us above the banal and the animal, and unites us in the common cause of the future. War is an aberration, like cancer. Truth is the only goal that is worth achieving. This film is a great and happy display of the supremacy of truth and the real conquest of reality, not by force of arms but by force of brains. As John Brunner wrote in his apocalyptic novel The Shockwave Rider, (according to Angus Porter) "This is the third stage of human social evolution. First we had the legs race. Then we had the arms race. Now we're going to have the brain race. ... And, if we're lucky, the final stage will be the human race." As long as there are men like Eddington and Einstein, I do not have the slightest doubt that there will be a human race, and we can all be proud to be part of it.
Planck: I have a question: what if God is going to say you are mistaken? Stop And Newton was right! ..
Einstein : Then I would thank his god for his point of view and that we have agreed to defer. I would leave feeling sorry for God..
Can a force of gravity move faster than speed of light? Why orbit of mercury does not follow the Newtonian law? Starlight that bends and the space that curves were explained and defined by the greatest theories of all time.
One scientist's belief and the other's faith in that belief. A brilliant factual account of two greatest scientists who were almost outcasted for proving another greatest scientist's theory wrong amidst WWI. The pursuit of truth in science transcended the national boundaries, unaltered by war. Here when the greatest mind in the history of the mankind was trying to reveal the universal truth of the universe, some other brilliant minds were occupied in finding a way that would eventually help kill some 15000 in Ypres and later build the gas chambers!
Wished there was a mention of the observations of Taurus constellation conducted at Brazil by Andrew Commelin and Charles Davidson along with the same by Eddington. Some melodrama and does lack scientific details but again It is not a documentary. Convincing performances, uninterrupted flow.
'I can not conceive god with wills as we have Life after Death- neither can I conceive an individual who has survived his own physical death.' A great watch even for those not into science..
Can a force of gravity move faster than speed of light? Why orbit of mercury does not follow the Newtonian law? Starlight that bends and the space that curves were explained and defined by the greatest theories of all time.
One scientist's belief and the other's faith in that belief. A brilliant factual account of two greatest scientists who were almost outcasted for proving another greatest scientist's theory wrong amidst WWI. The pursuit of truth in science transcended the national boundaries, unaltered by war. Here when the greatest mind in the history of the mankind was trying to reveal the universal truth of the universe, some other brilliant minds were occupied in finding a way that would eventually help kill some 15000 in Ypres and later build the gas chambers!
Wished there was a mention of the observations of Taurus constellation conducted at Brazil by Andrew Commelin and Charles Davidson along with the same by Eddington. Some melodrama and does lack scientific details but again It is not a documentary. Convincing performances, uninterrupted flow.
'I can not conceive god with wills as we have Life after Death- neither can I conceive an individual who has survived his own physical death.' A great watch even for those not into science..
- samabc-31952
- Oct 22, 2022
- Permalink
- regdennick
- May 12, 2016
- Permalink
key word - chemistry between two impressive actors. than - seductive performance. and a good story. a film from science universe but not exactly about science. about friendship and passion for knowledge but only as instrument. a pledge about basic values of society but not exactly a manifesto. a great show - this is perfect definition. because the script gives chance to do a splendid circle of delicate nuances. it is comfortable to discover Andy Serkis out of masks of his strange characters. and it is pure joy to meet a David Tennant in middle of a subtle work to explore limits of a scientist. so, result is full of joy. and proof of a smart work of a good director. far to be page from science history, it is a kind of fairy tale. and seed for charming definition of two legendary figures.
As the title suggests, this movie is about two men. Albert Einstein and Arthur Stanley Eddington. Einstein is light of heart, humorous, and a bit flippant. Eddington is a serious and religious man, a quaker. Einstein has no idea, nor cares how to prove or demonstrate his theory of gravity. Eddington works out an experiment using a telescope to observe if starlight bends coming near a massive object, so he takes his telescope to Africa to photograph a total solar eclipse. The story also highlights old guard science vs. a creativity. Neither English nor German scientists are comfortable with Einstein's Relativity. In the end, both Eddington and Einstein are scientists and intellectually honest. This the story of two very different men, trying to understand the universe in their own ways. The science is only a prop for the story.
Great story telling, with famous characters and actors. But is necessary to announce that the pictures took by Eddington in Africa were meanless due to the bad wheater. The real pictures used for measurement were the pictures of the second expedition, which took place in the city of Sobral, Brazil. This lack in the film send shadows to the production of science outside Europe.
And also, the film presents misconceptions about science. For example, the false idea of just a genial and lonely scientist working alone.
However, it's a nice film.
- lkramerpezzin
- Mar 4, 2020
- Permalink
Doctor who ! David tennant is eddington, british scientist at cambridge. When einstein's work is at odds with some of newton's theories, they hire eddington to see who is right. And they realize that any technology derived from this could fall into german hands, as this was around the time of world war one. Andy serkis highlights the zany-ness and playfullness that einstein showed. History tells us about his frustration with the rote memorization of old facts and figures in his school days. This curiousity would help him look for new challenges later in his work. Andy serkis is probably best known as gollum in lord of the rings. Donald sumpter is contemporary max planck, who wants to bring einstein to berlin. There's a nod to newton and his work, but they acknowledge that there were holes, or incorrect assumptions. According to wikipedia dot com, einstein divorced his wives years after leaving them for other women, in the last case, he had married his own cousin elsa. And continued to have relationships after that had sputtered. The film is very well done. Moves right along. Good acting by all. Directed by philip martin, who directs many projects about history. Story by peter moffat, who seems to write exclusively for television.
"Einstein and Eddington" is a Biography - History movie in which we watch the story behind theory of relativity and how two scientists worked together despite World War I and the distance in order to examine it and prove it experimentally.
I liked this movie because the plot was simple but not boring and it presented very well the story behind theory of relativity and the obstacles that some scientists had to surpass in order to prove it and change the world and how we see it. The interpretations of both Andy Serkis who played as Albert Einstein and David Tennant who played as Sir Arthur Eddington were simply amazing and they both did an excellent job. Some other interpretations that have to be mentioned were Jim Broadbent's who played as Sir Oliver Lodge, Rebecca Hall's who played as Winnie Eddington and Donald Sumpter's who played as Max Planck. To sum up, I have to say that I recommend everyone to watch this movie because you will learn more about some great scientist like Albert Einstein, Max Planck but you will also understand the important work of Sir Arthur Eddington who was forgotten.
I liked this movie because the plot was simple but not boring and it presented very well the story behind theory of relativity and the obstacles that some scientists had to surpass in order to prove it and change the world and how we see it. The interpretations of both Andy Serkis who played as Albert Einstein and David Tennant who played as Sir Arthur Eddington were simply amazing and they both did an excellent job. Some other interpretations that have to be mentioned were Jim Broadbent's who played as Sir Oliver Lodge, Rebecca Hall's who played as Winnie Eddington and Donald Sumpter's who played as Max Planck. To sum up, I have to say that I recommend everyone to watch this movie because you will learn more about some great scientist like Albert Einstein, Max Planck but you will also understand the important work of Sir Arthur Eddington who was forgotten.
- Thanos_Alfie
- Oct 25, 2020
- Permalink
Personally one of my favourite films. David Tennant is an incredible actor who is able to embody his characters so incredibly well. If you're looking for complete scientific and historical accuracy you probably won't find it here, in spite of this, this is still one of the best films I've ever seen. As a student who mainly studies drama and film I advice you much om the accuracy side I can however vouch for the complexity of this movie. The scenery, the costumes, the acting, I enjoyed every second of it and even cried at some parts which is very rare for me, my roommate who is a huge history buff loved it as well despite all the inaccuracies. David Tennant in particular was phenomenal, the emotion and realness he brought to the role was breathtaking and is really what put this movie over the top for me. Overall I've watched this movie many times both for comfort and enjoyment and will probably watch it many more time in the future.
... we had the first photograph of a black hole. Ain't science wonderful?
- martwiller-948-644122
- Apr 22, 2019
- Permalink
The fine ensemble of actors never seemed to gel and had zero chemistry. Einstein was portrayed as a joke, when he wasn't working, that is. They tried to drag too many dramatic elements which muddled things. They should have picked two and stuck to those. Nowhere it say, that I have found, that Eddington was gay. He might have been, but he never came out. As many people view movies based on history as history itself, this was a cheap ploy to resemble A Beautiful Mind, and further muddled the plot (why hire an actor to play the object of his affections, for two very short scenes?). Tennant, a fine actor, played Eddington over the top and his glasses magnified his eyes in a very distracting and strange way. What was the director thinking??? Give him clear lenses and contacts.
The "history" in this movie is not even close, except that Einstein did indeed solve this puzzle. Eddington did not help him or pose the question. Einstein already had the question. They left out key life milestones. Einstein did marry his 1st cousin, right after his divorce from his 1st wife came through, as it had taken a long time (the only thing this got right). The whole Africa thing didn't happen like this nor did the scene where Eddington proved Einstein's theory, and it wasn't in public. I don't expect any movie based on history to be a documentary, but at least get half of it right, not 10%.
The writing was bad TV movie worthy. I cringed for the actors often. The music was just embarrassing. I almost turned it off after the overly majestic opening, as I thought it was a kid's movie. The composer copied the ET score, if not in notes, in theme, mood, and dynamics. And not near as good as the ET score. I am glad that Andy Serkis got a nice leading role after being known as Gollum for so long. But like the other actors, he never got to really shine. He managed the situation better than most of the male ensemble, though. The women did very well, however.
The "history" in this movie is not even close, except that Einstein did indeed solve this puzzle. Eddington did not help him or pose the question. Einstein already had the question. They left out key life milestones. Einstein did marry his 1st cousin, right after his divorce from his 1st wife came through, as it had taken a long time (the only thing this got right). The whole Africa thing didn't happen like this nor did the scene where Eddington proved Einstein's theory, and it wasn't in public. I don't expect any movie based on history to be a documentary, but at least get half of it right, not 10%.
The writing was bad TV movie worthy. I cringed for the actors often. The music was just embarrassing. I almost turned it off after the overly majestic opening, as I thought it was a kid's movie. The composer copied the ET score, if not in notes, in theme, mood, and dynamics. And not near as good as the ET score. I am glad that Andy Serkis got a nice leading role after being known as Gollum for so long. But like the other actors, he never got to really shine. He managed the situation better than most of the male ensemble, though. The women did very well, however.
- caramia2002
- Apr 15, 2018
- Permalink
Arthur Eddington, a British scientist and Albert Einstein, a German physicist(and my idol since childhood) are the two main characters as suggested by the title I don't wanna comment anything on the plot or how the cinematography could have been better. I just felt everything went really smoothly and I never lost interest till the end.
It was really great to know how Einstein got fame and who was responsible behind it. His theories would have never reached the world without Eddington proving it. And yes hence I believe everything happens for a reason. Anyone reading this should definitely watch the movie even if you are not a science enthusiast. And if you are already, there is no chance for you to miss it. Thankyou for you time!
It was really great to know how Einstein got fame and who was responsible behind it. His theories would have never reached the world without Eddington proving it. And yes hence I believe everything happens for a reason. Anyone reading this should definitely watch the movie even if you are not a science enthusiast. And if you are already, there is no chance for you to miss it. Thankyou for you time!
- amananand-09293
- Mar 17, 2021
- Permalink
Truth being the center of all the scenes depicting those who are gratefully taught and their venerable teachers who expand on one another's empirical work sets the feelings established among intellectuals set in such a difficult time in history.
The filmmaker follows with scenes that also grasp basic emotive acts of love, loyalty, and human values as the highest principles of reverance, patriotism and charity being founded on Einstein's theory of gravity. The cast & crew celebrates with lives that naturally practice in science all moral, societal and religious considerations that evidence virtues for a receptive audience.
I suggest the impact between a madness of bombs side by side with studies of mankind are in a realm relevant to modern society then at the times denoting a semblance of sanity among men of science in a Royal Society are critical differing opinions where like-minded scientists can transcend a boundary of right resulting in a new theory of gravity.
To portray principles in a script involving brilliant minds makes sense when mutually beneficial, civil society, human rights are expressed in a universal manner this film aptly describes. A meaninful exchange of dialogue, personalization of the characters, and appropriate context mentioned in differing points of view requires the viewer to weigh their conscience with freedoms that are the same regardless of where each individual is located.
Importantly, if the political and/or religious/ethnic associations in pride and bigotry with contempt can ever be understood in human beings who shine with imagination and proof expressed on how and why academia, government, and stakeholders in the film industry sufficiently touch upon the "relativity" of making complex matters simply explained is no different than understanding allegories and symbols this movie hopes to cultivate in our universal minds.
Thank you kindly for the opportunity to write when my feelings rise to a level where it is deemed important to be loyal to what is equally good for one, should be equally good for another when individuals better themselves in moving forward notwithstanding limited minds who do not see the light and remain in a gray area where humanity does not advance itself from the "open" mind each of us know exists from within based on virtue, knowledge, truth, and integrity this historical drama correctly depicts. *calsonassociates Circa 1920.
The filmmaker follows with scenes that also grasp basic emotive acts of love, loyalty, and human values as the highest principles of reverance, patriotism and charity being founded on Einstein's theory of gravity. The cast & crew celebrates with lives that naturally practice in science all moral, societal and religious considerations that evidence virtues for a receptive audience.
I suggest the impact between a madness of bombs side by side with studies of mankind are in a realm relevant to modern society then at the times denoting a semblance of sanity among men of science in a Royal Society are critical differing opinions where like-minded scientists can transcend a boundary of right resulting in a new theory of gravity.
To portray principles in a script involving brilliant minds makes sense when mutually beneficial, civil society, human rights are expressed in a universal manner this film aptly describes. A meaninful exchange of dialogue, personalization of the characters, and appropriate context mentioned in differing points of view requires the viewer to weigh their conscience with freedoms that are the same regardless of where each individual is located.
Importantly, if the political and/or religious/ethnic associations in pride and bigotry with contempt can ever be understood in human beings who shine with imagination and proof expressed on how and why academia, government, and stakeholders in the film industry sufficiently touch upon the "relativity" of making complex matters simply explained is no different than understanding allegories and symbols this movie hopes to cultivate in our universal minds.
Thank you kindly for the opportunity to write when my feelings rise to a level where it is deemed important to be loyal to what is equally good for one, should be equally good for another when individuals better themselves in moving forward notwithstanding limited minds who do not see the light and remain in a gray area where humanity does not advance itself from the "open" mind each of us know exists from within based on virtue, knowledge, truth, and integrity this historical drama correctly depicts. *calsonassociates Circa 1920.
- calsonassociates
- Oct 8, 2022
- Permalink
The central approach is quite good: Einstein v Newton during WW1. It's the perfect setting for yet another reminder of the British/German enmity that Hollywood loves to ram down our throats. According to the plot, Einstein is given a top Berlin academic post in order to embarrass the Britons by proving Newton wrong. Whilst in England Sir Arthur Eddington is given a senior Cambridge position just in order to prove the upstart German wrong.
All the standard ingredients are there; nasty German scientists devoted to anti-personnel gas production, stiff old aristocrats interfering with progress and our two cool dudes strutting around their patches telling everyone what's what. But it's not just about giving the Krauts another bashing. Once again the Studios give us a spoon fed morality session with stereotypical bad guys looking like greasy bankers, sold out scientists and pompous officials waging senseless war for their own profit and power. (If only life was that clear cut) Meanwhile the good guys, Eddington and Einstein, are both above the mass killing. Their search for truth is a shining example of how the individual can change the world - or so Eddington tells us in a much edited final speech that could have been written by Thatcher.
The sheer banality of the script is enough to bend space itself. Max Plank makes a stage entrance so contrived that even the Cleethorpes Junior School Drama Society would be embarrassed to stage it. We are treated to Einstein the improvised clown who leaps from boats explaining relativity to knee high children. Then he becomes a disheveled dropout who goes around demanding that the German authorities stop their gas campaign. Once again Hollywood takes 21st century man and sticks him into 19th.century society and once again it doesn't work. Our Einstein is so profoundly rude and abusive to the authorities that you know exactly which century he comes from.
Of course David Tenant as Eddington is superb. Had he not been in the show I don't think I could have stuck it out and written this review. Watch this if you have a crush on him or an obsessive interest in Einstein. But don't expect to learn anything about 'Einstein the Man' in this movie for it was one of the worst pieces of casting and scripting that I've ever had the misfortune to endure.
All the standard ingredients are there; nasty German scientists devoted to anti-personnel gas production, stiff old aristocrats interfering with progress and our two cool dudes strutting around their patches telling everyone what's what. But it's not just about giving the Krauts another bashing. Once again the Studios give us a spoon fed morality session with stereotypical bad guys looking like greasy bankers, sold out scientists and pompous officials waging senseless war for their own profit and power. (If only life was that clear cut) Meanwhile the good guys, Eddington and Einstein, are both above the mass killing. Their search for truth is a shining example of how the individual can change the world - or so Eddington tells us in a much edited final speech that could have been written by Thatcher.
The sheer banality of the script is enough to bend space itself. Max Plank makes a stage entrance so contrived that even the Cleethorpes Junior School Drama Society would be embarrassed to stage it. We are treated to Einstein the improvised clown who leaps from boats explaining relativity to knee high children. Then he becomes a disheveled dropout who goes around demanding that the German authorities stop their gas campaign. Once again Hollywood takes 21st century man and sticks him into 19th.century society and once again it doesn't work. Our Einstein is so profoundly rude and abusive to the authorities that you know exactly which century he comes from.
Of course David Tenant as Eddington is superb. Had he not been in the show I don't think I could have stuck it out and written this review. Watch this if you have a crush on him or an obsessive interest in Einstein. But don't expect to learn anything about 'Einstein the Man' in this movie for it was one of the worst pieces of casting and scripting that I've ever had the misfortune to endure.
- RichardvonLust
- Nov 16, 2012
- Permalink