Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

alex-278 This film had a lot of potential and would have been a story well told if only it had not been too stylish and downright anchored in sepiatic based nostalgia. There was absolutely no need to turn a a potentially good film into a gloomy dark film. Even the scenes where the film is in daylight it is downright gloomy and often hard to see any contrast between the players and you have to wonder what idiotic rationale was behind that.Apart from that the story was full of images and style and really did not have a good narrative. I have just finished watching 'The Challenger' - that focused on Feynman's role in the enquiry - now that is the way to tell a story.

robert-temple-1 This is an impressive and thoughtful film about early incidents in the life of the famous Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynmann (1918-1988). The film is not about physics, but about the tragic love story between Feynman (played by Matthew Broderick) and his wife Arline (played by Patricia Arquette). This film, because of its subject matter, was always going to be for a niche audience, but was well worth making. The screenplay was written by Patricia Broderick, Matthew's mother, and they jointly produced the film. It is a pity that Broderick has not had further directorial opportunities in the years since this one, as he has a talent for it. But that is how ruthless the film business can be, as this was clearly no money-maker, because it is too quiet and sensitive and has no super-star to give it the public acceptance. It is a sleeper that did not awaken. Films where one of the leading characters is ill all the time (Feynman's wife), and especially one who has tuberculosis, are not generally successful at the box office. The last time TB made any money was with Greta Garbo as Camille. So by deciding to do this worthy project, the Brodericks were closing the door behind them. Investors hate TB and soft, gentle films in equal measure. (They prefer explosions and healthy killers.) I recently saw Matthew Broderick on the TV series WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE? where he traced his ancestors. His grandfather served in the First World War and his great-great-grandfather served in the American Civil War. (The programme resulted in his grave, which had been anonymous till then, having his name put on it. Previously he had been the unknown man killed in action outside Atlanta in Georgia on the Union side.) In the TV programme, it was obvious that Broderick is truly Mr. Nice Guy, all modesty and smiles, and that the 'boyish charm' for which he is renowned is perfectly genuine. Even though it was not his first film, FERRIS BUELLER'S DAY OFF (1986, see my review) burst like a comic miracle upon the scene at the time and launched Broderick, through the genius of John Hughes. Broderick is if anything even more delightful and amusing today. But he can be perfectly serious when required, as with this film. There is no use people complaining that Broderick is not as dynamic and mesmerising a presence as Feynman in his maturity: in this film, Feynman is never older than 27, so cool it. For much of the film, Feynman is working at Los Alamos developing the atomic bomb. Names like Wigner, Oppenheimer, and Fermi are mentioned, but we don't see them. There are some intriguing references to the spy Klaus Fuchs, but all we see of him is his car which Feynman borrows. Fuchs's keys are missing at one point, but we aren't told why. Presumably the man picked up by Feynman in the nearby New Mexico desert and given a lift, who pretends not to speak English but actually is fluent in it, is a Soviet agent passing messages for Fuchs, but this is not spelled out. Some of the script must have been cut, but it would have been better to leave those things in. There are many intriguing aspects to the story which are suggested in passing. For instance, Feynman raises the issue of the enrichment of Uranium. Someone ought to make a film about how the Uranium 235 was brought from Germany in a submarine (U-234, coincidentally) at the end of the War and used for the bombs over Japan because America did not have enough ready. But all that is a digression, This is a very fine film and deserves recognition, as it is well made and genuinely felt, and is eminently worthwhile.

ccthemovieman-1 This was kind of a strange, low-key movie, one that isn't going to get a lot of attention, especially with a younger audience which wants anything but a slow- moving story. But, whatever your age, if you want simply a nice movie, you have one here.Other reviewers here have gone into the details about the real-life persons this film is based on, so I will just make a few general comments I had while watching this.First, I enjoyed Matthew Broderick's narration. Broderick usually plays likable roles and is an underrated actor, I think. I've never seen him in a bad performance. Even though this story is an emotional one, I found little emotion in the film but that makes it intriguing in parts.Sometime past the halfway mark, I asked myself, "What is the point of this story?" There is a point, and there is more than what meets the eye to this. Those who have seen this film know what I mean. I'm making vague statements, but I don't want to give away anything.I enjoyed the 1940s look to this, appreciated Patricia Arquette's against-type role; appreciated the fact there were no villains in here and the profanity was low. As I said, it's a nice film and touching drama.Broderick and his mother wrote, produced and directed this film.

marianpo Although I agree with other reviewers that the reaction of the Feynman character to his wife's death is so restrained as to appear cold, that is but a minor flaw in a striking film featuring a fantastic performance by Patricia Arquette.I have seen many tearjerkers in my life, but this is one of the few that actually makes me choke up when I remember certain scenes.The characters' integrity, the tragic backdrop of the Manhattan Project, the revealing details, the respectful rendering of quaint aspects of the era, the simple truths simply portrayed all make this a small masterpiece.