From the Archives: Proof (2005, Madden)
April 27th 2010 00:20
Review: Proof (Madden, 2005)
originally written on September 18, 2005
At one point in Proof, the main character, Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow) says her mathematics is not as elegant as her father’s is; it is uneven and clumsy in sections. This is a perfect summary for Proof as a film. Notice I say ‘as a film.’ Proof is an adaptation of the Pulitzer Prize winning play by David Auburn of the same title. It’s the story of a Catherine, a brilliant yet introverted young woman, riddled with emotional and possible psychological problems.
Catherine has had to care for her father for years, a genius of mathematics, who suffered from mental instability. When he passes away, Hal, (Jake Gyllenhaal) a former student, comes to look through his notebooks, searching for anything unpublished while Catherine’s sister Claire flies in from New York. Hal provides a spark of interest in Catherine, awakening her a little from her asexual, inhibited life, whereas Claire conjures up the resentment of things that could have been.
Hope Davis plays the role of Catherine’s sister to perfection, incapacitating all of the things Catherine lacks: control, strength, and success. From the first shot of her on a cell phone, hailing a cab we know these characters, more through her body language rather than the words spoken. However, this is not the story of Claire; it is the story of Catherine, and thus the reason why Proof utterly fails.
Proof, directed by John Madden, is a character piece, and the part of Catherine is full of complexity and mystery. Paltrow, however, fails to let her shine through subtlety, and instead goes over the top for nearly the entire film. There are times when it seems she might have a handle on Catherine, moments of quiet hurt and anguish, but then the dramatics begin again and we audibility sigh for what could have been. It is possible I am judging the film too harshly, since I’ve been an avid admirer of the play for years and have seen the Broadway versions with Mary Louise Parker and Jennifer-Jason Leigh in role of Catherine. Paltrow was also in a version of the play, in London. Through the majority of the film, it seems as though she still thinks she is onstage, not recognizing the extreme differences of both mediums.
Paltrow seems uncomfortable and unable to grasp the character, providing an uneven performance. Parker or Leigh would have been the wiser choices for the parts, having done stellar Tony nominated work on the stage, but Paltrow obviously has more star power, most likely a strong reason for her casting.
Would the film have succeeded if either Parker or Leigh had been cast? I am unsure. Proof as a whole should perhaps be confined to the stage, never taken to celluloid. The screenplay is credited as written by Auburn and Rebecca Miller I would bet Auburn’s credit is simply his dialogue from the play (which is nearly verbatim, thankfully) and Miller provided the additional scenes, none of which were needed.
Even at a mere 100 minutes the film runs too long and stalls half way through. It then attempts to create drama and suspense adding a formulaic Hollywood cliché to the climax, when it should simply exist as an in-depth character piece, nothing more. Voice-over by Catherine in the film’s final scene is another addition, and is a classic mistake of dumbing down to the audience, when no explanation is needed. Proof is no longer on Broadway, but hopefully one day it will return to the place it belongs: the stage and not the screen.
| 85 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
