Better Late Then Never

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

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.

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.

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

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.