Typical Hollywood fare glamourizing life -- 6.5/10

Rating: 3/10 (6 July 2002)

Once again, Hollywood comes out with a film that strains the limits of credibility in order to make the viewer the happy man who walks out of the theatre feeling that love conquers all. This film is highly overrated although not altogether unsatisfying.
Unfortunately, right from the very beginning, I didn't believe much of the script that later had the rug pulled out of it in "Shylamanian" style. Some of the surprises were telecast right from the beginning and made for somewhat awkward scenes. Crowe's Virginia accent changes considerably over the film and the image of his buff physique should not have been shown, which in my mind made him the furthest thing from resembling a mathematician. But I'm whining here... let's get to why this film is truly overrated although not unwatchable.
The script was incredibly poor. A love story develops with almost no perceptible verbal chemistry on screen. Usually characters have to interact and the character and audience needs to be won over, not just by sensuality and a clever line or two. There is little explanation as to WHY Nash's wife saw something in him more than most who supposedly didn't like him at all (although everyone seemed to enjoy his company at Princeton too, except for one or two tough scenes -- odd.) Neither did I feel the viewer get the sense that the math genius could do the impossible in the manner he does -- look at a roomful of numbers, no pencil, no calculations, nothing -- and simply breaks codes with the aid of some cheesy Hollywood special effects "mesmerizing" your mind. Please, this more resembled Superman than it did a genius mathematician. It asks you, the viewer, to connect the dots you know you have to make since the script doesn't do it for you at all.
Unfortunately, the movie continues to strain credibility, especially the family troubles. The lack of other characters assisting in that difficult situation was odd, unexplained (where are their parents), and made me wonder just how much fantasy this movie was based. Apparently, the words "based on a true story" is an understatement as Nash's true story doesn't quite resemble this glorified, Hollywood heart candy. I didn't get much sense of struggle -- the problems encountered were simply passed over quickly. Everyone sticks around to help Dr. Nash, to ends that just were simply not the manner in which people act.
Is the movie altogether bad? No. In fact, there is quite a bit that is very good with the movie, such as excellent performance by Russell Crowe and an equally good and sultry performance by Jennifer Connelly, who does the best she can with a mediocre script. This is a good rental but don't go in expecting to be blown away with it's overhyped rating. It's your typical Hollywood fare that glamorizes and airbrushes the lives of people who should have faced serious adversity for fear that you might not want to go to the movies if you don't come out feeling all warm and fuzzy inside. In an era of incredibly weak film-making efforts, this film rises to the top of a mediocre heap.