The story behind DNA
Written: Jun 03 '02
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Unusual cinematography, clear characters.
Cons: Not for everyone.
The Bottom Line: Artistic and effective film-making combines with great acting to make this film both educational and emotionally touching.
|
|
|
| sweet-indigo's Full Review: Race for the Double Helix |
|
Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie's plot.
Last Biology lesson of term, my teacher decides to show us a film - the story behind Watson and Crick's discovery of the structure of DNA in 1953. It was based on Watson's book, The Double Helix, apparently quite humorous in places.
I like documentaries, and to be honest I didn't expect this to be any more than a bland re-enactment of a couple of scientists discovering something. I was wrong - whilst the science aspect of this film means that someone with no knowledge of the background biology/chemistry would be a little lost, the film is well constructed with strong characters, and human aspects weaved into the story line. Essentially, I'd say it's a good film in its own right.
The story interweaves the work of four researchers - American Dr. Jim Watson (Jeff Goldblum), who has subplots dedicated to his gradually worsening hair and escapades trying to find himself a young lady. He'd achieved a PhD by the age of 23. Watson achieves a scholarship to work at the Cavendish in Cambridge, and is placed alongside Francis Crick (Tim Piggot-Smith) who is still working on his PhD on haemoglobin. Watson's after fame - Crick is after something much less boring than haemoglobin... What could be more exciting than the secret of life? And just to quicken the pace a little, they're racing for the discovery alongside Linus Pauling, the American physicist.
Dr. Maurice Wilkins (Alan Howard), meanwhile, is working on DNA in King's College, London. Dr. Rosalind Franklin (Juliet Stevenson) comes from a beautiful part of France to work in a rainy London, on X-ray crystallography. It's plain that Dr. Franklin is not particularly content, and the relationship between her and Wilkins is a little strained. She's a researcher, hungry for knowledge, but not even allowed to go into the common rooms because they're for men.
The movie has many great strengths - the characters are cleverly and sympathetically portrayed, each one likable even though they don't like each other very much. The plot is historically accurate, and yet not dry in any way. I would not recommend this as a documentary to learn about DNA - I would recommend as a movie to enjoy, in which you can learn about some of the people behind the big names. The movie is, in my opinion, more interesting for the social background and the nature of scientific discovery it portrays than it is for the actual science involved. The overall social atmosphere is clearly shown to the viewer, allowing us to appreciate some of the qualms of scientific research at the time.
I'd recommend this movie to people who are interested in the ways in which real people interact, and the quirks of society's traditions. And to anyone interested in DNA, of course.
Recommended:
Yes
Video Occasion: Better than Watching TV
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID: sweet-indigo
|
|
Reviews written: 21
Trusted by: 1 member
|
|
|