User Reviews

Just saw this film at the SF Film Festival. I thought it was excellent. Why? It combines various levels of entertainment: the intellectual mathematics involved and the realities of academic competition; the historical and cultural conflicts between Indian and English traditions, attitudes, biases, and beliefs; the emotional love/friendship between men, between men and women, and between children and parents; and inhumanity towards other humans: warmongers vs. pacifists, religious vs. non-religious, individuals vs. groups, misunderstandings and lack of emotional intelligence in so many ways.

I comprehended very little of the mathematics involved but that did not matter and did not change my overall appreciation for the story and all the levels involved.

Kudos to all who created this film. The writing, the acting, the cinematography, the direction, all excellent...

The Man Who Knew Infinity is a lush, romantic biopic in the tradition of Hollywood's grand biographical melodramas of yesteryear. It is broadly accurate, if rather sentimental, but also somewhat superficial. We're constantly told that Ramanujan's work is important and ground- breaking, yet the screenplay mostly fails to demonstrate why this is so. We're shown how difficult life is for a vegetarian in England during the Great War, yet, oddly, it's never explicitly stated that the resulting vitamin deficiencies contributed directly to Ramanujan's demise. But for me the biggest flaw is the misplaced romance between Ramanujan and his wife, Janaki, when the more compelling romance is the intellectual one that unfolds between Ramanujan and G.H. Hardy. In reality, Janaki was nine or ten when Ramanujan married her in 1909, and only 14 or 15 when he left India for England. She was certainly not the ripe beauty portrayed in the film, and there is no real evidence that their arranged marriage was any kind of grand passion. The film is also strangely coy in avoiding any direct reference to Hardy's homosexuality. Perhaps the writer was being scrupulous about not implying any sexual aspect to the relationship with Ramanujan. Whatever the reason, it's an omission that makes Hardy less dimensional and airbrushes his sexuality from history as completely as a 1950s Hollywood biopic might have done. That aside, Jeremy Irons gives what might well be the best performance of his career as Hardy. It's a compelling and deeply touching portrayal. More surprisingly, Dev Patel - after a series of exuberant but lightweight performances - finally proves to be an actor with some depth and range. The film is also deftly directed, with some gorgeous cinematography.

"The Man Who Knew Infinity" is a Biography - Drama movie in which we watch the true story of the Indian mathematician, Srinivasa Ramanujan. His story starts in Mandras a city in India where he makes his first steps in mathematics while searching for a job and goes until he arrives in Cambridge and starts working there. He faces many difficulties and makes some friendships such as with Professor G.H. Hardy who was also his mentor.

I liked this movie very much because it was a true story of a person who suffered a lot, facing any difficulties but eventually succeeded in his field. The direction which was made by Matt Brown was very good and I believe that the combination he made between the life of Srinivasa Ramanujan in India and what he sacrificed in order to go to England with the life that he was expecting before arriving in England and what he actually lived there was a very good idea. I enjoyed also the interpretation of Dev Patel who played as Srinivasa Ramanujan and for one more time, he was very good at it. Other interpretations that were very good and have to be mentioned are Jeremy Irons who played as Professor G.H. Hardy and Toby Jones who played as Littlewood.

To sum up, I believe that "The Man Who Knew Infinity" is a beautiful movie with a great plot based on an incredible person and pioneer in mathematics. I strongly recommend everyone to watch it because it's a life lesson from which everybody will gain something by watching it. Never stop dreaming and never stop fighting for something you love.

Biopics have always interested me, regardless of whether liberties are taken with the facts (the case with quite a lot) many of them are very well made and fascinating while also featuring lead performances that do the subject in question justice. Srinivasa Ramanujan, his story and his ground-breaking contributions to mathematics also fascinate and worth telling and looking up, and it was great to have the opportunity to have them better known.

Another selling point for me was Jeremy Irons, have always loved him if again more for his early work up to 'Lolita'. Although he is deservedly lauded by many, to me he is deserving of more credit, due to generally being restricted to (mostly) supporting roles in hit (this, 'The Borgias', 'Margin Call' and 'Henry IV' for examples) and miss ('Assassins Creed', 'Batman v Superman', 'The Time Machine', though he was among the better assets in all three, and especially 'Dungeons and Dragons' which is in every way indefensible) output since 'Lolita' that don't show his full talent, even when in a vast majority of them he is one of the bright spots, that people sometimes forget how brilliant a lot of his early work is. This does sound irrelevant, but it isn't really once saying what my thoughts on his performance here is and how it fares compared to his other work. Despite what 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' had going for it, part of me was not sure as to whether it would completely work for me, with Maths always having been one of my least favourite subjects in school. Never got my head around some of it and it didn't engage me as much as Music, History, English, French and German did, while always appreciating its importance and why it is considered a compulsory subject in primary and secondary schools up to A-Levels.

On the most part, 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' was a winner and struck a chord with me. It is nowhere near close to flawless and it falls short of being a great film. It is though well-intended and earnest, that mostly compels and much of it well written and acted. Despite inaccuracies and what made Ramanujan's work so ground-breaking not delved into enough it does try to treat this remarkable man and his story respectfully and does well in making Maths interesting and accessible. Very like 'A Beautiful Mind', 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' helped make me appreciate Maths much more.

Didn't find the scenes in Madras/India depicting Ramanujan's personal life anywhere near as interesting as the scenes in Cambridge and particularly the scenes between Ramanujan and Hardy, and to me they are the film's biggest fault. They are nicely filmed and the scenery is beautiful and it did show his motivations which was great. Unfortunately, they are also far too slow-paced (which hurt especially the first twenty five or so minutes when we don't see Hardy), mostly uneventful when the film is switching back and forth, contains very soapy writing, indifferent chemistry between Ramanujan and his wife and the acting has been described before as a mix of cold and exaggerated which sums it up very well.

There are moments of less than elegant camera work, indicating some inexperience, where some shots are disappointingly out of focus in a way that makes one slightly queasy. Can understand the criticism of 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' not doing much new for the biopic genre and playing it too conventionally and safely, with an outcome that is foreseeable and slightly on the pat side. And as said, it could have delved more into what made Ramanujan's work so ground-breaking and focused less on his personal life.

However, 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' does have quite a lot working in its favour. The photography is not consistent but quite a lot of it is nicely done and complements the beautifully evocatively rendered Indian landscapes and the authentic 1914 Cambridge setting very well. Trinity College is shown in all its glory, in both the exteriors and interiors it looks wonderful. The music may not stick in the head but it serves its purpose well, it's sympathetic, not too syrupy and it fits at least. Again, there is inconsistency in the direction, not always focused visually and very pedestrian in the scenes in Madras, but it helps make the story intriguing and accessible and is a triumph in the scenes between Ramanujan and Hardy (particularly in the latter stages), Hardy and Littlewood's scenes are also well done.

Script is mostly intelligent and sincere, not being too wordy, too complicated, too treacly or overly simple. It is especially good in Hardy's dialogue and speeches which are beautifully written (especially the "who are we to question the Ramanujan" one). Irons' Shakespearean-like delivery in that wonderful unmistakable voice he has, that always makes things that are usually dull engaging, helps quite a bit. The story once it got going engaged, moved and inspired me, didn't understand all the maths but it still intrigued and illuminated me and found myself really caring and identifying with Ramanujan, rooting for his overcoming significant adversity. The chemistry between Ramanujan and Hardy is complex, never biased, intriguing to watch develop and heartfelt, it is the heart of the film and the driving force of the drama and one of the film's biggest strengths in that it rises the film above being completely routine. The characterisation of Hardy is similarly a triumph, a far more complex character that one seems to think when first introduced to him, the most developed (more so than Ramanujan himself and that is without seeing glimpses of his personal life really) and therefore the most interesting. Really appreciated how Ramanujan's adversity is not done in a way that was overdone or pantomimic, some of it having genuine tension, and also showing the harships England were going through at the time.

Notwithstanding big reservations with how Ramanujan's family were characterised here, the acting is very good. Dev Patel may not look like Ramanujan, too young, too tall and too handsome, and may seem a miscast physically, but is still great in interpretation due to exuding more emotion, charm and passion than seen before from him by me and made me care and root for such a remarkable man. To me, this is one of his better performances and he works incredibly well with Irons, the complexities of the relationship between the two portrayed with nuance and passion. Their scenes in the second half of the film are particularly beautifully done and the ending is initially inspiring and then very touching in Hardy's tribute. Toby Jones is endearing as Littlewood and the British cast, including Anthony Calf and Jeremy Northam, are sterling and don't overplay or phone in. The acting honours though belong to Irons, who is absolutely outstanding here as Hardy and gives one of his best performances in one of not many roles in recent years to fully show how great an actor he truly is (he actually shows it in a vast majority of his work, just that too many times he is well above what he is given). Because there is a lot of meat to Hardy and Irons wrings every ounce of juice out of it without ever overplaying, his eyes, gestures and face telling so much in a remarkably subtle way, yes there is much more to Irons' appeal than his voice. It is an authoritative and sincere performance in a way that's powerfully understated, full of gravitas and never less than compelling, he brings an edge to Hardy while expertly softening it when needed in the emotional latter stages when he becomes more sympathetic. The lack of big awards attention for his performance here is in my mind criminal and like 'Dead Ringers' (except not as bad) all over again in that it was a big inexplicable oversight that year.

Summarising, a well above average film though not flawless or great, though Trinity College, the chemistry between Patel and Irons and Irons' performance are massive assets and help make it a much better film. 7/10

An important film; cleverly mixing a love story with the equally deep themes of moral obligations on privilege to raise those without. At first I was concerned I would not be able to disassociate Dev Patel from the role on Marigold Hotel, but after a few lines which sounded too contemporary, he improved significantly.

Jeremy Irons was captivating and the other roles adequately developed. The direction, pace, setting, wardrobe, story, score -all hold the attention.

When I watched it, at the end, the audience applauded. In fact at the end of it, one wishes it could last longer - craving more.

The problem with this movie is that not a lot happens. And it's very slow. The maths is too abstract for the average viewer to appreciate the ground breaking nature of S. Ramanujan's work. The best thing about the movie is that it brings to the modern audience an awareness of the genius of Ramanujan - who was apparently every bit Einstein's equal or better, but remains basically unknown outside of maths academia.

The movie struggles because it can't build to any kind of dramatic "Eureka" moment, when there's a sudden breakthrough that leads to some sort of climax that the general audience knows about. The Imitation Game (2014) at least had a sense of time running out with Alan Turing (and others) trying to find a code to crack the Enigma Machine in WWII. This movie hasn't got that sort of pressure and it doesn't build to any sort of major breakthrough. It's just an interesting story about a maths genius of the 20th Century who most people have never heard of.

The director has obviously tried to build up the love story to give the audience something to connect with, but unfortunately it is largely fictional. In real life, 21 year old Ramanujan married his young bride who was 9 or 10 at the time. 5 years later he left her in India with family as he set off for England and Cambridge. The interfering mother- in-law and the star crossed lovers scenario in the movie seems to be pretty fictionalised in an attempt to provide something a little less dry than maths equations.

Nevertheless, the movie is beautifully acted. It's just pretty slow.

"The Man Who Knew Infinity" is a very unlikely film for me to love. After all, the film is about a brilliant Indian mathematician who I never heard about and lacks most of the usual story elements I look forward to seeing in a movie. And yet, inexplicably, I found myself loving the picture and recommend you give it a try. It's just debuted on DVD and is also available through Netflix.

The film begins in India just before WWI. A poor man with little education, Srinivasa Ramanujan (Dev Patel), has apparently taught himself advanced mathematics....and I am not just talking about Algebra and Geometry. It seems this man somehow naturally understood numbers in a way very, very have ever done and today he's seen as one of the foremost men in the field...ever! This film is about his life just before his work was discovered as well as his time spent at Cambridge, working with the famous mathematics professor, G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons). The film covers the prejudices Ramanujan encountered as well as the initial difficulty getting folks to even consider that he could be right when it came to his theories.

I know my very brief description sounds very dull...but somehow it isn't. Somehow, the writing, acting and the entire production screams quality and manages to be quite entertaining as well as uplifting. It's also nice to see Dev Patel in yet another excellent film, as this young man seems to have a real knack for picking film projects (such as his appearing in "Slumdog Millionaire" and "Chappie"). As for Irons, he is, as usual, amazing...as is Toby Jones. A very, very strange film....and I mean that in the most positive of ways. Do yourself a favor and give this one a try.

This is a wonderful movie which I hope will have a great success when it is released in the USA. I saw it at the Sun Valley Film Festival in March 2016 and it was by far the best movie I have ever seen in this festival. The story of this young Indian with a special gift for mathematics and who becomes a researcher at Cambridge Trinity college is by itself fascinating. The acting is superb with Jeremy Irons as a professor and mentor in one of his best performance ever. The film makes you feel the spirit of the place and the time (first world war England). Dev Patel is no longer the fun host of the Marigold Hotel but a great courageous young mathematician who beats old odds to become one of the major scientist of the 20th century. Please tell your friend to go and see this movie. They will thank you.

Greetings again from the darkness. When one imagines the most exciting topics for movies, mathematics tends to fall pretty far down the list. Heck, most students only take math classes because they have no choice, so why should anyone be interested in the story of a young Indian man who revolutionized the mathematics world at Trinity College in Cambridge in the early 20th century? The reason is that Srinivasa Ramanujan's personal story is about more than numbers … it's about faith and passion and overcoming life's obstacles.

The story also has an intriguing by-product of demonstrating the difference between intelligence and genius. Trinity College at Cambridge was staffed by some of the smartest, best-educated professors on the planet when this self-taught odd young man appeared with ideas and notebooks filled with equations and concepts that most couldn't even fathom, much less accept.

Dev Patel plays Ramanujan, the spirited man from Madras India who accepted his remarkable talent as a gift from God. His initially difficult relationship with Trinity Professor GH Hardy (Jeremy Irons) was a clash of two men whose passion for math far eclipsed their comfort in the real world. Hardy was a bit of an outcast at the university, while Ramanujan struggled to provide for his new wife, and had little patience for those who doubted his work.

Writer/director Matt Brown doesn't seem to believe that the relationship between these two gentlemen is strong enough to hold a mainstream audience, so he commits what comes across as an excessive amount of time to the long-distance battles of the wife and mother of this genius. On the math side, Mr. Brown doesn't allow us to get lost in minutiae of math equations, but also misses the mark on just how groundbreaking and extraordinary Ramanujan's work was. There is little doubt that the story of genius, when combined with the abrasive mentorship, racism, elitism and health challenges provides more than enough material to keep us glued to the screen. The rest is merely distracting.

Strong support work is provided by Toby Jones (as Littlewood), Stephen Fry, and Jeremy Northram (as Bertrand Russell), but it's Patel and Irons who carry the weight here. It's especially rewarding to see Irons as a co-lead again. There have been other popular math movies like A Beautiful Mind, Good Will Hunting, and Proof, but it's The Theory of Everything that seems to have the most in common with the story of Ramanujan and Hardy. So give it a shot … and remember to show your work!

In better hands - scripting, directing and casting of main character - this would have been a winner of a movie based on a real-to-life mathematical genius.

As it is, the whole thing is simply trite, contrived and a whole waste of a good opportunity. Right up front, the use of near standard English by the Indian cast who were supposed to be from the "abject poverty" of Madras is downright unbelievable and ridiculous.

The script doesn't know what it wants to focus on - is it about an Indian displaced in England? Is it about the genius of the man? Is it about the tribulations of leaving your young wife and family to go abroad? Is it about another important leap of mankind in the area of mathematics? Is it about the relationship between a student and his mentor? It is all over the place and at the same time pointless and trite.

Jeremy Irons is superb and is the only key redeeming feature of the whole movie. Cinematography is colour-by-numbers, but good enough. Apart from the mundane meandering scripting, Dev Patel is a total miscast. He is simply a one-dimensional school play actor who simply does not at all have the talent to take on the range a proper lead sorely requires. He is just playing himself in all the movies he has done - same doe-eyed expression, same hesitating mannerisms, same scuttling around, same intonation, just same himself - he does not at all inhabit this very important lead character, and his amateurism is just a constant sore annoyance throughout the movie.

This movie is a dis-service to Srinivasa Ramanujan. It doesn't give any insight into his genius nor a sense of his highly unique and compelling short life.

Watch it with little expectations, and it may be mildly entertaining, but never interesting, and certainly never compelling.

This is such a touching tribute to this amazing, brilliant man of humble beginnings. First off, there were a few moments in the film that dragged a little bit. I would have also preferred a little more development of some of the characters, however, it did not take away from my appreciation and enjoyment of this film. There is an underlying message to this story, and whether you're a man of science or metaphysics or spirituality, you will find satisfaction! Patel and Irons did a splendid job in this film. Patel is easily becoming a favorite of mine--he has that subtle intensity that is so mesmerizing and engaging. Irons, well, he is a seasoned actor and one of my all-time favorites. In his role here, he is very believable, showing emotion where it is needed, never overacting, always giving justice to his character. This film will make you laugh, it will break your heart, it will make your spirit soar, and if you have no math inclinations, it will inspire you and make you appreciate its beauty, its usefulness and contribution to the world of mathematics as we know it today!

The scientist-as-superhero movie genre is more than well-established by now and having seen A Beautiful Mind, The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything, I will readily admit it is something of a guilty pleasure of mine. That being said, the narrative of all these movies is basically the same, and The Man Who Knew Infinity doesn't rise above its genre or add anything new at any point. It fails to surprise, to bring wonder to the viewer or to inspire deep thoughts about the scientific subject. In the aforementioned movies, the main characters all struggle with a variety of challenges they have to overcome, and which ultimately grow into more important story lines than their scientific efforts themselves. The reason for that is probably that it's difficult to bring the story of the impact of theoretical science to a visual medium. I thought that A Beautiful Mind was ultimately most successful in visualizing the scientific impact of what the mathematician John Nash came up with. The Man Who Knew Infinity doesn't have a similarly powerful (but admittedly crude) metaphor as a Beautiful Mind does and therefore fails to bridge the gap between Ramanujan's work and the average (lay man) viewer. The result is an average movie about an exceptional man. It's fine if you're looking for a feel-good story in a somewhat-more-intelligent wrapper than your average rom-com or comic-book superhero movie, but don't expect anything particularly impressive.

One afterthought: the reference made to Newton inventing gravity is a very basic but unforgivable faux-pas. Newton discovered gravity but he never invented it. After all, one cannot invent something that is already in existence. For a movie with a science theme that is a painful mistake, especially given the fact that several mathematicians were involved as consultants. Knowing the difference between invention and discovery is what they teach you in introduction epistemology. Since having a decent idea of how knowledge is gathered and how the scientific process works is a must for any self-respecting scientist, I cannot help but wonder who the movie's scientist-consultants were.

I saw this movie at the International Film Festival Of India (IFFI), Goa. Most anticipated film which I felt got over in no time. So beautifully directed, enthralling from the very first cut. This is so far the finest performance by Dev Patel. Without Jeremy Irons this film would have been toothless, seeing him for the first time I have never seen a character executed with such panache. Overall a film cannot get better than this, there are some flaws which every film has but are forgivable and probably intended to show the audience that way. Not a film to watch for the entertainment value only but solely for the essence of film watching. A standing ovation to Matthew Brown.

Just saw "The Man Who Knew Infinity" at The Sun Valley Film Festival. So happy to see quality films make their US premiere in Sun Valley. Kudos to the non profit group. Must see movie with outstanding story, production and casting led by J. Irons. Independent films like these deserve to be seen & noticed. Opens NY/LA late April. Superb direction from Matt Brown with incredible sets and locations, especially location at Trinity College. Thought about the diversity issue facing the Academy and after seeing this movie, realized it was an issue for a brilliant mind like the lead against the English back in the day. The effort it took to make this film on a tight budget with incredible locations is a credit to the entire crew!

Without movies so much history would go unnoticed. Bio-pics like The Theory of Everything (2015) and The Imitation Game (2015) celebrate icons of knowledge and elevate brains to equal footing with sporting and other heroes. The Man Who Knew Infinity (2016) is another such story that needs to be told. The field of theoretical mathematics is not one that will excite many audiences and this film does little to convince us of its charms. Making sense of what was achieved in this field is an insurmountable challenge, so instead the film tells a tale of two cultures that collide in the hallowed halls of Cambridge in the early 1900s.

Gifted self-taught mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan (Bev Patel) was born into poverty in India and had no formal education. He absorbed mathematics intuitively and believed that "a mathematical equation had no meaning unless it expressed a thought of God". Having learnt all he could in India he connects with Professor GH Hardy (Jeremy Irons) of Cambridge, one of the leading mathematicians of the era and an avowed atheist. The rest of the story is a beautifully told narrative cliché of a dark skinned genius and his obstacle-course odyssey from poverty to a Fellow of Cambridge. Srinivasa's belief in God's will as the source of his gift clashed with musty academic traditions that required detailed proofs behind every mathematical breakthrough which initially led many academics to denounce him as a fraud. He found class, racial, religious and cultural barriers everywhere and Hardy's patronage forced Srinivasa to work against what came naturally. Having left a wife behind in his beloved India, he was emotionally isolated and his health suffered.

Nobody does historical period films like the British and this one has impressively high production values for a novice director and modest budget. It portrays the mood and style of the era with authenticity, both in Madras and England. The filming favours Srinivasa's viewpoint to show what it must have been like for a person of his humble origins to walk the grounds of Cambridge and encounter its academic aristocracy. The greatest strength of the story undoubtedly comes from its acting principals Jeremy Irons and Bev Patel. They play opposites in every way except in their love of pure maths, yet Hardy's patronage ensured that Srinivasa's legacy continues into the modern era. This is a great story of a hitherto little-known Olympian of knowledge that will thrust his name into today's mainstream film culture.

So far, 21st century biopics have been very kind to real-life 20th century scientists and mathematicians. Some of them were fairly well-known before getting the big-screen treatment and some… not so much. 2016 offers up "The Man Who Knew Infinity" (PG-13, 1:48), a biopic about the most famous genius you probably never heard of. Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan may not have the international renown of Stephen Hawking (featured in 2014's "The Theory of Everything") and the cinematic portrayal of Ramanujan's life may not offer the gravitas of helping to win World War II ("The Imitation Game", also from 2014), the mass appeal of a sports backdrop (2011's "Moneyball"), the excitement of a heist film ("21" in 2008), the controversy of early sex research (2004's "Kinsey") or the Oscar cred of a Best Picture winner ("A Beautiful Mind", from 2001), but "The Man Who Knew Infinity" brings us a story of tenacity, triumph and tragedy in the world of mathematics that deserves its own moment of discovery.

Popular British actor (of Indian descent) Dev Patel (from "Slumdog Millionaire" and the "Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" movies) plays Ramanujan, a young Indian man who fought prejudice and overcame numerous other obstacles in order to bring his particular genius to light. With little formal education and struggling to survive financially in the eastern Indian city of Madras (now, Chennai), he pursues his fascination with numbers by developing mathematical theorems that should've been well beyond the ability of someone from such humble circumstances. The only way for his highly advanced abilities to really develop further and for his discoveries to have meaning and a lasting impact, is to get help from leading mathematicians outside India. Leaving India, however, would violate his strict Hindu beliefs and cause him to leave his young wife, Janaki (Devika Bhise), and his mother (Arundhati Nag), who has no other surviving children. It's a lot to overcome, but Ramanujan's genius must be shared with the world.

A letter from Ramanujan to British mathematician G. H. Hardy (Oscar winner Jeremy Irons) impresses Hardy so much, he invites Ramanujan to join him at Cambridge University's Trinity College. With help from his friend and colleague, John Littlewood (Toby Jones), Hardy works to fill in the gaps in the young Ramanujan's education so the men can maximize what they can accomplish together. Ramanujan chafes under Hardy's rigid approach to developing his abilities, but the two eventually reach a happy medium between Hardy's insistence on "academic rigor" and Ramanujan's need to follow his intuition as far and fast as he can. The protracted fight that was World War I further complicates Hardy and Ramanujan's working relationship, as do religious differences between them, poor treatment of Ramanujan by some at Trinity, his long-term separation from his wife and mother and Ramanujan's own health problems.

"The Man Who Knew Infinity" makes its difficult subject matter relatable and entertaining, while enlightening and educating its audience. I, for one, had no idea that the modern world of mathematics was so intricate and deep. The script by Matthew Brown (based on Robert Kanigel's book of the same name) gives us just enough of the math (and simply enough) that we understand the uniqueness of Ramanujan's gifts and the importance of his work, but rightly concentrates on the more personal stories of the individuals who were involved in this real-life drama. The challenges of Ramanujan's interpersonal relationships in Cambridge are interspersed with scenes between his wife and mother back in India, reminding us of the sacrifices made by Ramanujan and others so that he could make a difference. Brown also directs and does a good job at making this little-known story accessible and interesting and he is helped by excellent performances from his entire cast, especially Irons and Patel. It may not be "The Imitation Game" or "A Beautiful Mind", but "The Man Who Knew Infinity" is worth getting to know. "B+"

Having watched the movie, instead of amazed by R's brilliance, I was more saddened by his family tragedy. I think this movie, other than focusing on one of the most intelligent mind in human history, has more touch on moral issues, like family, war, racial conflicts, humanity, religion, and love. Of course, R's discovery has brightened the whole world, but not his family. Not his wife or his mother. Especially his wife.

He sacrificed his family for his discovery. So I'd say, it's the gain of the humanity but the loss of his family. What I really love about this movie is that it recovers R as a human, not an almighty genius.

So I go into the movie knowing nothing about mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan, but I did come out finding the man quite impressive

You can't help but to love a story about a poor kid from India who discovers on his own that when it comes to math, no mind is more creative than his. The movie follows his attempts to prove this to the world which of course is met with the stereotypical challenge of convincing a room of old white men who think they are the center of the universe that they were wrong. in Ramanujan's case, one of those white men G.H. Hardy, was in his corner, and a lot of the movie was about their friendship based on mutual respect. I can appreciate the struggle Ramanujan had to got through.

I also like Jeremy Irons in the role of G.H. Hardy. Irons has a very appealing charm to him. Not sure how I feel about Dev Patel. I felt that I did not get enough from him in the story, considering he is the center of attention. May not have been all his fault. The narrative was not too exciting, which may have had a lot to do with the amount of material of the short period of time it goes though.

But overall it is a pretty uplifting story, which I liked.

I'm rather surprised that this film wasn't produced by Disney. Because it's right up their alley. A young man (Patel) from India travels to England in search of recognition for his work in mathematics. A professor (Irons) takes him under his wing as a mentor in an attempt to show him how to improve his theories. Needless to say, if you're not that into math, this film may not be for you. This ultimately cripples any chance of this film being popular. It shows so much that this man did but it's lost to anyone that doesn't understand what it means. The film just doesn't explain anything. It continues to say that the work is important but never shows why.It tells us to be invested without letting us be. For someone like me that doesn't know how these formulas are vital to math it's hard to be invested. The entire film rests on the work that this man did but is lost among the films own agenda. An agenda that brings religion in at the oddest of times.

The two main characters will be chatting about proofing the formulas than randomly god and faith will be thrown in. The film accidentally implies that you can't be great without God. This is the thing that frustrated me about the film most. I get that the main character was very religious but why does the film feel the need to say something like this?

One character is religious and the other not. And the film continually makes the case that nothing is possible without God. If you're not religious than this other wise well intentioned film is very pretentious. The strange part is, the only openly atheist character is the most interesting part of the film.

Hardy, played by Jeremy Irons, is the best part of the film. Not only is his performance excellent as always but his character is actually interesting. You can tell he has a hard time letting people close to him. He is cold and sometimes overly harsh but you can see that he cares. It's a complex character that I would've loved to see more of. Especially considering how bland the main character is.

I mean the entire film revolves around this young man and yet, all we know about him is he has a family, is religious, and likes math. That is all. Not knowing what kind of a person makes his struggles boring. It's impossible to care about him which makes the majority of this film unbearable to sit through. Not to mention the repulsive cinematography and direction.

Nearly half the film is out of focus. Even when a shot is in focus there is nothing interesting going on to hold your attention. Most of the shots are within dark rooms that are so poorly lit it's hard to tell where the characters are. All they had to do is put one or two more lights up in the room and the shot would have been a hundred times more compelling. But no, no one seemed to care in the slightest.

The film is as harmless as an underdog sports movie and that's the problem. It does it's main character wrong by not being anything different. It continually says that this man changed the world of mathematics but does so in the most by the numbers way. It's predictable, flat, and boring. If it weren't for the great lead performances and Jeremy Irons presence, this film would have been a disaster on every level.