- Studio: Miramax Films
- Release Date: Sep 16, 2005
User Score
7.0
out of 10
Generally favorable reviews- based on 34 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 28 out of 34
-
Mixed: 3 out of 34
-
Negative: 3 out of 34
Review this movie
-
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
DanaM.Oct 8, 20057Entertaining film. Worth seeng but does not deserve a 10 rating. No film deserves a ten rating or a zero at that. A tad depressing and frustrating but madness will do that to folks. Timeline at times a little confusing but overall well acted and directed.
-
-
HeatherWDec 6, 20055
-
-
PennyE.Sep 18, 200510I thought it was a most intelligent film and Paltrow was brilliantly directed by Madden.
-
-
AdamH.Sep 27, 20056Paltrow is good, Hope Davis is outstanding, but the movie is fairly mediocre. I would have preferred less of Hopkins as the father (who seemed too well-groomed for a mad genius) and more of the very believable sister dynamic.
-
-
RichardSOct 2, 20059
-
-
FrankS.Oct 23, 20059I thought Gwyneth did a sensational job of showng the fringe between genius and sanity.
-
-
SusanM.Oct 28, 200510This is one of the nest movies I have seen in such a long time. Gwyneth is once again AMAZING! And Anthony Hopkins is brilliant as well. A really impressive conversion of stage show to movie. I was so engrossed in the story that I didn't want it to end. John Madden is a very talented director.
-
-
JacobB.Sep 17, 200510Simply fantastic.
-
-
ChrisK.Sep 25, 20056Paltrow as a math hidden math genius? Come on. Also, some of the scenes require a suspension of belief that is just unbelivable. Prefer a few others.
-
-
LuntS.Sep 25, 20051The people who made this movie have clearly not done a math problem in their entire lives. Terrible.
-
-
MikeB.Sep 8, 200510Best film of the year! Gwyneth's performance deserves an oscar.
-
-
JenMar 31, 20067Generally well acted and directed, but kind of dull. Paltrow's a little over the top in parts and not terribly believable as a math genius.
-
-
TonyB.Apr 5, 20067This is a very intelligently written film that will unfortunately appeal mainly to a specific and rather small audience. It is well acted by Anthony Hopkins and by Jake Gylenhall, who is not miscast as some of the critics insist. The real acting honors, however, go to Gynneth Paltrow and Hope Davis, who, especially when they are in the same scenes, are just about perfect.
-
-
JeffM.Jul 27, 20066The movie, while well acted, suffers from an insurmountable problem: Gwyneth Paltrow's character is unbelievably annoying. I could not buy that Gyllenhaal was that interested in her, since I really looked forward to scenes without her in it, which are few and far between.
-
-
2RoadsJun 3, 20078A must see story for those living in the metaphorical house of quandary while caretaking a loved one. "How many days have I lost?
-
-
EllenS.Sep 23, 20057
-
-
[Anonymous]Sep 25, 200510Gorgeous.
-
-
JennyE.Feb 16, 20069I enjoyed this film more than most films I watch. Paltrow and Davis shine in a very real sister relationship. There is enough mystery to keep you interested, and emotionally involved right to the end. The ending, while not totally satisfying, was realistic. I didn't want the story to end. Very well done by all invoved !
-
-
SharonB.Jun 18, 20068Great job by Gwyneth Paltrow. Would like to know more about this complicated family.
-
-
May 29, 20116
-
90Proof is on the side of the lost, blessed souls. Paltrow, as alluring and reassuring as ever, emphasizes the blessedness in the isolation of genius, giving a new dimension to a complex role. New, true and thrilling--she is the Catherine that Proof was waiting for.
-
80But despite less-than-ideal casting of the male roles, and a tendency to soften the Pulitzer Prize-winning work's thorny humor with a more sober tone, director John Madden has woven together an elegant, intelligent drama of a breed increasingly rare in mainstream American movies.
-
50Madden directed Paltrow in the play on the London stage, but he does his "Shakespeare in Love" goddess no favors by filling the screen with big close-ups that betray the theatrical origins of the piece and drain the movie of life and urgency. Proof hasn't been filmed at all -- it's been embalmed.