The Theory Of Everything (12A)

And so, the new year is underway and as Michael Bay follows the money the worthy and important films are upon us as awards season looms.

This happens every year. You get a slew of quality films until the end of Feb, and then dross before the next big holiday looms.

Hollywood is nothing if not predictable.

And the first 'worthy' film out of the box this year is The Theory Of Everything, the tale of Stephen Hawking - based on his first wife Jane's book.

Which, it's fair to say, gives it an obvious slant.

For the two people left on earth who might not have heard of Prof Stephen Hawking, he wrote two books the re-defined how we think about the universe, time, space and black holes.

He also appeared in The Simpsons. And The Big Bang Theory.

What makes his achievements all the more incredible is that he has been living with Motor Neurone Disease (ALS if you're American) since the early 1960s - when he was told he had two years to live.

As lives go, it's a good one to capture on film.

And it's been captured well. Redmayne is superb as the Professor, his physical transformation over the course of the film being note perfect.

It probably helps that the Professor is such a loved figure around the world, so you feel you already know him as Redmayne first appears on screen.

And you love him throughout this film.

Likewise Felicity Jones as Jane. Granted you know nothing about her at the start, but through what is arguable a career-defining performance Jones brings to life the woman who was at Hawking's side for so many years.

It wasn't an easy life, and Jones is able to bring all of the conflicting emotions and feelings to the screen in such a way you really feel you have come to know and understand Jane.

It's the other characters that are a slight problem.

Stephen's friends and family are nothing more than passing background shapes, briefly brought to the front before being ushered back, and likewise his academic colleagues.

This is clearly a problem with the source material, as the film is taken from Jane's version of events - a point made starkly clear when Stephen's future second wife arrives on the scene.

And these aren't the only failings.

The score is bordering on the twee, there are some seriously clumsy 'this must be love' gazes and a semi-dream sequence towards the end is at best ill-judged.

But such niggles take nothing away from the film as a whole.

Thanks to the two central performances, you become wrapped up in the lives of two people who were - directly and indirectly - to change the way the world is thought of.

The journey from the 1960s - through diagnosis, discovery, children and fame - to the modern day is captivating and beautifully told.