Critical Analysis of the Film Good Will Hunting - Movie Review Example

? First Last Petit MDSA01 November 29, A Critical Analysis of the film Good Will Hunting Introduction The view of mathematics in overall culture, and specifically in the arts, has changed only a little from the time when Plato set the basic tone. He thought of mathematics not only as pure rationality, but also as a pointer of divine reality contained within even the lowest ranked servant. In recent times this rationality has come to be a metaphor for a lack of emotion or great but inhuman beauty. In recent times, Arcadia, a play by Stoppard sets mathematics as rationality against romanticism but sees both as extremes. Luckily, mathematics has been spared the symbolism of forbidden knowledge, troubled with ethical dilemmas (Frankenstein, Faust, Rappacini). Quite on the contrary, the film Good Will Hunting strikes a balance, and its mathematicians are portrayed as more multifaceted than those in the works referred to above. Good Will Hunting is in effect not about mathematics. It is about the touching story of a young man's struggling to outdo his Dickensian childhood, to find his place in the world, and to attain closeness with others. The main character, Will (the title is a play on his name), is a tough and supernaturally gifted orphan from Boston's South Side. He works as a janitor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and cannot resist showing anonymously his solutions to (apparently) perplexing mathematical problems. The identity of the solver is revealed just about the time that Will (Matt Damon) is arraigned for taking part in a street brawl. His following court-ordered supervision by a mathematics professor and Fields Medallist Professor Lambeau, (played by Stellan Skarsgard) includes psychological counselling. This sets the plot in motion. The way Will feels about himself, the woman he courts, about his remarkable gift and his background are looked into detail through an interaction with his psychologist (portrayed by Robin Williams) whose a background also turns out to be similar. So what is the role of mathematics in all this? Alfred Hitchcock's metaphor of the "McGuffin" rings in the head: an object or idea that drives the plot and with which everyone in the film, but not the audience, is preoccupied. In films by Hitchcock, the McGuffin might be a hidden treasure, or someone's identity. This film's McGuffins are Will's talent and the mathematics problems the he has a knack of solving so easily. It is quite possible that Will could have been gifted in physics, biology, in languages and faced similar issues in his life. Indeed, his intellect is drawn larger than life, so that he can learn organic chemistry, talk about economics, and even defend himself in court, with an ability to cite precedents. So why mathematics? One of the reasons is that mathematics is alleged to be vague that few can do it. In fact, this is amongst the few remarks about mathematics that this film makes, with which a mathematical audience will strongly disagree. Under the opening credits, the first frames of the film are of a mathematical text out of focus and blurred, as if seen by a general reader who cannot understand it. The mathematics referred to later on ranges from simple graph theory, through basic linear algebra to Parseval's theorem (mispronounced in the film) and to what seems like some deeper graph theoretical results. Mathematics mentioned persistently, but in no scene is it presented articulately. Will's gift is valuable, possibly because it is so rare. Mathematics highlights the major differences between Will and the academics. Will is a tough street youngster. His gift is well-regarded but not envied by his friends. Had his gift been in rock music or sports, the plot could not have turned on the choice Will has to make between his background and his destiny. The culture of mathematics doesn’t fit well with that of blue-collar South Boston. And it is not predominantly "our fault". Professor Lambeau goes to great lenghths to keep Will out of jail, to get him a decent job which uses his talents, and to get him proper counselling. It is Will, out of faithfulness to his background, who frustrates Lambeau's efforts, until an ill motivated breakthrough in his therapy (the weakest detail of the film) gives him the chance to begin a reconciliation between the two worlds he has become accustomed to. People who create mathematics fare rather better in the film than the subject itself. Lambeau is an industrious guy who drinks and talks tough with the Robin Williams character. He is patient with Will's faults than one might expect, but not so sensitive to another graduate student, a background character who is shown up by Will's talents, is clearly displeased, but is still able to support and admire Will. The third mathematician, an well-known professor, is dejected and humiliated when Will identifies an error in a mathematical proof and proposes the correct alternative on the spot. Each of these characters has a different variation to working with the stubborn material of mathematics, and the viewer will find each in some measure familiar. The least familiar situation is Will's own. He is not depicted as ever struggling with anything mathematical. With the lack of such struggle, making a mathematical discovery easily loses its lure, and so the film misses an essential emotional element of the experience of doing mathematics. In fact, no one in the film is described deriving any pleasure in doing mathematics. The film had "coaches" for the mathematics. One was Daniel Kleitman, of Massachussets Institute of Technology, gives his own story in a sidebar. Listed in the credits as "math consultant" was Patrick O'Donnell, a physicist at the University of Toronto, who was originally hired as an extra. His genuine Irish pronunciation is heard in a bar scene late in the film, and he is recognizable from a photograph posted on his Web site. O'Donnell says that he built on references in the script to select mathematical content for filming. These references included complex analysis, eigenvectors, combinatorics and graph theory, and the choices of the writer were perhaps not guided by mathematical consistency. Those inquisitive about this particular McGuffin are welcome to look. So the mathematical reader will enjoy connecting the bits of proof and calculations that flash on the screen. Similarly, the Boston occupants will have fun trying to identify which actors have grown up in Boston and which have been coached for their accent. Massachusetts Institute of Technology alumni and Cambridge audience will charm themselves trying to identify the locations (actually, most of the film was shot in Toronto due to tax breaks and the relatively weak Canadian dollar). All these details have almost the same importance to the total effect of the film. Undeniably, the film does contribute to the public image of mathematics. The Fields Medal gets a number of exposures, including an occurrence in a bar where it emerges that Ted Kaczinsky is better known than any Fields Medallist. Some of the most unforgettable scenes in the film concern a string of job meetings that Lambeau sets up for Will. Probably, Will scorns at these offers, but the order shows us a hint of the significance that mathematical research has for the emerging world economy. The film also contributes to the self-knowledge of the mathematical community. One lesson we can learn is about the effect of social class on talents. It is Will's upbringing, which prevents his talents from coming out. But reality of our social status is not everything, and Will's personal struggle dominates a larger part of the film. Maybe the most imperative point in this for mathematicians is made by Lambeau's graduate student, the one who finds himself outdone by Will. When Will complains at some of Lambeau's suggestions, the graduate student tells him, in a scene which brings life to this minor character, how lucky he is to have a teacher who cares about him. We can learn a lot from this film. We don't encourage our young mathematicians closely enough. Even those who have every advantage of education, resources and family have a hard task of starting their careers. We would do well, as a whole community, to look at how we treat these gifted young people. A talent in mathematics is where you find it, but remains in us useless unless there is a reason personal reward for exploring and developing it. Some may be lucky enough to acquire this reason on their own, but others require a helping hand. It is too little for us to spend time hunting our good Wills. We must give our own good will to them as well. Reference Harary, F., & Prins, G. (1959). The number of homeomorphically irreducible trees, and other species. Acta Math, 101, 141-162. Read More