MovieChat Forums > The Theory of Everything (2014) Discussion > Was the film implying that Jane cheated ...

Was the film implying that Jane cheated on Stephen with Jonathan?


Because why did she feel the need to tell Jonathan that she was pregnant? She said it as if Jonathan was the father.

reply

She did eventually have a physical relationship with Jonathan, but apparently not at that stage. It came later.

reply

I saw it as a way of saying, "You have feelings for me, and I have feelings for you, but it all needs to end now, because I'm not leaving Stephen." (Which is why I didn't care for the scene five minutes later when Jonathan overhears the argument with her mother-in-law -- it was just a reiteration of what they just showed us.)

I think the physical intimacy is implied later, on the camping trip, when she goes over to his tent after the children are asleep.

reply

I think the physical intimacy is implied later, on the camping trip, when she goes over to his tent after the children are asleep.
This. And then immediately he was rushed to the hospital where he was intubated, seemingly connecting her infidelity with his medical crisis via her guilt over what she'd done and the state in which Stephen now found himself.

"Lettin' the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier 'n puttin' it back in." -- Will Rogers

reply

You are right.

reply

Reading up on it, she did start an affair with Jonathan while they were married in 1985. Hawking left Jane in 1990 for his nurse but the divorce wasn't finalized until 1995. Also the mother did ask if one of their children was in fact Stephen's because of the closeness of Jonathan and Jane's relationship.

The movie doesn't give a very good time table as to when things happened though. It would have been nice if they'd have years shown over certain parts so you get a better understanding of how much time has gone by to get a better understanding of the progression of his disease.

reply

jane mantains she was faithful to Stephen the whole marriage so if this is true, it's quite disappointing.

reply

Of course she was faithful to Stephen-- she said so in her book. *sarcasm*

reply

she makes it clear in her book that she did start a physical relationship with jOnathan eventually, though not until after her youngest child was born.

reply

I was similarly confused by the status of Jane and Jonathan's friendship. I'm so tired of R-rated romps, but a little clarity would be helpful. For instance, I found it hard to believe that she would go to Jonathan in his tent with her children and their nanny in another tent ten feet away. Not exactly an ideal venue for a torrid first encounter.

reply

Isnt this movie based on her book about their life together? I assumed that meant that if it was implied they slept together then they did as this info came from her. I havent read her book but i know i read somewhere that her book was the basis.

Sorry Brother.

reply

The movie is taken from the first version of her book, Music to Move the Stars, which is no longer in print. After Stephen's divorce from Elaine Mason and the family reconciliation, Jane re-issued the book (significantly edited) as Traveling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen Hawking, which is the book you can purchase now. A lot of the more negative parts were edited out, but the original book was what the scriptwriter was working from.

She does discuss her relationship with Jonathan, which did ultimately become a physical one, but long after the birth of Tim, Jane and Stephen's third child; the catty remark by Stephen's mother about Tim's possible parentage was just nastiness; at that time Jane was not involved with Jonathan and indeed the child was Stephen's. Much of the discussion of negative family dynamics is missing from the newer edition.

reply

Thanks for the info. I should clarify that i dont think they slept together at the time of the mother/daughter scene which was stone cold btw...i figured if she said they hadnt slept together at that point there would be no reason to question her perspective. I did assume they would be sleeping together after she went back to see Jonathan in the church scene later on.

Sorry Brother.

reply

"A lot of the more negative parts were edited out, but the original book was what the scriptwriter was working from."

makes you wonder how much of it was true and how much was anger talking if she edited it out later.

reply

makes you wonder how much of it was true


There's no reason to believe it was "anger talking." These were not acrimonious or nasty revelations. She describes in some detail the many difficulties presented in their lives, from travel, to child care, to housing, to juggling completing her own degree, to meeting Stephen's needs (assisting in his work as well as his physical care). Pretty well all the people who know Hawking well acknowledge that he has a very large ego and tends to be very self-centered, thus not very perceptive about the needs or feelings of others. In this he is far from alone: many people who are wrapped up in their work above all, whether they are academics, artists or politicians, exhibit very similar patterns of behavior.

Stephen's family never approved of his marrying Jane, so their lack of support (moral or practical) was also an added stress to family life. Jane is quite matter-of-fact about these things in the book, but when she issued the new book, two obvious variables kicked in. One was the need to issue a much shorter volume, as the publisher wanted a more marketable book and the first one was very long; this necessitated the removal of the equivalent of 100 or so pages, as some additional material was added to bring the book up to date, and due to the family reconciliation (not only of Stephen with Jane, but also Stephen with his children), some of the material about their early difficulties was omitted.

If one is looking for a more realistic look at the challenges of everyday life they faced, the first version is by far the more interesting.

reply

Even before reading your comment about how this movie was based on her book,
I had a strong feeling that the movie was based on her telling of the story.
I find the movie portrays Jane as a saint who could do no wrong,
and Stephen's, "I'm traveling to America with Elaine," very abrupt with no explanation. It just makes Stephen looks like the bad guy, while Jane was of course the perfectly innocent wife.

reply

Even before reading your comment about how this movie was based on her book,
I had a strong feeling that the movie was based on her telling of the story.
I find the movie portrays Jane as a saint who could do no wrong,
and Stephen's, "I'm traveling to America with Elaine," very abrupt with no explanation. It just makes Stephen looks like the bad guy, while Jane was of course the perfectly innocent wife.


i have to disagree with this. i can't see how anyone in their right mind wouldn't think jane and jonathon's relationship was inappropriate, even if they never dated or hooked up. furthermore (and this may be myself as a disabled person talking) jane begins losing my sympathy even before she meets Jonathon. she knew stephen was sick and married him anyway. she knew stephen was like a baby and had 3 children with him, so for her to all of a sudden at the vacation at his parents house treat him like he was the worst kind of burden was horrifying to me. you made your bed, you lie in it. don't come crying about how you all of a sudden need help.

reply

i have to disagree with this. i can't see how anyone in their right mind wouldn't think jane and jonathon's relationship was inappropriate, even if they never dated or hooked up.


If Jonathan wasn't paid, I'd agree with this, but it wasn't made clear. If he was paid - although, obviously, not as much as a nurse - then there is nothing inappropriate.


furthermore (and this may be myself as a disabled person talking) jane begins losing my sympathy even before she meets Jonathon. she knew stephen was sick and married him anyway. she knew stephen was like a baby and had 3 children with him, so for her to all of a sudden at the vacation at his parents house treat him like he was the worst kind of burden was horrifying to me. you made your bed, you lie in it. don't come crying about how you all of a sudden need help.


She married Hawking when she was 21 - young, fit, healthy and in love. She made her bed, true; a bed she was going to have to lie in for 2 years. She had her third child when she was 35 and it seems like he wasn't planned - an added burden to an already demanding life. There was no 'all of a sudden' about it. So, if she loses your sympathy, I think you have a lack of understanding of how stressful life is for people like Jane - a more-or-less single mother - who also has to be a full-time care giver.

Able-bodied doesn't mean super-human.



reply

In the film, Stephen gives her his permission (at least that is how I understood it).

reply

I wonder if that -- the permission - really happened or if they were trying to make Stephen look like a martyr.

I certainly thought that he took up with the nurse to give his wife an out. Otherwise why would he be crying like that and rewind their entire life together.

Much of the discussion of negative family dynamics is missing from the newer edition.

That's too bad. I'd love to learn more about that.

reply

so did Jane put the D in the V with Jonathan at the tent ?

reply

At that point, it was all about image. Jonathan is more able-bodied. No one would suspect Stephen was capable of pumping out ANOTHER kid. BUT on that camping trip, I think she did have sex with Jonathan.

Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.

reply