The more I watch Russell Crowe, the more I am becoming a big fan of his acting talent. Here again, he demonstrates his skills in a role that had me spellbound. Of course, mentally-ill people are usually fascinating. Look how popular the cable television show "Monk" has become.

Crowe's character, mathematician John Nash, is not nearly as eccentric as "Monk," but his schizophrenia makes for a fascinating portrait of a very troubled man. This is another of those Ron Howard based-on-a-true-story films, so don't take everything here as gospel truth....because it ain't so. (One example: in real life, Nash's wife was anything but as supportive as Jennifer Connelly was portrayed here.)

The first time I saw this film I was disappointed. Maybe I expected more, maybe I felt the story was unfair to the viewer and I felt like this was just one more attempt at Liberal Hollywood to make fun of those in the 1950s who were opposed to Communism. Well, on the second viewing, just a few weeks ago, I didn't have a problem with any of those things, just enjoying the performances and the classy-looking cinematography, thanks to one of the best cameramen in the business, Roger Deakins. I'm not always a fan of director Ron Howard, but his films are usually interesting and pleasing to the eye. He and Crowe seem to be a good pair, too, as witnessed by 2005's "Cinderella Man."

For those who enjoy a cerebral thriller, this is a very intriguing film. Ed Harris, Paul Bettany, Adam Goldberg, Judd Hirsch, Josh Lucas and Anthony Rapp all deliver solid supporting help and, if you haven't seen this, this story will deliver a big surprise. If you know the ending, a second viewing is even more interesting as you trace Nash's actions from the beginning.

"A Beautiful Mind" is a film about the mathematician John Nash. It is very cleverly written and directed, as about mid-way through the film you learn something very, very interesting about the film. I'd say more, but I don't want to ruin it--especially since the film makers did such a great job in presenting Nash's mental illness--something he's struggled with for many years.

I enjoyed "A Beautiful Mind". It was a lovely semi-fictional biography of the life of a brilliant mathematician. But, as I just said, it's SEMI-fictional--meaning a lot of the film just never occurred and the story of the man's life was often sanitized. The result is a very uplifting film...but one that is also a bit phony. And, as a retired history teacher, I hate this about the film. Additionally, I think the 2002 Oscars was a rather poor year, as although the film did win the Best Picture award, the competition wasn't particularly strong. As a result of all these factors, I think the film is overrated. Does that mean you should not watch it? Certainly not. Just understand that Hollywood often gets it wrong--and they did here. And, incidentally, another thing that is just plain wrong was Russell Crowe's accent. I don't know where he was supposed to be from, but it was no where near West Virginia.

'A Beautiful Mind' had a lot going for it. An intriguing story based on an interesting man, a great cast full of talented actors, the involvement of James Horner and Roger Deakins (perhaps one of the best modern cinematographers in the business) and Ron Howard as director (a very competent director with some great films under his belt, directing always with a lot of quality and polish if not always distinction).

Finally seeing it, always wanting to but never quite having the time, 'A Beautiful Mind' was to me a good, often very good, film, if not quite great. Of its four Oscar wins, Connelly and adapted screenplay (on the most part) were worthy wins, though there were better contenders in the Best Picture and Director categories, 'Fellowship of the Ring' for Best Picture and David Lynch for 'Mulholland Drive' for director. Again, from personal opinion, 'A Beautiful Mind's' Oscar nominations were worthier of wins generally, especially Russell Crowe for Best Picture, make-up and the film editing, cinematography also should have been under serious consideration.

There are a few things that stop 'A Beautiful Mind' from being great. Pacing can be messy, feeling rushed in some spots and then dragging in others. Admittedly though there were other places where it was perfect.

Do agree with the portrayal of schizophrenia being problematic, it is a sensitive and courageous subject to address but those with schizophrenia and mental illness in general will find problems with how it's portrayed. It is a complex and often frightening illness, that the film tries to take seriously and sensitively, but it just felt too clean and like it was being careful not to offend but ended up being too careful. Other aspects are heavy-handed.

The espionage subplot was intriguing mostly and gave some powerful conflict, at the same time parts not quite gelling with the rest of the film and feeling a little confused.

However, 'A Beautiful Mind' for want of a better word looks absolutely beautiful. The cinematography with the vibrant colours and seamless fluidity was one of the best of its year, and the period detail remarkably evocative and a joy to look at. James Horner's score has garnered mixed views, mostly leaning on the positive, personally though it added a lot to the emotional power of the film, swelled thrillingly and was beautifully and cleverly orchestrated, didn't think it was melodramatic at all.

'A Beautiful Mind's' adapted screenplay really makes one think while also capturing a wide range of emotions, more than making up for the lack of accuracy. The story is compelling on the most part with a spot on portrayal of mathematics, something that was praised by the maths community at the time including John Nash. It is very moving and uplifting, many scenes dealt with powerfully.

Ron Howard's direction is some of the best he's done. As ever from him it is rich in quality and polish but it also is some of his most distinguished and shows that he can direct with distinction (even if he doesn't always elsewhere.

Can't praise the cast enough, along with the visuals it is the best aspect of the film. It is impossible to find fault with the powerhouse and perhaps career best performance of Russell Crowe, while Jennifer Connelly is touching in a loyal and sympathetically written role (even if not as challenging as a few of her other roles such as in 'Requiem for a Dream'.

Ed Harris is chillingly malevolent, while the rarely less than game Paul Bettany and Adam Goldberg charm and Judd Hirsch and Christopher Plummer also not putting a foot wrong.

In conclusion, admirable and extremely well made, directed and acted with a sizeable range of emotions, if missing the mark of being a "great" film instead of a good and often very good film and not doing enough justice to a great man and his life. The divisiveness is understandable. 7/10 Bethany Cox