User reviews

Not the world's best piece of film making, perhaps, but this is one of the most historically accurate movies ever made about science. As a biology teacher, I found it a great way to cover a rather difficult part of the syllabus. I'm sorry all those other biology students found it so boring; I can only hope that if their teachers had explained what was going on a bit better they would have found more to enjoy. This is a particularly good portrayal of the often bizarre and non-linear way in which science works, in contrast to the typical unrealistic expositions about the scientific method. The discovery of the structure of DNA was one of the most ground-breaking advances in 20th Century science, and one which is still having and will continue to have an enormous impact on our lives, so the value of the film as a depiction of history is very significant.

The only things that annoyed me were Jeff Goldblum's usual failure to speak clearly (made even worse in some scenes by talking with his mouth full of food) and all the rather puerile digressions (accurate though they may have been) about James Watson's tastes in girls.

I am involved in research myself, and I thought this movie portrayed perfectly what female scientists had to deal with in the 50s just to present their work and have it taken seriously! This is a painful, accurate, and meaningful film. I only wish more people could see it. The actress who plays Rosalind must have been active in science to understand that she had to play the role as icily as possible, simply because that is what the life choices of Franklin boiled down to: be emotionless or useless to the scientific community. I loved it, and I think every female who must publish, present, or argue for her research/work must watch this film to understand what is at stake and what "the worst case scenario" actually entails.

-LM

A fun romp through science history. It captures a certain flavor of the times, situations and people. But if you really want to get into _it_, go read Watson's "The Double Helix" or Crick's "What Mad Pursuit" or Judson's "Eighth Day of Creation". I first saw this movie as a junior in high school and it really made my soul soar. I used to watch it over again while in college to pick-up my spirits. This movie had an intro bio class of 300+ applauding!

The late Francis Crick said: "In spite of the intention to soft pedal the science, a surprisingly large amount has been included... It is obviously unfair to criticise the BBC for not achieving complete accuracy... What Life Story was trying to do was to get over the general nature of the discovery and how it was received... The ending was distorted to make a theatrical climax whereas Watson & I were worried that it might all be wrong and we had again made fools of ourselves...I think Jeff Goldblum is too manic as Jim Watson and far too interested in girls... Mick Jackson complained to me that no-one had told him that Jim didn't chew gum...Jim's natural manner was more subdued. Goldblum caught it rather well in the costume party scene when he is asked whether he is a real vicar. His American questioner quizzed him for half an hour about the upbringing of her children and was rather cross when she eventually discovered he was not a vicar at all... The other actors were all immediately recognisable as the people they portrayed... The key performance is by Juliet Stevenson. Her comments show that she had a real insight into Rosalind's character... The film gets over the obvious fact that scientific research is performed by human beings with no trace of the stereotyped emotionless scientist...It tells a good story at a good pace so that people from all walks of life can enjoy it and absorb some of its lessons. All in all, Life Story must be considered a success. In other hands it could easily have been nothing quite as good." End of quote

and I think it is brilliant!

One of the first multimedia products was developed around this film, which I worked on, so I've probably seen it about 100 times. In the course of creating the disc around it, I had to read a lot of the actual history as well as watching interviews with the real people (except Rosalind, unfortunately, but we did talk to her very fierce and wonderful biographer, who vigorously attacks some of the scenes in the movie on the disc). On the whole, I found it remarkably accurate as these things go (except with respect to some aspects of Franklin's story and character), very rich, very well-acted, well-paced, but I can see (I guess?) how today's 9th grader (the most recent review) might find it terrible and boring, though that's sad...I found this site while looking for a DVD of it--I wish someone would make one...

I could not disagree more strongly with the previous reviewer. I don't know that I've enjoyed any movie I've been forced to watch at school. That aside, this is a fantastic film about one of the watershed scientific discoveries of the 20th century. "Race For The Double Helix" is just that, a fantastic race to see who will discover the "secret of the gene." Jeff Goldblum and Tim Piggot-Smith are outstanding as Crick and Watson--the team that eventually goes on to build the model of DNA--but it is Alan Howard and Juliet Stevenson that really steal the show in portraying the relationship between Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin. Anyone who loves history, or science with be enthralled. The French dialoge adds a terrific touch of realism and the period is depicted with tremendous detail. I call this the "Rocky" film for science geeks, but it is so much more, a fascinating look at a real scientific discovery. Outstanding. 10/10

I haven't read the story about it yet so I'm no expert on the story. James D. Watson is a genius and has written a lot of best sellers that I'll read now. This movie is based on his brutally honest book about the discovery of DNA itself. So there are some things you might worry about here.

Firstly the budget. It's a BBC production so I kinda expected a bunch of low-budget sets and mediocre acting. But this was in 1987 and they seemingly had way higher quality standards than now. This really does feel like a proper movie. Not a huge production, but there is nothing British about it whatsoever. It feels like a movie made to be a movie and not one of these modern silly projects made by some public founding company. It is of course set in small sets with no huge budget seen anywhere. Yet the old objects, buildings, rooms, tables, observations make it feel like a real setting as they interact in a real world. You really feel like Watson is among real people and really does want to find a wife. It's not a fake set or lazy replication.

Then there is the issue of the science. It will either be too silly or too complicated in most cases. Frankly, 99% of the time it's too silly. I have yet to see a movie with science so complicated that I couldn't understand it. But this one may be the closest one to that ever. The DNA structures and various papers they discuss are out of my area of expertise. Still it's made very accessible and you feel like it all totally makes sense. Like a puzzle you don't quite understand, but as characters react to it you understand why a certain new fact is crucial for the puzzle. It's not boring and not too complicated.

Then there is the story. It could easily have been boring. But nope. It's done as a race. So they are racing to discover the structure of DNA at the same time as geniuses around the world have exactly the same goal in mind. But those other groups don't have James D. Watson. He is the catalyst here. Getting to UK with one single goal in mind: be the first to uncover DNA. While many around him try to stop him and keep him down he is eager to get to the goal and lets no one stop him. It really feels like without him nothing would get done which creates a strong proactive story.

You also have a race with the Dark Lady. Rosalind is hired by the university to take photos of DNA structures, but she hides all her work and even wants to take it with her to France/or another college. So Watson tries to talk to her and make her work with them, but she refuses. It's not quite clear what she wants. She doesn't know herself. But she's a jerk to everyone around her and not really helping science progress at the university overall. Rather she hides data. You always feel like at any point Watson and Crick could be trumped.

The expectation that someone somewhere could steal Watson and Crick's idea and be the first to publish creates a gigantic tension. Especially someone as cruel as Rosalind possibly being the first creates this needed tension in the race to the goal. The other competitors are at least far away and never seen on screen. She is right here and very unlikeable even though they tried to make her into an attractive genius in this movie. The script basically removed all the people around her who did much of the work presented as hers in the movie. It's maybe not ideal history wise, but I think her myth is so strong today that you have to present it this way even if it's not quite factual. Also, she was never really close to uncovering DNA, but we only learn that at the very end of the movie. That's how well the race is presented.

Overall a very strong movie with some weird things that drag it a bit down. Watson for example constantly chases women without success. I'm not sure why they added that. And then Rosalind seemingly wants to marry, but then not really because she just doesn't seem to tolerate men expect a few French men who may be gay or already married or something. Her story feels a bit like a teen girl story put into a movie about science and it becomes creepy at times. She's made into this hot lady all men want. I again assume they wanted to create extra tension. Both these love stories don't work that properly. They also made Watson kinda stupid and constantly mistaken while Crick and Rosalind are geniuses. It yet again works fairly well, but you constantly wonder why they made such artistic choices. I guess that's what writers do. It would be nice to have a huge budget TV show about this without all this silly imaginary cultural stuff in it. Just Watson and Crick doing research for 10 hours straight! Oh boy! But it likely can't sell so we need these hot smart chick/stupid nerd boy stereotypes to create a movie story. I think there could be a way to add in such characters from the outside if you made a long TV show. So you could keep the main characters more realistic without this extra fake drama created from myths or to fit into a movie mold.

This film, designed on the FACTS of the discovery, aptly depicts the saga of Watson, Crick, Wilkins and good ol' Rosie, the personalities that combined to create the correct sequence of our very own DNA. The amount of current technology based on their discovery is incredible, and the small piece of their lives that is shared in this film is to be examined by all.

Jeff Goldblum plays the character he is so good at; the eccentric, extreme, intelligent scientist type, in this case, Jim Watson. Juliet Stevenson plays a Rosalind Franklin who exhibits the struggle of being a brilliant woman on the verge of a great discovery in time of mans rule. This film has great performances by excellent actors who actually understand the scientific struggle.

(Rosalind Frankin was the only contributor who didn't receive the Nobel Prize; she died from cancer before the prize was awarded. Watson, Crick, and Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize.

I, too, watched this movie in AP Biology class, however, my analysis is different. Now, by no means was it Lawrence of Arabia or Schindler's List, but come on, it was made for Television. It's a clever piece of scientific history, exploring chauvinism, the cunning of two legendary men who were, essentially, leeches, and the not-always-so-philanthropic motivations behind the people who shape our minds today. I have also never seen Jeff Goldblum as a more attractive nerd. However, if the movie itself were an actual nerd--which it definitely is, don't get me wrong--then it would be the kind at which girls coo, not the kind that plays fantasy computer games until four in the morning. Double Helix is nerdy, yes, but in the likable way.

I watched this movie in my Biology Class and I do not know why anyone found this boring, it was actually pretty interesting. We actually learned a little bit more about them before watching it and read their original papers in my class so maybe thats why, we found it a little easier to understand and more relevant for us. Watson and Crick were extremely funny and their focus on things other than science was a perspective into the world of scientists, where not everything is science, science, and more science and except you go about it in a roundabout away. I would recommend this movie for anyone, but I suggest to get a little more background into the who the people actually were and what they did and it will help you understand the movie a lot better.

The Race for the Double Helix effectively brings to life James Watson's book (upon which it was based), which tells the story of how he and Francis Crick came to be the first to correctly describe the molecular structure of DNA. Crick and Watson's scrappy, boyish spirit is translated well by Jeff Goldblum and Tim Pigott-Smith. The story follows the highs and lows of the two and their drive to make the discovery, thankfully without enshrining them; their success was as much due to luck and rudeness as it was to genuine scientific integrity. The film is also set well in Europe of the 40s and 50s.

this movie has lame characters, is boring, and poorly filmed. There is no reason to watch this film. My Biology class watched it and i spent most of the time looking at my watch, waiting for class to end. this movie is 1/1000000000000000000000000 *

What a difficult story to tell, but what a beautifully executed result. I loved the performances from all of the actors. Goldblum and Piggot-Smith are splendidly accessible, and Alan Howard is mesmerising and painful as the tormented Wilkins. I'm not a great scientist or fan of "accurate" history pieces, but I thought this was a fabulous piece of drama, and an invaluable one. More dramatic and dynamic than BRAVEHEART and more moving than TITANIC. A triumph! This film is strangely and hypnotically beguiling, interweaving the plots of scientists with all their flawed characteristics while describing the race to define the DNA structure with aplomb. And even more of an achievement considering the potentially dull details of the story.

The correct UK (original) title should be "Life Story: A Horizon Special", and it is utterly criminal that this masterpiece from the BBC Horizon team has never been released on DVD. No reason has ever been given that I can see, and yet so many other documentaries, many far less worthy of seeing the light of day, are released on a daily basis. I know that I am not alone in finding this lack of a DVD (or better yet, Blu-Ray?!) release to be suspicious bordering on a conspiracy WHY NO DVD/BD RELEASE?

This is still my favorite movie of all time, 32 years after it came out. I have seen it at least twice and probably more. It is not a documentary; it is suspenseful, dramatic, and exciting and is historically accurate. I did not know that it is part of a series. Even though I know the events and how it ends, I am still captivated when I watch it, and I still feel happy and triumphant when Watson and Crick arrive at the answer. I agree with the review by David Bartlett. I am a physicist by training, and my appreciation comes partly from knowing that by watching it non-scientists can see how exciting science can be.

This film is among those few which exhibit qualities of clear-cut and exciting movie-making. Although it does not stand out in any brilliant way and I do not consider it to be a "must-see," it is a film I recommend to anyone who has the opportunity to see it. Well-developed characters couple with an intelligent and fascinating plotline and make for a truly gripping film that is, in fact, very educational. I had the honor of watching this film with a good friend of both Watson and Crick and for me, the experience in hearing of the reality of the characters heightened the experience.

Like commentators on other sites, I saw this film when it was broadcast on PBS in the late 80's. The science story is exceptional ( I don't understand a comment that the characters speak in French, there was no French in the original). The interplay between the rival scientists and scientific establishments is realistically portrayed. All three main actors faithfully recreate the feel of the original players in one of the most important discoveries in science. I had the chance to meet James Watson at an industry symposium two years ago. The VHS is only currently available to the educational market. If you want to see how the "business of science" works, this and "Something The Lord Made" are must sees!

I confess that I am a Martian -- that is, a male with a love for logic, action and success. We males got that way because it was up to us to go over the horizon looking for food and if we couldn't find our way back to the tribe, we died alone. While action was involved, it was the power of the mind that got it done. OK, women had minds, too, and many of them had these same skills, though it's clear they evolved other, very Venusian, characteristics as well. The life of the mind is full of mystery and excitement, because it directs every action of the body.

"The Race for the Double Helix" (the title by which I will always know it) is the most exciting intellectual adventure I have ever seen depicted on film. The prize is great, the pursuit desperate, the clash of egos titanic, the drama and suspense fingernail-chewing. I especially commend the author for his treatment of Rosalind Franklin, whom most now recognize as the third discoverer of DNA of equal importance to Crick and Watson. This movie is full of excitement while being true to the history. It's a thrill to watch it.

Unquestionable, the quintessential historical thriller of any biology discovery. The slow start jumps into fast mode and truly reflects why people get excited about scientific inquiry. The characters are a bit stereotypical, but I saw Dr. Watson at a presentation at the U. of Purdue in 1987 or 88 and saw that Jeff Goldblum caught the man's brilliance and eccentricity in a performance of a lifetime. Not knowing the other scientists in person, I still believe the characterizations must be on the mark. As the story "races" toward the discovery, the research and its many faceted directions it took reveal the many faces of science and scientists and how we try to understand the universe. Unfortunately, this movie was done by the BBC for TV and cannot be found anywhere. I would recommend this movie to be in the top five of outstanding historical story telling, along with "Marie Curie", "Dr. Erleich's Magic Bullet" and others.

First of all, let me make it clear. I know NOTHING about this level of science. My father was great at it, but it didn't fall to me to follow in his footsteps.

However, I've always liked good films and this one caught my attention when it was released. It depicts intensity of the scientists tearing their hair out to find how it all worked.

The scene when Jeff Goldblum finally sees where one peptide (if that's the right word) fits into the sequence was very memorable. A real 'voila' moment.

Many years later, a college friend 'ran DNA sequencing' to make money out of his home. And I thought 'oh sure, that's what a man with a PHd in microbiology does'. Again, not at all like my father who went to MIT and worked on scud missile designs for the military. But hey - I speak 3 other languages, so my talent lay in other areas.

If you are oriented towards science and good acting, check this movie out! Once, when I was getting an MRI, I asked the technician who was the Watson and Crick of the MRIs. He had no idea what I was talking about!

Coming, as it does, from Horizon, the BBC's premier science magazine, the science portrayed in this film is spot on. I'm not as certain some of the biographical details of Crick and Watson are quite as accurate but it does give a more human side to some of the greatest science minds of the 20th Century. I especially liked Juliet Stevenson and Alan Howard's portrayals of Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins and their sometimes fraught relationship. The film shows that although Crick and Watson get most of the credit for their discovery of the structure of DNA, their work was built on the work of Franklin, who sadly died at the very young age of just 37 and because of this missed out on a Noble prize, as the Noble committee do not award prizes posthumously.

Overall this is both an exciting and moving story, well acted (well, just look at the cast) with an incredible script.

This movie does a good job of presenting the story accurately. The discovery of the double was one of the most consequential scientific discoveries of all time. Without its discovery, many things today such as genetic engineering or modification would not be possible. I think the movie did a good job at showing the tension, or 'the race', that was felt between its characters and is realistic to what actually happened. At least according to Watson, the movie's depiction of real-life events was very accurate. The kind of rivalry depicted in the book was contrary to the ideal presented to the public, of a grand brotherhood of researchers all sharing their discoveries and cheering each other on. The rivalries are intense, jealousies are rampant, and there is even outright theft of ideas. Overall I feel that the production value of the film seemed somewhat low, even accounting for the fact that it is quite an old movie, but is made up for in the fact that it is accurate to real life events.

I saw this years ago on TV when it came out via the BBC. (Well done 'Auntie') and was enthralled with the realism of the portrayal. My interest was rekindled in it when the ABC (Australian Auntie) announced it would present an updated series on the discovery of the DNA Double Helix from the BBC on 7th July but it was scrubbed by the coverage of the bombings in London. I knew that this film existed but it took some time to research the name and origin. Success, thanks to the database of IMDb.

On 14th July I watched the first part of the ABC presentation which consisted mainly of reruns of original documentary plus interviews with James Watson and Maurice Wilkins.This went a long way to clarify the hostility between Wilkins and Rosalind Franlin. I remember the anger that was portrayed when she announced that she was "not your research assistant" to Wilkins. If he or his boss had clarified the position and what was the working relationship sooner then the angst could have been avoided. Wilkins operated from the position that knowledge should be shared and as head of the team he saw no wrong in letting Watson and Crick have access to Photo 51. There is a similarity in the current position that any discoveries made, become the property of the employer not the individual, regardless of what field the discoveries are in. For anybody interested in the story of the origin of the WCFW DNA Model this would be an excellent starting point. Previous crits about the acting or directing have little bearing on the value of the film.

I enjoyed this TV film and learned a lot. It's somewhat dated by its 80s'-style British television filmmaking conventions, and it's slightly padded with some unnecessary and slightly off-topic quirks, but in the end it's very informative both scientifically and biographically.

From what I've read, it captures the personalities of the four protagonists well, and it also communicates well the "race" and competitiveness between various scientists who were all striving to be the first to determine the structure of DNA -- in the absence of being able to actually view it.

The actors -- Jeff Goldblum, Tim Pigott-Smith, Juliet Stevenson, and Alan Howard -- are all quite good. The storytelling is fine and reaches its climax with flare. I've watched the movie twice, and I enjoyed it even more on the second viewing, perhaps because it made more sense as I understood the overall picture in advance.

The academic market has captured the DVD/VHS rights to this film, so you probably won't be able to get a home video hard copy unless you are a student or teacher. The film is however now viewable on Vimeo, YouTube, and Daily Motion, under the title "Life Story" or "Life Story: The Race for the Double Helix".

After viewing it, I very much recommend viewing the 2003 Nova episode, "Secret of Photo 51", which is excellent and adds another layer of entertaining understanding of the science and the competition involved. It's currently on YouTube.

All in all, if you are able to view this film, do!

I too watched this film in Biology. I thought it was marvelous. Though, Jeff Goldblum was eating something or chewing something in almost every scene, even the scene where they probably wouldnt have food. On a scale from one to ten, id say this movie was great. Keep up the good work. I hope to see the sequel soon. Wonderful! A delightful romp through everyones nucleus and private parts. It was like as if the director reached deep down into all of us and pulled something special out, like a twisted ladder composed of nitrogenous bases and phosphate.

Much lovin SkaboombafuX4

Ps: and dave