Other reviewers, professional and public alike, have praised this movie to the skies for its superb writing, fine acting, and smooth direction. This was, of course, the career-maker for two of Hollywood's biggest stars, and an inspiration to young would-be filmmakers.
One element that has not, perhaps, received as much attention is the degree to which this movie deconstructs for the audience one of its primary tropes: what it means to be educated. As an educator, I find the point a crucial one, and one which elevates this movie from the merely "very good" to the level of "important."
There is certainly a simple surface reading, in several scenes in which the audience is explicitly told that it is individual talent, ambition, and personal character which make for genius, not just a collection of degrees after your name from a prestigious university. The best of these is the scene early on at the bar, as Matt Damon's "Will Hunting" character dresses down one preppie pseudo-intellectual after another, revealing that the 'education' they have received could have been bettered at any local library. It's funny, and it's true: education doesn't happen when you get an "A" in a class, it happens when you internalize a bit of knowledge so thoroughly that you can integrate it, on the fly, with other material, as Hunting proceeds to do in a blistering (and hilarious) verbal assault.
But just as important is the subtext of Damon's character's story-arc as he proceeds from working-Joe to star-pupil. Rather than being seduced by the prospect of grants, lab-space, or prestigious employment which his degree could net him, Hunting chooses to pursue his principles (and the love of his life). It could be a ham-handed, overly dramatic feel-good moment, but it's not because Hunting doesn't arrive at this decision by giving up his brains and following his heart. Quite the opposite. His decision is almost cold-bloodedly rational. It is arrived at after much debate, external and internal, and a number of quotes, statistics, anecdotes and analogies are forwarded from both sides of the debate: it's an instance of education in action, not as a bloodless, disconnected ivory-tower theory, but as a living model for our lives. Would that more students would approach their educations in that fashion.
One element that has not, perhaps, received as much attention is the degree to which this movie deconstructs for the audience one of its primary tropes: what it means to be educated. As an educator, I find the point a crucial one, and one which elevates this movie from the merely "very good" to the level of "important."
There is certainly a simple surface reading, in several scenes in which the audience is explicitly told that it is individual talent, ambition, and personal character which make for genius, not just a collection of degrees after your name from a prestigious university. The best of these is the scene early on at the bar, as Matt Damon's "Will Hunting" character dresses down one preppie pseudo-intellectual after another, revealing that the 'education' they have received could have been bettered at any local library. It's funny, and it's true: education doesn't happen when you get an "A" in a class, it happens when you internalize a bit of knowledge so thoroughly that you can integrate it, on the fly, with other material, as Hunting proceeds to do in a blistering (and hilarious) verbal assault.
But just as important is the subtext of Damon's character's story-arc as he proceeds from working-Joe to star-pupil. Rather than being seduced by the prospect of grants, lab-space, or prestigious employment which his degree could net him, Hunting chooses to pursue his principles (and the love of his life). It could be a ham-handed, overly dramatic feel-good moment, but it's not because Hunting doesn't arrive at this decision by giving up his brains and following his heart. Quite the opposite. His decision is almost cold-bloodedly rational. It is arrived at after much debate, external and internal, and a number of quotes, statistics, anecdotes and analogies are forwarded from both sides of the debate: it's an instance of education in action, not as a bloodless, disconnected ivory-tower theory, but as a living model for our lives. Would that more students would approach their educations in that fashion.