Travelling Salesman (2012)

Let's be realistic.

An Exercise In Nonsense

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

The first 3/4 of this low-budget film may appeal to mathematics and computer science nerds, but to an outsider, it is mainly a bunch of mathematicians standing/sitting around talking their specialized vernacular about some important mathematical breakthrough that could have astounding impact on humanity. As storytelling techniques go, this one was weak in my opinion: it didn't seem very well written and directed. I'm not just saying that just because there was no action at all—just dialogue. I'm saying there were a number of weaknesses: there was no hook to make me want to watch the whole thing (I had to force myself to stay with it), and there was no significant character arc to it. In fact I wasn't really sure who the protagonist was and who the antagonist was. I have to presume they were respectively all the mathematicians on the team versus the government. The actors were good and did their best to not let the film completely implode from countless blasé pages of script.I gather these persons recruited to work on the project must have felt somewhat akin to what the Manhattan Project team felt: excited, optimistic and patriotic about their objectives at first, but later pondering what hell they might very well be unleashing on the world. Toward the end of the film, it starts to get a little interesting and tense—a little! The implications and the risks of success become a little more apparent. But I had to force myself to wade through about an hour of boring static scenes filled with meaningless (to myself, as a non-mathematician) and seemingly endless lingo. Not really very interesting or compelling overall. I forced myself to watch the whole thing, hoping there would be an astonishing climax. It's not one of those "I want eighty minutes of my life back" films, but none-the-less, I cannot recommend it to friends as a good movie to watch.

Far from being a "smart" movie like many reviewers here praise it, this movie is written by people playing make believe with characters who are suppose to be far more intelligent than the writers can claim to be. As a result, the dialogue is laughable. I've literally never seen a movie try SO HARD to be edgy and smart and yet be so vague and shallow. The characters in this movie are don't resemble real people, especially not top mathematicians and computer scientists. They're a fantasy of the creators who pretend that they know what it's like to be really super duper smart and work on something really super duper important. So we get a collection of vague, generic, shallow musings of the type that non-geniuses apparently think geniuses spend their time thinking about. And the characters always talk as if the audience is in the room but can't be let in on the secret. Just speak directly about what you're talking about instead of making indirect references to everything. But okay, that's not nearly as edgy and smart so we can't have that right guys? The pretentiousness is overbearing. Not to mention the occasional blatantly incorrect reference or analogy (demonstrating that the writers don't really understand the problem well enough, which makes me wonder why they're so caught up trying to make super smart and deep dialogue about a problem they don't understand?). Stop trying so hard, people. And let's stop making absurd caricatures of math genius.

I believe it is a travesty that this film has such a low score on here. The only thing I can attribute it to is that today's viewers have an attention span of a raccoon trapped in a treasure chest. I suppose the fact that I am a very big fan of this type of film--and what I mean by that is chock full intelligent dialog--may also have something to do with that. There are two other films that have always been in my top 10 favorite films list because of this attribute and they are 12 Angry Men, and The Man From Earth (not to be confused with the man who fell to earth.) Basically a few people trapped in a room for most of the movie discussing a monumental mathematical proof that has huge implications for just about everything and everyone on the planet, and the moral responsibility they have as they are in cahoots with the government through funding. If you have an attention span, love existential and philosophical discussions, or just enjoy movies that make you think then you will love this film as I did. Please help this film get the rating it deserves.

I recently took a course offered by Professor Pascal Van Hentenryck @ Coursera called "Discrete Optimization." The course was about solving the NP Complete problems like 'Travelling Salesman', 'Graph Coloring', 'Vehicle Routing', 'Warehouse Locations' and so on. The course was very fascinating and at most challenging. The movie is based on the premises that NP problems, or Non- deterministic Polynomial time problems are not solvable in reasonable time. Even moderately sized such problems might take trillions of years with modern computing power. So, brute-force search is out of the question. For this reason, modern cryptography are based on this assumption. When mathematicians in the movie break this assumption and prove that P = NP, i.e. such problems can actually be solved in polynomial time, there are many implications. There is a moral dilemma that it might be used unethically and also such discoveries shouldn't be locked out and classified. As my professor put it, solving(optimizing) NP problems is the most important challenge that no one has heard about. I am really grateful to this movie for addressing this issue. But other than that, there isn't much for me in it. I was expecting a little more math and knowledge about their non-deterministic processor. But the movie is catered more towards the layman, which is perfectly understandable. Instead of just trivial and heuristic solutions, the movie could have mentioned few complete algorithms just to get some credibility amongst mathematics community. For those of you interested, there is a million dollar Millennium Prize offered by Clay Mathematics Institute for proving if P = NP or P != NP .