BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » The Imitation Game (spoiler thread for those who have seen it)

SusiGo · November 6, 2014 11:08 am

As you know the film has different release dates in various countries some of which are months apart. So for those who are lucky enough to watch it early - please put all your reviews, personal impressions and discussions of the film in here. Thank you very much.

SusiGo · November 19, 2014 11:13 am

Bump

I think some of the Brits should have seen it by now.

miriel68 · November 20, 2014 7:03 pm

Well, I haven't seen it, as Susi knows well, but I have seen both trailers and some clips (didn't want to... but couldn't resist) and I must say one of the things that immediately struck me, was his body language in these short bits.

I noticed it even in the first pictures which were released some months ago, but in the clips it is so much more evident: his shoulders, for example: comparing to Sherlock, regal and erect, Turing has a kind of hunched shoulders and his whole body screams about his shyness and loneliness. I also watch closely his hands, how he moves them, how he holds the pen etc. and I found it utterly fascinating
Then in one of the recent interview B. is talking exactly about how he tried to inhabit T. body and he indeed mentions the way of holding the pen, lol!

Liberty · November 21, 2014 4:45 pm

I had been avoiding this thread until I saw the film and thought there would be lots of discussion here! I won't be the first to have seen it - what did you all think?

I loved it, and (as just about every single review says) Benedict is fantastic in it, and his portrayal is very sympathetic. I can't fault the rest of the (fine) cast either. I agree about the body language, Miriel. Alex Lawther, who played young Alan, did something very similar with his body language and I was very impressed. Even though he physically looks nothing like Benedict, it was easy to believe they were the same person. I thought he was stand-out in the scene where he hears about Christopher's death. For a while the camera is in close-up on his face, with him trying not to reveal emotion and talking in Alan's clipped tones - it's an amazing scene.

One thing that didn't work quite so well for me was the real war footage. I felt it was reminding me that this was real (and I'm sure it worked that way for some people) but it felt like it took me out of the film a little. I think I would have preferred to stick with the scenes made for the film.

Last edited by Liberty (November 21, 2014 10:56 pm)

Liberty · November 22, 2014 7:58 am

So it is just me, is it? I'll continue for now while it's fresh in my mind and hopefully more of you will join in!

Christopher was tall, good-looking, saved Alan from bullies, sought him out as a friend, introduced him to codes and cyphers, spoke to him in his own language and seemed to completely understand him. I don't suppose there is much record of the real Christopher, and I suppose this Christopher was meant to be the idealised boy of Alan's memory. In the film, Turing's work, and particularly the machine, become a replacement for Christopher - it's as if he loves the machines and they understand each other when other people don't. In the film, he even calls the machine Christopher, and shows extreme distress at being separated from it (when it's switched off, and later when he chooses chemical castration over prison.

We know that Turing never did meet another human Christopher, although he was sexually active. But I wonder how much of that was about the time and place, and how difficult or easy it was for a work-obssessed, rather awkward and unique man with a limited social life to meet suitable men in a society where it was illegal. No wonder he went down the business transaction route - I'm sure many men did. But having fallen in love once, he was no doubt capable of falling again - it's just that opportunities were very limited.

The film portrays Joan as a pretty good match for him, but just the wrong sex. He appeared to be thinking of her as well as himself when he chose not to condemn her to a life of loving a husband who was seeing young men on the side. He seemed to understand that she needed to be true to herself, and had chances that he would never get.

Last edited by Liberty (November 22, 2014 7:59 am)

miriel68 · November 22, 2014 8:36 am

Hi Liberty, thank you for your impressions: I haven't seen the film yet, but I don't mind spoilers (well, we know he cracked the code and he was condamned as the homosexual) it's not a film I am going to see for the thriller suspence.
Yes, I was hoping for more feedback from British fellows here on board: surely you are not the only one?

And what was the general reaction of the audience to the film in the cinema at your seanse?

besleybean · November 22, 2014 8:44 am

Thank goodness I
1. Held back last night, cos I could only see the Press thread.
2. Saw this thread just now!

Having said that, my reviews are usually spoiler free and are restrained to...
Yes, I eventually saw it last night.
I loved it, it's brilliant, fab performances all round...
I was more pleased by my pal's reaction, as she is not a Benedict fan.( and I know, why do I even speak to her?)
She said it's the best film she has ever seen and Benedict needs an oscar.

Liberty · November 22, 2014 9:30 am

Miriel, I went to an early showing with my boyfriend (who loved it), so there weren't many people there, but it seemed appreciative. Although the film does show Turing's flaws, Benedict makes him completely endearing - an easy character to love. The whole film is easy to love. It's hard to imagine anybody not liking it (unless it's because they disagree with some details). I suppose that's partly what was meant by "crowd-pleasing". I'd like to watch it again, but will wait until it's out on DVD.

Some of the reviews had implied that Turing's sexuality isn't made explicit in the film. That's not true. It's clear that he's gay all the way through. As it seems that Turing didn't have a personal issue with his sexuality, I don't think it had to be explored.

I remember one reviewer had said that Benedict didn't do much to become the character - not true at all! He's completely transformed in the film, so much that you almost forget it's Benedict Cumberbatch, if you know what I mean.

besleybean · November 22, 2014 11:04 am

Yes, yes and yes!
If I'm brutally honest, I did see a bit of Sherlock creeping in...but that's only because I'm a fan girl. It is absolutely no reflection on Benedict's talent: what was written for him, he acted brilliantly. They are also two slightly autistic, posh English and very brilliant characters. But that is coincidence,.(and shut up Mycroft!)
Benedicy played the character very sympathetically and the sexuality is implicit.
Just because we don't see hardcore gay sex, this isn't enough for some stupid critics.
This would have held more water if we saw straight sex scenes...which(thankfully) we don't.
Instead what we do get is a beautiful portrayal of a deeply lovng and sweet relationship between two teens...brilliantly portrayed by 2 fine young actors.

Last edited by besleybean (November 22, 2014 11:05 am)

Sherlock Holmes · November 27, 2014 2:35 pm

I saw it a few days ago and haven't been able to stop thinking about it since. Absolutley loved it.
I was in a packed out cinema with my friend. It was literally sold out wall to wall, not a single spare seat. When it got to the final scene between Alan and Joan I was crying so much, like literally sobbing into my hands and trying my best to stay quiet so I didn't spoil it for other people, it was ridiculous!

Sherlock Holmes · November 27, 2014 2:36 pm

I've already started working on my Alan Turing cosplay!

besleybean · November 27, 2014 3:35 pm

And we want to see it!

Liberty · November 27, 2014 10:32 pm

I know there were early comments about a lack of sex scenes (which I don't think are necessary at all), but I've been reading some reviews which do make a fair point about how his sexuality is shown in the film. I was quite happy with the fact that it was made clear, but then I'm not talking from the point of view of, say, a gay man watching a film about a famous gay icon. This isn't terribly spoilery, but I'll put it in spoilers anyway ...

Some of the reviews have suggested that there is something coy about the "tell, don't show" feel of the film, which isn't quite appropriate for somebody who wasn't ashamed of his sexuality. It's not just a lack of sex scenes, but nothing at all - it's only spoken, never shown. There is the touching relationship with his school friend which is shown as influential, but not at all sexual - it could have been two straight boys. The main focus is his relationship with Joan, which some have argued wasn't quite so important to him as is made out. Now, I don't know the truth of it. She was obviously important enough to him for him to consider marrying her. But although he didn't have any serious relationships with men, again, his sexuality was important enough for him to express it, despite the risk to himself. And we're only really told about it in negative ways - his blackmailer talks about it (which was invented) Turing tells Joan about it when he breaks off the engagement, and Turing mentions the act of "gross indecency" while being interviewed after his arrest.

I'm saying this, because I think I think that if people haven't seen the film, it looks as if the reviewers are complaining about a lack of explicit sex scenes. It's not that at all - it's a general feeling in the film that his sexuality must only be talked about, never shown. I think it was fine not to have sex scenes, but I can see why some people find it odd not to have anything at all - not so much as even a few words.

nakahara · November 27, 2014 10:38 pm

Liberty wrote:
I know there were early comments about a lack of sex scenes (which I don't think are necessary at all), but I've been reading some reviews which do make a fair point about how his sexuality is shown in the film. I was quite happy with the fact that it was made clear, but then I'm not talking from the point of view of, say, a gay man watching a film about a famous gay icon. This isn't terribly spoilery, but I'll put it in spoilers anyway ...
Some of the reviews have suggested that there is something coy about the "tell, don't show" feel of the film, which isn't quite appropriate for somebody who wasn't ashamed of his sexuality. It's not just a lack of sex scenes, but nothing at all - it's only spoken, never shown. There is the touching relationship with his school friend which is shown as influential, but not at all sexual - it could have been two straight boys. The main focus is his relationship with Joan, which some have argued wasn't quite so important to him as is made out. Now, I don't know the truth of it. She was obviously important enough to him for him to consider marrying her. But although he didn't have any serious relationships with men, again, his sexuality was important enough for him to express it, despite the risk to himself. And we're only really told about it in negative ways - his blackmailer talks about it (which was invented) Turing tells Joan about it when he breaks off the engagement, and Turing mentions the act of "gross indecency" while being interviewed after his arrest.

I'm saying this, because I think I think that if people haven't seen the film, it looks as if the reviewers are complaining about a lack of explicit sex scenes. It's not that at all - it's a general feeling in the film that his sexuality must only be talked about, never shown. I think it was fine not to have sex scenes, but I can see why some people find it odd not to have anything at all - not so much as even a few words.

And yet, it kinda fits into the general theme of the movie, doesn´t it? The love that must not be spoken about nor shown because you will be awfully punished if you act on it. Love that you must surpress and hide. No explicit sex scenes and certain lack of affectionate behaviour from the main protagonist fit to that context, IMHO.

REReader · November 27, 2014 10:49 pm

Liberty wrote:
I know there were early comments about a lack of sex scenes (which I don't think are necessary at all), but I've been reading some reviews which do make a fair point about how his sexuality is shown in the film. I was quite happy with the fact that it was made clear, but then I'm not talking from the point of view of, say, a gay man watching a film about a famous gay icon. This isn't terribly spoilery, but I'll put it in spoilers anyway ...
Some of the reviews have suggested that there is something coy about the "tell, don't show" feel of the film, which isn't quite appropriate for somebody who wasn't ashamed of his sexuality. It's not just a lack of sex scenes, but nothing at all - it's only spoken, never shown. There is the touching relationship with his school friend which is shown as influential, but not at all sexual - it could have been two straight boys. The main focus is his relationship with Joan, which some have argued wasn't quite so important to him as is made out. Now, I don't know the truth of it. She was obviously important enough to him for him to consider marrying her. But although he didn't have any serious relationships with men, again, his sexuality was important enough for him to express it, despite the risk to himself. And we're only really told about it in negative ways - his blackmailer talks about it (which was invented) Turing tells Joan about it when he breaks off the engagement, and Turing mentions the act of "gross indecency" while being interviewed after his arrest.

I'm saying this, because I think I think that if people haven't seen the film, it looks as if the reviewers are complaining about a lack of explicit sex scenes. It's not that at all - it's a general feeling in the film that his sexuality must only be talked about, never shown. I think it was fine not to have sex scenes, but I can see why some people find it odd not to have anything at all - not so much as even a few words.

It did look to me like that was what the reviewers were complaining about, so thank you for explaining it from the point of view of someone who saw the film. Whether I agree or not (I'll have to see the film first!), that makes it a more reasonable critique.

Last edited by REReader (November 27, 2014 10:51 pm)

Liberty · November 27, 2014 10:59 pm

I was thinking that maybe it's rather more like the way it used to be done in films, before it could be shown explicitly - there were clues and codes. But actually, the film is more explicit. It does use the word "homosexual". I didn't feel there was any doubt, watching it, that Alan was gay.   I wouldn't have liked them to shoehorn in a scene with a man for the sake of it.   But I can understand, from the representation point of view, why people might be disappointed that they didn't show anything at all, almost as if it's being brushed under the carpet (which I know wasn't the filmmakers intention at all - but I can see why people might have wanted something more positive, when it's about a famous person who, for the time, was fairly comfortable with his sexuality).

It's difficult - the film is mainly about his codebreaking, and his sexuality is only an issue in that it was his unfair conviction that led to his downfall.    But after so many, many years of homosexuality being hidden, I can see why people might want it to be shown more positively in a film about a gay national hero.

I've read some comments about Kiera being too attractive to play Joan too, but I suppose it's a sad fact that we all go to see beautiful people in films, and Benedict is also a lot more attractive than Turing.

@REReader, I'll be interested to see what you think when you see the film! As I said, I felt happy with it - in fact, I came out thinking "What are they talking about - of course his sexuality was explicit!".   But thinking about it some more I can see the reviewers' point of view.

Last edited by Liberty (November 27, 2014 11:03 pm)

REReader · November 28, 2014 12:36 am

@Liberty, that may have to wait a while--my budget is more "borrow DVDs from the library" than "seeing movies in theaters" at the moment.

Liberty · November 28, 2014 7:19 am

That's a shame. I think it's one that will work well on the small screen, though.

miriel68 · November 28, 2014 8:38 am

Well, the problem with the films which handle touchy subject - such as homosexuality - is that there is a lot a priori criticism, and a kind of general agenda about it. There were rumours about straightwashing Turing, giving too much importance to his relationship with Joan etc. etc. before anyone had ever seen anything of it.

Secondly, it seems to be a point about a gay man that there "MUST" be sex scenes in the film: had Turing been straight and - let's say - fetishist of women's feet - would the critics complain that we don't see him licking feet of his lovers? Also, are there any sex scenes in - say - The Beautiful Mind?

Finally, showing Turing with some young boys he paid for having sex with him could produce an anti-gay effect in the audience so the last thing gay community should be complaining, IMO, is that we don't see his sexual life shown in graphic detail.

Sherlock Holmes · November 28, 2014 9:49 am

Liberty wrote:
I know there were early comments about a lack of sex scenes (which I don't think are necessary at all), but I've been reading some reviews which do make a fair point about how his sexuality is shown in the film. I was quite happy with the fact that it was made clear, but then I'm not talking from the point of view of, say, a gay man watching a film about a famous gay icon. This isn't terribly spoilery, but I'll put it in spoilers anyway ...
Some of the reviews have suggested that there is something coy about the "tell, don't show" feel of the film, which isn't quite appropriate for somebody who wasn't ashamed of his sexuality. It's not just a lack of sex scenes, but nothing at all - it's only spoken, never shown. There is the touching relationship with his school friend which is shown as influential, but not at all sexual - it could have been two straight boys. The main focus is his relationship with Joan, which some have argued wasn't quite so important to him as is made out. Now, I don't know the truth of it. She was obviously important enough to him for him to consider marrying her. But although he didn't have any serious relationships with men, again, his sexuality was important enough for him to express it, despite the risk to himself. And we're only really told about it in negative ways - his blackmailer talks about it (which was invented) Turing tells Joan about it when he breaks off the engagement, and Turing mentions the act of "gross indecency" while being interviewed after his arrest.

I'm saying this, because I think I think that if people haven't seen the film, it looks as if the reviewers are complaining about a lack of explicit sex scenes. It's not that at all - it's a general feeling in the film that his sexuality must only be talked about, never shown. I think it was fine not to have sex scenes, but I can see why some people find it odd not to have anything at all - not so much as even a few words.

nakahara wrote:
And yet, it kinda fits into the general theme of the movie, doesn´t it? The love that must not be spoken about nor shown because you will be awfully punished if you act on it. Love that you must surpress and hide. No explicit sex scenes and certain lack of affectionate behaviour from the main protagonist fit to that context, IMHO.

^^^^ I agree with that statement entirely, nakahara...and speaking as someone who's a member of the LGBTQ community, this hadn't even crossed my mind at all. I really think the only people going to be giving criticism like this are straight journalists who feel they have to tick the boxes of being politically correct and seen to be liberal etc. All of my gay and trans friends have seen it and loved it.

It was fairly blatantly obvious that he was gay, seeing as he mentioned it several times and was arrested for it at the end. They really didn't NEED a scene of him kissing a guy or soliciting someone in a bar. What's the point?? It wouldn't have pushed the plot along in any way.