My thoughts on this have been, I guess, more from the psychological standpoint. That Alan had no friends until Christopher and that Christopher subsequently died had a real and permanent effect upon Alan. After that, although he had colleagues/'friends' his main emotional attachment was with his machines. He pushes Joan away, perhaps, because he feels that any deeper friendship will be fated in the same way as that with Christopher was. His reaction to the possibility of being parted from 'machine Christopher' is exactly what we would expect from the separation from a beloved human. His emotional investment in the machine is partly a projection of his remaining emotional attachment to the deceased Christopher and also because machines cannot get sick and die unexpectedly and they cannot betray you or abandon you (boarding school in his case). Alan is not just intellectually brilliant and autistic/Aspergers but also damaged. He has issues. 

Davina, I don't think I agree with you, at least as far as "filmic" Alan is concerned (who knows about real one?).

Davina wrote:

My thoughts on this have been, I guess, more from the psychological standpoint. That Alan had no friends until Christopher and that Christopher subsequently died had a real and permanent effect upon Alan. After that, although he had colleagues/'friends' his main emotional attachment was with his machines.

It is true, and the film implies that this loss had had a major impact on his personality.
However, what we see in Bletchley is that in spite of his off-putting behaviour he really longs to make bound with his collegues. You can see it as early as in sandwich scene, when he looks wistfully at the group leaving. He is horrified that his collegues could think he is a soviet spy and the scene in the pub, when he tells Hugh he is not a spy is very revealing: he REALLY cares what Hugh thinks about him. Once he has been accepted by the group, we see him sitting among collegues and smiling shyly when Hugh is telling his bawdy anectodes: he doesn't understand or enjoy them, but he is happy to be accepted.
Then he confides in Caincross, because he came to think about him as his friend and that's WHY he is so horrified when he discovers Caincross is a spy. And he is taught another bitter lesson when his "friend" immediately blackmails him.

Davina wrote:

He pushes Joan away, perhaps, because he feels that any deeper friendship will be fated in the same way as that with Christopher was.

In a real life, may be. Not in the film. In the film he cares deeply for Joan and although he has his doubts because of his homosexuality, he decides to break off the engagement once he realises he is too deeply involed in shadowy Menzies's schemes and vulnerable to blackmail. He wants to protect her and save her from danger. You see this realisation downing on him once Menzies left the home and then during Alan - Joan conversation you can also see all his regret when she declares she is willing to go one with the engagement even if he is homosexual. This is his last chance for a true friendship and relationship vanishing and he knows it - you can read it in his eyes. (Ah, Benedict's eyes - I could write a poem about their expressivity, lol). It's is all more tragic that he has to pretend that he is a "monster" and loose her respect.

Alan has issues, yes. But he is not presented as autistic or Asperger, IMO.
 

Last edited by miriel68 (January 18, 2015 11:15 am)

I've been shocked to the core by this film.

I finally got to see this last night, lucky enough to attend a pre-premiere. My friend and I was at the cinema an hour before the film started (mostly because I suck at laying plans) and when I went to pick up my ticket the man looked at me a little touched "You have picked a really amazing film to watch tonight" he told me... and I nodded and just said "I hope so I've been waiting a year for it."

I knew the film would have me in tears, just hearing about the  injustice of Alan Turing has made me cry. 

I was hooked from the very first second. "Are you paying attention?" and I was leaning forward in my seat, ready to listen intently to what Alan had to say.

I knew it was Benedict playing Turing but for me he actually became Turing. I bought the entire story. 
I had been a bit worried I would be comparing him to Sherlock, I guess some of their behaviour can be seen as alike. But to me there was nothing Sherlock about Ben's Turing. That to me is talent!

I'm also amazed how well the young Turing worked with the grown version, The speech, the body language... admirable! 

I broke down several times during the film, I just couldn't hold it back. It spoke about so many thing I've believed in most of my life... and selfishly I saw a bit of myself in Alan too... 

When the film was over I couldn't stop crying, the ending was just so emotionally intense... and I think for me it was only made stronger for knowing how it did end for Alan.

My friend and I were holding hands when Alan was sobbing that he didn't want to be alone... that he couldn't leave 'Christopher' and go to jail. That was such a strong, strong scene and it said so much about the character.

We both walked home in silence, I couldn't stop the tears (usually you can't shut us up when we're together)... there were so many emotions going through me... sorrow, anger, sadness... 
I couldn't even comment on the film last night. All I could do was paint a painting. 
It's not normal for me to be speechless. 

I know a big part of it for me is the LGBT rights, a very important subject for me... and sometimes it's easy to forget what it was like not long ago, and what it still is like some places on earth today.
Despite having a very homophobic mother, I live in one of the most safe countries to be gay. 

Before the film my friend and I had one of our 'romantic' dinners at the cinema's café where we can't help but look like we're way more than friends... And no one cares that we do that. 

I will probably give a better review in a few days... this is a film that takes time for me to process... a long time I suppose. 

For me the gay rigths parts hit so close to home.  I see my daughter happy and in love with her girlfriend.  They are so sweet and perfect together, and I imagine them being persecuted and abused the way Alan was.  My daughter has been very lucky that the worst she's had to deal with is some teasing.
I just can't wrap my brain around the hatred so many LGBT people have had to endure.

SusiGo wrote:

For me the most interesting information comes after about 20.00 minutes. I read more than once that burying Alan under the floorboards was a historical liberty. But here Tyldum says that when there was building work in the school some students buried Alan in a box in the earth and that he was dug out by Christopher. So it seems to be a true story after all. 

That's interesting.  I'd wondered why they'd used that particular incident and thought it might have been invented because of some symbolism (of him being buried, and reborn through Christopher, or something along those lines). 

I was just thinking today about something that wasn't accurate - using Christopher's name for Alan's machines.   I thought that was symbolic too, but maybe Morten Tyldum has some inside information and perhaps Turing did use the name after the war.   Anyway, true or not, I think it worked very well as a shorthand for the role of Turing's work in his life.    It's one of the things that has stuck with me - the idea that Turing's love and romantic feelings were moved to his work and his creations, as if he was making Christopher live beyond the grave and continuing their relationship and conversations - and Christopher's work too.   I suppose that in that sense, Christopher's contribution to humanity through Turing was great too, even though he didn't get the chance to fulfil his own potential (if he was a match for Turing or even brighter, then he was quite an exceptional person).    So I suppose Turing reciprocated by unburying Christopher (or what he felt for him) and letting him be reborn in a way.  It's lovely imagery. 

Last edited by Liberty (January 20, 2015 2:08 pm)

Here is an amazing podcast with scientists Janna Levin (who has written a docu-novel about Turing) and Simon Singh. I loved their fair and well-balanced appreciation/critique of the film. Two people who know their subject very well and are able to appreciate and explain even the liberties the film takes. Some film critics should take their approach to heart. You can listen to it here:

http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/12/19/2014/science-goes-to-the-movies-the-imitation-game.html

My thoughts exactly. 

And one of the most distinguished German papers, FAZ, calls the youth story a "fable", implying that it is fictitious. Which is really ironic because the Sherborne episodes are probably the most truthful parts of the whole film. 
 

Excellent description. Just one little correction: Pseudointellektulle Kackscheiße. 

Haha, my two years of German lessons back in Seconardy school was not for nothing. 

No, I actually learned the word "scheisse" from a comic book with a German villain.