“It was not because we were afraid it would offend anybody. If I … had this thing about a straight character, I would never have a sex scene to prove that he’s heterosexual. If I have a gay character in a movie, I need to have a sex scene in it — just to prove that he’s gay?”
I’m not shying away from it. His whole relationship, how he falls in love and the importance of him being a gay man, was all about secrecy.
He had some sexual partners, but it was few and far between. The only reason to have a sex scene in the film would be to satisfy critics who feels that every gay character needs to have a gay sex scene.”
— Morten Tyldum, Oscar-nominated director of The Imitation Game, defending his film in a Vanity Fair interview agains critics who said the film should have show same-sex love scenes.
Paco
Because it’s not gay unless there is a gay sex scene (or shirtless men with abs everywhere).
Low Country Boy
@Paco: Yes, Sir, and yes to Mr. Tyldum.
Josh447
I think that is an excuse and a cover up for keeping it as hetero as possible and possibly fanning homophobia. The fact Alan Turing was gay is a Centerpoint in the movie. Having a sex scene would have grounded his journey more. I smell more fear than logic at dismissing a sex scene or even just a kiss, especially with a faux hetero marriage at large. He had sex with men. I would have preferred that the director made that real. But it was completely discounted and dropped as a possible part of the movie. The director was obviously scared of possible fall out.
KwisatzHaderach
Uh, he had a sexual relationship with Arnold Murray… which eventually led to his arrest for gross indecency, the estrogen injections, and, ultimately, his suicide.
Ladbrook
Agreed, especially after having seen it. The film was about Turing’s contribution to the War effort and to his pioneering efforts in computer science. It was NOT about his sexuality, his love life, or his subsequent arrest and prosecution. Any or all of those topics might make for a great story (in the future), but that would be another movie… not this one.
Kieran
Why not just admit you didn’t want a gay sex scene because it would freak out the Billy Chrystals of the world? There is a gratutuitous heterosexual sex scene in practically every movie Hollywood churns out. Here we have Alan Turing, a WWII hero, a gay man, but even in 2015, he’s still not allowed to have sex publicly with another man. Ironic and sad.
Ladbrook
@Josh447: The fact the he was gay was NOT the centerpoint of this film. The film was about codebreaking in WWII. Period.
Low Country Boy
@Ladbrook: I agree. People need to stop equating the sexual act with a sexual identity. I have a sneaking suspicion that the people posting negative comments on this particular post are very young and have no clue what it was like for some of us older Queer folk.
Gruffling
Sex scenes of any kind are usually unnecessary, however when your film is about a real life person whose sexuality was kind of a big deal, you do need to be a bit overt about it. You know, to be honest to the real person whose life you’re trying to make money from.
That being said you couldn’t even pay me to sit through any sex scene with Benedict Cumberbatch in it. No way.
Giancarlo85
They need to tone it down for US audiences… even in recent times. There was a British film recently called “Pride”. It’s physical cover and back were heavily edited… from what I recall the back description didn’t even mention the word “gay” once. And the film itself was edited. Again US audiences are still too conservative.
I wish they would make a movie about Bayard Rustin who wasn’t overt about anything at all. In fact he was arrested too.
This movie is just another example of the “think of the children” mentality that exists in America. Well, this just applies to gay sex scenes. If it’s straight sex… that’s not a problem lol.
You’re dealing with America… huge portions of this country think anything gay is icky.
Cam
Yeah, it would all sound great, except for the fact that any of the other movies about similar people, (Stephen Hawking, John Forbes Nash Jr. etc….) ALL had significant portions that focused on their relationships. Touring was out to friends, he was in a relationship and got caught which is how he was arrested.
This reminds me of all the B.S. posturing when it was pointed out how the gay couple on “Modern Family” had never kissed. Everybody up and down the chain in Hollywood had all of these WONDERFUL explanations for it, and why having them kiss or even be nice to each other didn’t matter at all…….and it was all Bullsh*t, just like this is.
Hollywood only likes gays if they are gay in theory. And you can always tell Hollywood has it’s big guns out to defend themselves when they bigotedly pretend that putting anything gay in there means having a graphic sex scene. No, it could be hand holding, a hug, them waking up in the same bed etc…
Giancarlo85
@Cam: Yeah I agree with that. Hollywood certainly isn’t as gay friendly as people think. And this type of BS still goes on. I guess with the movie “Milk” there was a bit more related to sex scenes, but even that was toned down.
Plus Hollywood wants to make more money and they want it toned down for the widest audience possible. So they’ll do any sort of BS to accomplish that.
Ladbrook
@Cam: My statements may imply otherwise, but I don’t actually disagree with your greater point. H’wood is phobic (about a lot of things) and 99% of the time they get gay love, gay romance, and gay sex wrong (on the rare occasion that they bother to include it)… But with respect to this film, I didn’t miss the sex scenes, and really didn’t think about the absence of them.
I think Turing’s story is wonderfully unique and historically tragic. There’s room for another film about that part of his life in the future. I just don’t think anyone in Hollywood is all that willing to tell that story.
Cam
@Ladbrook:
I don’t think it’s about whether they were “Missed”, but if you look at the Stephen Hawking biopic it is almost syrupy in it’s focus on his relationship, a Beautiful Mind definitely didn’t shy away from Jennifer Connoly.
I think my issue is, the central theme of this movie is how this man was attacked, disgraced, and driven to suicide because of who he was, and yet we’re getting all of these excuses for NOT showing who he was.
And again, nobody is talking about a graphic sex scene, (That is the same excuse they used for “Modern Family), I’m talking about a simple scene that showed the guy is gay.
dhmonarch89
I’m perfectly fine that there was no sex scenes in the film- what pissed me off about it was the invention that Turing comitted treason- with ZERO proof!!!!!
MarionPaige
How many people commenting here have seen this nothing of a movie? Imitation Game probably seized on a GAY character because ALS was taken.
First off, a good 1/3 (or more) of this crap fest is recycled World War II clips, in black and white no less. They didn’t even see the point in color-rizing the clips.
Second, the movie tells you nothing about Turing. Turing isn’t really SHOWN to be gay, he is basically DECLARED gay by the Russian Spy on the decrypting team.
Third, this comment about the absence of a gay sex scene is probably just another marketing ploy as the whole movie is simply one blatant, “paint-by-numbers” approach to making an “Oscar worthy” film (i.e., English accents, a “handicapped” main character who dies etc).
it is an injustice that Imitation Game won any Oscars for anything.
Paco
@Cam: “And again, nobody is talking about a graphic sex scene,”
Actually, this article is about the director defending the decision to not include gay sex scene, because certain critics needed visual proof the character was gay.
“I’m talking about a simple scene that showed the guy is gay.”
Somehow, I doubt that would have appeased the critics since they specifically were complaining about the lack of gay sex scenes.
I knew Turing was gay and didn’t need visual confirmation of that to enjoy the film.
MarionPaige
Keep in mind that in order for the movie to have had a gay sex scene or a scene showing Turing maybe at a gay / all male party THEY WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY HAD TO SPEND MONEY TO FILM SUCH A SCENE. And, we’re talking about a crap movie that, as I said, relies on recycled world war II clips.
MarionPaige
I just saw the movie Miasto 44 (City 44) and the production re-created the Polish uprising in Warsaw against the occupying German army. It make my blood boil that there could be an amazing effort like City 44 and yet, people are talking about disposable crap like The Imitation Game (and the horror that that sh-t actually won an Oscar for it non-screenplay).
Milk
Why would a producer, director, screen writer and the actor have to consistently defend the lack of gay content on Alan Turing biopic? Isn’t a movie suppose to tell that part of the story? What’s the point of making a movie about him and censored part of his life? Can you cast a white actor to play Martin Luther King because, his skin color is not important but his struggle to fight for racial equity is the main story?
Realitycheck
@Ladbrook:
>>>Agreed, especially after having seen it. The film was about Turing’s
>>>contribution to the War effort and to his pioneering efforts in computer
>>science. It was NOT about his sexuality, his love life, or his subsequent
>>arrest and prosecution. Any or all of those topics might make for a great
>>story (in the future), but that would be another movie… not this one
Agreed, it was an amazing movie with a story to tell that did not revolve around
sex or dating, if anything it was about the unjust view of Gay people of the time.
I am so glad we have come a long way from that……..
Alan down in Florida
His being gay was merely the framework within which the important story about breaking the Enigma Code and developing the proto-computer. The irony of the story is that being a hero who saved millions of lives and shortened World War II was not enough to protect him from being persecuted by a government that should have lionized him.
Could the absence of a sex scene be due to a straight (Oscar winning) screenwriter and director?
OTOH I doubt that within the time frame the movie covers as they try to break the code that Alan Turing had his mind of sex.
MarionPaige
the irony of people complaining about “Hollywood” being resistant to gayness on screen is that the gayness of the character in the movie is clearly part of the Oscar baiting. Take away the English accents and the fatal character and you have a stupid movie with about three or four sets.
Giancarlo85
I do admit it wasn’t a really good movie at all.
jwtraveler
@Giancarlo85: I read (on Queerty) that the cover art for “Pride” was de-gayed (my word), which seems pretty stupid. I don’t know if the movie was edited, but I can say that the American DVD version that I saw was absolutely wonderful and I didn’t feel that anything was missing. If you haven’t seen it, you should.
I am opposed to censorship, in particular when it means omitting gay content, but not every movie about gay characters has to have sex scenes. There are many ways to be open about someone’s sexuality without showing him/her having sex.
enlightenone
@Cam: “… I’m talking about a simple scene that showed the guy is gay.”
Totally agree! What we do get is castration of ALL his sexuality. Only gets to be real for gay men, never for heteros, heck look at all the animated Disney films – “straight” sexuality for the child consumer!
enlightenone
@Milk: “…Can you cast a white actor to play Martin Luther King because, his skin color is not important but his struggle to fight for racial equity is the main story?”
Hi-Five!!!!!!!!! CAM will appreciate your comment.
Josh447
@Ladbrook
You misquoted me. I didn’t say Turing being gay was “the” centerpoint of the movie, I said it was “a” centerpoint in the movie. And it was a highlight that was focused on strongly. The movie worked regardless of a sex scene however in retrospect, I feel it was bias that the director did not address a more complete version of that area of Turing’s life. The movie was in simplistic terms, hetero sanitized.
zaneymcbanes
The Theory of Everything was movie in a similar vein with The Imitation Game (prestigious British biopic set in the mid-century), and there were no sex scenes in that (despite showing the story of a husband and wife). Sex scenes tend to not exist in these types of biopics (and if they are there they’re often shoehorned in).
Also, I think what The Imitation Game was trying to show what life was like when the idea that someone could be exclusively homosexual was just beginning to take hold. The Imitation Game seemed to be interested in examining how sexuality other-izes people even when it is not acted upon, and how indeed when people are shamed for that sexuality it creates issues in connecting with people even as friends.
broadshoulder
If it had been a British film it would have sex scenes from the off. The British government still feels shame about what it did to him – and his downfall was due to his sexuality.
Why isn’t that shown?
MarionPaige
Derek Jacobi as Turing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S23yie-779k
jjose712
Turing was not judged for being chaste. His fall from grace had all to do with having sex with men.
And that’s the problem. We are not talking about Henry James who didn’t have sex, or Pessoa who remained chaste all their life.
Or anyone in a period of their lives when they didn’t have sex, we are talking about someone with an active sex life, who had tons of problems for that active sex life.
And that seems what the director and the actors seem unable to understand.
A gay character doesn’t need to have sex to be gay, but when being gay is such important part of the character you need to show him at least having sexual interest for another male
tdx3fan
Yet, it was perfectly acceptable to turn him into a bitchy, queeny, gay stereotype. If you read the actual biography of his life you realize that he was most likely not nearly as stereotypical in his actual life. This was more like the autobiography somehow got mixed up with Sex in the City.
tdx3fan
@Ladbrook: Its not a documentary. Do you honestly believe that this film would have been at all successful if it completely centered on the scientific achievements? NO! The reason this got made was because it was a gay movie. Then, in order to reach some sort of mass appeal it became a stereotypical gay movie void of any male to male contact. Hell, they do not even show a freaking hug.
tdx3fan
@Ladbrook: Dude, stop deluding yourself. The movie was absolutely about the fact that he was gay. If he was not gay, they movie would have never been made because it takes a special kind of nerd-gasm to watch a movie about codebreaking and creating a computer.
tdx3fan
@Giancarlo85: I disagree. The same goes for straight sex as long as its not in the missionary style. They had to tone down Fifty Shades of Grey for the very same reasons. America has this unhealthy obsession with sex being a dirty thing. It comes from our puritanical roots.
tdx3fan
@Cam: They even picked the absolute least sexy man in all of Hollywood to play him. Personally, with who the leading star was, I’m kind of glad I did not have to see a sex scene.
Giancarlo85
@tdx3fan: Um, not really. Straight sex is almost always more explicit in movies than gay sex. Almost always. And if we’re going to seriously talk about Fifty Shades of Grey… tell me one mainstream (or somewhat mainstream) gay movie that comes even close to it.
Thomathy
It’s an odd choice in a biopic about a man who, at a time when being gay was not at all acceptable to the public, was out. Alan Turing did not hide the fact that he was gay, he was open about it. This, in fact, led to some amount of strife between his mother and him, who was among the 4 people he left his estate to (he apparently loved her very much despite the fact that she never quite seemed to have accepted him.) He left part of his estate to 3 other known gay men, one of whom was (or had been, I don’t have the biography in front of me) his boyfriend.
The fact that he was found guilty for the crime of having gay sex would also seem to be a rather important thing to illustrate in the movie. It’s especially pertinent because it was in the time following WWII, the Cold War, that secret agencies and their government sponsors began to become suspicious of gay men, ostensibly because they were considered ideal targets for blackmail.
Indeed, Turing reported such an attempt on himself of blackmail to police when he stood to gain nothing from officially reporting such a thing except to essentially declare himself to authorities as a gay man.
The movie, which I can grant did a Hollywood job to create an interesting story and recreated Turing for the screen, did a horrible job of creating a character who was anything like authentic to Turing. Turing was an affable, gregarious man who had friends, was well-loved in his community and was respected (defended) by his colleagues (often despite being gay). Above all, he was an out gay man in a time when such a thing was virtually unheard of and he most certainly had sex.
The movie was heavy stylised and reinterpreted Turing entirely. I suppose I’d have more of a problem with this if they had presented an authentic vision of the man. I’m just as happy to dismiss the movie than complain about the lack of a sex scene when the movie barely portrayed a barely recognisable account of Turing and his life.
Lvng1Tor
@Ladbrook: 100% agreed. When I think of Turning, the last thing on my mind is…is he a top or bottom, is he a good kisser? I’m thinking about that brilliant troubled mind that helped bring a WAR to close. Saving lives.
I understand the desire to have more of our intimacy, love and relationships depicted in mainstream movies. I want us to be represented too, but this is a movie about the man and team that created a device and in it’s essence a historical war drama. There is no need to interject a sex scene, unless the police barged in his home while he was in the throws of passion with a man as a historical fact.
Now, if it was a romantic comedy featuring gay men with Ryan Reynolds and Chris Pine and they din’t have a great bed scene I’d be pissed.
Cam
@Paco: said…..”Actually, this article is about the director defending the decision to not include gay sex scene, because certain critics needed visual proof the character was gay.”
____________________________________
And that is Hollywoods bigoted response ANY time they are asked about gay content. Nobody said the movie should have a sex scene. But when the Director, or anybody in hollywoid is asked about “Gay content” i.e. “Why didn’t you have any scenes showing Touring was gay” which means, anything, holding hands, smiling, showing his partner being there when he was arrested, having an argument with his partner, kissing a guy etc…
Hollywood PRETENDS that gay content is only “Buttfu*king”. That way they can play the old “Oh, gosh, we didn’t want a graphic sex scene to distract”.
They used the EXACT SAME DEFENSE when people asked why Modern Family never showed affection between the couple. They were saying “Nobody needs to see Mitch and Cam in bed having sex to know they’re a couple”. Yeah, and nobody was asking for that.
Same as in this movie. He was with another man which is how he got arrested. The movie is about how this hero was attacked, disgraced and driven to suicide because of who he was, and they want to defend, censoring out who he was.
I might buy it if every other biopic of scientists wasn’t DRIPPING with syrupy romance.
AxelDC
Maybe Eddie Redmayne won an Oscar for Stephen Hawking because Hawking was allowed to be a sexual human being, while Turing, whose life was destroyed for being gay, was neutered on film for the homophobes in Hollywood.
Hollywood is still blabbing about how Brokeback Mountain lost to the excoriable Crash because the characters were actually allowed to have sex. Ten years later, Hollywood is afraid of gays being fully human. Meanwhile, HBO wins Emmy after Emmy for shows that display gay sex that would make your grandma cringe. The Normal Heart, Looking, Behind the Candelabra, Game of Thrones, the Sopranos, etc. all have fully formed gay characters. AMC’s Mad Men has had several gay characters in a show about 1960s America. TV has left Hollywood in the dust displaying gay life as it really is.
Paco
@tdx3fan: “Then, in order to reach some sort of mass appeal it became a stereotypical gay movie void of any male to male contact.”
Had this been a stereotypical gay movie, it would have been a poorly done independent production where the main plot would be about two men naked together on a mattress, wrapped in an afterthought of a story with campy innuendo laced dialogue.
So glad Hollywood is not following that formula.
Paco
@Paco: oh and that last part was sarcasm. This movie wasn’t “50 Shades of Turing”.
AtticusBennett
http://littlekiwilovesbauhaus.blogspot.ca/2008/09/shortbus-and-state-of-queer-cinema.html
proof that i’m usually the first to call out and criticize the “de-sexualization” of gay men in art. THAT SAID, Tyldum is correct. This film, this story, this framework – putting in a “Sex Scene” would have been gratuitous. many a “straight film” has had its storytelling credibility undermined with the injection of sex scenes and romances. this film, in its structure, is perfectly made and modulated. there’s no “straight-washing” – i’ve seen this film a few times. his homosexuality is discussed and addressed right up there on the screen.
What would folks want? “well, let’s take a break from this whole Nazi code breaking thing for a quick blowie?”
to those who have seen it – at what moment would you have injected a gay love scene? and what do you think it would have done to benefit the film? do you really think the story would have been better told had there been a flashback to Turing romping with the boy who ended up being part of the reason he was “discovered”?
The Imitation Game was a very well made film, and it’s specific conceit of structure a truly wonderful one.
AtticusBennett
plus – we saw perhaps the most single heartbreaking “love” moment in cinema this year with this film. the young turing with the young charlie, the message in code: “I LOVE YOU”
Cam
@Paco: Said….”So glad Hollywood is not following that formula.”
______________________________
No, you seem to be glad that they are following the old bigoted formula.
bobbyjoe
Sex scene? Ummm, the adult Turing doesn’t even kiss a man in the film. He doesn’t hug a man in the film. There’s no scene where the adult Turing encounters a man on a street, at a bar, or even at the freakin’ supermarket and makes significant eye contact with him. There’s no scene where the adult Turing has a beer or tea with anyone implied to be a lover, a trick, or someone he’s even romantically or sexually interested in. The adult Turing never flirts with anyone in the film. We do get one recurring images of Turing as a kid having a doomed crush on another boy at school, but the other kid dies before anything happens, even the most chaste kiss.
Jeez, when I see the director talk about why there’s not a sex scene in the film, and get away with lame answers like what he gives above, it infuriates me that the wrong questions are being asked. The phrase “sex scene” gives him an out. Why is there not even a scene that shows the adult Turing displaying ANY signs of ANY gay relationship, furtive or not, hidden or not, whether it lasted ten minutes, two weeks or two years, AT ALL? It doesn’t have to be a sex scene. It could be a freakin’ wink. So why the heck is nobody asking the director why even those things are missing?
AtticusBennett
@bobbyjoe: where in the film would you have preferred to see the scenes interjected?
i guess the declaration from alan to charlie, in code (heartbreaking), doesn’t cut it eh?
and look, like i said, i’m usually utterly agreeing with this. but this film’s structure was rather specific.
and yes. we don’t see him “kiss” charlie. we just see him declare his love.
MarionPaige
Imagine how moving it would have been had the audience been introduced to someone in combat who would have been directly affected by the decision of the decryption team to keep secret the fact that they had broken the german code? Instead of the audience having a face to associate with how sacrifices were made for the greater good, the movie gives you a declaration from one of the characters about his brother being on a naval vessel.
Declarations are cheaper than actually filming scenes. Just as old WWII clips are cheaper than filming new scenes. And, just as the Russian spy declaring Turing to be gay is cheaper than filming scenes showing Turing being gay. At every turn, Imitation Game goes for the quick and cheap approach. It’s more con job than movie.
MarionPaige
btw, the name of the classmate (and the turing machine) is Christopher
AtticusBennett
@MarionPaige: “show Turing being gay…”?
You mean showing him write “i love you” to Charlie isn’t gay?
you mean him directly tracking about his homosexuality, and that WONDERFUL speech about diversity, machines, “tastes”, wasn’t enough?
Jeeez, some of you are impossible.
“unless i see him drinking semen i won’t be able to tell if he’s gay!”
Cam
@AtticusBennett: said… “and yes. we don’t see him “kiss” charlie. we just see him declare his love.
And
“You mean showing him write “i love you” to Charlie isn’t gay?”
_________________________
I understand you’re point, however, it’s still “Theoretical Gayness”. It is the same B.S. they used with “Modern Family” …i.e. Hey, we told you they’re gay so why should we show them holding hands.
And again, I would be more inclined to agree with them if it wasn’t for the fact that every similar movie about scientists is simply filled to the rim with relationships and yet this one wasn’t. When you compare it to similar movies it is a glaring omission ESPECIALLY considering that the topic of the movie is that this guy’s life was ruined because of who he was.
CCTR
@AtticusBennett:”Jeeez, some of you are impossible.”
“unless i see him drinking semen i won’t be able to tell if he’s gay!”
Can’t stop laughing, that was a funny comment 🙂
Paco
@Cam: Cam why are you so obsessed with Modern Family? It is just one show on broadcast network television. Have you not watched “How To Get Away With Murder”? I can promise you that the gay character on that show is far from neutered when it comes to expressing his sexuality and the straight audience is not spared from the “icky” gay sex. So I am not understanding why you keep comparing everything to Modern Family, which is just a sit-com.
Why does any movie or TV show need to be compared to other unrelated movies or shows? Are you saying that every gay character on film must be shown having sex and hooking up or they simply can’t be seen as gay? Help me understand this.
Cam
@Paco: said.. ” Cam why are you so obsessed with Modern Family? It is just one show on broadcast network television. ”
__________________________
Paco, why are you so obsessed with saying over and over that it is somehow a great thing that this movie glossed over the main character being gay?
What is your agenda? Explain how the usual Hollywood bigotry is a good thing and why you are posting so many times in support of it?
Paco
@Cam: Because I took the film for what it was and not what I wished it would be. I also don’t ignore the other examples of Hollywood showing change when it comes to showing gay men on film. Yes it is slow, but it is changing and moving in the right direction. Unfortunately a steady diet of porn and really bad independent gay movies based on sex with paper thin plots seem to have made some expect gay sex for every gay character on film with anything less being unacceptable.
Thanks for not answering my questions by asking a question though.
jar
The issue at play here is the erasing of Turing’s sexuality. It’s an age old Hollywood trope. First, there were at most hints of homosexuality, usually with condescension (the Franklin Pangborn character). We’ve evolved to the point of being able to identify characters as gay, but merely as a label. Their sexuality is still kept hidden. That’s what Imitation Game serves up.
For those who claim this film had nothing to do with his sexuality, only the war, I’d like to hear of similar films that did not include a love interest for its hero, whether present or absent and spoken of fondly. Devolving the argument to “sex scene” is merely the excuse used to support an unsupportable argument. Most sex scenes are gratuitous, driven by prurient appeal as a way to get bodies in seats (see the ubiquity of scenes set in strip joints). So, the director’s demurral is disingenuous. I’d like him to recount the films in which a straight male hero’s sexuality is not addressed at all.
Finally, I would argue that an artist who attempts to depict a minority character has a special obligation to ensure those portrayals are not reflections of stereotypes or cardboard figures. There is a duty to bring them to life the same way they quite handily bring to life non-minority characters. Depictions of black people suffer the same hollow presentation. Seen through the eyes of the other as other.
Cam
@jar:
So well said.
jwtraveler
@Milk: @enlightenone: That makes absolutely not sense. MLK’s race is essential to his fight for civil rights. Can you rationally argue that Turing’s sexuality was essential to his efforts to crack the enigma code?
enlightenone
@jwtraveler: “MLK’s race is essential to his fight for civil rights.”
Actually it isn’t. What was essential was answering the call of his God. God doesn’t see race! That was not my point.
This was not a documentary on “cracking the enigma code” or there would have been few moviegoing takers. It is a biopic of a MAN who was castrated and then committed suicide. He was not a cowardly “closet case.” He deserved better in showing his FULL humanity, not a sanitized one that his killers preferred he had!
Frankly would have expected more from this “not gay, weird,” having been depressed and suicidal adapted screenplay writer. But then again, he’s “weird!”
Cam
@jwtraveler: said… “Can you rationally argue that Turing’s sexuality was essential to his efforts to crack the enigma code?”
___________________
That wasn’t what the movie was about, it was about ho the man who did that was attaced and brutalized for who he was. So yes, his being gay IS central to the storyline.
Why is there SUCH rabid defense of not showing his life on screen. Are THAT many people terrified of who they are???
AtticusBennett
@Cam: well, that’s the thing i’m CAPTAIN OUT! I’m one of those gay militants who is, yes, decrying our de-sexualization in the media and in art. And yet, i’ve seen The Imitation Game a few times. I love the film. I truly, yes, don’t think it would have “been made better” by including what some of you are demanding – is it that you’d have preferred a cutaway shot to him embracing a man when he was being interrogated?
In a film where his homosexuality and the persecution of it is discussed so explicitly on screen i find it hard to agree that “his sexuality has been ignored” – and yes, the filmmakers makes a terrific filmic conceit that ties Turing’s need for secrecy and coding TO HIS SEXUALITY.
i mean, hell, the film almost makes the case that were Turing not gay he would not have developed an interest in coding and wouldn’t have been the brain to crack the Enigma code!
the film manages the feat of “not being about his sexuality”, while being completely about his sexuality.
the film’s structure. it’s narrative. you’re really saying the film would have been better had a shot been inserted that showed him being physically intimate with another man? I mean, call me crazy, but declaration of his love for Charlie and how it lasted with him is the heartbeat of the film!
how much “gayer” can you get?
AtticusBennett
@bobbyjoe: who about the part where he writes “I love you” to Charlie, in code?
that was pretty gay.
Cam
@AtticusBennett:
Hi Captain Out, and usually I agree with you. 🙂
In this one though I’m not saying whether or not the movie would have been “Made Better”, I’m saying that if touring wasn’t gay, there would have been no question, a female love interest would have been shown and part of the story, this was deliberately not done here and the reasoning wasn’t movie quality it was Hollywood “StraightWashing”
The put in a huge romantic aspect in the Stephen Hawking movie, they did it with a Beautiful Mind etc… So whether or not it would have been better or worse is less the point than that Hollywod deliberately broke from their pathway to making these movies to purposely minimize the aspect of Tourings life that led to his suicide. That is my issue.
AtticusBennett
you’re aware of True Stories, right? You can’t put an imaginary gay romance into a film where there was none.
a Beautiful Mind erased the character’s bisexuality, save for one moment where he stares down a male extra, who reciprocates with a classic look-back.
the stephen hawking story is about his life with his first wife.
they didn’t “put in a huge romantic aspect” in either of those films – those two films were SPECIFICALLY about how the love of each couple pulled them through their struggles.
The Imitation Game – Turing had no long-term boyfriend. There was no love interest while he was working to crack the enigma code. His love for Charlie, his interest in codes, that’s what carries through. His love for charlie, unrequited, carried him through all of this.
“to purposely minimize the aspect of Tourings life that led to his suicide.”
The aspect that led to his suicide was his persecution – being hunted and hounded for being gay, which was depicted right up there on the screen.
you’re basically demanding the inclusion of a fictional male love interest
jwtraveler
@Cam: I guess I really need to see this movie. The comments here are confusing and contradictory. Some people say that Turing’s sexuality was omitted from the story of his life. Others say the movie was about how he was abused and driven to suicide by the society after cracking the enigma code. Doesn’t make sense to me so I’ll have to see for myself.
@enlightenone: I won’t say any more than that it’s impossible to have a rational discussion with a delusional individual.
Cam
@AtticusBennett:
The true story is he was with somebody, his circle knew, and he was arrested. The Stephen Hawking movie? You answered it right there. It was “ABOUT” his relationship with his first wife.
So let’s analyse that. Here is one of the greatest thinkers alive today, and yet when they made a movie, did they make it about the science? No, it’s “About” he and his first wife.
That right there is what I’m talking about. Hollywood automatically defaults to adding in romantic aspects in any movie. And yet in Tourings case, even though his homosexuality is the only basis for the way his life ended, they did not.
Why not? They showed the persecution but not what he was persecuted for. You seem to be defending it by way of screenwriters choice, my issue is that, if he was persecuted for being an Anglecan, or a Catholic, or a Muslim, please dont try to tell me that they wouldn’t have shown him in a church or a temple. It’s only when he’s gay that they say “Oh, well we’ve told them, we don’t need to show them.”.
It is insidious bigotry. Do not focus on the script and think “Gee, I wonder where they could have shown him holding hands with a guy” but rather think “Why did Hollywood act completely different with this movie than with other similar movies.” It is the overall systemic bigotry at play here. It is irrelevent whether or not you liked the movie, many many people like “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” that doesn’t make the Mickey Rooney part any less rac-ist.
MarionPaige
It’s hard to believe that someone would actually get out of bed, drive to a movie theater and pay to see The Imitation Game more than once.
See the movie Miasto 44 (City 44).
The movie “Not Safe For Work” takes place entirely on one floor of an office building and still, The Imitation Game comes across as more of a con job than “Not Safe For Work”.
AtticusBennett
@Cam: yes. the theory of everything was specifically about his relationship with his first wife.
the imitation game was not about alan turing and the men he occasionally saw in his years after cracking the nazi code.
ok – he was charged with “buggery” – so you’re now specifically asking to see shots of him engaging in buggery.
there have been docs already made about The Science of Hawking – his work and discoveries. those films already exist. what did not exist was a film about the man before ALS wore away his body.
“That right there is what I’m talking about. Hollywood automatically defaults to adding in romantic aspects in any movie. And yet in Tourings case, even though his homosexuality is the only basis for the way his life ended, they did not.”
flat out wrong. the film was about his relationship with wife, a story that had not been told. it did not “add romantic aspects to the movie” the movie WAS A ROMANCE.
it was a specifically romantic film. The Imitation Game was not “the story of the men Alan Turing occasionally slept with furtively in the years after cracking the nazi code”
it was about the man who cracked the nazi code. and how his homosexuality, and need to keep it a secret, led him to an interest in codes and eventually world-saving code-breaking.
clearly you’re as unaware of the works already focusing on Hawking’s science as you are about the reality of alan turing’s life.
” You seem to be defending it by way of screenwriters choice, my issue is that, if he was persecuted for being an Anglecan, or a Catholic, or a Muslim, please dont try to tell me that they wouldn’t have shown him in a church or a temple. It’s only when he’s gay that they say “Oh, well we’ve told them, we don’t need to show them.”.
They did show it. he declared “i love you” to another male. that’s pretty gay.
you’re failing at this, but i’m not surprised.
AtticusBennett
@jwtraveler: everyone saying his homosexuality is “omitted” obviously hasn’t seen the film
and the people complaining are, ironically enough, all anonymous commenters. quel surprise.
cam’s claim that this is systemic bigotry is asinine beyond belief.
what we seem to have are bitter boys saying “you didn’t show him kiss a man! or hold hands with one! without that cutaway shot to him being physical with another man nobody watching the film will realize that he was gay!”
you’re all a bunch of idiots.
AtticusBennett
a brief history of time is a film adaptation of Hawkings work. it focuses solely on the science.
the theory of everything is about the man behind the science, specifically about his relationship with his first wife. this is not “hollywood adding a love story” – it’s telling a true story that had not yet been told.
Cam
@AtticusBennett: said…
“@Cam: yes. the theory of everything was specifically about his relationship with his first wife.
the imitation game was not about alan turing and the men he occasionally saw in his years after cracking the nazi code.”
________________________________
My point isn’t whether or not it should have been done or shouldn’t, my point is WHY did they make a movie about one of the greatest scientific minds of the century and it’s about he and his wife?
Cam
@AtticusBennett:
The second part got cut off.
Second part…..Now before you respond with “That is what that movie was about” my point is, think about whether or not Hollywood would have ever made a movie about Touring where the central point of the movie was about his relationship or his closet status and how he dealt with that.
I think we all know the answer is no. They made a conscious decision in this movie to kep his homosexuality theoretical.
Again, I am not arguing with whether or not you liked the movie, or saying that somebody is a bad person for liking it or not. I am simply saying that they made the decision, show the persecution, but don’t show what he’s being persecuted for…..because that is icky.
AtticusBennett
@Cam: they already made a film about his mind and theories and science. it’s called “A brief history of time”
they told the other story because it had not been told yet, and many folks were unaware of the man Hawking was before ALS took hold. duh.
they did show the persecution of Turing, whose name you continue to spell incorrectly.
you’re saying they didn’t show what he was persecuted for, which was “buggery’ – therefore your complaint is that when he was arrested or questioned they didn’t cut to a shot of him being physically intimate with another man.
what is it with americans who need everything shown to them?
“ywood would have ever made a movie about Touring where the central point of the movie was about his relationship or his closet status and how he dealt with that.”
that can be the next film. it can be titled “the fleeting furtive and brief romances between alan turing and some other secretive closeted homosexuals in the 1940s”
his homosexuality in the film is not “theoretical” – it’s right up there on the screen. in case you were unaware, homosexuality is not about having sex with other men. at all.
those are the answers to your braindead questions. Hawking’s life story had never been told on film, whereas his science ALREADY HAS BEEN.
the imitation game was about showing the world the man who helped save it, and how the world in kind repaid him.
his homosexuality was not omitted – it was right up there on the screen.
but it’s clear that what you wanted (although truth be told it sounds as if you haven’t actually seen the film….) was a cutaway edit that showed him….what? being intimate with the boy who eventually led him to being arrested? because without that shot you….what? feel it’s bigotry?
baby, you’re a world of fail in this regard.
AtticusBennett
but yes, let’s hope for a brutally sad film about the fleeting and brief and secretive encounters Turing had with other men.
that;’s what you want, Cam? a film not about what Turing did, but instead about the secretive and brief and usually rather sad sexual encounters he had with other men?
sounds like a real compelling film.
MarionPaige
@AtticusBennett: “(although truth be told it sounds as if you haven’t actually seen the film….) ”
you’re the one who keeps referring to a “charlie”. Unless I saw a different movie, Turning name his machine Christopher after his schoolmate Christopher.
AtticusBennett
@MarionPaige: freudian slip – i’m watching sweet charity on TV right now and she’s talking about charlie nonstop.
MarionPaige
@AtticusBennett:
let me be the first to point out to you that many people in many communities would NOT automatically assume that the relationship between Turing and Christopher in school was homosexual – at least not from what is shown in The Imitation Game. In what I’ve seen so far from “Breaking The Code”, it is suggested that Turing’s emotional attraction to Christopher was reciprocated.
IF you consider that the school mate scenes between Turing and Christopher would not in fact automatically be interpreted as homosexual, THEN, all you have in Imitation Game that tells the audience that Turing is gay is the declaration from the Russian on the team.
Cam
@AtticusBennett: said…. “therefore your complaint is that when he was arrested or questioned they didn’t cut to a shot of him being physically intimate with another man.
what is it with americans who need everything shown to them?”
___________________
Ok, this is getting ridiculous. You liked the film, I get it, but you can state that, dismissing a valid comment as What is it with you Americans” is ridiculous.
Please tell me you aren’t now claiming that showing any aspect of him being gay is showing a sex scene. They told you he was gay, they didn’t show him “BEING” gay, something as simple as look, a kiss, hell, the “Age of Innocence” showed a hidden relationship with the brush of a hand.
Your comment is mind-boggling, because it is reminiscent of anit-gay people saying “What is it with you hom*s always wanting gay stuff in movies.”
And lastly, “A Brief History of Time” is a documentary, not a full budget Hollywood film.
IF you disagree with me that is fine, but see if you can respond to me without dismissing it due to where I live or something else. I have respected your past commentary and would never post something similar about you.
AtticusBennett
no – showing an aspect of him being gay does not need to be a sex scene. for example, and aspect of him “being shown as gay” was when he told Christopher, heartbreakingly in code, “I LOVE YOU”
they did show him being gay. writing “i love you” to another man is being gay. discussing your oppression and defending yourself as a homosexual is being gay. ironic, that you demand this while you yourself remain an anonymous presence….
“something as simple as a look” – um, did you not see the film? it had more than just “a look” – it had a few looks, between alan and christopher. and an “i love you” declaration. that’s what you claimed to want!
a brief history of time is a film about the science. it’s ABOUT the science. the theory of everything was about the love story between the hawkings.
but you just said “something as simple as a look” – rematch the film and you’ll find you got what you wanted. there were a few looks. you clearly missed them.
be happy! you just got what you claimed you want!
Cam
@AtticusBennett:
Oh shut up, you know what I meant. LOL
Again, you liked the film, I hear it’s good, but I do not want to let Hollywood off the bigoted hook simply because the film was good. I believe that movies about gay people can be messed up with irritatingly out of place, or in place, romantic storylines just like straight movies can be.
Am I glad the movie got made? Sure! Do I think it would have wrecked the movie to show a kiss? (Please stop saying sex scene, nobody is asking for that, that is Hollywood’s response ANY time gay content is mentioned)
Saying I love you, usually in a relationship comes after a kiss, a hug, some hand holding, again, my point is, they show it in EVERY other movie, just not this one.
Using Modern Family as an example, when the complaints about the gay couple came out, the response was showing them in bed would be ridiculous, and why should they have to show a kiss? My response well, you don’t have to show it, but why do you show it with the other two couples?
Did it make it a better show with a better plot? Probably not, it just made it less offensive, and more realistic.
AtticusBennett
YOU HAVENT SEEN IT SO WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT IT?!
AtticusBennett
@Cam: you haven’t seen the film. i’m here to inform you that it contains exactly what you want it to contain – you yourself just typed “…something as simple as a look”. it has that, and more.
i can’t believe i just wasted my time arguing about this film with a fucking moron who HASN’T EVEN SEEN IT YET.
christ, dude. see the damned film before you go on rants about it. #getagrip
Cam
@AtticusBennett:
Really name calling? The fact that you had to scream about him writing “I love you” in code shows me that there wasn’t gay content in the thing.
Secondly, why are you so outraged about this? What I would like to know is please explain to me, how a kiss in the movie or other physical sign that he was gay, a hand holding, a hug, would have ruined it?
You can’t pretend those are in there, because if they were, you wouldn’t have focused on “A Look”.
And I wasn’t ranting, I was pointing out the simple and systemic bigotry of Hollywood. you are the one who has been on here decrying anybody saying that there should have been something obviously gay in the movie. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you are so upset, and again, how would something so simple as a kiss have ruined this movie?
Cam
Ok, I’m not going to argue on this one anymore. Everybody is pretty dug in. Which is fine.
I will now end this with something I think we can all agree one.
Aaron Schock is a closet case who looks like he might be going to jail. (Cleansing Breath)
jar
@AtticusBennett: Perhaps you have a problem with the concepts of indication and demonstration. This film merely indicates that Turing is gay. What Cam is arguing is that it does not demonstrate that he is gay. He is right about that. The treatment of Turing in this film is the equivalent of the oft-expressed, I don’t care that you’re gay. I just don’t want to see it. It’s a reinforcement of the oppressive position that we as gay people must exercise an added degree of “decorum” to ensure we do not offend others. Underlying this attitude is the presumption that such offense is valid and appropriate. The film is not simply about breaking the code. It ventures into other aspects of Turing’s life, but intentionally and notably leaves out that part of his life that encompasses his sexuality.
Before you start tossing your sophistic arguments at me, demonstrating does not equate to sex scenes. It simply means showing a full picture of the man. Not a man who enjoys a love that dare not speak its name- or be depicted in a major film release in the 21st century.
AtticusBennett
Cam is arguing about a film HE HAS NOT SEEN.
therefore, he has no foot to stand on.
how is a man telling another man “i love you” not a demonstration of homosexuality/ homosexuality is about feelings, not physical acts. you’re not gay because you have sex with other men, but because you have sexual and romantic feelings for them.
there was, actually, physical intimacy shown between Christopher and Alan – I’m guessing some of you didn’t notice it. see the film again.
or better yet, SEE THE FILM, before you go on rants about what it “doesn’t show”, based on what others have told you.
CAM has NOT seen the film! why on earth is he complaining about it?!
you don’t need to school me on how we’ve been neutered in art:
http://littlekiwilovesbauhaus.blogspot.ca/2008/09/shortbus-and-state-of-queer-cinema.html
*ahem*
it’s as if you guys have zero concept of what it was like for Turing in the 1940s. you’re pretty much saying “we needed a specific shot of him being physically intimate with one of the men he had fleetingly-brief encounters with after the war”
ironic, of course, that these comments are being made by Anonymous Internet Commenters.