Pages

Sunday, November 30, 2014

The Imitation Game

Morten Tyldum’s The Imitation Game is yet another dull tortured genius biopic in a very long line of dull tortured genius biopics. Before I get into my analysis of these types of films, I want to be clear about something from the onset. The Imitation Game is not an inherently bad film. In telling the story of how famed mathematician Alan Turing cracked the Nazi’s unbreakable Enigma code, thereby helping the Allies win World War II, Tyldum has made a perfectly average film. Tyldum, writer Graham Moore, and star Benedict Cumberbatch, spend 114 minutes capturing the full and tortured life of Turing, resulting in a safe movie that will surely tap directly into the hearts of many Oscar voters.

My problem isn’t with The Imitation Game. The film is just another player in an increasingly crowded game. My problem is with the Tortured Genius Film itself, a genre that follows a formula so closely that, by this point, we can expect as much variation to them as we can from most romantic comedies and horror films.

The formula is one defined by clichés. To name a few:

There’s the informal job interview scene, where our main character exercises his intelligence over his future boss by delivering countless witty retorts. Right as the boss has had enough, our hero says that One. Right. Word. that forces the boss to hire our hero. The Tortured Genius Film almost always stars a male, one who is backed by a strong supporting female character. The genius often suffers from sexual inadequacy, whether due to disability, sexual preference, or chemical influence. The film will contain countless scenes of our genius staring. Staring at charts, graphs, complex equations, blueprints. A lot of staring. He’ll surely have an A-ha! moment. These usually take place in bars or at parties. It’s when the genius suddenly realizes That. One. Thing. that will solve all of his problems. It’s a scene that’s immediately followed by the genius running to his lab or office, putting a few pieces into place, before realizing that, Yes, he’s got it.
The film itself probably implores a flashback narrative: we open at the “big event,” then flash back decades, thereby leading up to, and ending with, the big event from the beginning. The musical score will be string-heavy; swelling at moments of great accomplishment, and subtly underscoring moments of dread. There won’t be anything particularly interesting about the cinematography. If the film is set in England (which they often are), it’ll feature many shades of brown. Brown clothes, brown foliage, brown walls. Lot of brown. 

You get it. And again, it isn’t my intention to bash The Imitation Game. Everything I described in the previous two paragraphs is featured in this film, but I could easily be talking about The Theory of Everything, A Beautiful Mind, The King’s Speech, and numerous others. This review isn’t meant to discredit Turing’s work, or be flippant about his personal life, and the way in which his country shamed him. I have nothing negative to say about Alan Turing, the man, just as I have no ill will toward Stephen Hawking, John Nash and King George VI. The man isn’t the problem, the tired filmic adaptation of his life is.

My overall point is that The Imitation Game follows a safe and easily marketable formula that I find dull and unappealing. And look, I get that not every film can have the technical audacity of Birdman, or the narrative scope of Boyhood, or the ceaseless danger of Foxcatcher, or the frantic energy of Whiplash. What all those films do have, however, is a feeling of uniqueness. They are new, whereas The Imitation Game is barely average.

Perhaps it’s unfair for me to expect a Tortured Genius Film to stray from its formula. Hell, you might even argue that it’s foolish of me to pay to see a movie like The Imitation Game, when I all but know that I’m not going to appreciate the way it’s story is told. Point well taken. If I wasn’t obsessed with seeing every film that garners serious Oscar consideration, then I’d likely move right past The Imitation Game. But until that obsession subsides, I can expect to sit and watch The Imitation Game’s of each passing year. Sitting and watching and wishing I wasn’t able to call the film’s shots long before they happen. D+ 

40 comments:

  1. For a supposed Oscar frontrunner, I've been reading a number of mixed reviews! I also definitely agree with your last sentence, and sadly, that's been happening to me a lot of times with many films released nowadays. However, I will say one thing, which is that I liked The Theory of Everything. Looking back on it, I feel that I was too distracted by the two great central performances from Redmayne & Jones and a few of the technical aspects. The more I think about it, the less I like it.

    I think the reason these types of films do well (apart from having a good campaign, isn't that right, Harvey?) is because they make people feel happy. There are some people who just do not want to watch a dark film like Gone Girl, something that will leave them cold in the end. They want their movies to be formulaic, so that they know what will happen and they are happy in the end, because they feel better about themselves, after which they proceed to shower these films with awards, as if they have contributed something to the life of the people these films are based on (all of the films you mentioned above are good examples). Granted, I do not think I am the right person to judge as I have not yet seen The Imitation Game and this rant might be completely pointless, but I mean, how can it not be like those other films? I've seen the trailers, and it seems to follow the standard biopic rulebook to me. Will I still watch the film? Yes, because I like Cumberbatch and Knightley, and who knows, maybe I'll like it more than you did.

    The NYFCC announce their awards today (or tomorrow, depending on where one lives). Here's hoping they honour the films that dare to be different from the rest of the pack. Sorry for the rant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's funny, when I go back and read my reviews of films that fall into this genre, I realize I've been overly kind to them in the past. I guess I'm just done with them. But, yes, you're totally right that films like these make people feel happy. Even though Turing didn't lead a charmed life, it's an uplifting story that people sink right into. I'm curious about Unbroken. I'm hoping it has a bite to it that the films I mentioned in this post do not, but I fear it will ultimately be more of the same. We'll know if a few weeks, I suppose.

      Don't apologize for your rant! Believe me, your rant was well heard and received. Cumberbatch and Knightley are both fine in this film, sure, but Oscar worthy? Not to me. No way. There's nothing remotely special or earth shattering about their work here, and I say that as a great admirer of both of them.

      Delete
    2. Unbroken had its Academy screening today I believe. From what I've read so far, early word of mouth has been positive, ranging from 'good' to 'great'. Many of people who went to the screening said that there was lots of applause at the end of the film. However, some say it was just fine, it was just a good film, but it might not have been the major threat to Boyhood many were expecting. I guess we'll see what happens next with the critics. Boyhood for the win!

      Delete
    3. Yeah I was seeing some tweets from people last night. Some remarked that it's very violent but I mean... it's PG-13, you know? How graphic can it be. I'm eager to see it, but yeah, Boyhood for the win!

      Delete
  2. I thought about seeing it despite the mixed reviews as I was baffled into why it won the Toronto Film Festival's Audience Prize. I don't like films that play it safe. It has me guessing about what is going to happen next and it ends up being a total let down. I think I'll skip it. Thank you very much.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I think that's wise. There's talk that he'll be a frontrunner for Best Actor, which is beyond me. I just don't get it.

      Delete
  3. I pretty much expected this (in both instances) and have not seen either TToE or TIG yet, though I expect that I will sit through them both for the same reason you mentioned. I hear the performances are pretty good anyway (and I'll see anything with Felicity Jones in it) so hopefully that will at least keep my attention and won't put me to sleep. Though I have to say of the films that you mentioned, in relation to the formula you talked about, I would say I like The King's Speech the most - the performances in that film I do think are good and I actually think that film, slightly, transcends the formula in that at times I think it almost acts more like a comedy than a straightforward drama. Having said that, give me the Birdmans, the Foxcatchers, the Jaujas, the Whiplashes, and the Boyhoods over these formula-driven pieces any day!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh and to be clear, there's definitely nothing wrong with the performances in any of these films. I adore Felicity Jones. Like Crazy really changed things for me, as a filmmaker specifically. Her work in that film is sensational, and I enjoyed her in TToE. But do they deserve the highest acting honor that exists? Nah. But maybe I get a little too hung up on who wins awards and who doesn't. I just don't understand the overt praise for movies like this. What's especially odd is that the cinematography in TToE is being lauded. I mean, it is so insane with its color grading, I just couldn't help but laugh. But, again, oh well.

      Delete
    2. I think everyone is probably too hung up on awards in my opinion. If it wasn't for awards, movies like these might be a bit more adventurous and not stick to a formula so much. I'm sure the mentality is, "It worked for that other film, so if we do it maybe we can have a similar/the same result."

      I haven't heard anything for the cinematography of TToE. I've seen the trailer and it all looked a bit too "shiny, shiny, sparkly, dreamy, sparkly" (if that makes sense) to me. I guess I'll have to wait till I finally see it to see just how much color grading there is since I'm now weary to watch that trailer again lol. Hopefully Jones gets another shot at the big one one of these days, she certainly deserves it (she deserved it for Like Crazy as I'm sure you might agree).

      Delete
    3. Definitely makes sense, that's actually a fair assessment of the photography of that film. And I love what you said about awards. It does feel like a lot of movies like this are simply made just to win awards.

      Delete
    4. Ok, having just seen TToE your comment makes complete sense now. I'd love to see what it looked like without all the color correction.

      Delete
    5. Right exactly. I'm not trying to shit on TToE or anything. Everyone involved seemed to have very noble intentions. But that color correction was insane.

      Delete
  4. "It’s when the genius suddenly realizes That. One. Thing. that will solve all of his problems. It’s a scene that’s immediately followed by the genius running to his lab or office, putting a few pieces into place, before realizing that, Yes, he’s got it. " - to be fair that happens in Social Network too :)

    How were the performances? People are saying Benedict and Keira may very well win but it just doesn't seem like the movie is giving them enough nor this could be their best.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha, it certainly does. In fact, TSN really is just another tortured genius film, but they managed to elevated it so damn much, you know? Benedict and Keira are both truly fine here, but yes, exactly, the film doesn't give them enough to do. It's a very basic film to me, same as The Theory of Everything. I simply can't understand the lavish praise. Both have been FAR better in other films/shows.

      Delete
    2. I just hate how this year there are all those really daring performances like Pike, Gyllenhaal and I imagine everyone in Foxcatcher and Academy is gonna vomit praise all over TToE, IG and Still Alice which is seriously even worse than TToE because it doesn't even have production values and it may as well be a Lifetime movie. Unbroken looks cheesy beyond belief on the other hand.

      It would be fabulous if at least one daring performance other than Simmons won in February.

      Delete
    3. Yes, exactly, that is the problem. Daring and risque performances are routinely overlooked for safer performances. Sure, a few bold performances hopefully sneak into the Oscars every year, but they rarely have a shot at winning. A shame.

      Delete
  5. Dang! I'm always so shocked when you give something a shit rating, it doesn't happen often.

    I still want to see this for Cumberbatch and Knightley, but you're absolutely right about the formula for these types of movies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I used to write reviews of EVERY new movie I saw, but a few years ago, I realized I didn't like too many of the new films I was seeing, so I typically reserve my film criticism for movies I want other people to see, you know? But this review felt necessary to me, if only because I'm so down on this genre right now. Yuck.

      Delete
  6. I haven't seen either this or The Theory of Everything yet but since I saw first trailer for either of them, I knew that people are going to love this movie and I will be spending whole lot of time wondering what did they see in them?

    I know I am making sweeping generalizations and I will still watch them both eventually and I hope I like it more than you but your review strengthens that feeling. Not a good start :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, we all go off instinct, you know? The trailer, the poster, who's in it, who made it... it's all informed by what we personally think. And true, it's never good to judge a book by its cover, but in terms of these two films, I'd say your judgement is spot on so far.

      Delete
  7. Really not surprised about this rating. Films like these tend to be awfully formulaic indeed. Definitely watching this of course but my anticipations are definitely not high at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll be interested to hear what you think. The performances are perfectly fine, but the movie is just more of the same.

      Delete
    2. So I finally saw the film the other day and while I liked it more than you did it was exactly what I expected it to be. That kind of well made and brilliantly acted (in fact Cumberbatch and Knightley blew my mind with their turns there, incredible, just incredible work from both of them and 100% worthy of Oscar love) but painfully formulaic and Oscar-bait. What could have been a great film about an obviously fascinating man turned to something well-crafted but highly conventional. Typical Hollywood, I guess! Definitely not my type of film either but yeah, that was definitely one of those cases where what I expected to see and what I finally saw were pretty much the exact same thing. The one little thing I was pleasantly surprised to see is that while I expected the performances to be great I didn't expect them to be THAT great. It's the only thing I'm enthusiastic about the film. And of course if I'd decide to update my list for my favorite female performances of the year, Knightley would be definitely in my Top-15. Both her and Cumberbatch (especially Cumberbatch) were entirely commited to their characters. Best work I've ever seen from both until now.

      Delete
    3. The acting is very good in the film, no question. But I'm glad to see that you agree with me about how formulaic it is. It's such a bummer to be able to call a film's shots.

      Delete
    4. Oh yeah man, it really is. You're SO right about it. However wonderful it may be to see cast and crew members working hard and really commit and giving their all to formulaic material, they simply can't hide how formulaic it is. I wish Hollywood could stop giving so much effort to make and promote films that conventional and rather spread more awareness to daring and provocative work (like Richard Linklater's masterful Boyhood or Inarritu's fantastic Birdman for example), but hey, it's Hollywood, man, you know and I know and pretty much everyone who has ever spent the tiniest amount of time to care about Hollywood and awards season knows that films like The Imitation Game will keep on being made and I wish there will make for a little more brave and unconventional material to somehow suit the industry's need for mainstream entertainment and "serious cinema" (blah, I know). It's such a shame when a film can't speak to you, like really speak to you and touch you and move you because of how "by the numbers" everything or most things on the screenplay may be. However Cumberbatch or Knightley may be, there comes that moment in the bar and you go like "No! Hollywood at its most laughable" Though on the whole I was ok (and again simply ok) with the film, It's slightly uncomfortable how this particular film chooses to play it safe telling the story of such a fascinating figure like Turing.

      Delete
    5. Your final sentence speaks exactly to my biggest problem with the film. It was all just too easy. His homosexuality should've been integrated into the plot much more, as should his horrific punishment for being gay. But instead it was so minor and safe, really a shame. Formulaic movies will always be made because that's what the majority of movie audiences pay to see. And that's perfectly fine, you know? Just not typically for me.

      Delete
    6. And me as well man, no doubt about that. It would be really so great if the film chose to focus on those extremely important and complex issues but I wouldn't expect it anyway for a film that even from the trailer looked solidly made but way too formulaic to create excitement for someone who really loves film and dark, complex, daring material. As I definitely consider myself as that kind of person, films like The Imitation Game aren't my cup of tea either. Enemy and Under The Skin are among my favorites of the year, so you can imagine how I feel about something like The Imitation Game. And obviously my biggest problem with the film was the same you had. It just worked better to me on the whole. I found it to be a thoroughly well-made and enjoyable film, shaped with skill and passion but ultimately too mannered an generally formulaic biopic, one that fits the Oscar-bait stereotypes we often laugh about and have come to expect from films like this. Rather than becoming engrossed in telling Turing's story with accuracy and depth, Tyldum glosses over some of the most crucial aspects of his personality and life. And that's a MAJOR flaw. In a strange way, though, for me he succeeds to be emotionally involving at times and with his assured directions and impressive leads, he makes a solid film. It's a shame because with such a fascinating man as the central figure of his film, he could have made a great one. That's a bummer really. So great we had a great number of truly great films this year. There has been a time when something like The Imitation Game could easily win Best Picture, luckily the creative genius of Linklater and Inarritu evidently prevails.

      Delete
    7. Love your last sentence. So true. I would adore it if Linklater won Best Director.

      Delete
  8. I've been looking forward to this, so I'm a bit bummed to see that you disliked it. :) I'll come back and read your review after I see the movie. It'll be fun to see whether my opinion differs from yours.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, like I said, this isn't a bad film, it just has nothing new to offer. I called its shots within the first five minutes, which is never very fun.

      Delete
  9. Ouch. I expected it to be a generic movie that Oscar voters would love, but I am interested in checking out Cumberbatch's performance at least. Actually, I put this film at #10 on my most anticipated list at the beginning of the year. No idea why now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cumberbatch is good in it, as is Knightley, but not Oscar good, to me anyway. I'll be interested to hear what you think of it.

      Delete
    2. I like the film (B+), even if it is heavily sanitized and very formulaic. Cumberbatch is actually my #5 in Best Actor right now, but I have several performances just on the outside that could take his spot. Plus, I have a number of films to see before I post the 2014 CinSpecs.

      Delete
    3. Hey man, fair enough. Obviously a lot of people liked this one more than me. Just didn't do it for me.

      Delete
  10. Hey Alex! Definitely a great review here. I like that you stuck with what you thought, and I think you made an excellent point about certain films following a formula. Also, it feels a bit Oscar-baitish considering that this type of film often seems to do well at the awards.

    I think it's interesting that you included The King's Speech in here, because I always saw that more as a biopic of a man with a problem (he struggled socially, but he certainly wasn't a genius, much less a tortured one).

    I was reading the comments, and I would agree that people like to go see movies because they do make them happy. Movies came about because they were a form of escape for people who needed to get away from their very realistic lives filled with pain and difficulties. Don't get me wrong, I'm totally with you in that I respect and usually appreciate movies that aren't so formulaic and actually give us something different. Whiplash is one of the best movies I've seen so far this year! But as for a movie like The Imitation Game, which I have yet to see, I really am going more for the actors (as echoed by many others) as well as the intriguing story. I hope I enjoy it more than you do, but who knows!

    In other news, I did see Theory of Everything, and I feel like while it very much followed a certain formula, I did think that the main actors' performances, namely Eddie Redmayne's, rose above the material to make it a bit better than it would have been.

    Cheers, and apologies for such a long comment!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't ever apologize for a long comment! I really appreciate you leaving comments of any length. Now, if you're going to The Imitation Game for the performances, then I think you'll enjoy it just fine. But, like The Theory of Everything, the story is very heavy handed and very formulaic. To me, anyway. But I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on this one once you see it.

      Delete
  11. Ha! I loved this review, Alex. The breakdown of the tortured genius movie tropes.....that itself is genius. I laughed out loud in the theater during that bar sequence when he had the "A Ha!" Moment. I mean, they brought that other female character in JUST for that sequence. God, how obvious. The whole thing played like the screenwriter had just taken a How To Write A Screenplay class. Everything felt so manufactured. And such a shame because the Turing character, I think, has real bite that goes unexplored.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YES! The moment we were introduced to that new gal in the bar, I thought, "Oh Christ, let me guess where this is going..."

      I agree that Turing seems like a very interesting and remarkable man, one who deserved a better film. And holy shit, I laughed out loud at your "How to Write a Screenplay" bit. So, so true.

      Delete
  12. I caught The Imitation Game when it came out near me back in December and it's funny because immediately, I was like "Wow" it was very good. But eventually, I was like "Eh, it wasn't bad" and I realized my biggest weakness as a film critic is that sometimes, I tend to like whatever I see. I still liked it better than Theory of Everything, but the direction had a very cold vibe and the "Sometimes it is the people.." line was used a little too often. I did think that Cumberbatch and Knightley were very good, though. It wasn't my favorite movie of the year and may not have cracked my top 15, but it wasn't horrible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, it wasn't a horrible film, but it was certainly an ordinary one, to me, anyway. It offered nothing new and relied on the conventions of the genre to pull on heartstrings. Just didn't work for me.

      Delete