What did the Weinsteins did this time in terms of meddling?
Pirate AND writer!
Downplaying/cutting the parts related to his homosexuality.
Looking for some stories?
Eh.. He *died* because of a highly misguided attempt to treat his homosexuality medically. How the heck do you downplay that?
Mad Scientist Wannabe
The Weinsteins found a way. They ALWAYS find a way to ruin good movies.
Of course, don't you know anything about ALCHEMY?!- Twin clones of Ivan the Great
It's interesting because the player still strongly hints at it ("What if I don't fancy her that way?" "You can't say, it's illegal").
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
Yeah, that's what I'm most afraid of, the thing about how they handle Turing's sexuality
I think the cutting out of the homosexuality turned out to be just a rumour. And really, it's a part of Turing's life that you can't ignore in a faithful film adaptation, unless it just ends with him getting married to Keira Knightly and then cutting to the credits so the audience can assume they lived happily ever after together. Which would be a huge insult to Turing, to the audience and everyone involved in the film.
3DS Friend Code: 0018-0767-4231
Homossexuality being cut out would be a shame that would hit the Weinsteins' wallets hard.
Downplaying it is a possibility. While elaborating on a person's sexuality on a biopic is not obligatory, it would be good if they could show something valuable. There's no need to show any flesh (gay male sexuality is still a rarity in mainstream cinema, with Brokeback Mountain having been a fluke of sorts), but it would be great to portray some intimacy in his life.
Personally, I'm more interested in Turing's achievements than in the portrayal of his sexuality. That being said, portraying his sexuality with a good amount of pathos would make it a good movie on its own. Besides, having Cumberbatch in it might be an advantage, thanks to the Sherlock shippers, who would help with a good deal of word-of-mouth.
Well, it's still hard to "downplay." Yeas, it's certainly possible to regulate how much of his sexual relations with other men are shown, but considering how much it dominated his later life and death, it's not a topic that can be stepped around or addressed only briefly. Fetishising it to appeal to the Sherlock fandom would possibly also be somewhat questionable in light of what happened.
Turing was prosecuted for homosexuality, and was sentenced to chemical castration- an ongoing hormonal treatment designed to control his sexuality, which led to health problems and depression, culminating in his suicide. Not something that you can really sidestep, assuming they cover his story up until his death (given that Cumberbatch looks close to 40 in the trailer, it's likely that they do.)
That's not to say that there won't be plenty of focus on his work as well- the title of the film comes from a thought experiment Turing developed as a metaphor for artificial intelligence. It'll be like in Hawking, I suppose, where the focus was equally on Stephen Hawking's work as a young physicist as well as the progression of the disease.
3DS Friend Code: 0018-0767-4231
I know his story. Either they'll cover that Downer Ending or they will only focus on the experiment, with some homoerotic subtext/actual text ocurring during the time of said experiment. Some biopics don't end with the death of the person the movie is about, so, there are various ways the movie could be approached.
Also, while fetishing for the sake of Sherlock is questionable, I wouldn't put it past the Weinsteins. If it renders more profits, it's what matters to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2jRs4EAvWM
New trailer just came out, makes a fair bit of notice on how Turing was treated after the war due to his homosexuality.
Sneering Imperialist
Having just got back from it, I can safely say that his homosexuality is not downplayed in any way, shape or form. Quite the opposite, in fact. Neither does it dominate the film, either. The thing that dominates the film is Alan Turing, not one particular aspect of him, be it his genius or his sexuality.
edited 14th Nov '14 2:46:53 PM by pagad
With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
Saw this today and wasn't overly impressed; having been to Bletchley Park on three occasions myself, I know that the story there is grossly Hollywoodised. Keira Knightley was particularly miscast.
Also spotted a fairly big anachronism in the scenes at what was supposed to be Euston (I guess that was actually King's Cross; Euston was rebuilt after the war) - visible overhead wires... which weren't added until the 1960s!
Too old for this
Saw it yesterday (it was only released last week in my country) and was not overly impressed. I felt too much of the movie relied on how Turing has trouble relating to people, which is apparently not that close to how Turing was in real life (at times I really had the impression I was watching some mix of Sherlock and Sheldon). Also, as a computer buff, I'd have loved to have a bit more focus on the science part, but I am aware this would not have interested a lot of people.
The flashback scenes in boarding school were interesting though, and Knightley is as easy on the eyes as ever (no matter if that is not historically accurate) and her character was funny. And it was quite new to see Cumberbatch play an Insufferable Genius.
Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.
What do you guys think ? Shameless Oscar Bait? Scares about executive meddling from the Weinstein Company?
edited 12th Aug '14 3:15:03 PM by Xopher001