This essay contains significant spoilers regarding the life of Alan Turing as depicted in The Imitation Game.
I loved The Imitation Game and consider it among the very best films of 2014. Not being all that much of an awards watcher or prognosticator, nor much of a “British period piece” aficionado, I did go into the film knowing it had some awards buzz, but not certain it would be “for me”. I came out feeling that buzz was justified. But more and more, I see the tide of online critical opinion turning against The Imitation Game, with it being called out as yet another “prestige picture” made solely as “Oscar bait”. In fact, my fellow esteemed colleagues here at Cinapse feel much that same way, with Wilson Smith kicking off his review thusly “Ah, the Oscar-bait biopic. It’s that time of year again when we’re inundated with countless prestige movies centered on the life of a noble historical figure and the obstacles he/she struggled with on their way to achieving greatness”. And James Carey, our voice from across the pond, offered a much more forgiving review of the film, but still made the observation that the filmmakers made a “stylistic decision to produce what amounts to an Oscar tick box exercise that verges on the formulaic”. My colleagues have both written well articulated and thorough reviews of the film which offer praises in fair measure, but which also assert that this is simply another in a long string of Oscar bait films. I’m intimidated to even try to offer a counterargument to their valid observations, but I’m going to try. And that is largely because, while I’m proud to say that my Cinapse peers offered measured and well argued points… The Imitation Game is receiving dismissive and snide pot shots across my social media feeds of late which I find distasteful and disingenuous.
Obviously, there is no getting around that The Imitation Game falls well within the comfortable confines of the prestige picture. Set during World War II, making it both a period picture and a tale of our greatest generation, is particularly attractive to Academy voters. The focus on a tortured genius is also a regular repeat offender at the Oscars. On top of that, the film is distributed by The Weinstein Company here in the US (no company does a more thorough job of courting voters and marketing films as potential Oscar winners), stars an up and coming beloved British actor (Benedict Cumberbatch) in a powerhouse lead performance, and in a coup de grace, The Imitation Game is “based on a true story”.
But wait, Ed, didn’t you say this piece was about how The Imitation Game ISN’T an Oscar bait film?
Yeah, I did. My point in laying out the argument for why many consider it Oscar bait is to acknowledge where the sentiment comes from. I get it. I understand why so many see the film through that lens. There’s a pretty airtight logic to it all… which I’ll attempt to break the seal on below. Here goes.
1] Crafting a film specifically for a wide audience doesn’t necessarily dumb it down, and might be the best way to handle material like this.
The Imitation Game is the story of previously unknown-to-me Alan Turing, an uncontested genius who applied his formidable skills to cracking the German “enigma” code during World War II, ultimately succeeded, and through keeping the cracked code a secret, was able to (along with his team) save the lives of millions and ultimately contribute greatly to bringing down the Nazi empire. That’s a hell of a story, and I can’t deny that my total unfamiliarity with said story contributes greatly to my love for the film. I think that will be many people’s experience of it. They’ll see a genuinely heroic tale with consequences that only become more breathtaking the more you think about them, and they’ll wonder why they’ve never heard this story before. Had Turing and his team not succeeded in cracking this code, how different would the outcomes of D-Day or any number of other infamous battles have been? The implications of the story told in The Imitation Game are about as far sweeping as can be imagined… so what is the harm in making the story widely accessible to general audiences?
Had The Imitation Game been more of an oblique study of a troubled genius, or skewed deeper into art house territory, or even simply left out some of the swelling music or over-explanatory title cards that pop up towards the end, I argue the film would have reached or interested far fewer people, which would have continued to leave Turing’s story a peripheral one. When Headhunters director Morten Tyldom and screenwriter Graham Moore made the conscious decisions which led to this film being crafted for a wide audience, they opened up the gates (if it does achieve a swath of Oscar nominations) to allow folks in small towns and countries all over the world to get a chance to see this film. It may sound trite to say it, but I believe Alan Turing deserves to be honored on as wide a stage as possible, even if that is far too little, too late.
2] The application of WWII-era themes to today’s issues are breathtaking and potent.
How had I never heard of this guy before? Why weren’t Hollywood studios working on their 4th or 5th retelling of this incredible tale?
Well, that would be because Alan Turing was also a gay man, whose sexual orientation cost him greatly, and resulted in his being charged with “indecent acts” after the war and sentenced to chemical castration therapy which ultimately contributed to his suicide. A bonafide hero, unsung, who died tragically in part because of the repressive laws of the very society he helped save from extinction.
This element of the story is both crucial, and telling as to why the story hadn’t been told up until now. The long arm of justice is finally bending in favor of full and equal rights for homosexuals in western society, but up until even the past decade, I don’t believe a film like this could have galvanized an audience to embrace Turing as the hero he was, not simply in spite of his homosexuality, but perhaps even because of it.
The film in no way shies away from exploring and empathizing with Turing’s sexuality, even if it isn’t primarily focused on that topic. As a small piece of the cultural discussion in favor of offering full civil rights to gays here in 2014, I couldn’t help but feel that The Imitation Game had extremely relevant points to make for modern audiences. Juxtaposing Turing’s inarguable heroics against his illogical and immoral treatment after the war may cause some mainstream viewers to wonder about other injustices committed against similarly gifted and heroic (or even wholly ordinary) homosexuals. And I can’t think of that as anything but a good thing.
Aside from the exploration of Turing’s sexuality, I was shocked at just how many elements of this WWII era story offered poignant themes for today. Upon the cracking of the “enigma” code, one of the most gut wrenching and fascinating elements of the story involves the fact that years of Turing’s team’s work involved simply crunching numbers amidst top secrecy, figuring out exactly how to interpret the German communications in such a way as to win the war and save lives, but also not reveal that the code had been cracked (lest all their work be swept aside when Germany would have inevitably changed their code).
The moral quandary of keeping the cracked code a secret was fascinating. Clearly the right decision in hindsight, the choice to allow innocents to die on occasion, in service of the greater good, must have been no less challenging to abide by in the moment. This element of the story was equal parts heartbreaking and applicable to so many of the conversations happening in today’s society. Drone warfare, for instance, is at the forefront of debate in our country today. Is the gathering of intelligence and the use of drone technology to carry out strategic strikes an endeavor that is saving lives by avoiding more traditional “boots on the ground” warfare? Or are we allowing ourselves to become murderers with our hands on joysticks? Or consider the “whistleblowing” of Edward Snowden, revealing to us all just how thoroughly our government is tracking our every move. Is he a hero for bringing hidden information into the light? Or a villain for exposing what our government is up to behind closed doors?
No, The Imitation Game isn’t about today’s espionage, today’s secrets, or even today’s computers and technology, but it does offer an incredible story that shaped the current landscape of each of these things. I found the movie to be remarkably applicable to a modern audience and precisely by being so accessible, feel that the film has a greater chance of impacting more people’s thinking about pressing issues of today.
3] The ending is a gut punch brave enough to eschew treacle.
We won World War II. Spoiler alert. This was always going to be the outcome of this film. Much like watching Titanic with the full knowledge that an iceberg is in our lead characters’ very near future, there’s never really any doubt that Alan and his team will be victorious. This is perhaps the best opportunity the filmmakers had to amp up the schmaltz, swell the orchestra, and give us a chest thumping salute to an Allied victory. Alan succeeded, our team are heroes forever committed to silence lest their secret get out, and if this film were truly not concerned with weightier matters than awards contention, I’d argue the ending would have glamorized this victory. Instead, we see through the conclusion of all the various threads of this story which had been taking place on different timelines, the arrest and subsequent downfall of Turing under the influence of governmentally imposed chemical suppressants.
Yes, Turing’s life and achievements are celebrated in The Imitation Game. I understand via James Carey’s review that Britain has since formally apologized for their treatment of Turing, so posthumously his story is becoming quite redemptive and will certainly be of help to struggling gay people who learn of his story today. But none of that helps Turing himself, who died tragically of suicide. The Imitation Game makes this tragic ending clear. The fact that his suicide is revealed in on screen text at the end of the film isn’t a cop out so much as a relief. We didn’t need to see this hero end his own life on screen in order for the tragedy of it all to impact us.
But neither did the filmmakers have to address this element at all. A lesser film could easily have sideswept the entirety of Turing’s homosexuality and the injustices brought upon him because of it. But The Imitation Game takes Turing’s sexual orientation and builds it into his lasting legacy. He wasn’t a hero because he was gay, but he was (and is) a hero who happened to be gay. Gay and straight people the world over need examples like this right now to remind us all that equality for homosexuals is a civil right worth fighting for.
So sure, The Imitation Game is cinema for the masses, and it’ll likely win a boatload of awards. Even the film’s critics seem to be frustrated precisely because of this possible eventuality of Oscar glory. But on top of all the reasons listed above arguing why the film isn’t specifically crafted for Academy votes, it also happens to be thrilling, edge of your seat entertainment, impeccably acted and solidly directed and written. I’d enjoy watching the film again and argue that it will remain relevant and popular long after many other so called prestige films have won their awards and disappeared into our collective memories.
And I’m Out.