I saw two of the nominees for best picture this weekend spoiler alert for Imitation game
Both are bio pics about important men who did important things. Alan Turing who cracked the Enigma and MLK who led the South into the twentieth century (the film focuses on the March in Selma and the Voting Rights Act). Both films play fast and loose with history as pretty much any film does. This is a link to a discussion of the historical inaccuracies in the Imitation Game http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/dec/19/poor-imitation-alan-turing/ There really is no need to rehash the historical inaccuracies of Selma as they are far better known.
Selma is a very well acted movie with one glaring exception. The casting of Tom Wilkinson as LBJ was a huge mistake. It was very jarring to hear Johnson's southernisms without any hint of a southern accent. Otherwise the acting was great with huge props to both Kings and Wallace. It is a shame that none of those performances were honored with a nomination. In terms of direction, the period was evoked quite well. The costumes and make up were brilliant. Overall it was a powerful film. As a film it gets a A- (sorry no A for a British Johnson).
The Imitation Game had at once and easier and a harder job. Alan Turing was a much less well known figure, in so small part because he was dead before anyone could even know what he did. People like Johnson and King are well known enough that even those of us who weren't born when Selma occurred recognize their voices and visages. Turing, on the other hand, only saw a revival of his role in fairly recent years. That meant that Turing had to be both introduced to the audience and the story of what he did had to be told. Thus we saw scenes of his childhood as well as his work on the breaking of the Enigma. On the other hand, there aren't huge numbers of people who can say I knew Alan Turing and Cumberbach is no Alan Turing. The acting was brilliant with both Cumberbach and Knightly richly deserving their nominations. The era was very well evoked (adult scenes from 39 to 42, and 51 to 53 with childhood in 27). As a movie it gets a firm A. Historically the false plot of his not turning in a Soviet spy was a nearly unforgivable sin.
I can't say if either film was the best of this year as there are six other nominations and I saw none of those. I can say they are both good films and not so great history. When I want history, I watch Ken Burns.
= new reply since forum marked as read
