THE IMITATION GAME

‘Based on a true story’ says the opening card of the movie. By the time the movie ends you wonder how such an important event in history was not public knowledge for decades. We have seen dozens of WWII movies, and quite a lot on the launching of the Second Front at Normandy beach, which was a decisive moment in WWII. But, who decided the moment and place of that attack? Have we ever thought of that beyond perhaps the generals and commanders who decided the strategies of war? What if those were not the decisions of the Generals, but that of Christopher? Who’s Christopher? Watch The Imitation Game to find out.

Its 1939, the Nazi’s are threatening civilization and the allies have no clue about their movements. There is a way to know their movements before they actually happen. But to do so they have to break a code, the code called ‘Enigma’. Espionage thrillers usually have an undercover agent in enemy territory pilfering information for his people back home, risking his limb and life. Here, the spies are in the comfort of a radio factory, in cozy huts with sheets of papers. They are the best cryptographers in all of England, and they have been chosen because they solved crosswords faster than anyone else. How do they break ‘Enigma’? That journey and the bigger journey that Alan Turing takes through this task is The Imitation Game.

This is as different a WWII movie as you can think about. Yes, there are fleeting footages of war that

remind us of the devastations of the period that the movie is set in. But for most part, the movie is a drama set within a military camp where a group of certified geniuses rack their brains. While all of them want to use pen and paper and their gray matter to crack the problem, Alan Turing, professor of mathematics at Cambridge, wants a 100,000  pounds with which he wants to buy rotors and wires. What’s he up to? That’s as much as one can reveal about The Imitation Game.

If you need just one reason to watch a movie, then here the reason is Benedict Cumberbatch. He plays the irascible genius to perfection. He is not good at talking to people, he never understands why people mean something and say something else and yet expect you to know what they mean. He never wants to explain his ways to others and believes that even if he tried they would never understand the importance of what he was doing, not even his fellow geniuses. He can’t take orders, he can’t work in a team. He’s just not normal! But as it is said many times in the movie, almost always at the right time, ‘It is the people who no one imagines much of, who do things that no one can imagine’. All those traits portrayed with seasoned expertise, underplay and expression at the exactly right places. This is a pitch perfect acting masterclass by Cumberbatch.

And his brilliance has rubbed off on others too. Everyone around him transforms into min-geniuses in their own ways. Keira Knightley comes in as a very important character who makes Alan Turing likeable to his other teammates. Their romance that seems to spring from the admiration of each other’s intellect and oddities comes across as refreshing.

The script, and the way it ahs been shot, beautifully shows the ways in which geniuses function on a different plane. Their daily frustrations of knowing that there is someone or something out there smarter than them, their processes of elimination and calculation; and most importantly the final moment of truth when they hit upon what they have been looking for all this while! It is not all said in a way that a layman cannot understand. Especially, the simple piece of logic which gives them the final breakthrough is very understandable.

A special word of mention for the dialogues. They are witty, sharp and deep at different points and you will enjoy them as they sprinkle humor along the way. The movie begins in 1951 as cops enter the house of Alan Turing whose neighbors have reported unusual sounds. The movie then flits between 1951 and the WWII, as the police investigate into what or who made those unusual noises. One small detail that could have been better here is a clear demarcation of the two periods. The scenes shift so fast from one era to another that there are a few seconds before one can actually pick up which it actually is. That apart, the few looks at the boyhood of Alan Turing are revelations into the growth of his genius and some of his predilections.

In the end, it is a bit sad to know how late in history this man has been acknowledged. Nevertheless, The Imitation Game is the beginning of a very late tribute that the world owes to Alan Turing.

Brilliantly executed portrayal of brilliance that changed the world!

4/5

Taken 3 Review

The last month or two have been filled with pretty meaningless sequels; Night at the Museum 3, Woman in Black 2 etc. Movies that were made because the producers felt that there was still some steam left in the franchise, and not essentially because a good script was ready. So, going for Taken 3, one did hope that it was not a sequel made out of compulsion.

We know the drill with Taken 3! It has been the same over the last two movies. Miller (Liam Neeson) has to save his family from some huge mafia or drug lord or flesh trader who has somehow laid his hands on them. No matter how many people are killed, how many cars blown up, how man buildings brought down, Miller doesn’t care. He just wants his family safe.

It goes the same way here too. But, there is a slightly more sinister twist this time. Miller finds his wife Lennie dead in his bed. Before he knows there are cops pointing guns at him. He has to prove his innocence all by himself, because he knows that he has been framed by people who are really god at it. So, who’s framing him and why? That’s the only thing that Taken 3 is worth watching for.

The Taken franchise has worked mostly on Liam Neeson’s ability to pull of close range action

sequences with the slickness of a professional. He did it perfectly in Taken 1, which is why we loved it. But, in Taken 3, he seems to have slowed down a lot. Especially the first chase when he is running on the road and over fences, one can clearly make out that a body double has been used. That is shoddy making and has no excuses! The action too does not match up to the standards of the Taken franchise. The car chase looks more messy than exciting, with some special effects looking cheesy (you would expect something similar in a medium budget Tamil film). And, Liam Neeson escapes from too many car crashes without a real good explanation. Come on, we know he is not Superman!

But, the biggest let down is the script itself. It is just one action sequence set up after another with different reasons. One wonders why Miller is so desperate to contact his daughter in person just to tell her that he is okay, and risk getting arrested and getting his daughter in big trouble. It just seems like artificially induced spikes in the script because of lack of sufficient material. Yes, we know Miller dotes on his daughter, but we also know he is intelligent enough to sort out his priorities.

The best thing about Taken 3 is not Liam Neeson. He does his usually senior-pro stuff with ease. You will enjoy Forrest Whittaker’s nuanced performance as the detective. He has employed a couple of unique mannerisms which he consistently follows, and gets some very witty lines. But, his role is cut off for long periods in the script, which spoils the fun.

One feels that Taken 3 was just made because some people felt that there was some more juice left in the franchise. The script is half baked and does not excite at all. The action sequences are repetitive, and all what we have seen before, and sometimes look half-heartedly done. If you like Liam Neeson’s trademark underplay, and can enjoy Forrest Whittaker’s nuances, you might just about feel not too bad about this. Otherwise, there’s nothing new to watch it for.

[The audience]Taken (3) for granted

1.5/5

The Woman in Black: Angel of Death

One never imagined in 2012 that the Woman in Black would actually have a sequel. It was a small movie that used old school tricks to give us a few thrills. But, it did hit it off well with audiences, which is why she returns as Angel of Death. The movie is set in 1941 where children from London are being evacuated to the countryside to keep them safe from the bombings. One such group is sent to Eelmarsh house, the house of the Woman in Black. But of course, the unsuspecting children and the two teachers accompanying them know nothing of this.

The makers of the movie have gone ahead with the script with the assumption that anyone watching this already knows everything about Eelmarsh house. Now, that is a pretty far reaching assumption considering that the original Woman in Black was not such a huge hit after all. There will be many who have not watched the first movie and will consequently have no idea about the reason behind the haunting at Eelmarsh house. Those audiences are bound to find everything a bit meaningless.

Coming to the movie itself, and assuming that you have seen the first part, Angel of Death comes as a

heavy disappointment. It tried to play its cards the same way that the first movie did, by slowly spooking you, by using darkness, half open doors and ravens flashing against the windows. But, it doesn’t work this time because almost always you know that it is coming. The director also tries to use ghastly faces coming out of nowhere as a scaring tactic. But save the rare momentary jump in your pulse, it does not have any effect whatsoever. The lesser said of the story, the better. It is just another one where one kid after the other keeps finding ways to die, with the veiled lady making fleeting appearances now and then. The characters really do not have any meat in them. The only one who seems to have a character arc is the flying officer. He is the only one whose fears seem real, and he doesn’t fear the ghost but something else.

The Angel of Death tries to do what the prequel did. It tries to give you a tense two hours with you guessing what will pop out of which corner. But the script and the director have failed in putting together anything meaningful and even remotely scary. It ends up as a collection of ‘horror gimmicks’ which fall flat. In 2012, when the Woman in Black first released, we hadn’t seen old school horror for a while, which was one of the reasons it found interested audiences. But, in 2013 and 14 we have had far too many including The Conjuring, its sequel Annabelle (which was also a big let down), the forgettable Jessabelle etc. It is not new anymore, which is one more reason the Angel of Death falls flat. And by the way the movie ends, they are definitely leaving room for a sequel. Hope they work hard on the script this time.

The greatest horror is that you actually spent time and money on this!

1.5/5