call me a sucker for historical biopics, I actually liked "The Kings Speach" as visual immersion therapy and could care less about the politcs . Imitation game does the same thing for me, puts me deep into a world of a gay man living in a world I have difficulty understanding from my own reality of 21st century Seattle.

Just saw "The Imitation Game" today.

A lot of this review is actually spot on.

But that last paragraph in this review though . . . just . . . eh. Denigrates the film in an abstractly vague sort of way.

What I found most disappointing about "The Imitation Game," is that it assumes the audience won't have the patience for the film to elucidate even the teensiest bit of the actual science being used to decrypt Enigma. Perhaps I shouldn't have expected it would cover this.

An attendant at the place announced that the audience should see the film "Codebreaker" on Netflix to fill in any holes the movie left. I have yet to see if that is true but she seemed to be on the same page as me in terms of hoping to get more or the process, rather than story.

@2, Codebreaker that you can stream on Netflix isn't all that bad for a dramatized documentary. Though this movie doesn't really seem to appeal to me that much. Probably because I'm getting a little tired of Benedict Cumberbatch being the latest eye candy we're all supposed to be drooling over. He's an okay actor but that's about the extent of it

i like that sweater ms. knightley has on. very fetching.

I will see this movie this evening. But even before I go see it I am aware of the workings of Bletchley Park because information about the mechanics of code breaking can be found in many TV shows and movies made and also documentaries. But the stories about the lives of the incredibly inteligent men and women that worked there especially Turing has not been told.

So before I go to see this movie that is what I am aware I am going to see.

SO I don't understand why anyone expects to see " actual science".

Maybe just read the New York Times review instead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/movies…

Liked the movie a lot, my 26 yo roommate said she liked it when she went.

Not sure why the reviewer didn't

We have to take the filmmakers' assertion that Turing is gay in the film, they seemed uncomfortable with the idea of showing grown men interacting that way. Better to show a budding schoolboy romance, a little Damon and Pythias. And that was Tom from Downton Abbey there! I wondered what he did during the war. You know who would have loved the film? Phil Dick. The business with the crossword puzzle echoes "Time Out Of Joint", where a guy solves daily newspaper puzzles that help the army defeat enemy invaders.

Cumberbatch, as usual, is very good. He will be in great, eventually. This script, though, is paint by numbers biopic machine stuff. It's clunkier than some due to its pasted on "war scenes" and "historical footage." See it for the Cumberbatch canon entry. The film cricket is right, the real historical story here is how the government that Turing saved, turned on him, sort of like a Daddy hamster eating its newborn. Amen.

8) No one super genius actually made the Enigma code, as it were. Two and three reel Enigma machines were made by a Swiss company and were available on the general market as early as the 1920's. Every office that needed to mask their communication over long distances (primarily finance and diplomatic concerns) had these Enigma machines for nearly 15 years before the Nazis got the notion to reverse engineer them, add third and sometimes fourth reels to soup them up, and release them into the wild. From a dramatic standpoint, it is almost always a better story about how a code is broken then how a code is made.

Does this movie go very much into the development of game theory as a field of study in response of questions what to do with the information the Allies got from reading the Nazi's mail? See "Cryptonomicon" by Neal Stephenson for more on that subject.