I had strong hopes for this, for two reasons -- I'm a big fan of the Turing story, and consume every doc and feature film about Turing I can find, and because this one had high ratings on IMDb, at about 7.6. I give it a 6. First, the low budget look that pervades throughout.. Sure, it was only about $130,000-ish to make, which requires a lot of corners to be cut. But that notwithstanding, it looked TOO cheap, resembling an edgy car commercial more than a dramatic film. The lack of almost any extra actors became glaring and and annoyingly distracting, making me think this was a post-apocalyptic movie because there were almost no other humans in it. In one scene they talk in a movie theater without anyone shushing them, and most of the rest of the acting is off-key, the emotions often unexplained. The dialogue is rambly without charm; it's not ab-libbed, it's just saggy and flaccid, and what's worse -- it's a tad mumbled and delivered overly-fast, as if it were the actors' first nervous take that the director had to keep in the final cut, again, for budget reasons. The lead actor isn't up to the task of carrying the project, and doesn't get as much help from the supporting cast as he needed.
I can't help but think the filmmakers used the very good Aronofsky film Pi (1998) as their baseline and inspiration, a BW movie about mathematics, puzzle solving and paranoia that, like this movie, even includes discussions of Plato, if I recall correctly. That's pretty much where the resemblance ends, for as many ways as Pi succeeded, this movie fell short.
Then there's the sound. At times it's a bit echoey, hollow and stark, again a reflection of the budget. The sound lacks layer and perspective, resulting in all the voice levels being about the same, regardless of which room they're coming from or how many walls separate the voice from the character's POV. The shot choices aren't bad, effectively going for a poor- man's Hitchcock thing. But then there's the EDITING, which instead of keeping me merely guessing in a good mystery kinda way, instead kept me frustrated and reaching for the mouse to turn it off. If you don't watch carefully, you'll easily get lost trying to figure out the point of the whole story.
This would be an above-average student effort, but it's not ready for primetime, and certainly not ready to be judged by primetime standards. For more reviews, check us out at Movies With Greg and Chris on FB.
I can't help but think the filmmakers used the very good Aronofsky film Pi (1998) as their baseline and inspiration, a BW movie about mathematics, puzzle solving and paranoia that, like this movie, even includes discussions of Plato, if I recall correctly. That's pretty much where the resemblance ends, for as many ways as Pi succeeded, this movie fell short.
Then there's the sound. At times it's a bit echoey, hollow and stark, again a reflection of the budget. The sound lacks layer and perspective, resulting in all the voice levels being about the same, regardless of which room they're coming from or how many walls separate the voice from the character's POV. The shot choices aren't bad, effectively going for a poor- man's Hitchcock thing. But then there's the EDITING, which instead of keeping me merely guessing in a good mystery kinda way, instead kept me frustrated and reaching for the mouse to turn it off. If you don't watch carefully, you'll easily get lost trying to figure out the point of the whole story.
This would be an above-average student effort, but it's not ready for primetime, and certainly not ready to be judged by primetime standards. For more reviews, check us out at Movies With Greg and Chris on FB.
