The Irritation Game

Rating: 3/10 (1 November 2016)

This movie irritated me so much. The story was interesting, but the action felt forced, the dialogue was both simplistic and overly modern, ("what does that even mean?") the preachy tone and oversimplified characters failed to convey any of the real issues of the society of the time, and the atmosphere of World War II never felt authentic even once from beginning to end.
Other than that, though, it was a great film. Mr. Cumberbatch certainly does know how to convey the itchy, twitchy mannerisms that are understood to represent genius on the screen. Charles Dance is his irascible best as the cold, humorless, authoritarian naval officer. (Did you really think a modern film for an elite audience could depict a military man in any other way?) Keira Knightley is given the most perfunctory dialogue and still manages to shine, her stunning beauty shining through even though her hair and makeup are done very poorly. (The film's one concession to wartime realism?)
The ugly truth is that the film makers don't really care what this man really did, or what World War II really meant. They just want to force a gay martyr down the audience's throat. They sentimentalize the protagonist in the shallowest way possible. (He was picked on at school! His best friend died! His own mother didn't like him!) And about fifty-six times in the film someone says, "but homosexuality is ILLEGAL!" Oh Jesus no!
Sure, it was illegal. But it was going on everywhere, under all kinds of circumstances. Such as, aristocrats forcing themselves on servants and the poor. Older boys forcing themselves on younger boys at elite "public" schools. Senior officers forcing themselves on junior officers in the Royal Navy. But that kind of victimization, based on class, doesn't interest the film makers at all.
I wonder why!