Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Kinsey

This is topic Kinsey in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000859

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 11-23-2004, 04:58 PM:

Pretty good but a little slow towards the end.

Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 12-23-2004, 06:34 PM:

The trailer looks good, looking forward to it.

JJ

Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 12-25-2004, 07:00 PM:

I was afraid this film might be of historical or nostalgic interest only, but found its treatment very timely.

Liam Neeson ["Schindler's List"] portrays the entomologist and teacher Dr. Alfred Kinsey whose 20 year zoological study of the gall fly's variation of species caused him to apply scientific methods to the study of human sexuality after becoming aware of the enormous ignorance of sex among his students and the great marital unhappiness resulting from it.

Since Kinsey's inductive methods relied heavily on surveys and interviews, the film's narrative method utilizes Kinsey's training one of his staff interviewers, interviewing him about his personal sexual history. These b/w questions are intercut with dramatized answers in color.

Bill Condon's direction presents the researcher as a man driven by altruism and scientific search for truth, beset by hypocrisy and bigotry. The film's release is timely because even today scientific research is under attack by religious and political groups, as witnessed by the petition of the 48 Nobel Scientists, the restrictions on sex education ("abstinence only"), family planning funding and stem-cell research, and the required teaching of "creationism" in Nebraska.

I wondered whether some of the story complications involving the sexual affairs of staff members were script insertions merely to heighten drama. And I could have done without the grainy b/w zoo shots of copulating animals gratuitously thrown into the final credits.

But the story held my interest, and gave me better perspective on the books published during my years, and the changes in American attitudes and legislation they effected.

Kew Gardens Cinema, 12/25/04, 118". Audience: 36 Seniors,
2 M.A., and 3 Y.A.

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 03-24-2005, 07:46 PM:

I enjoyed it and there were parts that were humorous that I didn't expect. I thought it was going to be completely serious and that I would probably be falling asleep. But I didn't so that's a good sign.

Ah, yes my hot rating...
Chris O'Donnell... hot as always.

Posted by Erica Peterson (Member # 1784) on 03-26-2005, 08:22 PM:

I thought the animal stuff at the end was pretty funny...especially the two porcupines very cautiously circling each other. That's got to be difficult to get right [Big Grin]

And Peter Sarsgaard sets off my hottie meter...

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 03-27-2005, 04:29 PM:

I think it's a good story told straight, the only thing I disliked was the shallow depth of field. Lots of unnecessary focus pulling in dialogue scenes, some shots that should have been retaken (technically), like the close ups and medium shots of Kinsey proposing to his wife which are totally out of focus.

Very sad that editors and/or directors do not trust great images. The film has some fantastic shots like Kinsey collapsing in the "arena" of the Rockefeller Foundation, but it seems that cutters are paid by the number of cuts they make. [Roll Eyes]

If you have such fine actors and a good story, don't jump around too much in unnecessary cutting.

Great acting and very impressive set design and lighting. I'll definitely see it again (I caught only the dubbed version yesterday... [thumbsdown]

)