Slashdot Mirror
Leonardo DiCaprio To Play Alan Turing?
mikejuk writes "2012 is the one hundredth anniversary of Alan Turing's birth, with many celebration events being planned around the world. This week Warner Bros outbid other companies for the script of a biopic based on Turing's life. The script for The Imitation Game, by first-time screenwriter Graham Moore and based in turn on the biography by Andrew Hodges, Alan Turing: The Enigma, was snapped up by Warner Bros in a 7-figure deal. Right now the leading candidate to portray Turing is Leonardo DiCaprio."
...although it would be ironic if the actor playing him would fail his test.
If Scorsese's directing, DiCaprio's leading.
If DiCaprio's leading, Scorsese's directing.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Turing wasn't into chick anyways.
As long as the movie is of infinite length, and certain other conditions are observed, shouldn't it be possible for any actor to successfully play Turing, albeit quite possibly requiring impractical amounts of time to do so?
He is one of the last actors I would imagine to play character like Turing, a thoughtful man, mathematician, scientist.. Everything Leo isn't.
Personally I think this would be fantastic. Two of my favorite people. I think Leo is a superb actor and we all know what a fascinating and enigmatic person Turning was.
This doesn't sound like a moneymaker for Hollywood.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
oh... yeah
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Women do drool over men who are into other men, you know.
We've already seen the following actors in comparable roles:
Russell Crowe - A Beautiful Mind
Dustin Hoffman - Rain Man
Matt Damon - Good Will Hunting, The Talented Mr. Ripley
Tom Hanks - Forrest Gump
No need to see the same movie twice.
Women love homo-erotica. They don't fantasize about guys having sex, but rather, imagine men falling romantically in love with each other. Weird, eh?
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Being a gay man is a disease. AIDS is an advanced form.
You talk like a closet fag. Try not to dream of muscles when you sleep tonight.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
A story on Turing could exploits a lot of interesting angles. He's an important figure in computer science AND in cryptography. His most prestigious work was done with WWII in the backdrop, and helped the allies tremendously. Finally, he has the total romantic yet misunderstood hero story - his contribution was a war secret, he was condemned for his homosexuality by the state he helped so much, and died a Plato death.
There's a kickass script to be made out of that.
Oh and DiCaprio is a fine choice. Great actor, versatile enough to pull it out and to let the character be the story.
How is that weird? Guys do the same about women. The falling in love part too.
Also, many girls have told me they like watching gay porn much more than lesbian porn.. which is true for most men too, just in reverse.
They don't drool over the fact they're into other men, they're like that because they (even if unknowingly) know that they cannot get that man. Same is true for men in relationships too. Women show much more interest towards you when someone else already has taken you.
because the anus tends to get torn and bleed much more than the naturally self-lubricating vagina or mouth. Other fact: gay men tend to have A LOT MORE partners than anyone else what with no female inhibitions to put the brakes on things. Being a gay man is a disease. AIDS is an advanced form.
You do know that you can have anal sex with women too, right? Besides, females don't put much brakes to amount of sex men have, not at least for me. Usually they're trying to get sex too often. On the other hand, I do live in Thailand.
And what would you say about having sex with kathoeys? They're originally men, but have turned into women, have boobs and are generally even more beautiful than real women. Is that gay sex if it's pre-op (still have penis), post-op (now they have vagina, but have been men before)?
At least its not Keanu Reeves.
Mad scientist Alan "Mhz" Turing invents an intelligent robot that transforms into a flying car, which he uses to embark on a great journey into space where he will find true love with an alien prince (cue for love scene on front of spaceship) and, of course, get the idea for the first desktop computer. When he returns to Earth, he builds a prototype for his new invention, which surprisingly turns out to be a modern Mac (because in Hollywood all computers are Macs), however his contemporaries find out about his love with the alien, which forces him to abandon the Mac and travel back into space where he lives happily ever after as the queen of an alien planet. THE END. If this does well at the box office, expect a sequel in a couple of years.
I'd be a 26 episode series to get even half the book.
He was a fag. Stop making it normal. It's not. No matter how hard you try.
If there is anything more useless than a homophobe it is an anonymous coward homophobe.
I bet he was afraid to approach a woman anyway. They can be manipulative by nature you know. .
And a misogynist on top of it.
Poltroon.
more cowbell
Who else could understand Turing better?
Yes, the AC went off on a homophobic rant. However, I don't subscribe to the Freudian concept of homophobia as related to repressed homosexuality.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
I think Mr. Homophobic AC has a point with the female inhibition thing. However, that concept implies to me that it's a general male issue rather than an issue specific to _homosexual_ males - straight males would also act like that if straight females were more cooperative.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
I don't have any large issue with DiCaprio playing Turing. He is versatile, capable, and very hard working. However, the part should go to Jeremy Northam. It would have been a better age match if they tapped him 20 years ago, but there are other factors to consider than matching the actor's age to the character in his prime. I didn't know Turing, so it's just an impression, but I think Jeremy Northam would do a superb job. See The Winslow Boy and tell me I'm wrong.
Technically that's just efficient thinking. After all, some other woman has already done the quality control, so he's bound to have some good properties.
20 years ago I would have agreed.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Boring, boring, boring, better, climax, done. That and you'd have to film the almost erotic Captain Crunch chapter and the expensive furniture / stockings stroke piece.
>reads whole message
>reads last line
>another "turing was a fag" troll
*sigh*
Go drink bleach.
--
BMO
> they're like that because they (even if unknowingly) know that they cannot get that man.
Are you saying they're "forbidden fruits"? :)
All of that research into Turing's contemporaries just so you can justify your homophobic biases.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Post's 1936 paper described the same kind of machine, and Post came up with better versions of it (nobody uses Turing's original formulation, and the formulations actually used in textbooks etc usually build on Post's work).
I can't find a reference right this second but I'm fairly certain that nobody thought of the DFA or PDA abstractions for >10 years after all three papers were published (I think Post's later work on string rewriting and the PCP helped lead to those ideas along with the corresponding ideas of regular/context free), so there wasn't yet any other framework for the Post/Turing formalism to fit more naturally into.
Thanks for actually trying to provide an alternate reason rather than jumping at my throat for mentioning the only reason I'm able to come up with like most of these folks. I'm interested to hear whatever alternate explanations people can come up with.
It could be a zany rom-com with a dog, a monkey using an abacus, and even fit in the gay angle somehow (maybe a fashion designer on the side, a la Zoolander?). Tom Cruise could be the romantic interest, fighting with Turing the whole time about how machines are evil and Xenu is the one true way, until the monkey, riding the dog, slaps Cruise with a fish and makes him realize the errors of his ways. Let Terry Gilliam direct.
Guaranteed $500 mil 1st weekend.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
That I can't wait to see, or the part where Turing blasts the incoming V2 with a couple of .45s held sideways. Gangsta style. While diving over a moving tank. In slow motion.
This is gonna be AWESOME.
Since the alternative would involve attempting to make money by releasing a movie about math, I suspect that they'll have limited choice.
You can really only have so many minutes of 'montage of intense-looking-dude scribbling math on stuff' before people lose interest. At that point, you have to split the remaining feature-length-film time between WWII drama and persecution and suicide drama...
I just can't wait to see Leo bite into the poisoned apple. The hormonal castration should be particularly dramatic too. Maybe they can get the political apology right in the film, and properly repent for a truly disgusting deed. But I still think Matt Damon would be a goodlier choice, based on the face. ....Well Alan, you were way ahead of your time, but we were still in the dark ages. Sorry about that, and thanks for all the help. PS: If you come back, try San Francisco, Rome, or maybe Key West; I hear they finally accepted that patterns of "indecency" are not always matters of choice, and even if they were, they're your own. And anyway, you're really not missing much - and CCTV never flatters the form.
Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made. - Otto von Bismarck
In your original post, you admit to Post's work being submitted after Turing's. Just food for thought.
The reason is probably nuanced and impossible to determine. But this sort of thing happens rather frequently in scientific research. There's the more famous example I cited about Newton and Leibniz. Why does Newton always get the credit, but we use Leibniz's notation? Is it because Newton moved onto calculus (but then why Leibniz's notation) or was it just a fluke? Take the slightly different example of powered flight. Why did the Wright Brothers get everything right and not somebody else? How close was somebody else to beating the Wright Brothers?
In the end, for some reason or another, the field just settled on Turing. It isn't really important why and it's probably non-deterministic. I honestly don't think it was because he was gay as the terminology was really crystalized before (or right on the cusp) the gay rights movement had any real momentum, widespread attention, or successes under its belt. What's more interesting is that three people independently discovered these foundational concepts contemporaneously. And I think that leads to an even more interesting question. Why did this happen with three people at this particular time in human history? Did somebody else stumble upon the concepts before, but didn't publish or wasn't in a position to publish?
I know you're a troll, but let's do a simple takedown of some of your "points" shall we?
He should have waited for AIDS to come around.
He died in 1954 at the age of 41. AIDS was first discovered ca. 1979, so he would've been 66. Do you know a lot of 66-year-olds who have lots of sex? Especially with multiple partners? Neither do I.
AIDS = the Anally Injected Death Sentence!
Not anymore. Most people with AIDS in the first world live nearly as long as their counterparts without AIDS. Sure, it's still likely to do you in at some point, but when that point is at 70 vs 75 without AIDS, it's not such a huge setback. Nevertheless, the disease can still be deadly at a young age, and having a weakened immune system makes even minor infections much more serious.
Fact: anal sex transmits this virus more effectively than other forms of sex because the anus tends to get torn and bleed much more than the naturally self-lubricating vagina or mouth.
The mouth does not naturally lubricate per se; saliva is a digestive aid. However, there is nothing particularly heterosexual about the mouth nor particularly homosexual about the anus.
Other fact: gay men tend to have A LOT MORE partners than anyone else what with no female inhibitions to put the brakes on things.
Perhaps, although my straight friends seem to have a lot more sex than I do. Do you know Alan Turing's sexual history? If not, then tendencies are meaningless to the evaluation of the life of one man.
Being a gay man is a disease. AIDS is an advanced form.
There are far more heterosexuals with AIDS than there are homosexuals in total.
He was a fag. Stop making it normal. It's not. No matter how hard you try.
In one sense, you're right: homosexuals account for 2–5% of the population. In another sense, though, you are wrong: homosexuality occurs with enough frequency that it is not outside the range of normal variation, and it occurs in other species as well (to a much more limited extend). Also, there are plenty of things that (presently) aren't normal under the same criteria, like having a PhD, being a mathematical genius, and fundamentally defining the elements of an entirely new discipline. Are those also bad?
I bet he was afraid to approach a woman anyway.
Could be, but of what relevance is that? If he wasn't interested in women, then being afraid to approach them is largely irrelevant, especially at a time when women were virtually nonexistent in math and science.
They can be manipulative by nature you know.
Funnily enough again, the most manipulative people I know are straight. Although I've certainly known manipulative homosexuals, they do not seem over-represented vis-á-vis heterosexuals. Hard statistics, of course, would be preferable.
Unless you're enough of a man to win their trust.
What, you mean like an anonymous coward?
Fags aren't.
See, once again I find myself in the strange position where most of my friends consider me the most trustworthy person they know. It's a shame you never bothered to actually meet some real gay people.
They can be substitute "girlfriends" to women.
Some are, to be sure. I have one straight female friend, and we usually do "guy" things together. The rest of my friends are straight males, none of whom are particularly lacking for masculinity, I might add.
They definitely can't close the deal.
A gay man can have sex with a woman just as well as a straight man. In fact, he might even enjoy it (physically). It will never, however, be what he primarily desires nor what he finds as expressive of a lasting emotional connection. Thus, gay men tend to avoid sex with women, since it leads to false promises, mistrust, and broken hearts.
They're fags.
That's a tautology.
I have to smile, seeing SIRI+YOU are playing his imitation now all day.
Yes, Caprio is a sterling selection, but please no Guns'n Agents stuff, but more Beautiful Mind'esk. Turing thinking was far more fascinating.
FAIL if not includes his Mind about building a Brain by to get his passed kid friend Malcolm back:
a) by building a Mind from scratch with/inside a Computer (has to be invented)
b) in a Petri dish with chemicals (de novo rules had to be thought out)
c) How to make a neuron/code cocktail that evolves into human (imitation game)
c) Code breaking was just a job assignment. Enigma was just an "opponent". (Was asked, so did it brilliant for the job's sake; of course he was a perfectionist)
Think, he was planning to have a self-evolving SIRI thingy; but actually wanted a Malcolm-like thing. The "imitation game" thingy was just a selection rule for his self-evolving "would be" MALCOLM.
PS: I am curious who will act John v Neumann.
my 5c,
muenalan
Why not a British actor?
i love maths montages
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
The fact that things got named after Turing when terminology was first being settled in the late 30s-early 50s is, as you say, not attributable to his homosexuality. But that's not what I'm talking about- though naming things is a very visible way of assigning credit etc it doesn't explain the continuing total imbalance of credit or the popular idolization.
You make an interesting point about oracles- I don't know about independent inventors there- but here's a relevant quote from a paper "Turing Oracle Machines, Online Computing, and
Three Displacements in Computability Theory" by R. I. Soare:
Again, it's conceivable this could have contributed to Turing's fame, but as far as deserved credit goes, taking oracles into account would actually weigh in Post's favor.
I don't think saying Newton gets all the credit for calculus is accurate. Even high school students learn about the independent discovery and Leibniz's contributions.
The Wright Brothers are a somewhat more parallel case, as everybody learns about them and nobody remembers any of the other innovators in early flight.
Can't have women drooling over a geek. Even if it's only an actor playing a geek. 'tis not natural. /jk
Not only a geek, but a gay geek. That means women drooling over DiCaprio, gay people as well, and even geeks might find some bits that turn them on. Now imagine a transgender homosexual geek...
better age match??
Türing was past 40 when he had the affair with the 20-something guy that led to his arrest and consequent suicide.
Leo's perfectly the right age for 40.
I know you're a troll, but let's do a simple takedown of some of your "points" shall we?
Trolls exist to waste other people's time, it's probably copy-pasta and by taking the time you've lost. That you know just makes you look stupid, it's like knowing it's a trap but walking right into it anyway. The only way to win is not to play.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Why do people remember Turing rather than Church and Post
Church because of scientific progress, and Post because of telephones and email.
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
Other fact: gay men tend to have A LOT MORE partners than anyone else
Awww, looks like someone's jealous..
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
There are far more heterosexuals with AIDS than there are homosexuals in total.
Estimates place the homosexual percentage of the population anywhere from one to twenty percent, with the five to ten percent range being backed by most studies. If more than five percent of the heterosexual population has AIDS, then the species is in a pretty poor state...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
This is the single gayest comment, and beautiful.
I think the conclusion is that he could do it
The reason Turing is so respected is that he, like Dijkstra and very few others, made significant contributions to both the theoretical and practical side of computer science. As well as proposing a theoretical model of computation, he worked to create some of the first real computing engines. That's what makes people regard him as the father of modern computing: taking some interesting theories and turning them into machines that helped win the second world war and went on to produce the foundations for our society.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Isn't it ironic that a Jew and a homosexual helped end the war with such monumental scientific contributions? (Einstein with atomic bombs, Turing with cryptanalysis.) :)
Anyway, would love to see an unflinching movie on this great man's life! A true hero and my most favorite computer scientist ever. Tragic what happened to him later in life...
Actually ummm... I saw a research study done on this before and old people get it on plenty. Especially in rest homes where it's easy to socialize and find new partners. I'd cite something but...
Do you REALLY want to google that??
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Great, yet another terrible fake English accent to look forward to. Why does Hollywood always hire British actors to portray the villains, yet never hires British actors to portray British characters?
It will probably have a fake gay lisp as well, adding to a completely unbelievable character.
How long after the purchase will they prohibit anyone from using the term Turning Machine in any product or application?
http://code.google.com/p/moonblink/wiki/Tricorder
Sorry Tricorder fans, Tricorder has been deleted from the Android Market by Google, at the demand of CBS's legal weasels. This all happened without any discussion or warning -- I was simply notified after the fact.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
... clever.
But I think the "once you have a girlfriend they all come running" phenomenon thing is a mixture of "Well, he's a got a girlfriend, he can't be a total bastard, right?" and "Well, I'm so much better than she is, obviously, and I'll prove it by taking him."
Don't forget that the "OMG so many partners!" thing has been more or less completely debunked.
But nothing he did at Bletchley Park has anything to do with "produc[ing] the foundations for our society." His machines there were totally special-purpose rotor machines, no more related to modern computers than were the German Enigma machines they existed to decrypt or the Polish decryption "Bomba" they were based on.
He didn't have anything to do with Colossus, which was the one project from there that did have any relevance to modern computing; the idea that he was responsible for Colossus is a common misconception.
But... if you've seen pictures of Alan Turing, particularly from when he was younger than the more common pics, you know he was, in fact, a very attractive man.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Let me guess, you gave up on mathematics ever since you couldn't figure out the blocks in kindergarten?
Post actually predeceased Turing; if he "continued to be productive for years" while "Turing's participation in the field was cut very short" that's because Turing turned his attention to other things.
I guess another explanation for Turing's early fame is that his article in Mind introducing the Turing Test captured the popular imagination in a way that everyone's more substantive work --including his own-- didn't. Though it's not CS but rather philosophy of mind, and though I think as philosophy of mind it's kind of naive and its primary merit is that it is effective as a starting point for discussion, I'd bet that from the time of its publication until the AI winter it was better known and more discussed than any real theoretical results.
But Turing's idolization - plays, parades, statues, and being the only one to really get credit for creating the computer revolution in the eyes of millions whose interest came after the PC exploded in popularity- really started after the AI winter had been going on for a decade and people had become disillusioned about hard AI and about the post-ELIZA Turing test. I still retain my former conviction about the most plausible explanation for his idolization over the course of the past 25 years.
I'm certainly not saying Turing was a hack job whose contributions should be overlooked; far from it. And no matter what you think of other sodomy laws, Lawrence v. Texas, etc, it's obviously atrocious what was done to Turing. But I think there are a dozen other "fathers of computing" who are at least as deserving of all the brouhaha and of a Commemorative Year as Turing is.
It's almost like you have a point, but somehow you'd rather make snide remarks than actually let anyone know what it is...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
"Bullshit. No real man cares about women falling in love with eachother. We just like to see hot chicks dyke out. Q: Why do women fake orgasms? A: They think we fucking care. Quit sissy-fying guyhood or GTFO."
I didn't think this was funny until I saw the poster's username.
You know, I have grown really weary of this knee-jerk, inaccurate labeling of people. It's just "political correctness" all over again, for which I have absolutely no respect. You are being as much of a jerk as he was, if not more.
It is possible to dislike gays without being a homophobe, just like it is possible to dislike anything else without being "phobic" or neurotic about it. "Homophobe" is a label that has been far too often and grossly abused, and it's time to knock that shit off.
Heh, not really. Although I don't know of a whole lot of rest homes for swinging gay seniors... In all seriousness, though, the life expectancy for someone born in the UK in 1912 is around 52, so making it to 66 and then contracting AIDS would still put a person well ahead of the curve.
So this DiCaprio person actually passed the Turing Screen Test then, eh?
This space unintentionally left blank.
This film has been rated NP Complete
tone
Eh. What about Japanese yaoi, and fangirls writing slash? Plenty of explicit sex in that.
It is possible to dislike gays without being a homophobe,.
No actually. Look up the definition of homophobe.
And read the original post. AC seethes hatred and disgust.
Next your going to tell me that someone who seethes hatred and disgust of
women is not misogynistic.
Not liking hatred does not make me PC.
more cowbell
Hatred is not truth.
Oh and
woah.
more cowbell
I like to think that, sometimes, when someone takes the time to do a reasonable, polite, well-considered analysis of some common horseshit... there can be a real benefit to other readers too.
Obviously the original troll isn't going to stop being an asshole, but someone else might read the response and learn something, or just see things in a different way. That can't be a bad thing.
I say "nice work" on keeping it level-headed. If I had cared enough to reply, I certainly wouldn't have been so decent about it.
Certainly not Church. Because, most computer scientists are agnostic so they won't remember Church. Post? Email is faster, cheaper, and greener.
With the exception of the role he playing in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape", he has been film after film trying to play roles he is thoroughly unsuited for. He tries to play roles made for guys much more macho or intelligent than he is. Other's have mentioned Keanu as being the type to fail the Turing test... but in reality, from the interviews I've seen with him, DiCaprio is often nearly as bad. I think it's terrible when you have little guy like DiCaprio who is in rush to grow up to be Matt Damon playing roles like these.
I think that DiCaprio needs someone to explain to him that he is not and never will be Bruce Willis (for pure testosterone), Matt Damon (for his ability to fake someone intelligent) or Al Pacino (for his sheer versatility and ability to play role such as the jew in "the merchant of venice"). Even worse is that someone needs to tell him that there is no way in hell he is a suitable replacement for Michael Clarke Duncan... he's too short, too small, too white and also not nearly smart enough.
He is at best who Heath Ledger was trying so hard not to be... a pretty little boy who will end up on posters in teenaged girls bedrooms.... though more like middle aged women now probably.
I truly hope they can find an actor far better suited for this role.
Well... maybe if they do a film about Babbage... Leo can play Ada.
Its easier to explain computing in terms of a machine to people and lambda calculus is not instantly real to most of us. So Turing is one of the people whose work almost any layman can at least conceive.
I think this deserves plenty of credit.
This is all just my personal opinion.
You got the Mac part right, because the next computing-related movie will surely be a Jobs biopic.
Unless the name of the movie is Cryptonomicon, I'll take a pass. Otherwise Hella yeah!
The dictionary goes by popular usage, not technical accuracy. Which was my entire point. So that's a nonsense argument. YOU go look up the technical definition.
I don't care whether you think it was hatred or not. It could have been someone just trolling, for example. But your opinion of somebody does not give you license to go around publicly mislabeling them. That's about as hypocritical as it gets.
Although I will accept "misogynistic". There was direct evidence of that.
Using the dictionary is a nonsense argument while referring to a technical definition without providing a reference is a valid argument?
Perhaps you can reference a psychiatric definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia
"Definitions refer to irrational fear, with the implication of antipathy, contempt, prejudice, and aversion."
I think there is direct evidence of antipathy, prejudice, and aversion.
"He was a fag." Prejudicial slur. Similar to insults as "He was a nigger" or "She was a cunt".
Wishing AIDS on someone seems direct evidence of antipathy.
You allow "They can be manipulative by nature you know." as evidence of misogyny. Wonder why?
more cowbell
you forgot:
Bletchly Park will be somewhere in the US.
Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.