Connect with us

Arts & Entertainment

Tragic hero

Film tells story of Alan Turing — from cracking Nazi code, to chemical castration and suicide

Published

on

Alan Turing, Patrick Sammon, gay news, Washington Blade
Alan Turing, Patrick Sammon, gay news, Washington Blade

Patrick Sammon, right, on the set of his new docu-drama ‘Codebreaker’ in London. (Photo by Marc Sethi)

Scientist cracks codes to help defeat Germany during World War II, essentially laying the groundwork for modern computer science, but is busted for being gay and in 1950s England is chemically castrated and eventually commits suicide.

It’s a tragedy of epic proportions but such is the little-heard biography of Alan Turing. A new 81-minute docudrama about his life called “Codebreaker” debuts next week in Washington.

Novice filmmaker Patrick Sammon — a former executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans — says Turing’s story needs to be told.

“As I sorted through my hundred ideas,” Sammon says, “Turing’s idea quickly came to the top of the pile, because it was an amazing story, and I thought everyone should know about Turing’s contribution to our world. And then I realized there really hadn’t been a film like this done about him.”

The film (turingfilm.com) was released in the U.K. last year. Its U.S. premiere is Wednesday at the Georgetown AMC. It’s sponsored by the D.C. Center and tickets are available to the public (todpix.com/codebreaker). An advance screening and discussion were held last week at the National Press Club on the centenary of Turing’s birth and the film will also screen in New York on Oct. 25. Beyond that, TODpix, a distribution company, is working with grassroots organizations across the country to find audiences for additional showings.

Sammon, who’s gay, hopes to reach pockets of both the LGBT and tech communities to build a demand for additional screenings, culminating in “A Night with Alan Turing,” featuring screenings in 50 cities on Nov. 8.

Turing grew up in England in the early 20th century. He quickly stood out as a bright student and his teachers praised his “considerable powers of reasoning.” He developed a strong bond with fellow student Christopher Morcom. According to David Leavitt, novelist and Turing historian, “Morcom was, I think, more important to Turing than any other human being in his life. Turing was probably, in an adolescent way, quite in love with him.”

Patrick Sammon, Codebreaker, Alan Turing, Log Cabin Republicans, Washington Blade, gay news

Patrick Sammon (Photo courtesy Sammon)

When Morcom died at a young age, Turing delved into his work as a sort of tribute to his late friend. As years passed, Turing developed the idea of the computer, broke encrypted German army messages during World War II and laid the groundwork for the future of artificial intelligence and mathematical biology.

Later in life, Turing had an affair with a 19-year-old named Arnold Murray, a friend of whose burgled Turing’s house early in 1952. Turing reported the crime, and the circumstances surrounding it, to the police. At the time, homosexuality was illegal in England and they charged Turing with indecency. Turing opted for hormonal treatment over prison, resulting in serious physical and mental side effects. Shortly after ending treatment, Turing committed suicide at the age of 41.

Sammon moved to Washington in 2003 to become a documentary filmmaker, but his career took a detour when he began working for, and ultimately running, the Log Cabin Republicans, a conservative organization that advocates for equal rights for the LGBT community. During this time, Sammon amassed many ideas for films. When he launched Story Center Productions in 2009, he partnered with a U.K.-based production company to help with his first film, “Codebreaker.”

He spent about six months in London during the production, which he’s been focused on full time since 2010. He factored in some living expenses into the production cost, which was funded largely from Channel 4 in the U.K. and also on his savings. Other donors, foundations and corporations including Intel and Google helped finance the project.

Sammon calls the film a “drama-documentary,” saying, “A third of it is drama, recreation, and then two-thirds is documentary. It’s a good mix of those two elements, and I think they play well together.”

It features a myriad of interviews with Turing’s relatives and associates, historians and industry professionals. His work is widely recognized as the foundation of all modern-day technology. In the film, Google’s Alma Whitten describes his contributions as timeless, saying, “They’re the things that are fundamentally true, so they’re always going to be with us, in the same way that the things that Galileo and Newton contributed to physics are always going to be with us.”

Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak credits Turing with making possible all subsequent technology. “Alan Turing was sort of at the top of everything that ever developed,” Wozniak says in the film. “All the future research that was done by people, building real equipment that can compute.”

The interviews are juxtaposed with dramatizations of therapy sessions from Turing’s last year, while Turing was undergoing chemical castration. Ed Stoppard (“Upstairs, Downstairs”) plays Turing opposite Henry Goodman (“Taking Woodstock”) as Franz Greenbaum, Turing’s psychiatrist and friend.

Production for the dramatizations lasted only five days, but Stoppard’s performance is a stand-out piece of the film. He dramatizes the internal struggle that drove Turing to take his own life. Stoppard’s sometime-sardonic, sometimes-reflective comments mask a pain his character carried with him.

Sammon’s passion for the story stemmed from the injustice Turing faced despite his contributions to society.

“Here you have someone who is one of the key people who helped the Allies win World War II by breaking Germany’s naval enigma code,” Sammon says. “Then you have the technology world really giving Turing credit for creating the intellectual foundation for modern computer science. The paper he wrote in 1936 really laid down the key ideas for the modern computer.”

Sammon goes on to describe the “Shakespearean tragedy” that followed. “In spite of his genius, in spite of his amazing contribution to the war, the fact that he was gay, the government persecuted him because of it.”

During the course of a year of chemical castration, Turing took daily doses of estrogen. Effects of the treatment included shrunken testicles, a loss of his libido, a loss of body hair and the development of breasts. Months after the treatment ended, Turing’s body had not returned to its normal state. Sammon believes Turing elected the hormone therapy, in place of a year in prison, to avoid being taken away from his work.

Sammon, who says he has “a lot of other ideas” for future film projects though he’s focused on the “Codebreaker” distribution for now, says it’s important to recognize the historical accomplishments of the LGBT community and foster a more inclusive society. At the same time, he believes all people, regardless of sexual orientation, should admire Turing as a hero and a genius.

“I admire him very much because he was unconventional,” Sammon says. “I respect Turing for the fact of how unconventional he was, and he wasn’t afraid to be different. The sad part is society, at the time, didn’t have tolerance for differences.”

Leavitt describes Turing as a tragic hero we must learn from.

“His refusal to compromise or lie, under such circumstances, was nothing less than heroic — yet we must remember that, as a consequence of his heroism, he was erased from history for many years. Nor is the institutionalized hatred of gay men and lesbians any less of a reality today than it was in 1953. Even as we honor Alan Turing, we must be vigilant. We must not let ourselves lapse into complacency. This could happen again.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Photos

PHOTOS: Black Pride Pageant and Unity Ball

Back-to-back events held on first night of D.C. Black Pride

Published

on

The 10th annual DC Black Pride Unity Ball was held at the Westin DC Downtown on Thursday, May 21. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Schackelford)

The Mr. and Miss DC Black Pride Pageant was held at the Westin DC Downtown on Thursday, May 21. Following the pageant, Black Pride events continued with the 10th annual DC Black Pride Unity Ball.

(Washington Blade photos by Landon Shackelford)

Continue Reading

Photos

PHOTOS: Helen Hayes Awards

D.C.-area productions honored at Theatre Washington’s annual ceremony

Published

on

The 42nd Helen Hayes Awards were held at The Anthem on Monday, May 18. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Theatre Washington’s 42nd Helen Hayes Awards were held at The Anthem on Monday, May 18.

(Washington Blade photos by Michael Key)

Continue Reading

Movies

Quest for fame becomes an obsession in entertaining ‘Lurker’

Psychological thriller explores the dynamics of power and control

Published

on

Archie Madekwe and Théodore Pellerin in ‘Lurker.’ (Photo courtesy of MUBI)

It was nearly 60 years ago when über-queer icon Andy Warhol pronounced to the world his prediction that “in the future, everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.” While it may have been an overstatement, we’re now experiencing the future he was talking about; and though it remains statistically impossible for “everybody” to achieve fame, that doesn’t mean that we can’t all “feel” like we’re famous. If social media has delivered any gift to the human race, that might just be it.

In the real-life dystopia that is 2026, Warhol’s 1967 quip has become a kind of cultural mantra: influencers are more famous than movie stars, podcasters can shape political policy, and anybody with a “hot take” can change the way we perceive even the most fundamentally held opinions. Whether or not this is progress is probably a moot point; it’s the reality we live in, and we have a government full of “cosplaying” charlatans to prove it.

That’s why Alex Russell’s “Lurker” – a 2025 Sundance favorite that’s now streaming on HBO Max after a limited theatrical run last summer – cuts so close to the quick. A psychological thriller exploring the dynamics of power and control within the entourage of a rock star, it strikes some uncomfortably familiar chords for an era when “bootlicking” seems to have become a national pastime.

It centers on Matthew (Théodore Pellerin), a young Angeleno who lives in his grandmother’s apartment and works in a trendy designer boutique on Melrose Avenue. When rising pop musician Oliver (Archie Madekwe) brings his entourage to the store one afternoon, Matthew sees a chance to make an impression; plugging his phone into the shop’s sound system, he plays a song that he knows the pop star admires – and minutes later, he’s been given a backstage pass to Oliver’s next concert and invited to hang out with the star himself.

Their relationship continues to develop quickly at the show. Though he’s met at first with some discomfortable hazing from members of the entourage, by the end of the evening he’s on his way to becoming part of the inner circle. Chosen by Oliver to become his “official documentarian,” he’s soon a fixture in the entourage himself, sparking jealousy from members higher in the “pecking order” than he is; but Matthew is better at the game than they suspect, and despite their attempts to keep him in his place, he uses his proximity to Oliver – and a few surgically precise acts of sabotage – to rise quickly to the top.

Staying there, however, is not so easy. Within the volatile social politics of the entourage, he must always be on guard, and his efforts to thwart others from displacing him become increasingly ruthless. Eventually, he crosses a line, resulting in a fall from Oliver’s grace and his ejection from the group; but being close to fame leads to its own kind of fame, and Matthew has worked too hard to give it up so easily – even if it means using his Machiavellian powers to go after Oliver himself.

Slick, stylish, and as hypervisual as any viral pop music video you can imagine, Russell’s sardonically amoral exploration of fame – or rather, the desire for it – is as much a satire as it is a psychological drama, but it plays like a horror movie. Matthew is a protagonist cut from the same cloth as the title character of “The Talented Mr. Ripley,” a schemer whose endearingly awkward appearance masks a devious purpose and a diabolical mind. Oliver, whose creativity seems more about his “vibe” than his actual music, is charismatic but aloof, beneficent but mercurial, and seemingly blind to the massive ego that hides beneath his “chill” persona. There’s a kind of tension between these two characters that feels distinctly romantic, even homoerotic, and though it’s expressed only through subtext, it provides a palpable edge that makes their relationship feel dangerous – as if this were a love story in which anyone who tries to come between them is likely to get hurt.

As to what they actually feel about each other, “Lurker” keeps quiet about it. Matthew “reads” like a queer character, but his inner life is never revealed to us save through the conclusions we can draw from his behavior, and Oliver seems so much in love with himself that nobody else can compare; even so, there’s something between them that plays as much more intimate than the enthusiastic “bro”-ish affection that they exhibit together. 

In the end, however, the “love story” here is not about romance, nor even sex; it’s about fame. Matthew, even if his own creative talents may be more solid than Oliver’s, is enamored primarily with fame; perhaps he longs for importance, for a life of more excitement and opportunity than his thankless existence as a low-level retail employee, and as the movie proceeds it becomes clear that he is willing to go as far as he has to go in order to achieve it. For Oliver, maybe it’s about the longing of the famous for something more than sycophantic lip-service, for finding the adulation of his fans personified in an authentic, tangible, and individual form. Whatever it is, there’s very little love involved.

Of course, there’s an unavoidable comparison to be made between the mentality on display in “Lurker” with the prevailing trend in our American consciousness, in which performative loyalty and opportunistic friendship feel like the order of the day; from the fickleness of “fan culture” to the escalation of outrage-baiting on social media to the barely-concealed cutthroat narcissism on daily display in our very government, the message that comes through loud and clear is a chilling throwback to the Reagan-era “greed is good” philosophy: loyalty, feelings, and friendship are for suckers, and the most vicious player is the winner who takes it all.

As usual in a character-driven piece like this one, it’s ultimately the actors who make it work; Pellerin (a Canadian actor who won his country’s equivalent of an Oscar for “Family First” in 2018) is the lynch pin, and he delivers such an endlessly fascinating portrait of obsessively determined duplicity that we find ourselves rooting for him even as we recoil from the coldness of his tactics; Madekwe (“Saltburn”) captures the vapid pretension of a pop artist who has faked his way to success, but infuses Oliver with enough well-meaning sincerity that we can still feel a little bit sorry for him. In a smaller role, Hannah Rose Liu (“Bottoms”) makes an impression as the manager who keeps Oliver’s life running, offering an anchor of relative sanity in a sea of madness. 

Russell’s taut and tantalizingly opaque screenplay manages to capture all these things and more into a compact narrative that keeps us engaged while weaving its observations seamlessly into the plot, and his direction – which somehow yields an expansive scope through an intimate and sometimes frenetic focus – reinforces the unpredictable instability of fame, status, power, and the social hierarchy that governs them all. There are occasionally twists that feel a bit too convenient to be believable, but all in all, it’s a solid piece of cinematic workmanship.

Continue Reading

Popular