ह्यूमन सेक्सुएलिटी के रिसर्च के क्षेत्र में सबसे आगे रहे अल्फ्रेड किन्से के जीवन पर एक नज़र डालते हैँ, जिनका 1948 का प्रकाशन "सेक्सुअल बिहेवियर इन द ह्यूमन मेल", सेक्सुअल बिहेवीयर के वैज्ञान... सभी पढ़ेंह्यूमन सेक्सुएलिटी के रिसर्च के क्षेत्र में सबसे आगे रहे अल्फ्रेड किन्से के जीवन पर एक नज़र डालते हैँ, जिनका 1948 का प्रकाशन "सेक्सुअल बिहेवियर इन द ह्यूमन मेल", सेक्सुअल बिहेवीयर के वैज्ञानिक अध्ययन का सबसे शुरुआत में रिकॉर्ड किया गया काम था.ह्यूमन सेक्सुएलिटी के रिसर्च के क्षेत्र में सबसे आगे रहे अल्फ्रेड किन्से के जीवन पर एक नज़र डालते हैँ, जिनका 1948 का प्रकाशन "सेक्सुअल बिहेवियर इन द ह्यूमन मेल", सेक्सुअल बिहेवीयर के वैज्ञानिक अध्ययन का सबसे शुरुआत में रिकॉर्ड किया गया काम था.
- 1 ऑस्कर के लिए नामांकित
- 17 जीत और कुल 51 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Liam Neeson did a tremendous job of acting as the role of Kinsey!! The entire film evoked a candid admission concerning lustful desires. If there were no such thing as desires about sex with so many people, Kinsey's research would not have been considered a breakthrough!! The film also points out that Kinsey's ideological binges with his research were often times halted by a lack of funding!!! Much of Kinsey's findings resonated to hedonistic wishes, much of them also translated to blatant intimacy!! Novice excursions with sexual deviancy made Kinsey and his wife educationally curious!! Attaining knowledge through various experimentation that both Kinsey and his wife engaged in, transcended infidelity and callous fruition, and relegated the two of them to the precarious plight of the ultimate guinea pigs!! These were emotions that were not sanctioned by love, rather, they were motivated by capricious lust!! Intellectual rumination on the motives of socially adverse carnality invoked a plethora of academic findings for Kinsey!! The end result of such research made Kinsey an unmitigated madman for the acquisition of perverted information!!
I found this movie to be very consciously significant...It was very socially sensitizing, especially in terms of the comprehension of the dogged tenacity Kinsey had to expose the perplexing facts about sex!!! A critical component to unearthing facts about an issue such as sex was merely to talk about the issue of sex!! This film depicts Kinsey's determination to attain knowledge about the historical importance of research and development germane to human sexual behavior which altered the lifestyle patterns of American living!! The cinema accommodated provision to the movie audience for Kinsey's findings that were in fact revolutionary floodgates that opened the formulation of the attitudes people have today!! The introductory dialog to this film is outstanding, and excellent performances by Liam Neeson and Chris O'Donnell make this film worth watching over and over again!! Bottom line, See this movie at least once!!
Hypocrisy vs. common sense. The movie cleverly reveals that Kinsey helped us along the way, to become open about such a basic but non-the-less extremely vital part of our existence. True, some of his subjects were pedophiles or engaged in sex practices that most people would find offensive. However, the knowledge that he as a scientist derived from his studies, is immeasurable - it enables intimate insight into the human psyche, and with that, possible treatments for those that are sexually victimizing others.
And this is the key point: the law should protect life, the innocent (under-aged and animals) and of course, the non-consenting. Other than that, sex is something between consenting adults and no-one should have the right to outlaw what you do in the bedroom. If you listen closely, the movie will give you the same message.
My only complaint is perhaps that on the subject of "perversion" they barely scratched the surface on Kinsey's personal response. It was clear that as a scientist, he would continue on the path of knowledge, however dark it may have been. I would probably agree that the movie version of his life and work was toned down to a "pill small enough to swallow" - still, I feel it shows the audience enough to get a picture of who this man was.
Don't expect "adult entertainment" when going to this movie. There is little that will cause an open-minded, sexually in touch with him-/herself adult embarrassment or even excitement. It's more like a documentary.
The acting was superb on everybody's part, and Academy Award Nominations will be forth-coming - no doubt. Hopefully they will take some wins home.
It is shallow in that it is almost completely devoid of any analysis, subtlety, or development of its characters; meaningless in that it presents nothing that isn't already known or couldn't be surmised from a documentary; and destined to be the most overrated film of the year in that most critics praise the film, almost blindly, ignoring the stilted dialogue, the almost nauseating depiction of human behavior - devoid of analytical follow-ups, and the very, VERY standard performances. The film includes a below average turn by Liam Neeson, who, despite perhaps giving a good impression of Kinsey, never manages to conceal his accent, and CANNOT handle any drama that needed to be conveyed. His dramatic scenes reminded me of those of Cary Elwes' in "Saw", and if you seen those scenes, you know what I mean.
"Kinsey" was utterly pointless as a movie. It featured a lot of depicted fact, a lot of graphic sex talk, and lot of graphic images that curiously managed to "sneak" past the MPAA's pocketbooks, I mean, ratings system. It never once attempted to show why "Kinsey" was fascinated by sex, why his constituents were so easily enveloped into his sexually lax world, or why Linney stayed with him. They never developed these characters at all. Their gross actions were never discussed or examined by the director.
There is a scene in "Kinsey" that sums up my opinion of the film. In it, a man being interviewed by Kinsey claims he has slept with basically everything. I mean EVERYTHING. Think of something, hes slept with it. He goes into graphic detail about his sex life and demonstrates his ability to obtain an erection and a subsequent self-administered orgasm in 10 seconds, all the while Kinsey just watches sternly, and his partner squirms, and eventually leaves in disgust. Later, the same partner is seen having sex with a much older woman for the purpose of the study, smiling raunchily while watching the grainy video of the deed. Why? Who knows? Is it in is character to be both disgusted by the actions of one man, and obviously enthralled by his own actions? No it isn't. And it seems that the director does not care to elaborate.
For sure, Condon manages to shock with his film. But by the end, the sex has become so repulsively clinical, that its shock value is lost, and the film really takes on no meaning, becoming just plain boring.
It tries to slap on a metaphor about men and trees at the end, but its just too quick and dirty to make up for the film's lack of analysis about its subject, or about America.
Why do critics and film patrons hail the film? It shows what most films aren't allowed to show. Any film that non-chalantly features graphic female and male nudity, frequently, and can still be featured with an R rating at any movie theatre most be an edgy great movie, right? Wrong. (And may I just note that an increasing amount of male nudity has found its way into major theaters through indie, artsy films like "Kinsey" and "Sideways". Its interesting to note that two of the most well-reviewed films of the year both break R-rated bounds frequently within their running times).
With such a high pedigree in its creative team, it seems almost impossible for the film to be anything other than superb. But for this moviegoer, it, no pun intended, sucked the big one.
Condon knows how to tell stories about real people (Gods and Monsters), and here is a life filled with curiosity and far reaching accomplishment.
Raised in a repressed family dominated by a stern father, Kinsey is portrayed as an isolated teen who rebels against not only his father, but against sexual convention. As a science instructor in college, he meets a student who becomes his wife. As other students look more and more to him for sexual advice, his original interest in insect studies changes to sex adviser and ultimately sex researcher. His team of assistants and even their wives become involved in the research. As Kinsey's study requires sample interviews across the country, a diverse, amazing discovery of sexual habits and statistics are revealed. The study ultimately becomes published in a groundbreaking best seller amid a swell of damnation from the public.
Condon interweaves the science with the human element in a very intelligent screenplay. It is remarkable that such a coherent storyline emerges from a multitude of scientific and news sources. The movie also says a lot about the state of the country at a time in mid twentieth century America when the Red Scare was in full swing and the populace was guided by the morals and sensibilities of its time. Kinsey's relationship with his wife is the thread that ties the film together thematically. She essentially becomes the barometer for his work and his shortcomings. Here is a man who was brilliant and at the same time fallible.
There is no epilogue at film's end as might be expected for a biography, but it is a nice touch for a film that tries to approach its subject with freshness and reverence. The set design and costumes are all authentic in period flavor, but the film seems to be focused not on marking the precise year but depicting an era or time. Do stay for the amusing end credits which show a veritable Noah's Ark of animals in their glory.
Liam Neeson is very good as the obsessed scientist who tries to conduct meaningful, quantifiable research while reconciling the emotional toll on his marriage and his friendships. Laura Linney is in fine form as the supportive wife who observes and then participates in her husband's venture.
As his research assistants, Timothy Hutton, Chris O'Donnell, and Peter Sarsgaard round out a very strong ensemble cast. In fact, these fine actors are almost wasted in supporting roles. John Lithgow is pitch perfect as Kinsey's cruel, insensitive father. There is a nice, near cameo appearance by Lynn Redgrave (Gods and Monsters) as the last interview of Kinsey, and she resonates in her brief appearance.
In keeping with the subject matter, there is graphic dialogue and sexual depictions, but there is nothing exploitive or without narrative purpose here. It is interesting to note that this film is coming on the heels of a moralistic backlash of media content and permissiveness. By showing how well-intended human studies into formerly taboo subjects helped to enlighten and reexamine human behavior, Kinsey proves to be the right film for the right time.
Kinsey's sexology includes so many open-ended questions that they leave room for respondents to elaborate upon their true sexual experiences. Their thousands of responses included in Kinsey's research {published as "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) & "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953)} are anything but black & white! It is to Kinsey's credit, his passion, the effectiveness of his research techniques, that sexology discovered US respondents were eager to speak about sex. Since Kinsey's findings are not what the US public expected to learn, his research became controversial. For instance, the first book found males had many more same-gender sexual experiences than anyone imagined. The second book really rocked the world when Kinsey's research showed that females shared the same sexual desires as males! From the start of the film to the end it is loaded with sexological words: in other words, the clinical names for genital body parts & sexual activities. Sexual activities are spoken of scientifically & sometimes depicted. This is not by any means a pornographic motion picture. It is about the science of sexology. But, most especially, it is a fine film that aptly portrays both the research & intimate passions of the world famous US sexologist, Kinsey.
It's not necessarily an adults-only film; depending upon how well prepared & educated teens are in studies of human sexual behavior. I feel Condon masters the topics of sexology & sexualities.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाOn the DVD commentary, writer and director Bill Condon revealed that he wanted to include, in a montage, a clip from I Love Lucy (1951), in which a character makes a joking reference to Dr. Alfred Kinsey's research. Condon says that he was unable to use the clip because Lucie Arnaz (the daughter of Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz) denied him the rights, offering very little explanation, aside from claiming that her parents would never allow themselves to be associated with Kinsey.
- गूफ़During the credits, the producers thank the "University of Indiana" when it is actually "Indiana University" of which Alfred Kinsey was a part. The university notified director Bill Condon of the mistake. Condon gave his word that it would be taken care of when the film went on general release, but the mistake remains.
- भाव
Alfred Kinsey: [Kinsey is teaching his first class] Who can tell me which part of the human body can enlarge a hundred times. You, miss?
Female Student: [indignantly] I'm sure I don't know. And you've no right to ask me such a question in a mixed class.
Alfred Kinsey: [amused] I was referring to the pupil in your eye, young lady.
[class laughs]
Alfred Kinsey: And I think I should tell you, you're in for a terrible disappointment.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटAt the end of the film (following the main cast credits), a montage featuring Kinsey Institute footage of the mating habits of various animals is accompanied by "Fever" by Little Willie John.
- साउंडट्रैकEtudes, Opus 25
Written by Frédéric Chopin
Performed by Idil Biret
Courtesy of Naxos of North America, Inc.
टॉप पसंद
- How long is Kinsey?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Kinsey, el científico del sexo
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,10,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $1,02,54,979
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,69,038
- 14 नव॰ 2004
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $1,70,50,017
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 58 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1