Review of Kinsey (2004) by Filipeneto — 15 Sep 2021

Alfred Kinsey is still a little consensual figure today. Appointed justly as a pioneer and "father" of Sexology and scientific studies around human sexuality, he fought for these studies at a time of enormous social conservatism and managed to publish two important scientific studies in the area, which greatly shocked and changed the way in which society and the academic community faced sex. However, as later studies have argued, the methods used by Kinsey were not always the most impartial and correct, such as the claim that he was too much concerned with homosexuality and the way in which he encouraged his students and collaborators to record, in detail, the sexual encounters and practices they had in their own privacy for study purposes. The film, in part, reflects the controversies, but highlights the essential: the pioneering spirit of a man who made sex known to a society that refused to even utter that word, paving the way for the changes and upheavals that, decades later, would allow the Sexual Revolution.

After these introductory words, I don't think it's worth talking about the script. With a non-linear narrative, the film addresses several important moments in the scientist's life, with his origins in an ultra-conservative milieu (his father was a particularly harsh and puritan religious preacher) and the way he managed to break away from that milieu to graduate in sciences, becoming a distinguished entomologist and, later, dedicating himself to the study of sexuality, in part driven by events in his personal and marital life. The film does not have an erotic charge, as one might think at first, but the dialogues are full of varied allusions to sexuality (acts, positions, specific practices, fantasies, perversions, etc.) and this is as didactic as it is unpleasant, so I personally advise against the film for minors.

Liam Neeson is an excellent actor, but this film is far from being one of the best and most relevant in his extensive filmography. Still, it's worth highlighting the actor's commitment and the way he managed to give the character an aura of charisma, like a lone crusader in a very personal war. Beside her, the beautiful Laura Linney gave life to a dedicated and liberal wife, with a free spirit, but faithful to the love that was born in her marriage. Personally, I think she was even better than Neeson, stealing attention whenever she shows up and turning the character into someone who is easy to like. The reward was her nomination for the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. The film also features appearances by other well-known actors such as John Lithgow, Timothy Hutton, Chris O'Donnell, Peter Sarsgaard, Oliver Platt and Tim Curry. Everyone, without major exceptions, made a good contribution to the film and did a positive job.

Technically, it's a low-key film, one that doesn't overwhelm and leaves the script and cast to the full attention of the audience. The cinematography is very good and works very well, as is the editing work, which gives the film a pleasant pace and allows the two and a half hours to pass without the audience realizing it. The film is set in the mid-twentieth century, and this is achieved very effectively through the sets, a series of props (the telephone, for example, or even the black-and-white radio and newspapers, and the old cars) and very dated but very elegant clothing. The film doesn't have very obvious effects, but what was used has quality and works well.