Inclubabu
Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.
SpunkySelfTwitter
It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.
Kien Navarro
Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
Mehdi Hoffman
There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.
Stella Adhisurya
Christopher and His Kind is not a heartfelt, moving film about homophobia and homosexuals being persecuted by the Nazis. However, it is a movie about a gay writer who travels to a war- torn Berlin all for the sake of boys. The main character, Christopher, goes to Berlin in search for freedom (and gay, gay sex) from his safe hometown of London giving up being a doctor in return for sexual freedom and promiscuity. Is it vain, you may ask. Yes. Is it reckless? Completely. Is it completely stupid considering there's a war going on in Berlin? Of course. And does Christopher completely ignore this and go on crusading and falling in love? Yep. To understand this movie you must first understand Isherwood, there is a reason why they chose Matt Smith and not bloody Johnny Depp. You should watch this movie and see for yourself, it's humor and optimism set on a backdrop of war and genocide. If you want a poignant, moving story on homosexuality in the midst of the Nazis, go watch something else. This is a lighthearted look into Christoph Isherwood's mind and motives, a biography, not a history book.TL;DR: It's funny, it's gay, it's insightful and inspiring. It's not heartfelt, moving or depressing, but it is kind of incredible.
Anja Bech
I have just watched this film and upon reading the reviews became quite confused since most of the reviews are being considerably harsh, particularly when it comes to Matt Smith's performance. Perhaps it is because I am extremely fond of the actor, but I found his performance compelling and warm, though a bit awkward. I enjoyed the film thoroughly. The atmosphere of Berlin in 1933 was captured really well and the supporting actors were well cast. Imogen Poots' Jean was wonderfully outrageous. The greatest fault I found with the movie is probably that Heinz in the last bit in 1952 looks more like a woman impersonating a man than an aged man.Overall definitely a film I would recommend.
steven-222
This is the BBC at its most disappointing, delivering glossy, glib, entertaining "product" which could have been, should have been, something deeply moving and profound. Acting, writing, directing, and production are all competent...and nothing more.Matt Smith's performance amounts to one unconvincing pose after another. To play Isherwood, one of the Fox brothers (James or Edward) in his prime would have been ideal. Surely there's a British actor out there who could have made an indelible impression with this part; Smith doesn't have the edge. It's hard not to think of you-know-Who when he does his trademark OTT posturing. There's no depth here.Deeply disappointing.
matt-488
An otherwise brilliant idea was ruined by Matt Smith's performance. This actor had just done a few 'bit' parts in UK drama until he was cast to play BBC's 'Dr Who'. His abilities are fine for light entertainment - but it doesn't make him a good actor.He was clearly chosen to play this role purely because of his 'Dr Who' connection - not for the merit of his potential performance. Having him attached no doubt gave Mammoth the green light they needed from the BBC. He brought nothing to the role of Christopher Isherwood - a rich, complex and intriguing man who was a seminal and critical voice of Nazi Germany in the run up to WWII. Matt Smith was unable to cope with such a demanding character and brought nothing to the part. A really lacking performance. He was also completely 'out acted' by his fellow cast - each and every one of them.Get back to the Tardis, Mr Smith and leave the proper acting to the decent actors out there. You ruined a potentially brilliant piece of drama.
