ridiculous rating

It is so daring, it is so ambitious, it is so thrilling and weird and pointed and powerful. I never knew where it was going.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

This film if you can even call it is an insult to the work and life of Christopher Isherwood, it's pompous, vulgar and ugly where Isherwood work was subtle, classy, distinguish but still modern and decadent . The film takes liberty with his life and history that is odious, the acting except for Inoggen Peotts is disastrous, that Guy from Dr Who is trying hard to be an English gentlemen, but he's just excruciatingly irritating to the point you want to slap him in the face, he's cocky and pedantic something Isherwood was certainly not. The camera work is pretty ugly, interesting angles sometimes, but the grain of the photography is horrible The mise en scene is utterly disgusting and the narrative is insulting to the intelligence of the spectator, you don't need to underline everything in red, we got the message the first time. Next time someone does a film on Isherwood please watch A Single Man, interviews of the man himself, and Cabaret This so UN clever and clearly cheaply made , made for people with a low QI whose only idea of homosexuality is GAY and Comptons in Soho, pathetic

This is a nicely constructed period piece which is completely watchable but nothing more than what you're probably expecting.(I know little of Isherwood but just from the description of the story I imagined how the film would be and I was exactly right.)Casting Smith as Isherwood wasn't such a great move, especially if you watch Doctor Who. Smith's performance in this film isn't as manic and heroic as his work in Doctor Who, and his acting here is fine. But he still constantly reminded me of Doctor Who, especially as Doctor Who and Christopher Isherwood wear very similar clothes and have a similar haircut. And since Doctor Who travels in time, seeing him in 1930s England and Berlin seemed entirely appropriate. So, unfortunately, this film felt a lot like it could have been titled Doctor Who Takes a Gay Holiday. Which makes Christopher and His Kind an ideal film if you're a Doctor Who fan who has always wanted to see the Doctor be as flexible with love and sex as he is with time and space.

If we have to look at BBC's "Christopher and His Kind" only as an informative piece about the Germany during the Nazi regime told by the perspective of a known writer, the movie works perfectly fine; but as an adaptation of Christopher Isherwood's autobiography it doesn't go quite right. I haven't read the book (and perhaps will never do since this is still unavailable here) but I can surely guess that inside of it there's much more than show an hedonistic type who went to Berlin because of the boys and his fascination for them, more liberated there than in his repressive England. Something tells me that in the printed material there's way more than what we're told on the screen.As a biographic film the story provides some good insights into Isherwood's life and his time, his writing and his passions. Played by Matt Smith ("Doctor Who") in a quite reliable way, the writer of "Mr Norris Changes Trains" has his fun, good and bad moments just like anyone else, falls in love and has to fight for it; and deals with the advance of the Nazism. In other words, it's an usual biography film that shows a small period of life of a personality. But compared to, let's say, Bennett Miller's "Capote", this TV movie doesn't go very far in almost anything (except for some good sexual scenes).Getting into it it's not that easy, the whole "Cabaret" segments are irritating and repetitive; most of the time it's fun and a little adventure here and there, the problems never are presented as something dreadful, dramatic, everything seems to be easily solved for these characters when in fact during the days of WWII things weren't so simple. But what makes the movie not hold much of its audience attention is to give a deep look to its main character, I mean, what did he learn from this experience and what can we learn from his experience? He's just a vain figure who wants to share his adventures and that's it?For a TV movie is quite okay, totally watchable, and it's not a total waste of time. More was needed for all involved, cast, crew, writer and direction. 7/10

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.