'Based on' what? Meandering travesty?

Rating: 3/10 (23 July 2016)

What's the purpose to invest your (life's)time to watch any film?
Cinematic / artistic depiction; tell a story; human endeavour in portrayal acting chops? If so, this film fails on two out of three and on that third (the last), even then is from an incredibly miscast T. Maguire - which affirming what other reviewers here have noted, in that not only his stature (in real life he towered over Spassky) but that when you see archival footage of the real Bobby, it's absolute obvious it should have been Nic Cage as a shoo-in to play the temperamental genius, even more so when you know of Cage's maniacal over-acting style of late which would have been ideal to represent the paranoid troubled Fischer.
What about the other two failures then? Cinematically dull, jump shots and ponderously unwinding to what should have been the nail biting '72 Reykjavik held chess championship finale mind games only really briefly hinted at with (just) one shot of Maguire looking as though trying to put the hex on Spassky, which is exactly how many contemporary observers thought contributed to his crushing victory over him; even the famous Icelandic location, in which Fisher (supposedly) disappeared into for the odd no-show second game, little is made cinematically of its legendary landscape - one wandering along road scene when TM / BF is then met by a car  and that's it ..
which leads onto story: as any film fan knows a 'based on a true story', ostensibly a bio-pic, is supposed to be marginally more reliable than 'inspired by', but as other reviewers here point out, (most notably 'Susie Bogus') this is almost a travesty of what really was likely: so much that, to me, the scriptwriters were either arrogant, or simply couldn't care less, about much fact at all, and yet of which there is plenty of archival material to reference: by which, I would advise you ignore this – for other than that last 'reel' / 20+ minutes when it finally does begin to excitingly represent the sort of real world politik shenanigans that seemed to accompany the erstwhile niche game of chess at that time, still it ends on only the fourth game – not, arguably, the real clincher 21st 'overnighter' where surely there was just as much drama as Spassky realised his position was so hopeless he was to finally concede the championship to his opponent, the lone hero (even Kissinger called him to patriotically carry on for American superiority against state machine drilled Soviets !) BF, which the film purports to represent: since, well, after that (only 4th) match, the story build up just closes up (did they run out of funds? Lose interest?), so that all the real mystery and intrigue on how Fischer's subsequent life developed is merely summed up in lame end credit captions.
Interested in BF? Then instead I would recommend the far more revealing/informative 'Bobby Fischer Against the World' of Liz Garbus' documentary effort from the always reliable HBO imprimatur.
Most disappointing travesty of efforts.