Good movie, but I would have liked a little more truth in the telling

Rating: 7/10 (3 April 2015)

The danger of an interesting movie based on true events is that one is likely to run to wikipedia to discover the whole story, only to discover that the whole story has very little to do with the movie.
Such is the case with The Imitation Game. While there was, in fact, a genius named Alan Turing who worked on breaking the Nazi's enigma machine, but while the film was entertaining, liberties were taken that to me seem both unnecessary and disappointing.
I'd say the biggest issue was the creation of an antagonist for Turing (which apparently really upset the family of the antagonist). The obtuse, hard-headed boss is nothing but a cliché, and while the writer may have felt it created a nice dramatic tension, for me it was a little annoying in the movie and very annoying when I found out it was fiction.
When asked about the way the script strayed from the truth, the screenwriter compared himself with Monet. Besides being wildly egotistical, it's a false analogy. Monet was not using waterlilies to make a greater statement about politics or gay oppression, he was experimenting with colors. He wasn't touting the fact that waterlilies exist in the real world to raise interest in his paintings; he used them as a vehicle for his art. The screenwriter said that, like Monet, he wanted to give the feeling of Turing's life, but his changes seem more designed for creating a pat but effective conventional narrative rather than to create a feel.
I can understand not following anyone's life exactly - life is too messy for a movie - but to me it seems if you're going to veer this much from truth you are better off just writing fiction.
My advice; if you watch this movie, which is quite engrossing and well worth watching, don't look it up on wikipedia if you care about truthfulness. It will drive you nuts.