An entertaining but forgettable biopic predictably overrated during the awards race

Rating: 7/10 (14 April 2015)

The Imitation Game is another biopic in a seemingly endless list of biopics that come out every year indistinguishable from one another. For all its self-important attitude and melodrama, it doesn't even attempt to shine above other similarly themed films; it actually revels in following convention to a T. Morten Tydlum, of whom I've only watched his acclaimed feature "Headhunters", which I quite liked, here follows the British Biopic Manual at every second, including but not limited to:
* Heart-stirring but otherwise functional soundtrack by Alexandre Desplat. * Casting great British actors and giving them stereotypical roles. * Casting Benedict Cumberbatch in another misunderstood and antisocial genius. * Making up many unnecessary plot points. * Hundreds of historical inaccuracies.
And so on, and so forth. Cumberbatch gives a good performance, but one that feels too manufactured and rehearsed. I still can't understand how Cumberbatch and Bradley Cooper were nominated over Jake Gylenhall's masterful performance in "Nightcrawler", but that's for another review. Speaking of undeserved Oscar nominations, even more baffling was the nomination for Tydlum's serviceable but entirely forgettable directing over David Fincher, Dan Gilroy, Christopher Nolan, etc. I guess the Oscar voters will have a heart attack if they even think of nominating someone who doesn't direct a polished British drama.
Now, to my biggest gripe with the film, the historical inaccuracies. Of course every biopic has them, it's practically inevitable when doing a film you can't include every fact and person or otherwise it would be endless. But the matter is that other biopics haven't suffered in quality because of this; Spike Lee's Malcolm X is a monumental example of this and that film even now remains underseen and underrated, and was even practically ignored at the Oscars. The Imitation Game suffers because it's noticeable when something was drastically altered from history just to make it more digestible for a mainstream audience. Although I found it a little better on first viewing, my opinion on the film lowered when I read about the inaccuracies, such as Turing's personality, greatly altered to make him much more socially isolated than he actually was. Maybe the filmmakers thought he wouldn't be relatable or sympathetic otherwise, but given his eventual tragic treatment by the British government, I think they were rather mistaken.
Despite all these flaws, the film remains an entertaining affair throughout; it's just that it never elevates itself from nothing else than an affable but completely forgettable film. At least it's a little better than "The Theory of Everything".