I was disappointed. Instead of learning about Turrings mathematical theories & the various ways in which they helped & improved the world the movie wastes too much time on all of Alan's homosexual romances.

After having found this obscure docudrama on Netflix I decided to look in at its various reviews on IMDb. My curiosity in the first place came from watching The Imitation Game from 2015 and wondering what else was out there on the subject of Alan Turing. I had read a good deal about him over the years but was unaware that there were several other biopics based on his life story.

Only a handful of reviews on this one, despite the popularity of others? I was intrigued. Ed Stoppard's credits on IMDb fail even to mention it. Was it really that insignificant, or a bad film?

Not at all. It is a fine piece of work, combining fact and fiction in an artful and satisfying way...an excellent accompaniment to The Imitation Game for anyone who found, as I did, the more recent Cumberbatch portrayal mysterious and vague. Codebreaker for all its faults in not going far enough into the science of computing does indeed reflect the real man and those who were integral participants in his life and tragedy. It pulls no punches. Although the role of the psychoanalyst is a throwaway gimmick, I cannot fault the Stoppard performance. It informs cold documentation very well indeed.

Nine out of ten marks without any hesitation.

I knew I was in trouble when this documentary pointed out that Alan Turing had borrowed "The Game of Logic," "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass" from the library at the same time, but failed to point out that all three books were written by the same author, Lewis Carroll. That Carroll was both mathematician, observer, and writer of fiction would seem to be key to who Turing was, but was either unknown to or neglected by the filmmakers.

The documentary continues along the same lines, superficially describing who Alan Turing was and what his contributions were without "connecting the dots" between his observational skills and his intellectual skills. It shows, at best, a Wikipedia-level knowledge of who he was. Even the title "Codebreaker" is misleading. Turing's contributions at Bletchley Park are barely dealt with and not in any way informatively dealt with. One could make the case, I suppose, that the title is a play on words, referring Turing's breaking of the gentleman's code of conduct, but that's not stated in the film.

I felt like this was pretty much of a loss of an hour or so of my time.