I’m curious. What do you mean by “trained visual storyteller”? Comic book artist? Storyboard artist? Film director? Also, out of interest, how is that connected with finding fictionalised history problematic?

“The acting was amazing, but cannot recover from the fact that the film really should not be viewed via any "Left-Wing" or "Right-Wing" lens" - I don't think the film does put across a left or right wing view. For me, the great strength was it put both sides of the nuclear argument and left it to the viewer to draw a conclusion of their own. It isn't directly political, and it's all the better for it.

"Draws most rabid movie fans, but not really anything that would satisfy anyone gets tired of stories meant to play to the lowest common denominator by surrendering to the simplistic" - Have I just been insulted? This "rabid movie fan" with “simplistic”, “lowest common denominator” tastes thought the film was excellent. ;)

I understand some people have concerns about fictionalising history. Personally, I am primarily concerned with the filmmaking, and to my mind, Oppenheimer has great filmmaking in spades. My understanding is it actually stuck pretty close to history, but then people always quibble about what was omitted. Frankly, this "rabid movie fan" is often (though not always) inclined to take such quibbles with a sack of salt.

I wrote an article rebutting some of the common criticisms of Oppenheimer here, if you're interested. :)

https://fanfare.pub/why-i-disregard-oppenheimer-whataboutism-51ecbf7145m