if his sexuality was so uncertain, why make a movie as if it wasn't?
If it is debated among historians - people who study this stuff for a living using research and evidence - whether Hoover's relationship with Tolson was either that of a good friend or of a lover then what possible good comes from releasing a hollywood film to the general public asserting one way or the other as if it were definitely known? Many people will now think J. Edgar Hoover was definitely gay entirely because of this film. Now obviously there's nothing wrong with being gay, but there is something seriously wrong with manipulating a person's life story in order to sell movie tickets.
Obviously when true stories are adapted into a 2 hour movie sometimes characters, events, and facts must be condensed or re-worked so that the story can be told in the time span of this format in a meaningful way without completely distorting the overall message. But what this movie does is present just one of the possibilities that some historians have put forth and declare that this is who J Edgar Hoover was. Honestly, I find this to be very deceptive and downright harmful to the american public who will take this movie as fact. I also find it shameful that movie studios can get away with doing things like this.
If I were making this movie I would have made Hoover's sexuality just as much of a mystery to the audience as it is to historians. I would include scenes based off of events described by their real life co-workers that showed Hoover's relationship with Tolson as being that of very close friends as well as scenes that dropped subtle hints based off of the claims made suggesting the possibility they could have been lovers.