The best movies are those where the filmmakers do their research. Director Cronenberg and Christopher Hampton clearly care enough about the psychiatric practice in order to study it carefully and skillfully weave theory into the lives of the characters in the movie, "A Dangerous Mind." Darren Aronofsky, likewise, clearly did his research into the inner world of professional wrestling in order to make his film, "The Wrestler." As a result, "The Wrestler" not only had compelling human stories, but we also got to understand what the lives of some wrestlers were really like with their drug use, the male camaraderie, and the physical stamina involved in one bruising fight after the other.
Yet with "Pawn Sacrifice," we get the sense that that Director Edward Zwick, the three screenwriters, and the producers are not really interested in learning anything about chess – despite the fact that this movie was about the only American to become World Chess Champion, Bobby Fischer. Instead, "Pawn Sacrifice" is solely a character study on Bobby Fischer (played quite well by Tobey Maguire) with his personality quirks and bad temper, but divorced from his chess. For instance, there are a few scenes where Bobby Fischer defeated Soviet grandmaster Ivanov. Ivanov then withdraws from the tournament by claiming that he came down with influenza. Fair enough, but how was Fischer able to defeat Ivanov? And what made Fischer's chess victory any different from the victories which other grandmasters had over Ivanov? The film does not answer these questions, because it does not even bother to take the time to explain the chess game to us. I also have the same complaint about Fischer's victory over Victor Korchnoi. Korchnoi was a master at defence and counterattack and one of the strongest grandmasters in the world by the late 1960s. So how was Fischer able to beat him? Again, this question goes unanswered, probably because the filmmakers and producers assumed that the game of chess was too boring to be worth explaining to anyone or they were not particularly interested in Fischer's unique genius for chess, which inspired a future generation of Soviet chess players like Garry Kasparov. Yet if they really felt like this, why make a movie about Fischer at all? The reason why neglecting to explain Fischer's chess games is such a big flaw is two-fold. To begin with, Fischer's brand of chess is what made him so unique and extraordinary -- not his moods or his wild conspiracy theories. Yet judging from the film, I do not yet see how Fischer's chess was any different from Soviet grandmaster Ivanov's. Second, Fischer sacrificed everything, including his sanity, to achieve a mastery over his unique craft which no one else had. So shouldn't we get a clear idea of how challenging professional chess is? Should we not be given a clear idea of the hurdles Fischer had to overcome in order to become world champion? And also why achieving this level of mastery over chess was so important that Fischer was willing to sacrifice as much as he did? These are also questions that this film has not addressed.
"Pawn Sacrifice" does have its strengths. All the performances are pretty solid, especially Tobey Maguire's as Bobby Fischer. We get to understand this man's inner demons, his intense sensitivity to noises and lights, his paranoia and anti-Semitism, and his eccentricities. These aspects of Fischer are of some interest to us, since they foreshadow his eventual and tragic psychological breakdown. Yet "Pawn Sacrifice" can hardly be considered a great film, largely because the filmmakers seem as clueless about Fischer's chess genius (which I assume is a hugely important component of the film) as the young woman who took away his virginity in California.
6.5/10
Yet with "Pawn Sacrifice," we get the sense that that Director Edward Zwick, the three screenwriters, and the producers are not really interested in learning anything about chess – despite the fact that this movie was about the only American to become World Chess Champion, Bobby Fischer. Instead, "Pawn Sacrifice" is solely a character study on Bobby Fischer (played quite well by Tobey Maguire) with his personality quirks and bad temper, but divorced from his chess. For instance, there are a few scenes where Bobby Fischer defeated Soviet grandmaster Ivanov. Ivanov then withdraws from the tournament by claiming that he came down with influenza. Fair enough, but how was Fischer able to defeat Ivanov? And what made Fischer's chess victory any different from the victories which other grandmasters had over Ivanov? The film does not answer these questions, because it does not even bother to take the time to explain the chess game to us. I also have the same complaint about Fischer's victory over Victor Korchnoi. Korchnoi was a master at defence and counterattack and one of the strongest grandmasters in the world by the late 1960s. So how was Fischer able to beat him? Again, this question goes unanswered, probably because the filmmakers and producers assumed that the game of chess was too boring to be worth explaining to anyone or they were not particularly interested in Fischer's unique genius for chess, which inspired a future generation of Soviet chess players like Garry Kasparov. Yet if they really felt like this, why make a movie about Fischer at all? The reason why neglecting to explain Fischer's chess games is such a big flaw is two-fold. To begin with, Fischer's brand of chess is what made him so unique and extraordinary -- not his moods or his wild conspiracy theories. Yet judging from the film, I do not yet see how Fischer's chess was any different from Soviet grandmaster Ivanov's. Second, Fischer sacrificed everything, including his sanity, to achieve a mastery over his unique craft which no one else had. So shouldn't we get a clear idea of how challenging professional chess is? Should we not be given a clear idea of the hurdles Fischer had to overcome in order to become world champion? And also why achieving this level of mastery over chess was so important that Fischer was willing to sacrifice as much as he did? These are also questions that this film has not addressed.
"Pawn Sacrifice" does have its strengths. All the performances are pretty solid, especially Tobey Maguire's as Bobby Fischer. We get to understand this man's inner demons, his intense sensitivity to noises and lights, his paranoia and anti-Semitism, and his eccentricities. These aspects of Fischer are of some interest to us, since they foreshadow his eventual and tragic psychological breakdown. Yet "Pawn Sacrifice" can hardly be considered a great film, largely because the filmmakers seem as clueless about Fischer's chess genius (which I assume is a hugely important component of the film) as the young woman who took away his virginity in California.
6.5/10