The movie never really spent time showing us how these kids trained to become better chess players. Showing them the odd Morphy game here and there with whoops and hollers is not great training. The film should have showed them spending time playing chess with each other, studying the game. The Cuban boy had a rating of 2300, which is International Master. So if he was roped into the school just to become part of their chess team, he's what you call a "ringer". There's a segment where the teacher (Leguizamo) tries to answer a question about why "our people" are not represented. The answer was typical liberal claptrap, and the teacher missed a great opportunity to say, "but Jose Raul Capablanca WAS represented--in fact idolized by millions and was the reigning World Chess Champ for many years." And how they identify more with a foreigner ("our people") than an American is telling.
I thought the father was going to be a positive influence, since the movie starts with them playing chess, but he turned out to just be a total, brutal ass. The actors did a good job and there was chemistry and camaraderie.
As a tournament chess player, however, I must point out the many awful cliches: For one, players don't STARE at each other so much during games. Most all the time their focus is on the board. Most players do not try and "eyeball" their opponents. The "eyeballing" scenes should have been limited to only those moves the player thought was trappy or surprising, to see his opponent's reaction. Instead, every single chess game both opponents are eyeballing each other. Ridiculous. Secondly, they represented the game as BLITZ--a chess variant where both players have very little time to move their pieces, so watching those games is indeed nothing but move, slap clock, move, slap clock, etc. But in reality, the tournaments they played at are serious, classical time control tournaments, and so MOST of the time it would be quiet and players would be just staring at the board. Instead, we see a flurry of chess moves (slamming down the pieces, also ridiculous), followed by slapping the clock, eyeballing, jack-jawing, and other horrible behavior.
The most disappointing part of this movie is that it is called "Critical Thinking" and so I thought it would try to make a tie between the consequences of "bad moves" on the chessboard and the "bad moves" in life. The character Ito, for example, seems to make some bad moves, but it's not clear exactly why he needs to sell drugs for money, and we didn't see the scene where he was fired. Why was he fired? Because he left for a tournament without telling his boss? If so, it's no wonder. But the movie doesn't tell us--we just see Ito spiraling down, making bad decisions, but there's no real parallel to chess. In fact, at one point Ito even says, "We won--so what? What did we win?" He cannot see the value of chess to his life, so neither can the rest of us.
I thought there were many missed opportunities, such as when the teacher gives his "pep talk" and talks about each of them tapping into their inner "intangibles", bringing "themselves to the game". What does that even mean? Instead, he should exhort them to not move too quickly, calculate deeper, be objective as possible, and to play the BOARD, not your opponent. Instead, it's like the team won because they dug deep into their PERSONALITIES, which is something more appropriate for boxing, not chess. A chess game can be lost by a single mistake, and with this young, brash, impulsive crew--the best advice would be for them to be humble, and to actually RESPECT (but not fear) their opponent, and to look at the board objectively. "Tap into your intangibles"--not a very catchy slogan for a pep talk.
I give it 5 stars for being a true story, and for showing the young/older original real-life people the film is based on.
I thought the father was going to be a positive influence, since the movie starts with them playing chess, but he turned out to just be a total, brutal ass. The actors did a good job and there was chemistry and camaraderie.
As a tournament chess player, however, I must point out the many awful cliches: For one, players don't STARE at each other so much during games. Most all the time their focus is on the board. Most players do not try and "eyeball" their opponents. The "eyeballing" scenes should have been limited to only those moves the player thought was trappy or surprising, to see his opponent's reaction. Instead, every single chess game both opponents are eyeballing each other. Ridiculous. Secondly, they represented the game as BLITZ--a chess variant where both players have very little time to move their pieces, so watching those games is indeed nothing but move, slap clock, move, slap clock, etc. But in reality, the tournaments they played at are serious, classical time control tournaments, and so MOST of the time it would be quiet and players would be just staring at the board. Instead, we see a flurry of chess moves (slamming down the pieces, also ridiculous), followed by slapping the clock, eyeballing, jack-jawing, and other horrible behavior.
The most disappointing part of this movie is that it is called "Critical Thinking" and so I thought it would try to make a tie between the consequences of "bad moves" on the chessboard and the "bad moves" in life. The character Ito, for example, seems to make some bad moves, but it's not clear exactly why he needs to sell drugs for money, and we didn't see the scene where he was fired. Why was he fired? Because he left for a tournament without telling his boss? If so, it's no wonder. But the movie doesn't tell us--we just see Ito spiraling down, making bad decisions, but there's no real parallel to chess. In fact, at one point Ito even says, "We won--so what? What did we win?" He cannot see the value of chess to his life, so neither can the rest of us.
I thought there were many missed opportunities, such as when the teacher gives his "pep talk" and talks about each of them tapping into their inner "intangibles", bringing "themselves to the game". What does that even mean? Instead, he should exhort them to not move too quickly, calculate deeper, be objective as possible, and to play the BOARD, not your opponent. Instead, it's like the team won because they dug deep into their PERSONALITIES, which is something more appropriate for boxing, not chess. A chess game can be lost by a single mistake, and with this young, brash, impulsive crew--the best advice would be for them to be humble, and to actually RESPECT (but not fear) their opponent, and to look at the board objectively. "Tap into your intangibles"--not a very catchy slogan for a pep talk.
I give it 5 stars for being a true story, and for showing the young/older original real-life people the film is based on.