Bobby Fischer on BBC 2 Friday 15th May 2020

[Reg Clucas]

In the 6th game of the 1972 match, did Spassky really lead the applause for Fischer after the game, as portrayed in the film?

[Paul Cooksey]

Fischer made "dodgy" comments on Jews well before 1972, though that didn't stop him playing chess in Israel during the 1960s of course.

Jan Hein Donner wrote that at the time of Bled 1961, "He idolized Hitler and read everything about him that he could lay his hands on. He also championed a brand of anti-semitism that could only be thought up by a mind completely cut off from reality."

I understand the narrative Fischer was eccentric as a great chess player, and mentally ill afterwards. It might be true. But I am pretty sure he was an extremely unpleasant person his entire adult life.

[Matt Mackenzie]

In the 6th game of the 1972 match, did Spassky really lead the applause for Fischer after the game, as portrayed in the film?

I think that at least is pretty accurate - he certainly joined in the applause even if he did not start it.

Same was apparently true for one of Korchnoi's wins in their 1977/78 match, despite their near-enmity at the time.

[Nick Grey]

Film better than expected.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I expect history teachers have their own wee grumbles on their web sites every time a film about the Tudors comes out."

Very true... I have some good laughs when they try to depict science on screen, a friend in the police can't bear to watch detective stories as they are full of mistakes, that's entertainment. This is of course a big problem with films about real people, that viewers might actually believe the film reflects the truth.

[JustinHorton]

Also see almost any film set in a coutroom, etc etc

[John McKenna]

The above statement should in no way detract from Henry Fonda's iconic performances in The Wrong Man and Twelve Angry Men.

[Roger de Coverly]

Film better than expected.

It was a dramatisation rather than a biography. So most of the incidents in the film took place, just not at the time or place depicted. The accusation of Russian Cheaters was made, but at the 1962 Candidates in Curacao rather than the Olympiad in Varna. Equally the "arrive with seconds to spare" incident as with others historically taking place elsewhere were depicted as taking place in the Piatigorsky Cup, whereas that was against Reshevsky in the Sousse Interzonal because of a dispute about when games should be played. That was a whole subplot left out, namely that RJF made demands about scheduling for religious reasons which were similar if not identical to those of strictly observing Orthodox Jews.

I did wonder who the Russian Ivanov was supposed to be. He was the one who was declared ill after facing Fischer. Spassky wasn't World Champion at the time either.

Another oddity was why the teams following the games felt the need to press a clock after updating their analysis board with the current position.

[MJMcCready]

I suspect Twelve Angry Men is beyond criticism of any form as its surely stifled by the pure pleasure of watching the production. I think what I found too difficult to accept about the film referred to in this thread was what some call 'artistic licence'. Maguire put in a performance of someone without any real drive, fanaticism or driven obsession. Take for example Gary Oldman in Darkest Hour, that characterization has real depth and draws you into the mind of Churchill effectively. The narrative that Maguire acts out makes Fischer seem like the archetypal hollywood star, craving attention and socially orientated. It's too glamorous, superficial, and what's worse, very American. It's genuinely accepted that since Michael Camino's Heaven's Gate the production of hollywood movies was changed forever, what directors having far less say in matters. I don't know how this film came to be what it is but it feels collaborative and rather wishy-washy. If the point was to make the chess playing world appealing to a new generation, I suppose they aren't open to excessive criticism. It does seem rather strange when a central character of a movie has more than enough personality to act out, why they would, with artistic license' portray him as a fraction of the person he was. It seems like the main actor had little control or input or just wasn't particularly interested -a distinct lack of passion in play that's for sure.

[MJMcCready]

Film better than expected.

It was a dramatisation rather than a biography. So most of the incidents in the film took place, just not at the time or place depicted. The accusation of Russian Cheaters was made, but at the 1962 Candidates in Curacao rather than the Olympiad in Varna. Equally the "arrive with seconds to spare" incident as with others historically taking place elsewhere were depicted as taking place in the Piatigorsky Cup, whereas that was against Reshevsky in the Sousse Interzonal because of a dispute about when games should be played. That was a whole subplot left out, namely that RJF made demands about scheduling for religious reasons which were similar if not identical to those of strictly observing Orthodox Jews.

I did wonder who the Russian Ivanov was supposed to be. He was the one who was declared ill after facing Fischer. Spassky wasn't World Champion at the time either.

Another oddity was why the teams following the games felt the need to press a clock after updating their analysis board with the current position.

Doing homework is too unglamorous.

[Nick Ivell]

One thing that actors never do is move the pieces as real players do.

Check out the Thomas Crown Affair.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"One thing that actors never do is move the pieces as real players do.

Check out the Thomas Crown Affair."

I now challenge all readers of this forum to imitate Faye Dunaway next time they play Nick!

[MJMcCready]

Do actors ever do anything the way real people do? The one I've always found most amusing is they way they wake up in a scene, which usually takes a bit of time to do and may involve bodily functions. Doesn't usually involve full bodily motion and full attention to something in a concentrated manner. Even saw in a film someone fast asleep then immediately become involved in a complex argument as soon as he woke up.

[Brian Denman]

Fischer did not beat any Russians at Santa Monica in 1966, so I have no idea who this alleged Russian called Ivanovic was. I believe also that false information was given about Paul Morphy, though it all happened so quickly that I am not sure about the words. Was it said that Morphy came to fame in 1855, started having visions at age 26 and took his own life? If so all three of these assertions are probably wrong.