Friday, August 24, 2012

Searching for Bobby Fischer

Year 4, Day 237 - 8/24/12 - Movie #1,227

BEFORE: I sort of have the feeling that I half-saw this one once before, or maybe I'm confusing it with "Little Man Tate".  Damn, I hate that sort of uncertainty - I've made it this far without accidentally counting a film that I've seen before, I'd hate to do it now.  This one will wrap up the "screwed-up young boys" chain, I think.  Linking from "It's Kind of a Funny Story", I'm lucky once again, since Emma Roberts was also in "Valentine's Day" with Joe Mantegna (last heard in "Cars 2").


THE PLOT: A prepubescent chess prodigy refuses to harden himself in order to become a champion like the famous but unlikable Bobby Fischer.

AFTER: Well, if I had seen this film before, I'd forgotten all of the pertinent details, so that's really the same as not having seen it, right?  I certainly can't name the time nor place - still, if there's any uncertainty about a film, I wonder if I should strike it from the list, or watch it over the holiday break.

Anyway, tonight we've got an awkward kid (aren't they all?) who's brilliant at playing chess, and whose playing style evokes that of Bobby Fischer, the former world champion who notably declined to defend his title and became a recluse.  After living in exile and making some anti-American and anti-Israeli statements, he sought asylum in Japan and Iceland - and for some people (OK, me), his story proves the fine line between genius and madness.

Fischer is more than name-checked here, the main character knows all about Fischer's life - but is he trying to emulate him, or is he trying to avoid becoming him?  This is also about the pressures on kids these days, to succeed, to get into the right prep school, and by extension to write the best essay and get into the best college (and I saw last night where that all ends up - in the looney bin).  And for parents, there's a fine line between encouraging a kid's hobby and making it the focus of their lives.  By all means, if a kid excels at something, his or her endeavors should be promoted, but a kid also needs balance, and downtime just to be a kid.

I used to be pretty good at chess, and tricks like solving a Rubik's Cube quickly (kids, ask your parents...) and my mother even brought me to one of those summer academies where they offered college-level courses on topics like logic, probability and radio broadcasting.  And some of those courses probably helped shaped the career I have, and made me the person I am  (plus, I'm sure my mother was ecstatic that I wasn't playing sports and risking serious kickball injuries).  But it got to a point where I'd reached a plateau of sorts - I was enrolled in a summer course at M.I.T. to learn some computer language called Pascal (again, kids - ask your parents).  After one class I realized I was in way over my head, and had to come clean.  My mom and dad heard what I said, and they didn't make me go back - which was for the best, because I don't think that computer language survived anyway.

I know someone who travels with his teenage daughter so she can participate in equestrian events - I imagine she's good at it, otherwise I don't see the point.  Again I'm of two minds here, because where do you draw the line between being an encouraging parent, and being one of those ogres that you see on "Toddlers & Tiaras"?  I guess you just have to play it by ear - but if I ever became an overbearing stage dad, I'd hope one of my friends would have justification to shoot me in the head.  I'm aware of another kid, who can't be more than 12, who's gaining some notoriety as an animator.  I'm sure he's got the skills and all, but I'm also aware that his biggest supporter (and publicist) is his mother.  Sure, I expect a mother to be supportive and encouraging, but not to the point of ridiculousness.  I'm guessing the kid would rather just go outside and kick a ball around, or stay in and read a comic book, than be holed up in a studio over a computer working out walk cycles.  There'll be plenty of time for that later.

Anyway, back to Bobby Fischer.  Has anyone prominent ever removed themselves from contention like he has?  Or gone out on top, if you want to look at it another way?  Viewed from the right POV, it almost seems like a brilliant move - if you reach a pinnacle, win a championship, achieve some goal, to just quit while you're ahead.  Imagine if Michelangelo quit sculpting right after the Pieta, or if some sports team just folded up and quit after winning a championship.  But now, our culture, particularly sports culture, is all about threepeating and creating dynasties - what a bunch of greedy bastards we all are.

Actually, child actors are a great metaphor for what I'm talking about - even though some of them probably have overbearing stage parents.  But the truth is, some of them peak at the age of 5 or 7, when they're quite cute, and then by the time they're teenagers, and not so cute any more, their careers are essentially over.  Could you handle having your greatest success before high school?  Or being told at the age of 12 that your looks have faded?  What was that like for Mason Reese, Rodney Allen Rippy, Peter Billingsley, etc.?  (one last time - kids, ask your parents)

There's my new goal - when I'm done with the movie project, to succeed at something beyond the daily grind of doing my job.  Write that screenplay, do it well, be all that I can be - and if it goes well, and I'm happy with it?  I promise to never write another one.  Because that's where madness starts - people always reaching beyond their abilities, or wondering why they can't pitch another perfect game, or fill those rock concert seats the way they used to, or whatever.  I think maybe more people should succeed at something, and then just walk away.  Go out on top, leave 'em wondering.

NITPICK POINT: The prominent chess tutor in this film states that he doesn't want his protege playing speed chess in the park.  Why?  This was not properly explained to my satisfaction.  The games of chess in the park are timed, and so are the tournament matches - and the goal in both games is to win, according to the exact same rules.  What, exactly, is the problem with playing speed chess, what bad habits will a player learn by doing this?  I know there must be a distinction, but I'm guessing that to the vast majority of the audience, both games look exactly the same.  The only difference I'm aware of is that decisions need to be made faster in speed chess, but that's a skill that can only help in tournament play, no? 

Also starring Max Pomeranc, Ben Kingsley (last seen in "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time"), Laurence Fishburne (last seen in "The Cotton Club"), Joan Allen (last seen in "Nixon"), David Paymer (last seen in "Bad Teacher"), with cameos from Dan Hedaya (also last seen in "Nixon"), William H. Macy (last seen in "Seabiscuit"), Laura Linney (last seen in "The Mothman Prophecies"), Tony Shalhoub (last seen in "Life or Something Like It"), Josh Mostel (last seen in "Sophie's Choice"), Austin Pendleton.

RATING: 6 out of 10 queen sacrifices

No comments:

Post a Comment