I don’t mind the use of chess as a shorthand for ‘battle of wits’ but I object to how badly written they usually are. Bad Genius hasn’t noticed, and isn’t expecting, a Queen sacrifice move by Good Genius? Please.
As bad as poker. Every round of poker in movies is a smorgasbord of high value hands:
“But can you beat a full house, Queens over nines?”
“I also have a full house, Kings over Jacks.”
“I have four 10s.”
“I have a Royal Flush.”
“I have six Aces.”
This always bothers me so much! It always comes down to one hand, and it’s ALWAYS presented prior to the deal, that this is the hand that has to win, and the hero gets a royal flush.
Oh wow. He got REALLY lucky and it required no skill at all. 🙄
My wife decided the climax of her book would be a poker game and I was like “If you do this, DO NOT use the royal flush takes all trope. It is a tired cliché.”
She did something a little different and I’m very pleased with how she subverted that trope.
It ends with a chop and the protagonist cashes out and walks away. Not exciting from a poker perspective but the protagonist develops as a person between the last bet and the reveal.
I guess I’m a bit confused what is meant by battle of wits, is it supposed to mean, like two super geniuses going at each other? Or?
Because there are 7 year olds that would wipe the floor with me in chess, but get absolutely sent into the shadow realm in every other category mental or physical lol
Chess is a game and being good at it, maybe means you are disciplined? Patient? But intelligent, not really, not any more than any other average person or gamer.
Ah, but if you were a movie-level genius you’d be brilliant at chess because all movie-level geniuses are brilliant at chess. Up until they fail to notice a Queen sacrifice play.
As someone who plays a lot of chess, (10-20 matches per day, one day I might get decent at it), a queen sacrifice is not a big whoop, and I doubt it would result in any audible gasps from an audience if there were spectators. Those who are dorky enough to watch chess (that includes myself) knows this.
As for movie-poker, a movie named Maverick comes to mind (Mel Gibson, iirc)
I don’t mind the use of chess as a shorthand for ‘battle of wits’ but I object to how badly written they usually are. Bad Genius hasn’t noticed, and isn’t expecting, a Queen sacrifice move by Good Genius? Please.
As bad as poker. Every round of poker in movies is a smorgasbord of high value hands:
“But can you beat a full house, Queens over nines?”
“I also have a full house, Kings over Jacks.”
“I have four 10s.”
“I have a Royal Flush.”
“I have six Aces.”
Everyone gasps!
Also, they always play until checkmate. If there are two geniuses playing chess one of them would resign at least 3 moves before reaching checkmate.
I just want a film to get it right. I want the hero to realise he needs to fold out his amazing hand based on instincts and skill.
This always bothers me so much! It always comes down to one hand, and it’s ALWAYS presented prior to the deal, that this is the hand that has to win, and the hero gets a royal flush.
Oh wow. He got REALLY lucky and it required no skill at all. 🙄
My wife decided the climax of her book would be a poker game and I was like “If you do this, DO NOT use the royal flush takes all trope. It is a tired cliché.”
She did something a little different and I’m very pleased with how she subverted that trope.
I hope it was beating the nut flush with a full house made from a pocket pair.
Now THAT’S exciting to a poker player!
It ends with a chop and the protagonist cashes out and walks away. Not exciting from a poker perspective but the protagonist develops as a person between the last bet and the reveal.
Turns out the real pot was the friends we made along the way, or something.
That poker hands reminded me of the episode in Malcolm in the Middle where they’re playing and suddenly realize there are 6 5s in the deck
That’s not poker, that’s multiplayer Balatro lol
I guess I’m a bit confused what is meant by battle of wits, is it supposed to mean, like two super geniuses going at each other? Or?
Because there are 7 year olds that would wipe the floor with me in chess, but get absolutely sent into the shadow realm in every other category mental or physical lol
Chess is a game and being good at it, maybe means you are disciplined? Patient? But intelligent, not really, not any more than any other average person or gamer.
Ah, but if you were a movie-level genius you’d be brilliant at chess because all movie-level geniuses are brilliant at chess. Up until they fail to notice a Queen sacrifice play.
As someone who plays a lot of chess, (10-20 matches per day, one day I might get decent at it), a queen sacrifice is not a big whoop, and I doubt it would result in any audible gasps from an audience if there were spectators. Those who are dorky enough to watch chess (that includes myself) knows this.
As for movie-poker, a movie named Maverick comes to mind (Mel Gibson, iirc)