Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Hans Gerber This is again a movie about a very gifted person who has an obsessive relationship to his profession. Though he's admired by many for his great talent he's mainly driven by his own expectations about himself. Not even his love to a woman that is not only fascinated by his talent but also about his personality were able to save him from being eaten up and finally destroyed by his possession.John Turturrow gives us one of his most outstanding acting performances of his career and so the rest of the cast does. It's a very beautiful but also sad movie about a sensitive, eccentric, tormented character suffering from the burden of his own perfectionism.It is a love story indeed - about the love to a woman but first of all about his love to his favorite game.Of course also this movie can't match the original book. And again I think its for the same reasons:The movie would have gotten way to long.Since movies are a way more passive form of entertainment than reading a book (were you have to use way more of your own imagination) they are expected to be dramatic and entertaining. Too much of the book's details would have made the movie to exhausting to watch.But all this doesn't make this a "bad movie" at all. It's a fascinating movie with an interesting story and great actors - way more delicious than today's usual movie fast food.

kinophiliac I'm rather surprised that no reviewer so far has commented on the rather elementary chess blunder in Luzhin's game as white against an unnamed opponent immediately before the final. Despite the use of Jonathan Speelman as consultant chess expert, Luzhin is shown winning the game with an illegal move. In between the rapid cuts away and back to the board it is not hard to spot that after Luzhin's combination culminating in a queen sacrifice, his rook on d1 is still pinned by black's rook at c1 against his king in the corner at h1. Thus he is unable to play the purported mating move Rd1-d8 which would be illegal - but he's shown doing so to rapturous applause from the audience.

semenyatk very few chess movies have been made over the last couple of years ,but this one is more than just a chess movie its a story about the need to be loved and the need to win it,John Toturro plays a psychologically challenged man ,nothing matters to him accept 64 squares and 32 pieces ,the game validates him as a person ,when he looses a game he looses the one thing that makes sense to him and John Torturro expresses this in a beautiful fashion,even the love of a woman was not enough to save him from his sad existence.It makes you wonder if there other Luzon's out there who obsess about the game,i am sure they are,if you are a chess enthusiast it won't hurt to watch it.Its an intelligent piece of work laid out properly and executed well,it achieves its objectives,unfortunately i doubt if there will be sequel.

teacherjoseph Once again proving his amazing versatility, John Turturro plays the introspective Russian chess genius preparing for a comeback tournament, and forging an unlikely relationship with a gadabout fellow resident (Emily Watson) at a 1920's Italian hotel. They fall in love,to the horror of her social-mountaineering mother (Geraldine James).A wonderful love story, whose gloss of chess might make it appear cerebral.But in spite of its origins in a Nabakov story, it certainly is not .The romantic elements and the sense of time and place beat the psychological analysis hands down.John Turturro, having appeared in "Barton Fink" ,"O Brother,Where Art thou?" "The Big Lebowski" proves that he is not dependant on Coen Bros films to assert his stature.