That was an excellent one.

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

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

If you are interested in chess or computers you may be tempted to watch this film. Don't be. The film is only tangentially about chess or computers. It has nothing to say - no purpose. Many of the scenes are meandering. Some seem to have nothing to do with the movie. Some are genuinely creepy.The film's title and back cover description miss-represent what the film is about. If is was titled "Creepy people play computer chess" then the potential viewer at least has an idea what they were in for. Now I know the typical stereotype of the computer nerd who plays chess, and there are some in this film. Fine for dramatic effect. But that's not what chess or computer development is about.I have a keen interest in film. Most film produced and distributed today is of a good standard in terms of purpose, script and production values. This fails on all three.Disclaimer: I have played competitive chess for many years and have a FIDE rating over 2000.

This low key mockumentary is so dry in it's humor that it's more likely to produce a nostalgic or rueful smile than a belly laugh. Set at a 1980s man vs. computer chess competition, and shot on what looks like a video camera from the time, it certainly succeeds in capturing a time, place and atmosphere. On the other hand, some of it starts to get a bit repetitive and meandering. Unlike Christopher Guest's hysterical mockumentaries, this is so close to 'real' for much of it's length that it started to wear down a bit. And then when it switches to a more 'over-the-top' tone, as when one of the young leads is hit on by a pair of middle- aged swingers, it suddenly feels like a scene from another film. None-the-less, this is an impressive accomplishment, using it's lack of budget as a plus to create the feel of a truly home made documentary of the time. It may not be brilliant, but it's sweet, inventive, and fun, which puts it well ahead of most of what's out there.

This is a profound film about life, creation and art and IMO one of the best from 2013. It is also one of the most original and the bravest film to come out in a long time. I love this film. Please watch it!First of all, there is a message in the fact that it was filmed on an old 70s Sony AVC-3260 analog video camera. If the goal was to get a perfect visual picture then this was not the camera to use. We can assume that the goal is not perfection but rather imperfection. Why? Lynch does not want to work with film anymore (or perfect digital video cameras) because he likes the imperfection. He once said he wanted to get back to the 1930s films, where "some of the information is lost and it made me feel like there was more room to dream."Jean Renoir also once said: "I believe that perfection handicaps cinema." This is something Hollywood does not get. It has all this technology. Perfection in fact. They can create anything with it but it leaves no space for the human soul. No space to dream, whether it be creatively or visually. It has become so perfect that it is sterile. Why is that? Well the answer is too much control. The studios have too much control. There are too many people creating the film so there is no space to improvise and let the human soul take over. There is a scene in the film where a man drinks 3 scotch. Two has no affect and 4 is too much. 3 is perfect, because it allows him to keep his senses but at the same time loosen up and think out side the box. It is this balance that the film preaches. This is why we have the hippies at the same hotel with the nerds. Two extremes. One group that is in to too much control and another that is maybe in to too little control. MILD SPOILERS Stuck between these two is a computer that has just come to life but instead of getting a chance to explore the creative side it is forced to talk to other computers, something it hates doing. And everyone is so focused on logic that they can't see that there is something much greater happening here. They miss the chance of real creativity. Sounds like Hollywood to me :) But it goes farther than that. There is a life lesson here. We often miss the chance of real creativity, real experience, because we are too rational and don't take chances. HUGE SPOILERS FROM HERE ON!!! The end can be read in many ways. One way is that the computer commits suicide because it knows that its king and queen (which it has been trying to kill in every chess game it played) will never recognise its value or allow it to grow. It will only be allowed to be a computer. Peter on the other hand learns from his mistakes. He wanted to try the threesome but chickened out but he does end with the prostitute so he is taking a chance on life. Stepping out of his comfort zone. Man and machine are coming together and will maybe become one. At least the head of the prostitute suggests so.

Not knowing my way around computers (I still type with two fingers at a time), I was expecting to be bored stupid by this little independent film. However I was pleasantly surprised. Even if you are confused by anything and everything A.I. this movie works on so many levels you're bound to get something from it. Shot in black and white with a cinema verite style, it looks great and feels nostalgic. The performances are very funny, I'm not sure if they all serve to reinforce nerdy stereotypes, but all are very believable. I found the subtle themes of Cold War competition and the anxieties about machines becoming more intelligent than humans to be very interesting.I saw this film just before Spike Jonze's 'Her' and they make for good company with back to back viewings.