All the interviews they show say Fischer was insane.
I'm not saying he wasn't.
But the cinematographers should have explored the other side, maybe in a form of What If scenario. What if he was sane and really followed.
In fact, he must have been after he played the match in Yugoslavia.
The documentary should have been longer.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings
The question is how he insane was he? He was right about the Soviets trying to rig the chess games, but then he made a lot of crackpot statements. He could've faded away and no one would've been following him if he hadn't played that match in Yugoslavia. That was when he got into LEGAL trouble.
share"But the cinematographers should have explored the other side, maybe in a form of What If scenario"
Um... the job of the cinematographer is to light and shoot. Not to write and direct.
I agree with the OP, the only person who spoke with any depth was the neurologist at the end saying the extraordinariness of his chess playing was linked to other aspects of extraordinariness which is that aspect called disease.
In life certain things to together but in our consumerist lifestyle where we consume a part of something and discard it's wasted husk, people only want to take one side of people and judge the misunderstood part that naturally goes with it. It's insanity that we do this b/c it's a form of cultural neurosis we divide against ourselves.
Like fischer said "you don't see how Fuc*ed up the world is. That's a form of insanity" which is true most people can't face the loops of destruction that modern culture has been stuck in since the industrial revolution.