IMDb >
Game Over: Kasparov and the Machine (2003)
Watch It
Buy it at Amazon
Rent it at Blockbuster.com
Discuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
BETA
Discuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsGame Over: Kasparov and the Machine (2003) More at IMDbPro »
| Videos (see all 3) |
Overview
User Rating:
Director:
Release Date:
23 January 2004 (UK)
more
Genre:
Plot:
Garry Kasparov is arguably the greatest chess player who has ever lived. In 1997 he played a chess match against IBM's computer Deep Blue...
more
| add synopsis
Plot Keywords:
Awards:
1 nomination
more
User Comments:
Kasparov may have lost, but IBM surely could've cheated as well...
more (22 total)
Cast
(Credited cast)| Marc Ghannoum | ... | Voice Over | |
| rest of cast listed alphabetically: | |||
| Joel Benjamin | ... | Himself | |
| Michael Greengard | ... | Himself | |
| Anatoli Karpov | ... | Himself (archive footage) | |
| Garry Kasparov | ... | Himself | |
| Jeff Kisselhof | ... | Himself | |
| John Searle | ... | Himself | |
| Terry Wogan | ... | Himself (interviewing Garry Kasparov) (archive footage) | |
Additional Details
MPAA:
Rated PG for brief mild language.
Parents Guide:
Runtime:
90 min | Canada:84 min (Ontario)
Language:
Color:
Sound Mix:
Filming Locations:
Company:
Fun Stuff
Quotes:
Garry Kasparov:
[after being defeated by Deep Blue] I think the competition just started!
more
Movie Connections:
Features Le joueur d'échecs (1927)
more
FAQ
This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.more (22 total)
Message Boards
Discuss this movie with other users on IMDb message board for Game Over: Kasparov and the Machine (2003) moreRecommendations
If you enjoyed this title, our database also recommends:
Show more recommendations
|
|
|
|
|
| Hatley High | 2001: A Space Odyssey | Tommy | 2001: HAL's Legacy | X-Men: The Last Stand |
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
Related Links
| Full cast and crew | Company credits | External reviews |
| IMDb Documentary section | IMDb Canada section | Add this title to MyMovies |



I saw the documentary, and saw the actual games in 1997.
Kasparov could surely be a fine actor, since the guy is very expressive and charismatic.
Whenever he felt good and winning, you could see it. And when he was losing and crumbling, you could see it too. Was way obvious. Like the documentary say, Kasparov would be the worst poker player in the world.
Now, did IBM cheat?
Who knows. Anything is possible
Arguments against it: Kasparov could've taken for granted Deep Blue's playing antics as the one of a normal computer, and since IBM had a grandmaster chess player advising the programmers, it's not so wild to conceive that they managed to program Deep Blue to be able to spot traps like the one Kasparov set up that wouldv'e nailed any other computer. And he's a paranoid (coming from the U.R.S.S. no one can blame him), since chess is also psychologic warfare, IBM surely did it's best to psyche out Kasparov and play his paranoid assumptions.
Arguments for it: Kasparov won fist game easy, but lost second when Deep Blue didn't take a bait a compute would've taken. Maybe losing the first game was intended to lower Kasparov's defenses so he would try a play like that, and there Deep Blue would surprise him, psyche him out and steamroll. But that's a human strategy, not a machine's (the computer only knows the game in front of it, doesn't know there are six games total, so it would NEVER sacrifice one to try to surprise Kasparov in the next one).
Also IBM,s attitude, while could be attributed to psyching out Kasparov (fueling his paranoia), looked totally like a cheater's conduct. Also when they won (no rematch, no further research, dismantling of Deep Blue) doesn't look like honest behavior (first truly artificial intelligence? Who would NOT follow through with research?), but like a cheater who won and now has to skip town before he's discovered.
And, the final nail: Why shouldn't IBM cheat? To IBM, it's nothing but a marketing stunt, nothing else. The whole point was not to beat Kasparov or improve artificial intelligence (or they would've continued the work on Deep Blue, published the groundbreaking work, patented programming code, etc), but only to improve stock value and reposition themselves on the market. So why not cheat if necessary? Like a company would be above that (Enron, etc.) or anything for that matter to increase profit.
But since there's no way to verify what Deep Blue did (thanks to IBM, like e-voting paperless machines, "trust us"), we'll never know...