User reviews

Knight Moves starts as a clever movie about a murder investigation over some "Zodiac" wannabe. It's one of those movies where you'll only get your answers at the end-ish.

"End-ish" because, as the movie goes on, it seems like they couldn't keep up with their complicated murder plot, so they pretty much simplify things out.

In the end, an abrupt ending and a bunch of weird fight scenes sour out the movie.

After Highlander series Lambert got an average status and promissing actor who never walk on the top, Knight Moves was an ambitious project as thriller that turn up flawed for many reasons, unrealistic, too complex, endorsed by a really bad screemplay and finally overlong, the idea to revenge through a chess game seems be insane to start, some characters likes Daniel Baldwin's behavior is incompatible with a real cop, although this neo giallo won't disappoint tatally, but the final scenes on flooded basement is too implausible, this little mistakes taken away an auspicious picture, fine and hot sexy scenes neutralize something!!

Resume:

First watch: 2019 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.5

In 1972, two boys play in a tournament. The loser stabs the winner with a pen. The loser's life falls apart. The winner Peter Sanderson (Christopher Lambert) becomes a grandmaster. He's a single dad and a womanizer. His latest groupie is found dead. Capt. Frank Sedman (Tom Skerritt) and his loud-mouth partner Andy Wagner (Daniel Baldwin) investigate. Sedman is under political pressure to keep the tournament going. He brings in psychiatrist Kathy Sheppard (Diane Lane) to test Peter and she falls in love with him.

This is trying way too hard to make chess cool. I have no problem with yet another dark serial killer movie. Daniel Baldwin is over-acting. Christopher Lambert is not good. None of the clues get the audience involved. It's a whodunnit in which nobody really cares about.

Peter Sanderson is a chess master in town for a major tournament. After visiting her and having sex with her, Sanderson's casual lover is murdered and left in a strange pose. The police suspect him as the person who was with her moments before her death but things are confused when Sanderson is contacted by the killer wishing to play a game with him. The murders continue as Sanderson and the police try to outsmart the killer – however clues still indicate that Sanderson could still be a suspect himself.

There are very few thrillers that would chose to set themselves in the world of grandmaster chess as the basis for their plot, and even fewer that would manage to pull it off convincingly; this film falls into the former but not the latter. The plot only really uses chess as the background so that it can make a rather tenuous link between that game and the game that is played between Sanderson and the killer. This basic plot is interesting enough even if it doesn't really stand out from the basic video-thriller genre that the chess connection suggests it is better than. The chess connection doesn't really work as it doesn't actually fit in with the murders very well – feeling forced quite a lot; certainly the whole chess championship is just a side issue and the film never manages to actually convince that this is a battle of wits, in fact the police do most of the leg work and Peter only occasionally blurts out the odd 'Eureka in the bathtub' line.

The solution is semi-clever in that I realized that the film had tricked me from the first scene onwards, but, despite this fact, the identity of the killer is as out-of-the-blue and you would expect it to be. The film is littered with minor characters who jump out of shadows, appear at suspicious times or say menacing things under their breath, all red herrings of course but most of them are not explained and it is obvious the writer never thought about whether or not they made sense in any context other than them being red herrings. Having said that, the film is enjoyable but mainly as a genre film rather than anything clever or particularly inventive. The lack of a really clever cat'n'mouse game was a letdown for me because of the potential that the chess connection had suggested.

The cast are a fairly average mix that contribute to the feeling that this is a genre film rather than anything particularly clever. Lambert has had a very mixed career and this is just another strange role that he doesn't play that well – certainly the words 'Lambert' and 'chess master' are words that words that don't seem to naturally appear together. Sticking with the clichés of both the genre and Lambert films, we get the obligatory love scene (twice!) that have little relevance but gives the film the added selling point of breasts! Skerrit and Baldwin are better than the rest of the cast even with poor characters – the two of them control each scene they are in and make the film feel better than it is.

Overall, the title and background suggest a clever game of wits between a chess master and the killer but it doesn't manage to be anything more than an OK genre film. The twist is out of the blue as always but getting there is quite fun and the end result is a film that is enjoyable but quite unspectacular.

Some consider opening scenes about events from past, when they were children, shot in B/W as great. I don't think so. It was too long, slow(ed), over top. And worst, it made it much more predictable.

Direction was fine most of part, script, dialogs, acting not really. I blame mostly script and dialogs for seemingly bad acting. No actor which would pull it much better than Daniel Baldwin, because it was just character written as utterly stupid one. C. Lambert was OK most part, in some scenes seemed away.

Despite mentioned flaws it could be solid thriller, but last 10-15 minutes were really letdown. Extremely predictable, cliche overall, and just 'game over', the end. Still, it was watchable - I watched it on TV some 25 years ago, and now on some better display. I would give it higher rating then, now I'm more mature :-)

Ratings:

C. Lambert: 6

D. Lane: 6

Tom Skerrit: 4

Daniel Baldwin: 5

Director: 7

Script: 4

This film begins with a young boy playing in a chess match and then physically attacking his opponent upon losing the game. After being hospitalized he is released to the custody of his mentally ill mother who is told that he must abstain from playing chess from now on. Not long afterward, he discovers blood dripping from the ceiling and upon investigation notices his mother bleeding profusely in her bed and then weakly asking him to help her. But rather than helping, he chooses to open up the night stand by the bed and pulls out the chessboard that he had been deprived of and calmly helps himself to some milk and cookies before beginning a new game. The scene then shifts to twenty years later with a European Grandmaster named "Peter Sanderson" (Christopher Lambert) participating in a tournament when his lover is found in bed totally drained of blood with a sign above her body saying "Remember". And because of his connection to this woman Peter Sanderson is a prime suspect. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an entertaining movie for the most part with both Christopher Lambert and Diane Lane (as "Kathy Sheppard") performing in a fine manner. I especially liked the way in which the mystery was sustained up until the final moments. On the other hand, the way some of the chess players were depicted as being mentally unstable was somewhat overdone. Neither did I care for the rather obvious allusions to Bobby Fischer in the introduction of Peter Sanderson. Even so, I still enjoyed this film and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

Very poor effects but at least you REALLY don´t know who is the killer until the last breath. Rating: 3.5/5

I like Lambert, and he's the main reason I liked the movie. It's a pretty standard suspense movie. Keeps you guessing at times.

IMDb says there's a factual error in one of his games. They say the problem is that there's a mate in 5, not a mate in 4. I don't agree. It's a mate in 5 for black (if played correctly by both sides, correctly meaning that white plays to avoid mate as long as possible.) The problem I see is that Lambert's coach suggests he can win with a mate in 5, and misses it. But Lambert is playing WHITE. His rook move to c2 is correct, but only in the sense that's the best move to delay an already lost game. The coach seems to imply HE can win the game, otherwise why say "he missed it"? But he can't win, his game is already lost.

KNIGHT MOVES

Aspect ratio: 2.39:1

Sound format: Dolby Stereo

Filmed on grim Canadian locations by German director Carl Schenkel (OUT OF ORDER), this curious psycho-thriller has the look and feel of an Italian giallo, despite the American setting. All the elements are in place: Christopher Lambert plays a chess grandmaster targeted by a serial killer who leaves obscure one-word messages at the scene of his/her crimes, hoping to draw Lambert into a lethal game of cat and mouse. That the murders are based on well-known chess manoeuvres should come as no surprise to seasoned thriller addicts, and nor should the killer's identity, which is betrayed by a seemingly throwaway bit of business near the beginning of the film (not a spoiler - only the truly attentive will spot it). Brad Mirman's convoluted script bends over backwards to cast suspicion on Lambert throughout (which means it *can't* be him - or can it?), but the narrative is undermined by some poorly-drawn characters, and everyone but Tom Skerritt - as the detective leading the investigation - seems to be coasting through proceedings on auto-pilot. The murders aren't explicitly detailed, and Schenkel goes out of his way to avoid crowd-pleasing exploitation, which rather curbs the film's commercial emphasis. But at least it's never dull, and the climax is reasonably proficient, complete with overwrought thunderstorm and psycho with a mommy complex! Daniel Baldwin exaggerates wildly as a macho cop determined to nail Lambert for the crimes, while Ferdinand Mayne hovers in the background, making the most of a glorified cameo as the hero's blind mentor.

Christopher Lambert stars as Peter Sanderson a master chess player who is targeted by a serial killer who is killing women and blaming it on Sanderson, Captain Frank Stedman(Tom Skerritt) and Detective Andy Wagner believe that Sanderson is behind it all, while a Dr.Kathy Shepperd unwisely falls for Sanderson in this entertaining yet confusing thriller. The ending while a good twist, is somewhat disappointing. However Knight Moves works fairly well most of the time.

Knight Moves is a film of/for fruitcakes....a little too complicated to be called a Madeira, but heavy enough to take away the hunger pangs. It manages to convey the horror of death without any real murder sequences being shown and is rather Hitchcockesque in places.

The story centres around chess player Peter Sanderson (Christophe Lambert) and his (possible) involvement in a string of serial killings. Due to his complete absorption in the game, he has already lost his wife and is now in danger of losing his daughter. Although he is the prime suspect, he becomes involved with a psychologist called in by the Police. This role was picked up by Christophe's (then) wife, Diane Lane, who not only coped well with the character, but also with a well-rehearsed bedroom scene. A case of 'truth being stranger than fiction'?

Like many of Christophe's films, this one relies heavily on explaining the psychology of the killer, even if it is only in laymen's terms; but it does deal with complex issues of responsibility and duress. The photography is a juxtaposition of European noir sur blanc and British thriller, with a little American 'home-grown' logic thrown in for good effect. Tom Skerritt is disappointing as the chief of police, a role that he plays woodenly. He is upstaged by his sidekick (Daniel Baldwin). Jeremy is portrayed by Ferdinand Mayne, an actor well known to film-going audiences, with over 120 roles to his credit before his death in 1998.

Although this film was not initially well received, its continued presence on the 'Pick of the week' shelf at the video store proves that it may well become a 'cult' film. It is often in the top-100-rentals slot in many countries and it seems to appeal to a diverse range of people. While some of the supporting cast need acting lessons, its camera work and well co-ordinated plot make this an original and enjoyable 'who-dunnit'...and you really will be guessing to the end.

Average serial killer romp, this time through the world of big time chess. Too many slow spots to be called really good: I especially detest those time slowed, useless sex scenes: all that slow motion nipple sucking lends nothing to the program. High tension ending, although not all that surprising.

This film is absurd hokum of the first water.

Here is a sample line of the tense dialogue, delivered by Christopher 'The Method' Lambert: "I'm getting pretty close pal, and I'm gonna nail yo ass to the wall!".

It is rubbish this one, watch it for a laugh but it's pretty dull so that might be tricky. Still there's stuff to look out for.

1) Silly second guessing murderer/chess move plot. luckily the crime busting chess grandmaster Highlander is to the rescue. Cue lots of piffle about 'checkmate' and whatnot.

2) Whatever happened to Diane Lane? A very attractive woman indeed, however she is in a shockingly unsexy sex scene with Lambo, all silk curtains over a pristine four poster.

3) There's sundry other boring nonsense. And there's a bloke who looks like Tobey maguire in it but it might be TM, I didn't look so hard.

Not recommended, except ironically maybe.

I have no idea how much the shills on this site were paid to write positive reviews for this piece of debris, but believe me they had to be on someone's payroll. There is no story, the killings are totally redundant and create zero interest, and make zero sense. The acting is absolutely pathetic, especially by the Baldwin not named Alec. It's like lets try and wrap this ridiculous script around a chess tournament. Tom Skerritt should be ashamed for lending his name to something that could have been thought up in ten minutes, with flash gun killings, lipstick messages, and boredom beyond belief. I lived with the fast forward button, and still can't stand that I wasted any time on this worst of the worst ever. You have been warned. - MERK

I suppose I agree with 'Bob the Moo' on this one; fairly entertaining, definitely WOULDN'T have chosen Lambert as a world renowned chess genius, Diane Lane does the best acting, etc. (I know 'etc.' doesn't REALLY work here, but... : ) Anyway, main complaints are the script and direction. VERY good idea and I wouldn't have minded Lambert so much if the bloody direction had been better. I mean, even WITH the so-so script a GOOD director (emphasis on the word 'Good'...) can make anything work, tighten up the story, camouflage the weak points of the script or actors, etc. (THIS time 'etc.' works : )

Could have been a REALLY great, very much like as one misguided poster here states, Hitchcockian film. I WILL say though that the opening scene was done very beautifully; the B&W photography, staging, and mood are excellent. It just would have been nice if the REST of the film had followed suit.

But, don't get me wrong, there are a LOT of other FAR, FAR worse films out there...

________________L@the

I remember watching this film in the 90s and early 2000s. My memory was that i liked the movie and that ir was a nice suspense thriller. As of 2024, me rewatching it: the director started off really great, it seemed he had ambition to uplift the movie with a more cinemstic touch instead of a rushed low-budget feel. Anyhow, the whole movie is a drag, a real drag. The movie could have easily cut 30mins short without losing much of the story. The final "reveal" is not a surprise, i didnt remember the end at all. Christopher Lambert has undeniably a screen presence rarely a lot of actors has but other than Highlander and The Fortress he never really had much "hits". You can watch this movie if you're a 90s fan and never watched it but its not going to be a "cult movie expierience". I think its biggest flaw is really the screenplay, too much, too little, too long.

A psychopath uses the game of chess as a blueprint for a series of brutal murders, in this stylish 1992 film directed by Carl Schenkel. Cinematography, sound effects, scary music, and sparse dialogue combine to create an atmosphere of terror, suggestive of the "giallos" of Dario Argento.

We see the killer's black gloved hands; we see the flashlight shining in the darkened room of the next victim; we hear the killer's breathing through a mask. And in these scenes, absence of dialogue amplifies the surreal, menacing presence of the killer.

Suspense scenes alternate with scenes of mundane normalcy, which gives the viewer a chance to select the murderer from a pool of suspects whose behavior appear more or less normal. But beware; there are plenty of plot twists and false clues. The whodunit element kept me guessing and unsure; the film's suspense kept me fully engaged.

Acting quality is average. Diane Lane gives perhaps the most convincing performance of the bunch. My main criticism is the screenplay. In any murder mystery, the viewer needs enough information to have a fair chance at solving the whodunit puzzle. But in "Knight Moves", crucial details are left out. Also, several characters are poorly defined; we know almost nothing about them. Moreover, in several key scenes, the behavior of one of the main characters is not credible, given the story's underlying premise.

As a result, it's going to be almost impossible for the viewer to identify the killer, based solely on the plot. A script re-write, with more emphasis on character development, combined with the deletion of superfluous scenes would, I think, have made for a more satisfying whodunit puzzle.

Even so, I recommend "Knight Moves" as a most frightening and spine-tingling suspense thriller. For maximum effect, try watching it alone, in a mansion, at night with the lights turned out, during a thunderstorm.