I finished reading "The Queen's Gambit". Contains spoilers

After watching the movie, there were some things in the film that I didn't think were wrapped up very well.  There were things I wondered about.  I liked the movie well enough to decide to read the book.  This is a sort of review for anyone who might be tempted to do the same.

First, there were some significant differences between the book and the movie.  The plot was very recognizable and hit the same important points, but there were some side scenes that were substantially different.  I won't describe them in this post, but I will write a subsequent post talking about them, so if you are tempted to read the book, but don't want to hear about what happens until you read it, don't go on in the thread.  You have been warned.

     One thing I really liked about the book was that his writing really captured the emotional feel of the chess games even better than the movie did.  He would describe the moves on the board, but more often he would describe the thought processes, including the emotional state of Beth Harmon as she played.  Some of the games were boring.  In some she practically held her opponent in contempt.  In the losing games she felt strangled and helpless.  In challenging games the author did a good job of capturing that feeling of anxiety knowing that there must be a way to win this game, and a feeling of triumph if it is found, or desperation if it is not.

     Another thing I think the book did better than the movie was in covering the general theme of addiction.  The movie had a sense of Beth fighting addiction, and when she was able to break free of the alcoholism or drug dependency, she would triumph on the chess board.  In the book, it is a little bit more obvious that the choice between chess and booze was not the choice between addiction or non-addiction, it was a case of choosing which addiction to follow.  The chess addiction was not nearly so destructive as alcoholism, but it was still an addiction.

     In general, I would say that if you liked the film, you probably would like the book, and they were mostly similar.  The significant departures from the book were ones that often created more of an emotional hook, but the basic story is not altered.  However, the book only adds a little bit to what the movie said.  Most, but not all, of the emotion in the book came through in the movie, so there is not major revelations within the book that explain the loose ends in the movie. 

    Overall, I can recommend it, but not enthusiastically.  This is one case where seeing the movie is almost as good as reading the book.  In some ways, one or the other is maybe a little bit better.

Things significantly different in the book than in the movie:

There were two that I found very significant.

In the movie, during the Paris tournament, Beth goes on a drinking and sex binge and ends up playing less than perfect against Borgov, and losing.  The whole drinking and sex binge was totally absent from the book.  She played Borgov, and lost.  In the book, her conflict with Borgov was part of displaying her addiction.  After the Paris tournament, she ends up going into her real binge drinking, ignoring chess for a while.  In the book, Jolene helps her out of it, but she is the one who initiated the conflict.

     The other scene that I found significantly different, although it was a very small thing, was the final scene.  In the movie, she was on her way to the airport with her State Department handler, and she defiantly leaves the car and goes to find the old men playing chess in the park.  The book ended in the same park, and with the same line of dialog, but it was simply what she did at the end of the tournament, the day before returning home.  There was no hint of rebellion or of defying the State Department guy.  It was just a case of, after winning a prestigious tournament, and beating the man that had been her nemesis for years, what did she do?  She played Chess.

     There were a few other things that they changed for the movie, but I don't think they were incredibly important.  They just seemed to add some drama.  It didn't really advance the plot, or the theme, of the book, but it created dramatic moments that weren't in the book.

I designed Queen's Gambit christmas Tshirts: https://www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/The-Queen-s-Gambit-about-Beth-Harmon-Christmas-Edition-by-brodalka20/63507893.WFLAH.XYZ  Take a look/like/ love

Yes.

Actually, more accurately: in the book, Beth was at her chess-playing peak. She went into her second game with Borgov with utmost confidence, and her chess was firing on all cylinders. She had never played better in her life.

But Borgov still crushed her. Demoralizingly so. The position fell apart in front of her, despite playing the best moves she could find.

How can you defeat someone against whom even your absolute best isn't good enough?

For that reason, I felt that the loss was much more powerful in the book. In the show, they essentially blamed her loss on a single night of drinking.

One important difference is that in the book Beth is not an attractive girl. It really affects her confidence, not necessarily in her playing but in how she approaches people. Like in the show, when she’s signing up for that tournament with the twins even though she had never done it before she was not awkward, just very matter of fact and determined. In the book she was not that way. Her confidence came through chess. Not through anything else. And when men found her attractive it was through her playing, not her physical appearance.

I don’t think they needed to make Beth ugly in the show, but to have her be so beautiful and glamorous sort of took me out a bit. Anya Taylor Joy was a huge fan of the book, that’s why she wanted to do the series, so I don’t know...actresses gotta actress. Not everything has to look like Mad Men, though.

In the book, she was definitely unattractive as a young girl, or felt that way, and she never became a stunning good looker, but I got the impression in the book she was attractive as a young woman, just not the elegant, gorgeous, character in the movie.

I actually thought this was a series not a movie until I read this thread. That actually explains a lot lol, no way the mainstream is going to watch a series about chess. 

edit: it is a series. wtf are you talking about OP, it's not a movie at all, it's a mini-series, and yes you can laugh at my conclusion that the mainstream wouldn't watch a series about chess it's true they did.  

Walter Tevis, the book's author, was, at least to some degree, writing what he knew.  He played pool and chess, and had experiences with substance abuse in his life.  I read another of his science fiction works, Mockingbird, and really enjoyed it.  One fact that still amazes me is that 4 of his 6 novels have been made into significant movies!  The Queen's Gambit.  The Hustler.  The Color of Money.  And, The Man Who Fell to Earth.  The last one is a science fiction "cult film" staring a young David Bowie.  I'm sure that many authors dream of achieving that high of a percentage!

Here's a different blog post talking about the author.

https://www.chess.com/blog/EricTangborn/the-writer-behind-the-queens-gambit

It's seven hours of film, that tells one story from beginning to end.   I think of it as one long movie, with six intermissions.

That's okay but it's not a movie, it's a series. 

it's a series of like 5 videos or smt

Thanks for this. I thought the movie didn't cover the back stories of other characters very well. Particularly her adopted mother. What was her history and why did she also have addiction problems?

Sorry. phone. Did the book cover her adopted mother in more detail. Come to think of it both mothers had problems that raised many unanswered questions. Does the book attempt to close these off?

have you seen this teaching video>

Beginners' Openings and Tactics - GM Varuzhan Akobian ...

 

He calls it beginners. What you can get out of warching this is solid gold. If  you do what he says you will have a good offense and defense in just a handful of moves, The first thing he talks about is the queen's gambit/ gambit accepted/gambit denied. He goes on to explain how to set up your board for black and white. Excellent easy to follow and he gets his class and viewers involved 57 minutes

blocked

I didn't realize ya'll were talking about the mini series. I thought u were talking about chess, lol 

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!!!!!

Mark, in my humble opinion, her addiction started as a coping mechanism at the orphanage.  They drugged the kids to keep them in line, so it follows that some will find ways to abuse the drugs and, for some, addiction patterns are sure to emerge.  I've seen the series and I just bought the book, but have not yet read it.  I felt the series gave a solid backstory regarding Beth's addiction issues.  They could have done more there, as well as develop the mother's backstory more, and they could have made this an 8-10 episode series.  Decisions, decisions.  I'd also have loved to see more about that fabulous chess-mentor character, the janitor at the orphanage.  I'm looking forward to reading the book.

Masterful

I understand the origin of Beth's addiction issues. My question was regarding the two mothers. I understand there are many reasons why these may not appear in the film. I was interested in whether the book goes into greater depth. In fact both sets of parents, biological and adopted, seemed uninterested in their responsibilities towards young Beth. It struck me as a strong theme. Something else absent was misogyny. It was completely absent in the film which given the period is hard to believe. Was the book more realistic in this regard?

I suppose I should read the book 😄