On 1/3/2024 11:45 PM, MK wrote:

On January 3, 2024 at 6:00:01 PM UTC-7, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

Assuming the producers and writers didn't know much about
backgammon, they seem to have researched it really well.

Why would you assume that? It's hard to see the board clearly
and I'm not sure if the moves are legal and/or match the rolls
but the comments sound to aim at making it all look realistic
even for viewers who may not know anything about the game.

In fact, the first roll was apparently a 45, but the player
clearly moves only one checker, and that checker is moved
less than 9 pips. But that has less to do with the screenwriter
and more to do with the director.

---
Tim Chow

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/4/2024 2:37 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

I thought the younger woman put two fingers on two nearby checkers and moved them both
with one hand motion.

Hmmm...okay, looking at it again, I think you're right! I retract
my previous remark.

---
Tim Chow

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/5/2024 3:19 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

I think it's far more likely that everything or almost everything they learned about backgammon was while preparing for their roles.
That's exactly what actors do.
The percentage of people who can move the pieces competently like
experienced players is very close to zero.

They didn't move the pieces by tapping on each point because they were _acting_ as experienced players, but they were acting.

I agree with Paul. But it does suggest that the director cared enough
about authenticity to ensure that the actors behaved convincingly.
I find that somewhat remarkable. Maybe WIRED needs to create a video, "Backgammon champ breaks down backgammon scenes from film & TV." Like
this one for chess:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWo68KgwQzE

---
Tim Chow

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)