I watched this last night, it was interesting although I don't think I could spend that long playing a single video game. Wow! Anybody ever watch this? Thoughts?

Personally I like Wiebe over Martin. Martin seems like a bit of a pompous a**.

Fun to watch though ... brings back the memories - I could almost smell the smoke, hear the pacman and feel the grease on the buttons. Ahh the arcade memories!

Quoted from tom_454

I watched this last night, it was interesting although I don't think I could spend that long playing a single video game. Wow! Anybody ever watch this? Thoughts?

Personally I like Wiebe over Martin. Martin seems like a bit of a pompous a**.

Fun to watch though ... brings back the memories - I could almost smell the smoke, hear the pacman and feel the grease on the buttons. Ahh the arcade memories!

Do you mean Mitchell?  

I agree it's a super fun movie.  I've seen it a few times now 'cause I like to show it to new people .  There's another movie that's been out for a while but isn't on DVD or anything I'd love to see called Chasing Ghosts which is along the same lines.  No clue what's going on with that one though.

  

Quoted from tom_454

Personally I like Wiebe over Martin. Martin seems like a bit of a pompous a**.

I haven't watched it and for the reason you just stated there, Gameroom magazine did a big story on the movie and basically Mitchell who was portryaed as an a** really isn't at all in real life, they twisted and turned events to make it look like everyone was against Wiebe when in actuality it wasn't like that at all.  

It bugs me they would twist the story in a such a way to make it more interesting to the general public, so I choose not to watch it.  

G4 in the States just did a half hour special called Beyond King of Kong to find out the truth as to much of an a** Billy Mitchell really is.  It wasn't on the Canadian G4 (which totally sucks!), but the commercial made it seem like he was indeed as big of a jerk as the movie portrayed him to be:

http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/videos/26372/Philosophy_of_Billy_Mitchell.html

I never read the Gameroom article, but like most docs I have no doubt sure it twisted things to some degree.  Every interview etc...I've seen with Billy he's been kind of a private which is cool 'cause I find it entertaining.

Quoted from Vengeance

I haven't watched it and for the reason you just stated there, Gameroom magazine did a big story on the movie and basically Mitchell who was portryaed as an a** really isn't at all in real life, they twisted and turned events to make it look like everyone was against Wiebe when in actuality it wasn't like that at all.  

It bugs me they would twist the story in a such a way to make it more interesting to the general public, so I choose not to watch it.  

Oh get over it. It's just a movie, and Mitchell is just a hot sauce salesman that's good at old video games.

The movie is extremely entertaining, and Mitchell's actions speak for themselves. The movie doesn't have a voice over to tell you what to think, you judge people in the movie based on what they do or what other people say about them. They also show his kinder side when he gives a Q-Bert machine to a sweet old lady that likes the game. They also made that other dude that has a hate on for Micthell and Twin Galaxies look like a loser, but again, he did that himself.

Why should you trust Gameroom magazine more than the film? How can you come to a conclusion if you haven't seen the film? Is Mitchell such a hero to you that you wouldn't dare have his image tarnished in your mind?

Quoted from jonny_eh

Why should you trust Gameroom magazine more than the film?

Hummmmmm....because Gameroom Magazine has nothing to gain by siding with either party. The movie, on the other hand, gains alot by creating the illusion of a villain and a good guy.

Duane

I never heard of Billy or Tom before this movie I don't care about them, what I do care about is someone try to pass a movie off as a documentary which is supposed to be an accurate representation of the facts that led up to the defeat of Billy's DK high score when in reality King of Kong is a work of fiction twisted and turned to look a certian way to apese the audience.  That's what bugs me, call a spade a spade, don't drag a mans reputation threw the mud for other peoples amusment.

Quoted from Vengeance

It bugs me they would twist the story in a such a way to make it more interesting to the general public, so I choose not to watch it.  

Ummm...have you watched ANY documentary or news stories lately at all?   That's the whole premise of editing and documentary film making.  Take it from me, I spent 4 years in film school and made a couple that made it to the big and little screens - there is absolutely no such thing as impartiality in documentary filmmaking - unless of course you are watching raw, unedited footage of a speech at some pinball convention... and even then there's an arguement for the bias of the videographer's choice and point of view.

it was a fun watch...  i do have a copy that i loan out to others to watch.  they enjoy it.  but shot with enjoy air guitar nation and black balled.

Yikes, I did indeed mean Mitchell (not sure where Martin beamed down from).

After watching the movie I really wondered how true the story was? That is my issue with "documentaries? these days. You can no longer seperate fact from fiction. I mean it is one thing to raise questions but entirely another to knowingly stretch the truth for entertainment and still consider it a documentary. Either tell us it is a story (with mucho embellishment) or that it is closer to the truth - (documentary).

Anyone ever met Billy or been to Twin Galaxies?

At any rate it brings back the memories? My mullet is long gone (fair amount of my hair for that matter).  

Quoted from Vengeance

I never heard of Billy or Tom before this movie I don't care about them, what I do care about is someone try to pass a movie off as a documentary which is supposed to be an accurate representation of the facts that led up to the defeat of Billy's DK high score when in reality King of Kong is a work of fiction twisted and turned to look a certian way to apese the audience.  That's what bugs me, call a spade a spade, don't drag a mans reputation threw the mud for other peoples amusment.

I guess you are not a Michael Moore fan huh?  

I've looked into a few different articles and interviews to see if they twisted Mitchell's personality that much and I've got to say they hit pretty close to home.  The guy is an arrogant pig.  In fact, I've only come across one story that paints him in a positive light and that's the Gameroom Magazine story.

Also... you have decided to not watch based on opinions of others.  Why not watch the movie then make an informed decision on if you agree with it or not?  That's the purpose of a documentary.  

Quoted from Vengeance

I never heard of Billy or Tom before this movie I don't care about them, what I do care about is someone try to pass a movie off as a documentary which is supposed to be an accurate representation of the facts that led up to the defeat of Billy's DK high score when in reality King of Kong is a work of fiction twisted and turned to look a certian way to apese the audience.  That's what bugs me, call a spade a spade, don't drag a mans reputation threw the mud for other peoples amusment.

Get off your high horse, seriously. They didn't drag anyone through mud. They gave Mitchell some rope, and he hung himself. There were absolutely no lies in the movie, at least none from any of the filmmakers. Watch the movie, and the commentary track, and you'll get a good idea how much work went into this movie.

And if you think that Gameroom magazine has nothing to gain from sucking up to classic gaming's only celebrity gamer, then I don't know what planet you're living on.

Now I haven't read the Gameroom article, was it written by a writer, or was it an interview with Mitchell? If it's a writer, I could have been written by a friend of Mitchell's (how else would he 'know' Mitchell is really a super sweet guy?). If it was an interview, then of course an a**hole would say he's really not an a**hole, it's called cognitive dissonance. Of course Mitchell isn't gonna come out and say "It's true, I'm an a**hole", he's gonna scream from the heavens that it was movie magic and special effects that made him say all those stupid, mean, and arrogant things.

Also, he didn't come off that bad! They did not 'vilify' him. Watch the movie yourself before criticizing! Ugh.

And remember folks, we're talking about a movie about highly competitive Donkey Kong players, not the Iraq war.

Quoted from jonny_eh

And remember folks, we're talking about a movie about highly competitive Donkey Kong players, not the Iraq war.

...aaaaaaand just to tie the whole thing together, here's an interview with Roy Schildt (aka "Mr. Awesome" from The King of Kong) where he talks about the Iraq war and Missile Command in the same breath.

http://the-minusworld.com/2008/07/02/dont-get-chumpatized-missile-commander-roy-schildt-speaks-up

Holly Crap Batman - its a movie about a bunch of guys play Donkey Kong.  One guys a low-key guy, the other has a bit of flash..

Mitchell's pretty damn good - none of us could beat him, and sure he has a bit of attitude or "colour".  Cool!  Good for the business - move on folks.  

Gretzky never said anything wrong, after awhile he's kinda boring to listen to, don't you think?   Avery, or that dancing guy Jermey Roenick or Hull - these guys you listen to, 'cause they speak their mind more openly...

mess, Mitchel's pretty damn good - he deserves the right to boast.  Now if he could dance like Roenick...

...come 'on wouldn't you seriously have liked to have heard Gretzky once say:

"Sh*t, Holly Cow did I do that?  I'm good!".

The Michael Moore reference is a great example.  Have you seen Moore's Farenheit 911?  A lot of what is shown is a very strained look at Junior Bush.  I don't doubt for a second he's not as bad nor as dumb as that movie portrays.  Moore makes his documentary with a pre-conceived viewpoint and his work will confirm his opinion, it certainly won't change his mind.

... however I do think the movie got Bush mostly right, he's a private anyway, just not as bad as private as shown. .  I think Mitchell is probably like that. Not as bad, but an arrogant private.

All I know about Moore is that the way he portrayed Canada in Bowling For Columbine and Sicko was quite inaccurate. It's easy to see how sneaky he is when he hits a topic you actually know about. He is making an argument, and will do anything to convince you.

On the other hand, King of Kong is a pretty honest 'fly on the wall' linear style doc. Of course there can be bias in the editing, but what they show really happened.

And I agree with doug, if I was that good at DK, i'd act like an arrogant rockstar too. Mitchell seems to be the only one that has a problem with that image.

Quoted from jonny_eh

Also, he didn't come off that bad! They did not 'vilify' him. Watch the movie yourself before criticizing! Ugh.

Maybe you should take your own advice and read the article before criticizing it. Ugh!

Duane

You guys have to keep in mind that ALL documentaries (always, not just today) take the viewpoint that their director/editor wants them to. There isn't such a thing as an unbiased documentary.  If you think it's unbiased, it's because you happen to agree with the viewpoint of the filmmaker, that's all.   It's the nature of the media (and the medium is the message).  If you think a Jaques Cousteau documentary is "unbiased" then you should talk to his crew, or to the locals that he took advantage of, or the environmentalists that he pissed off because he rode roughshod over nature (ala Marlin Perkins) to "get the shot".

What I think is more interesting is that agressive, driven people defend other agressive driven people's behaviour, if they are portrayed as a villian. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, we need driven people.)

Quoted from jonny_eh

Now I haven't read the Gameroom article, was it written by a writer, or was it an interview with Mitchell? If it's a writer, I could have been written by a friend of Mitchell's (how else would he 'know' Mitchell is really a super sweet guy?). If it was an interview, then of course an a**hole would say he's really not an a**hole, it's called cognitive dissonance. Of course Mitchell isn't gonna come out and say "It's true, I'm an a**hole", he's gonna scream from the heavens that it was movie magic and special effects that made him say all those stupid, mean, and arrogant things.

The GameRoom articles (there were 3 of them) were written by a guy who had never met Billy before that series of interviews.

Personally, I believe that Billy is a bit of a private, but at the same time the movie suffered from some very creative editing regarding the realities of events, not the least of which is that Billy wasn't even the world record holder when Steve broke the record.

About the only thing that I believe 100% about KoK is that Brian Kuh is totally freaking annoying!

Quoted from TwilightZone

Maybe you should take your own advice and read the article before criticizing it. Ugh!

Duane

I'd love to, where can I read it? (BTW, I never criticized the magazine article, I just defended the movie)

One of the Gameroom magazine article is available on-line. Scroll to the bottom.
(some of us also subscribe to the magazine).

http://www.gameroommagazine.com/


Cheers,
- Sylvain.

Quoted from CheffoJeffo

About the only thing that I believe 100% about KoK is that Brian Kuh is totally freaking annoying!

Heh, I'm thinking we could all agree on that point!

Well watched King of Kong and I have to say my opinion still stands.  I enjoyed the movie but I enjoyed it for what it was a work of fiction rather then a documentary based on fact.  

I also went back and read threw the Gameroom magazine articles and I have to say the number one point that really drives home how squeued this movie is was the fact that at the time of filming the movie Billy Mitchell didn't even have the high score in Donkey Kong.  There was another player not even featured in the movie at all that held the world record when Steve was trying to beat it.  I'd be happy to scan in the 3 artilces for everyone if they want to take a look at them and formulate their own opinion.  

Yeah, of course the producers of the movie placed certain occurences in a certain order and probably edited certain scenes in order to make the whole thing more interesting, but you can't deny certain things actually happened:

- The two minions who travelled to Steve's place, and actually entered his garage without permission and proceed to take pics of it. Ever heard of trespassing? I would have personally shown them a killscreen had it been my house...

- The fact that Steve's scores were put aside due to him not doing them live... although no one has actually seen Billy play in the last 20 years, not denying at all his previous exploits, which should be mentioned. Billy was the best player at the time, but no one has seen him play since...

- Billy's attitude towards Steve at the last tournament in Florida, and seeing Walter Day's reaction because of it. I am not putting other reactions inito play because we don't see the whole story (all the Billy-ites could be idiots, like it could also be that strong words were previously exchanged without us seeing it, causing the animosity...).

Sure, it is a nice montage to give it some spice, but the actions and facts are all there. The basic story is unaltered... a new guy challenges an old record, beats it, and is constantly rejected by the people who are supposed to be unbiased. I believe what the film is trying to depict the most is not that Billy Mitchell is an idiot, but that in any competitive area, there are small cliques that form, and unbiased positions are often compromised. I believe that the realisation of this caused a lot of people to look at themselves... why do you think the head referee (I forget his name) quit shortly thereafter? Opinions started taking an upper hand over facts.

This being said, if I were to meet Billy Mitchell, I would gladly shake his hand. Yes, the movie makes him look like a moron, but then again, chances are he is not that bad of a guy. Like I said, his previous exploits were and still are a amazing.

Wrong

"- The two minions who travelled to Steve's place, and actually entered his garage without permission and proceed to take pics of it. Ever heard of trespassing? I would have personally shown them a killscreen had it been my house..."

Totally taken out of context accoding to both Steve and Billy.  They were invited in and then after Steve got home they hung out for a number of hours after the fact.

"- The fact that Steve's scores were put aside due to him not doing them live... although no one has actually seen Billy play in the last 20 years, not denying at all his previous exploits, which should be mentioned. Billy was the best player at the time, but no one has seen him play since..."

That was explained as well, again taken completely out of context


"- Billy's attitude towards Steve at the last tournament in Florida, and seeing Walter Day's reaction because of it. I am not putting other reactions inito play because we don't see the whole story (all the Billy-ites could be idiots, like it could also be that strong words were previously exchanged without us seeing it, causing the animosity...)."

Wrong again, you really should read the interviews with both Bill and Steve before assuming that the movie is fact rather then fiction.  Again it was taken tottaly out of context, Billy did stop and talk to Steve and they have spoken a number of times it just never came out in the movie.

Also the general theme from the guy at game room magazine was that Billy was actually a really nice guy.  Now I'm sure you could just assume that this could be more "spin" as Billy is supposed to be gaming hero but I don't see what Game Room Magazine would have to gain by reporting anything other then their unbiased opinion.  The makers of the movie needed to make it interesting to viewers and they did that.  But it what bugs me is how everyone jumps on the Billy and his "thugs" are a bunch of a$$holes just based on the movie rather then trying to gather all the facts.  

As another example the scene where Steve showed up at one of Billys resturants and made it out like Steve was cast out, again taken totally out of context.  You didn't see the part where that dude on the phone went over to talk to them and then ended up picking up their tab for the meal.  That wouldn't make for a good movie gotta keep the contraversy.

Well, I get back to my original opinion... I would still shake Billy's hand. It's just a movie anyways. Besides... I don't even trust what is on the news today anyways... it is just as fictionalized. The best source of info is an uncut, unedited interview. When the camera never cuts from the guys' faces, you can accept it more as fact. But when it is put together, whether it be on the news or a movie, take it with a grain of salt.

One thing I did take a genuine though was Billy's attitude towards Doris, the 80-year-old QBert player. You could tell he was being genuine, he had nothing to gain really from being nice to an old lady. And also, knowing what it takes to keep a small business running, I am positive that Billy wouldn't have made it so obvious to look like a jerk since his business would have suffered. There is a difference between being competitive and being an a**.

Another thing I didn't like about the movie was how they almost portrayed Walter Day as a flake, with the whole singing bit. Walter probably has been doing the Twin-Galaxies thing for decades out of the goodness of his heart, not for fame and fortune. A guy who puts on a ref shirt and does what he does day after day should be commended... not made to look weird.

That's my take on it, it's fiction it's entertaining, but I'm not going to forumlate and opinions on any of the people in it because you can't really.  IMO they are no diffrent then any actor in any movie.  

But yea Walter is just doing it for the love of the game and nothing else.  It was interesting to get some insight into his world, but take I take it with a grain of salt, having a camera on you makes you do funny things.  

Quoted from websherpa

You guys have to keep in mind that ALL documentaries (always, not just today) take the viewpoint that their director/editor wants them to. There isn't such a thing as an unbiased documentary.  If you think it's unbiased, it's because you happen to agree with the viewpoint of the filmmaker, that's all.   It's the nature of the media (and the medium is the message).  If you think a Jaques Cousteau documentary is "unbiased" then you should talk to his crew, or to the locals that he took advantage of, or the environmentalists that he pissed off because he rode roughshod over nature (ala Marlin Perkins) to "get the shot".

What I think is more interesting is that agressive, driven people defend other agressive driven people's behaviour, if they are portrayed as a villian. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, we need driven people.)

Well I have to agree with most of the above as it is unbais  

except for the part about Marlin Perkins ... he never ran roughshod over nature to get any shot .. he was too busy having multiple gin and tonics back at the HQ ... now Jim is resident flunky/lure he defintely ran roughshod over nature.

Haven't seen the film yet .. Adam do you have a copy that I could borrow ?

Yea, no problem, had you mentioned it earlier I could have brought it tonight.

Related interview on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9O0s_bV0dI

Cheers,
- Sylvain.

I was there when they filmed this, I'm on screen a few times too. Good movie as long as you remember that documentaries now a days are always fixed up a bit for entertainment purposes. Some really nice people down there at Funspot. Most accurate thing about the movie, Brian is damn annoying .

Did you see this spoof for the sequel? Hilarious!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCNC-ms1lXk

Quoted from The_Pro

I was there when they filmed this, I'm on screen a few times too. Good movie as long as you remember that documentaries now a days are always fixed up a bit for entertainment purposes. Some really nice people down there at Funspot. Most accurate thing about the movie, Brian is damn annoying .

Did you see this spoof for the sequel? Hilarious!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCNC-ms1lXk

Holy crap, that was hilarious!

Quoted from The_Pro

I was there when they filmed this, I'm on screen a few times too. Good movie as long as you remember that documentaries now a days are always fixed up a bit for entertainment purposes. Some really nice people down there at Funspot. Most accurate thing about the movie, Brian is damn annoying .

Did you see this spoof for the sequel? Hilarious!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCNC-ms1lXk

Holy crap... Wiebe is really in it!!!

Good god that was funny!