Donkey Kong Forum
General Donkey Kong Discussion => General Donkey Kong Discussion => Topic started by: Mary McManus on October 11, 2013, 04:41:40 am
-
Just doing some research and discovered the legal definition of a "Documentary" and it is "QUITE DIFFERENT" than the Orwellian definition movie hucksters Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham understand.
I thought it would be fun to ask the community if "King of Kong" meets the legal definition.
Heres the definition I found:
doc-u-men-ta-ry (adj.)
1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on facts
2. Presenting facts objectively "without" editorializing or inserting fictional matter as in book or film
Does anyone on this forum think KOK should keep its definition as a "documentary"?
Should the be allowed to profit from it?
I also don't want to here any more Orwellian terms such as a "New Style Documentary"
The term "New Style Documentary" just means the producers can manufacture 3/4th bull plop and market it as truth to the dumb down , idiot public. Soon, as Orwell stated 2+2 will = 5
The legal definition of "documentary" is at the top for those that can still read and don't need to have the definition read to them from an audio CD.
-
Just doing some research and discovered the legal definition of a "Documentary" and it is "QUITE DIFFERENT" than the Orwellian definition movie hucksters Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham understand.
I thought it would be fun to ask the community if "King of Kong" meets the legal definition.
Heres the definition I found:
doc-u-men-ta-ry (adj.)
1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on facts
2. Presenting facts objectively "without" editorializing or inserting fictional matter as in book or film
Does anyone on this forum think KOK should keep its definition as a "documentary"?
Should the be allowed to profit from it?
I also don't want to here any more Orwellian terms such as a "New Style Documentary"
The term "New Style Documentary" just means the producers can manufacture 3/4th bull plop and market it as truth to the dumb down , idiot public. Soon, as Orwell stated 2+2 will = 5
The legal definition of "documentary" is at the top for those that can still read and don't need to have the definition read to them from an audio CD.
Did Steve Wiebe get those Donkey Kong scores? Yes, he did.
Did Billy Mitchell sand bag his score while holding a tape of a higher score? Yes, he did.
Did Steve Wiebe travel to Funspot, and get the first killscreen at Funspot? Yes, he did.
Did this secret Billy tape catch Steve Wiebe off guard causing him to cry after getting a high score at Funspot? Yes it did.
Did they invalidate Steve Wiebe's score because of a "Gummy Substance"? Yes, they did.
Look the basic plot outline is true. Steve Wiebe gets a super high Donkey Kong score that causes him to get the limelight by being on TV shows, and the such. In a year or two they invalidate the scores because of a "Double board", and they invalidate another score because it's associated with Roy Schildt, and the Gummy Substance. This makes Steve Wiebe go to funspot where he once again gets the world record, but this time live. Billy Mitchell than sends in his tape to pour water on Wiebe's accomplishment.
Everything I said is true, and this makes up the vital moments of the documentary. So yeah, it's still a documentary because the core elements are basically true.
-
What are you trying to achieve here? Is it not clear that almost everyone here knows that King of Kong is not the entire truth?
-
Just doing some research and discovered the legal definition of a "Documentary" and it is "QUITE DIFFERENT" than the Orwellian definition movie hucksters Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham understand.
I thought it would be fun to ask the community if "King of Kong" meets the legal definition.
Heres the definition I found:
doc-u-men-ta-ry (adj.)
1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on facts
2. Presenting facts objectively "without" editorializing or inserting fictional matter as in book or film
Does anyone on this forum think KOK should keep its definition as a "documentary"?
Should the be allowed to profit from it?
I also don't want to here any more Orwellian terms such as a "New Style Documentary"
The term "New Style Documentary" just means the producers can manufacture 3/4th bull plop and market it as truth to the dumb down , idiot public. Soon, as Orwell stated 2+2 will = 5
The legal definition of "documentary" is at the top for those that can still read and don't need to have the definition read to them from an audio CD.
Did Steve Wiebe get those Donkey Kong scores? Yes, he did.
Did Billy Mitchell sand bag his score while holding a tape of a higher score? Yes, he did.
Did Steve Wiebe travel to Funspot, and get the first killscreen at Funspot? Yes, he did.
Did this secret Billy tape catch Steve Wiebe off guard causing him to cry after getting a high score at Funspot? Yes it did.
Did they invalidate Steve Wiebe's score because of a "Gummy Substance"? Yes, they did.
Look the basic plot outline is true. Steve Wiebe gets a super high Donkey Kong score that causes him to get the limelight by being on TV shows, and the such. In a year or two they invalidate the scores because of a "Double board", and they invalidate another score because it's associated with Roy Schildt, and the Gummy Substance. This makes Steve Wiebe go to funspot where he once again gets the world record, but this time live. Billy Mitchell than sends in his tape to pour water on Wiebe's accomplishment.
Everything I said is true, and this makes up the vital moments of the documentary. So yeah, it's still a documentary because the core elements are basically true.
No the core elements ARE NOT basicly true. Facts and events that were "CORE ELEMENTS" from the start were deliberately omited . I suggest you re-read the legal definition and the do some research.
Dwayne Richards Doc "King of Con" which does fit the legal definition above would be a good start for you.
-
What are you trying to achieve here? Is it not clear that almost everyone here knows that King of Kong is not the entire truth?
If everyone knows this then why doesn't anyone else other than myself or Dwayne Richards tell Walter the two Steves and Billy what they did and what the producers did was not only wrong it was just plan rotten.
I guarentee NOBODY going to the Kong off has the balls to look either one of them face to face and ask why they felt I needed to be cheated like I did. Then ask them why they deserved the money they got.
Thats one reason that I wont go to ant of these things.......years ago it used to be considered an honor to be in the same arcade as Walter Day and Billy Mitchell..........now the same thought not only makes me sick, but makes me angry as well.
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
Sure its based on "facts" the facts only they wanted you to know.
The basic premise of Steve setting out to take down Billys 1982 record was already done a FULL 7 years before and these people knew it from the start. Walter Day, the all knowing guru of all things historic in arcade gaming should've told the producers that..I'm sure the dollar signs in his eyes clouded his better judgement.
If I had the directors hat I would have ask walter to find me to get my input. The fairy tale that they fabricated that the producers could not reach me is a bald face lie to cover their asses and they all know it.
In the summer of 2007, I recieved a call from Both Walter and Billy, this was the first I ever heard there was film interest in the subject material as I was doing work on games rather than playing them at the time. Walter told me on the phone in 2007 and I remember verbatum and I quote"..........."I (refering to myself) was sitting on something big!".........here it is 6 years latter and I'd still like to ask what was so big I was sitting on.
This would've been the first thing I would've done as a director claiming to be making a documentary.
-
What KoK did to spark interest back in CAG is unprecidented. Peopel like me who were there back in the day came back to it, 30 years olds and 20 years, and some teens now have an interest in it.
I do have one question Tim, what did Steve Wiebe actually do to you? Even if the producers intentionally left out your 895K score, what was Wiebe's crime? He told a friend what happened to him, his friend told the producer, and the story started getting documented from there. Even if Steve played a few games on DDK before he knew all the rules, the gameplay is pretty much the same. He just was trying to get his score recognized.
EDIT: OK, so I do see one thing since your last post. In Kok, when steve said he lost his job he went to a computer and typed ina score for DK world Record and it said Billy Mitchell 872K and he said "Hey, I can beat that", why he didn't find your score or acknowledge it. So I gotcha, peace.
-
What KoK did to spark interest back in CAG is unprecidented. Peopel like me who were there back in the day came back to it, 30 years olds and 20 years, and some teens now have an interest in it.
I do have one question Tim, what did Steve Wiebe actually do to you? Even if the producers intentionally left out your 895K score, what was Wiebe's crime? He told a friend what happened to him, his friend told the producer, and the story started getting documented from there. Even if Steve played a few games on DDK before he knew all the rules, the gameplay is pretty much the same. He just was trying to get his score recognized.
EDIT: OK, so I do see one thing since your last post. In Kok, when steve said he lost his job he went to a computer and typed ina score for DK world Record and it said Billy Mitchell 872K and he said "Hey, I can beat that", why he didn't find your score or acknowledge it. So I gotcha, peace.
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
Nope, its not! I tried to stomach watching KOK and when it was shown that billys record stood for over 20 years untill Steve came along............. I just shut the damn thing off! Then had to restrain myself from throwing the tv through the window as well as I know what went on behind the scenes
I'm so glad TG wasn't charging for scores back then. Imagine going through the proper channels and getting a verified and paying for the score to be documented "THEN" several years later they cover it up so their own people can use the subject material.
So you see there's "reality" Seth Gastropods...........(gordons) and Ed Cuntinghams version of "reality" then there's "actual reality"......actual documented events........again re-read the definition I supplied above and then re-think your response.
Steve going to his computer and seeing Billys 872 over mine is another lie. When did steve do this?
Are you saying steves score was verified before mine!?!
I think some people here need a history lesson and not the pre manufactured for profit/entertainment diarrhea that spews out of Seth Gordons version of "reality"
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
Sure its based on "facts" the facts only they wanted you to know.
The basic premise of Steve setting out to take down Billys 1982 record was already done a FULL 7 years before and these people knew it from the start. Walter Day, the all knowing guru of all things historic in arcade gaming should've told the producers that..I'm sure the dollar signs in his eyes clouded his better judgement.
If I had the directors hat I would have ask walter to find me to get my input. The fairy tale that they fabricated that the producers could not reach me is a bald face lie to cover their asses and they all know it.
In the summer of 2007, I recieved a call from Both Walter and Billy, this was the first I ever heard there was film interest in the subject material as I was doing work on games rather than playing them at the time. Walter told me on the phone in 2007 and I remember verbatum and I quote"..........."I (refering to myself) was sitting on something big!".........here it is 6 years latter and I'd still like to ask what was so big I was sitting on.
This would've been the first thing I would've done as a director claiming to be making a documentary.
OK, that does not exactly answer the question. How bout I write how you could have been fit into the documentary? This is how I would envision what I call "The Prelude".
In 1983 Billy Mitchell shook up the world with a World Record score by attaining the unimaginable killscreen to Donkey Kong. For 17 long years this record stood before a man by the name of Tim Sczerby came along with true grit, and determination and knocked Billy Mitchell off that pedestal by besting what was thought of as the unbreakable record. If you thought Billy Mitchell would let things be, and just walk away, than you have clearly the wrong assumptions. It wasn't a question of if Billy was going to get this record back, but when. And soon thereafter like a thief in the night Billy snatched back up his record, and bested the record by over 50 thousand points. By this time though Tim had gone onto other things, and Billy Mitchell was again top dog.
Than of course we go to where the film starts, and begin with the present day story. If they had given an extra 10 minutes to the film with something like that would that have been what you wanted?
-
Tim, have you ever read this timeline of events for the DK record? I don't know who documented it, but what is the deal with RTM's quote regarding your tape. Stuff like this could be the info that was fed to the producers that no tape existed at the time. EVen though it shows yours being official by 2001.
http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/ (http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/)
-
That moment when you realize that Steve Wiebe had a 900k+ PB back in the 80's, just not official.
The documentary didn't only lie about your score, Tim, but it also "lied" about the scores (and kill screens) Steve Wiebe got back in the day.
The truth is Billy did 874k in 1982 (something like that), Steve Wiebe did 900k+ (I don't remember how much exactly) by the end of 1980/beginning of 1990. Then they shot King of Kong saying that Steve Wiebe was trying to get the record, even if he unofficially had the record for a long-time theoretically. (Someone can correct the info if I'm missing something).
Now you can say that Steve is lying when he told us he got that score back when he was in college (since we obviously don't have any visual proof), but I would personally believe Allen staal to get 1.1m more than to believe Steve Wiebe lied about that.
So theoretically, Steve Wiebe did beat Billy Mitchell unofficially, before Tim has beaten Billy officially.
No offense to anyone on what I say, I'm just saying the "chronological" order of the DK "world record".
and knocked Billy Mitchell off that pedestal by besting what was thought of as the unbreakable record.
Fk, that's Vincent Lemay's math there. Even me knew that 900k+ was definitely possible by grabbing the bottom hammer when I first started playing DK. I never knew it was possible to be worst than Vincent Lemay's math!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4)
Steve wasn't lying when he said he saw 874k as the score to beat. This interview is in 2004 and he mentions around 13:30 that around 5 years earlier he looked up the world record. King of Kong is just edited in a way not consistent with the context of the interviews, I don't that its Steve's fault
-
Here we go again. Everyone open wide so these already known facts can keep getting crammed down our throats.
-
Actually some facts I sort of forgot about, and some things are really interesting new info. Now I see from a very early time period Wiebe, and Mitchell never really cared to go after Donkey Kong 3. Also I think I know what Billy Mitchell's secret plan was. He talked about 20 percent luck. I believe Billy Mitchell was going after the million point game on Ms. Pac-man.
-
Not trying to start anything but if you're saying that you think no one would have the balls to go and talk to Walter an Billy then why post this in the first place? I doubt that even if someone did go over to them they would give the same response they did to you and Dwayne.
The KoK film is know outdated by other documentaries and even if the producers of the film listened and got your name out there I don't think you will get recognition like Steve did anyway, although I do think what they did was wrong and you should have been included in the film in the first place.
-
If I was this upset about being shunned regarding something I worked hard to achieve years ago, rather than posting on forums about how wronged I was, I'd instead note how much interest Donkey Kong has generated since the movie came out and how much it carries still and use that time more constructively, namely, playing to break the current arcade WR. Then again, I'm a bit of a poser CAG player and have imposed a sort of temporary hiatus on myself from gaming so what do I know....
-
That's actually a pretty cool timeline. I hope that link doesn't get buried too deeply in these forums and I hope that website doesn't suddenly disappear. Have people copied and saved the text from that site? I was aware of most of these details, but to see it all layed out in order like that is helpful.
-
If I was this upset about being shunned regarding something I worked hard to achieve years ago, rather than posting on forums about how wronged I was, I'd instead note how much interest Donkey Kong has generated since the movie came out and how much it carries still and use that time more constructively, namely, playing to break the current arcade WR. Then again, I'm a bit of a poser CAG player and have imposed a sort of temporary hiatus on myself from gaming so what do I know....
Putting words in my mouth to frame the narrative "you" want others to believe" is pretty juvenile.
You say my time on this topic should be spent more constructively like trying to beat the current record? Well I did beat the record 13 years ago and look what happened. Fine you want to rub elbows at these events and think people like Steve, Billy and Walter Day are your buddies, go ahead and live in denial.
As far as the poser comment I will definately beat "you" this weekend thats a 100% promise and I still have got my controll panel set right.
-
What KoK did to spark interest back in CAG is unprecidented. Peopel like me who were there back in the day came back to it, 30 years olds and 20 years, and some teens now have an interest in it.
I do have one question Tim, what did Steve Wiebe actually do to you?
What did he do!?.....he and his movie pals deliberately lied re-wrote the games scoring history to favor themselves and made a nicle tiddy penny doing it. Is this not obvious?
Even if the producers intentionally left out your 895K score,
879,200 to be exact
what was Wiebe's crime?
His crime......mabye its not on the books but a whole hell of a lot of it isn't like what has to do with right and wrong
He told a friend what happened to him, his friend told the producer, and the story started getting documented from there.
No, the story was documented starting in 1982 when billy set the record.
Even if Steve played a few games on DDK before he knew all the rules, the gameplay is pretty much the same. He just was trying to get his score recognized.
As a new commer I can understand this as the rules reguarding DK weren't as stringent at the time
EDIT: OK, so I do see one thing since your last post. In Kok, when steve said he lost his job he went to a computer and typed ina score for DK world Record and it said Billy Mitchell 872K and he said "Hey, I can beat that", why he didn't find your score or acknowledge it. So I gotcha, peace.
You "got" nothing, and let me explain how you"got nothing". You've watched that stupid KOK movie too many times. Please explain this, at what point in time did steve look to see what the high score was? I have some news for you, my score from 8/16/2000 is still TO THIS DAY recorded on the TG site.
There is a specific reason I did not submit any more games.................and that was to keep my initial score registed and on display.
For those with critical thinking, they can easily piece the time line together. I suggest you put down the crack pipe, stop drinking the flouride and stop taking the vaccines, aspertame and GMO.
Soon just being able to tie ones own shoelaces will be considered an act of deep critical thinking here in ameriKa.
So let me ask this just when was it that Steve sat down and viewed the TG score board for the first time? Gotch ya!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4)
Steve wasn't lying when he said he saw 874k as the score to beat. This interview is in 2004 and he mentions around 13:30 that around 5 years earlier he looked up the world record. King of Kong is just edited in a way not consistent with the context of the interviews, I don't that its Steve's fault
Well I guess I had beaten him to it then didn't I?
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
You got shit! and I believe I already explained why.
-
Hey, Tim, you know this is like the 4th time you've ranted in a thread, right?
Just figured I'd let you know, so you don't end up repeating yourself.
-
Hey, Tim, you know this is like the 4th time you've ranted in a thread, right?
Just figured I'd let you know, so you don't end up repeating yourself.
Not cool, mitch. Ranting is the first step to recovery, and we need to embrace that. Tim, I just want you to get better (and not end up like Mr. Awesome). Here's to a speedy acceptance and recovery!
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
You got shit! and I believe I already explained why.
You do realize that this is the second time you have responded to this exact post? The responses have been completely different each time.
-
OK, I gotcha. Is this a documentary despite the fact that it does not include you in the film? Yep, it is, because it is based on facts. Just not all the facts. I have a question for you. Say you had the directors hat for King of Kong. How exactly would you put yourself into that film?
You got shit! and I believe I already explained why.
You do realize that this is the second time you have responded to this exact post? The responses have been completely different each time.
Really, point out the differences
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4)
Steve wasn't lying when he said he saw 874k as the score to beat. This interview is in 2004 and he mentions around 13:30 that around 5 years earlier he looked up the world record. King of Kong is just edited in a way not consistent with the context of the interviews, I don't that its Steve's fault
But wait a minute I thought billy had a higher score and THAT was the score Steve was trying to beat
;) so goes one of the arguments listed here
-
Tim, have you ever read this timeline of events for the DK record? I don't know who documented it, but what is the deal with RTM's quote regarding your tape. Stuff like this could be the info that was fed to the producers that no tape existed at the time. EVen though it shows yours being official by 2001.
http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/ (http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/)
I'm sure some "Wiebie-Head" put this together as it is bull plop my score was never verified.
Just more lies and another CYA on behalf of TG.
I still have the tape!
-
RTM was never a Wiebe-head, he was actually a Billy defender and anti-KoK for years after the release, it was him that said that about your tape. I know you have the tape, but did TG ever have the tape? That's what RTM's quote was saying:
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
And earlier when I said "Gotcha ya" , I was saying "got you" because I was agreeing with you. Steve sat down in 2003 when he looked up the score, he had to see your name, but once it was determined they were not going to mention your score, they obviously must have told Steve Wiebe to say Billy Mitchell's 874K score, because that fit the flow of the story. Probably made Steve uncomfortable to state it that way, but those producers can be intimidating during filming I'm sure.
-
RTM was never a Wiebe-head, he was actually a Billy defender and anti-KoK for years after the release, it was him that said that about your tape. I know you have the tape, but did TG ever have the tape? That's what RTM's quote was saying:
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
OK.then, allow me to refresh everyones memory buy boradcasting this game via my justin TV channel.....later next week ..Dwayne Richards and others have seen it.
There were only 3 copies of this game ever made, The first for TG that I'm sure"dissapeared" when the producers offered money contracts to the scabs at TG.
The second I made for Dwayne Richards 5 years ago
The third I still have.
So when I show this game does this mean wikipedia will be corrected and I get the financial remuneration I deserve....
I offered to show this tape in 2009 to a number of people but they didn't care or were afraid of having their world of denial shattered.
-
RTM was never a Wiebe-head, he was actually a Billy defender and anti-KoK for years after the release, it was him that said that about your tape. I know you have the tape, but did TG ever have the tape? That's what RTM's quote was saying:
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
I believe Robert Murczek was refering to wiebies initial score on the double donkey kong PCB in this clip......my god you people are supposed to be experts on this and I shread your arguments everytime! You know why........because I was actually there! and I know what I 'm talking about. I'm not basing my understanding of facts from KOK, thats why you people will lose your arguments every time!
And earlier when I said "Gotcha ya" , I was saying "got you" because I was agreeing with you. Steve sat down in 2003 when he looked up the score, he had to see your name, but once it was determined they were not going to mention your score, they obviously must have told Steve Wiebe to say Billy Mitchell's 874K score, because that fit the flow of the story. Probably made Steve uncomfortable to state it that way, but those producers can be intimidating during filming I'm sure.
-
Hey, Tim, you know this is like the 4th time you've ranted in a thread, right?
Just figured I'd let you know, so you don't end up repeating yourself.
Not cool, mitch. Ranting is the first step to recovery, and we need to embrace that. Tim, I just want you to get better (and not end up like Mr. Awesome). Here's to a speedy acceptance and recovery!
What's the next step? I don't really see a way any of us can help fix the issue. We've already agreed/sympathized with him. Seems like it'd just be following in Shildt's footsteps to continue ranting now. :-\
-
If I was this upset about being shunned regarding something I worked hard to achieve years ago, rather than posting on forums about how wronged I was, I'd instead note how much interest Donkey Kong has generated since the movie came out and how much it carries still and use that time more constructively, namely, playing to break the current arcade WR. Then again, I'm a bit of a poser CAG player and have imposed a sort of temporary hiatus on myself from gaming so what do I know....
Putting words in my mouth to frame the narrative "you" want others to believe" is pretty juvenile.
You say my time on this topic should be spent more constructively like trying to beat the current record? Well I did beat the record 13 years ago and look what happened. Fine you want to rub elbows at these events and think people like Steve, Billy and Walter Day are your buddies, go ahead and live in denial.
As far as the poser comment I will definately beat "you" this weekend thats a 100% promise and I still have got my controll panel set right.
I'm going to a wedding this weekend. There's no way you beat me at eating more steak and wedding cake. 100% promise. Just kidding, I'm a cake eating poser.
-
RTM was never a Wiebe-head, he was actually a Billy defender and anti-KoK for years after the release, it was him that said that about your tape. I know you have the tape, but did TG ever have the tape? That's what RTM's quote was saying:
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
I believe Robert Murczek was refering to wiebies initial score on the double donkey kong PCB in this clip......my god you people are supposed to be experts on this and I shread your arguments everytime! You know why........because I was actually there! and I know what I 'm talking about. I'm not basing my understanding of facts from KOK, thats why you people will lose your arguments every time!
Geez, Tim, the entire section about that quote was about your score, you didn't shred anything. RTM deleted the comment on the CAGDC link (this was RTM's words about your score, not a clip from KoK), but even the title of that before he deleted his text was called "Tim's Score." Man, I'm giving you the opportunity to explain some things, and even went as far as telling you I agree with some of your stuff, but if you keep coming back with these childish insults and attacks, forget it then.
http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/ (http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/)
2001 April 23
Twin Galaxies verification date for Tim Sczerby’s videotaped record
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
verified record Tim Sczerby: 879,200
TG database Tim Sczerby: 879,200 ?
unverified n/a
Classic Arcade Gaming Forum: Tim’s Score
Twin Galaxies database, circa June 3, 2005 – King of Kong
-
RTM was never a Wiebe-head, he was actually a Billy defender and anti-KoK for years after the release, it was him that said that about your tape. I know you have the tape, but did TG ever have the tape? That's what RTM's quote was saying:
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
I believe Robert Murczek was refering to wiebies initial score on the double donkey kong PCB in this clip......my god you people are supposed to be experts on this and I shread your arguments everytime! You know why........because I was actually there! and I know what I 'm talking about. I'm not basing my understanding of facts from KOK, thats why you people will lose your arguments every time!
Geez, Tim, the entire section about that quote was about your score, you didn't shred anything. RTM deleted the comment on the CAGDC link (this was RTM's words about your score, not a clip from KoK), but even the title of that before he deleted his text was called "Tim's Score." Man, I'm giving you the opportunity to explain some things, and even went as far as telling you I agree with some of your stuff, but if you keep coming back with these childish insults and attacks, forget it then.
http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/ (http://superbunker.com/resources/dkt/)
2001 April 23
Twin Galaxies verification date for Tim Sczerby’s videotaped record
Robert Mruczek states (August 24, 2007) that he does not know who verified this score, when the score was entered, or who entered it. Regarding the tape itself, Mruczek states: “no mention of this even being on tape has come across my level of attention.â€
verified record Tim Sczerby: 879,200
TG database Tim Sczerby: 879,200
unverified n/a
Robert states he does not know who verified the score but obviously someone must've verified it or it would'nt have been accepted and Billy Mitchelle himself congratulated me.
Before I got to know Dwayne and I first met him, we watched that tape and he as a former ref said himself there was nothing wrong with it as it conformed to the rules at the time and there was no suspicious game play behavior.
So can anyone tell me why its still listed as unverified?
I can tell you why. Doesn't matter anyway I will just broad cast the old footage I sent to TG.13 years ago...a verification from TG is obvioulsy shit as I learned the hardway. No wonder noone wants to send in scores anymore.
Classic Arcade Gaming Forum: Tim’s Score
Twin Galaxies database, circa June 3, 2005 – King of Kong
-
Tim, my friend, I am sure that by now we know and understand your opinion. So...... what do you want to accomplish here other than make thread after thread about stuff like this. Just play the game, enjoy the friendships, share your in-game pro-moments. As it is, I am not even reading your stuff any more, it is all the same, nothing really new, maybe you will be able to draw in a few people but I don't really think people in general come to the forum looking for any of this, and I am sure that new members would be better served with other things in the recent post section than seeing this stuff.
-
Tim start a blog page! Let everybody know what happened and what you're going to do to rectify the situation. Btw how much did you pay for your dragons lair? Since it's laser disc it's not really a mame game and would love to play it sometime. The lag on nintendo sucks for this title.
-
As a teacher I like the question you have posed, and could be asked about any news article on TV, radio or written, or any film claiming to be a documentary. Media control of information is a big issue.
However, you have posed a question that can have two possible answers; yes it is a documentary or no it isn't a documentary. You have asked this question to the community on this forum. Having done that you have allowed us to respond either way, as is our right to answering any given question.
But you only accept a response that you agree with. If you ask a question you have to be willing to hear and accept any answers.
-
As a teacher I like the question you have posed, and could be asked about any news article on TV, radio or written, or any film claiming to be a documentary. Media control of information is a big issue.
However, you have posed a question that can have two possible answers; yes it is a documentary or no it isn't a documentary.
This does not make sense, its pretty straight foward. Either it is or isn't theres no grey area inbetween when it comes to the actual history and facts.
You have asked this question to the community on this forum. Having done that you have allowed us to respond either way, as is our right to answering any given question.
But you only accept a response that you agree with. If you ask a question you have to be willing to hear and accept any answers.
I don't have to accept the answers if they are just more fabricated lies and cover ups. I agree with the facts not just what I what I want to hear. The trouble with the otherside of the argument is they KNOW I'm right so they keep presenting strawman/tarbaby arguments.
If I can hear an explaination of why my score was swept under the rug and lied about and not included in the time line of the "STORY" which was chronicaled starting in 1982, I will accept that.
Don't believe it was verified? Then look at the TG scoreboard right now, as it is still there........so obviously someone verified it didn't they?
Theres a resson I never broke that score on the scoreboard even though I have many times since 2005.
I have been asking this for 6 years and NOBODY offers any explaination except "it was more entertaing with Steve and Billy" "Steve vs. Billy was a better story" (which is strictly opinion.....believe me I can be a complete asshole worse than Billy if I want to be) this is the best argument offered.
Now I will ask again, look at the legal definition at the start of the thread and ask yourself if KOK was a real DOC.
-
What exactly are you looking for here? Financial compensation? A reshoot and rerelease of KOK so you can be included? A pity party? Sorry to say, but I don't think any of those are going to happen.
We get your point. We got your point the first 50 times. I understand you're passionate about this, and that's ok. I'm sure there are even others who see your side of things, but sounding like a broken record isn't helping your cause and certainly not gaining you any new converts. You just start sounding (more) bitter and (more) vindictive.
Yeah, it sucks being marginalized, but you realize this happened, what, 7 years ago? If nothing has changed since then, what makes you think beating it to death will make a difference? What do you hope to accomplish?
This whole thread:
(http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/dead-horse.gif)
-
I think Tim makes the most interesting posts here. Why on earth would you guys want to do anything to discourage this?
-
Thats the weirdest looking horse ive ever seen ;D
-
To be honest, that horse beating graphic is the most amusing part of this thread.
-
I think documentaries are no longer fully based on truth; or at least they are made with selective truth.
Look at "An Inconvenient Truth"; a "documentary about the danger the world is in due to global warming. Then look at "The Great Global Warming Swindle"; a documentary about how global warming is a lie. Both claim to be documentaries and based on facts, yet they contradict each other.
There are other documentaries that contradict other documentaries. Take the moon landing. Some say it happened, others that it was fake. Yet these documentaries claim to be truthful; yet we all know the moon landing was fake.
It's all about entertainment these days, so I guess the makers of KOK felt their truth made a more interesting story. Personally, I think having a third person (Tim) in the documentary would have made a really good twist.
-
You know, everything on the DKForum doesn't have to be amusing for you. There are other people here who appreciate reading what Tim has to say. Me, for example.
-
i for one enjoy tim's posts
-
I would like to know more about Tim's side of the story, because I am sure he has a lot of interesting things to say. That being said, if he actually told his side of the story instead of being passive-agressive and hating on the directors and the people in the film, I would actually take what he says more seriously. The Doc is mainly focused on two guys going head to head. Honestly if there was a third guy, I don't think it would have turned out well. It was a Good vs Evil story between a kind family man who was down on his luck up against a man who has everything and comes off as arrogant and manipulative. A third main character would have made the plot more disorganized and harder to follow confusing the viewers. The directors did what they thought would make a great story and they succeeded. If Tim wants to blog or post about his side of the story a lot of us would love to read it as long as he would just tell the story and quit hating on others so much.
-
I agree with Robbie. I prefer someone who's informative and opiniated, instead of a person that is just passive-agressive.
-
I think the term "Passive Aggressive" is a wrong term to apply to Tim. The guy has definitely been super outspoken about how he feels about a situation. Passive Aggressive is the "Say one thing do another". For instance a husband asks his wife if he can go for a night on the town with the boys. The wife says "Sure whatever". When the husband comes home he finds the door to their bedroom locked, and a pillow, and blanket on the coach. Now that would be "Passive Aggressive."
Edit:
In this corner on the post directly to my bottom is Tim "Mary quite contrary" Sczerby! On the post four posts down is Ken "Quite the Scoundrl" House! This is sure to be the battle of gargantuan smack downs. Gentlemen, let's get ready to rumble!
-
What exactly are you looking for here? Financial compensation? A reshoot and rerelease of KOK so you can be included? A pity party? Sorry to say, but I don't think any of those are going to happen.
We get your point. We got your point the first 50 times. I understand you're passionate about this, and that's ok. I'm sure there are even others who see your side of things, but sounding like a broken record isn't helping your cause and certainly not gaining you any new converts. You just start sounding (more) bitter and (more) vindictive.
Yeah, it sucks being marginalized, but you realize this happened, what, 7 years ago? If nothing has changed since then, what makes you think beating it to death will make a difference? What do you hope to accomplish?
When the gaming officials lie and cheat you out of a chance to earn ten grand then let me know.
Who wouldn't be bitter? Of course the crooks aren't going to rectify thier wrong doing.
This should show what little character these guys have.
Yet every year they have a festival called a kong off where Steve and Billy are heros....inspite of their treachery.
This is the equivalent of having a banking convention where Bernie Madoff and Jon Corzine are guest of honor. Its really a big joke! Of course Walter will be creeping around in a black and white stripe shirt. It would be more appropriate if water wore a black and white shirt with the stripes oriented in a horizontal fashion.
Their used to be a time in this dying country of ameriKa when people who stood up for themselves when they were in the right were considered heros and when justification was proven people rallied behind them.
Now amerika has devolved into a pathetic, apathetic ,morally and financially bankrupt, war mongering joke.
As for the new commers to s this whole DK thing don't think for a minute that you will ever take priority over Billy or steve. Those that do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
This whole thread:
(http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/dead-horse.gif)
-
I would like to know more about Tim's side of the story, because I am sure he has a lot of interesting things to say.
Theres a real DOC from Dwayne Richards called King f Con that touches on the subject.
That being said, if he actually told his side of the story instead of being passive-agressive and hating on the directors and the people in the film, I would actually take what he says more seriously.
I've tried illustrating the facts nobody cares about facts they simply want to be entertained.
The Doc is mainly focused on two guys going head to head. Honestly if there was a third guy, I don't think it would have turned out well. It was a Good vs Evil story between a kind family man who was down on his luck up against a man who has everything and comes off as arrogant and manipulative.
Yes, this was the "story" and not the documented facts reguarding the games scoring history or who actually beat the original record first.
With this said, look up the legal definition of was a documentary is. I guess the "story" was entertaining but probably could've used a vampire or zombie though
A third main character would have made the plot more disorganized and harder to follow confusing the viewers.
The point I'm making is that as far as documented facts went, there was no need for a third character I agree, either Steve or Billy never should've been used.
Steve did not set out to beat billys old score he set out to beat mine or from the other narrative I originaly set out to beat billys old score not steve. So from what ever direction one wants to approach the narrative, I fit in during this time period
The directors did what they thought would make a great story and they succeeded.
Yes great "story", but why is my psyche assaulted every time I see this made up story refered to as a "documentary" again look the legal definition I provided.
If Tim wants to blog or post about his side of the story a lot of us would love to read it as long as he would just tell the story and quit hating on others so much.
When one is intentionally cheated out of a chance to make ten grand off of subject material that was systematically stolen from them, yes I think people are going to hate and be bitter, and with good reason.
The classic arcade gaming scene........where friend is another word for fool :/
-
hey Tim, Billy Mitchell gave you a shout out at the first Kong Off...thats got to count for something! ;)
8)
-
Learn how to use the 'quote' feature you fucking moron. Its bad enough you pollute the forum with your cry baby bullshit but then you make it even worse by fucking up the quotes every time you use them.
There is no 'LEGAL' definition of 'Documentary'. You quoted the dictionary definition.
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong. There you have it.
-Ken
-
Learn how to use the 'quote' feature you fucking moron. Its bad enough you pollute the forum with your cry baby bullshit but then you make it even worse by fucking up the quotes every time you use them.
There is no 'LEGAL' definition of 'Documentary'. You quoted the dictionary definition.
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong. There you have it.
-Ken
Tim I think it's time to call it quits. You don't want to get in a trolling match with Ken. Trust me on this.
-
Learn how to use the 'quote' feature you fucking moron. Its bad enough you pollute the forum with your cry baby bullshit but then you make it even worse by fucking up the quotes every time you use them.
There is no 'LEGAL' definition of 'Documentary'. You quoted the dictionary definition.
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong. There you have it.
Ken, I realize all those hours in front of a dig dug machine at the "Kencade" have obviously caused you serious brain damage. Don't worry, I understand. So I will say it real slow.
....................dictionaries.......are ................considered..............legal ...........reference...............material..............in .......a................ court........of.........law.
I was told my score was never verified....Trust me everyone knows this was a lie.....so Ken your wasting your time arguing this point
I suggest you get your head and brains some place other than a did dug screen and emerge from the "Kencade" on a fact finding mission before you interject an imbecilic comment like you just did.
-Ken
-
Say it as slow as you need to, because its in the dictionary does not make it a 'legal definition'. Legal definitions are defined by statue, administrative rule or prescient NOT by the dictionary DUMBSHIT.
Maybe you should do a little fact checking before you go posting stupid made up shit like that.
-Ken
PS, you fucked up the quote again. Maybe you should spend a little time researching how that feature works.
-Ken
-
lol, you did not just say that to Ken. :o Dude, you post this question with a personal agenda, and argue with anyone who does not agree with that agenda. I agree with Ken that you are polluting the forum and twisting its purpose. You have allowed this stuff to poison your soul and now you want us to suffer for it too. You are the only person who is perpetuating this anger and suffering... did we learn nothing from Star Wars 8) If I were the moderator of this section I would have deleted your stuff a long time ago. And I propose that we cleanse this forum of this stuff for the sake of our new and upcoming members. For too long has our recent post section been flooded with this stuff. Please, vote. ;D
-
Say it as slow as you need to, because its in the dictionary does not make it a 'legal definition'. Legal definitions are defined by statue, administrative rule or prescient NOT by the dictionary DUMBSHIT.
Maybe you should do a little fact checking before you go posting stupid made up shit like that.
-Ken
PS, you fucked up the quote again. Maybe you should spend a little time researching how that feature works.
-Ken
Don't say I didnt warn you Tim. And remember to start typing your part after where it says quote on the bottom. It's even more annoying to read your bullshit.
-
Tim, you didn't answer my question. What would it take for you to feel that the wrong done to you has been rectified? A reshoot of KOK? $10,000? Everyone in the CAG community to show up at the doorstep of the creators of KOK with torches and pitchforks demanding justice? You spend a lot of time on here complaining, but you're not offering any solutions, just vitriol.
And I don't think anyone is here to try to take priority over Billy or Steve. We are here to HAVE FUN. Something you probably did once upon a time.
-
Say it as slow as you need to, because its in the dictionary does not make it a 'legal definition'. Legal definitions are defined by statue, administrative rule or prescient NOT by the dictionary DUMBSHIT.
Maybe you should do a little fact checking before you go posting stupid made up shit like that.
-Ken
PS, you fucked up the quote again. Maybe you should spend a little time researching how that feature works.
-Ken
[/quote
I already have. perhaps you can explain how KOK is a documentary based on facts?
I have news for you "administrative rule" goes far beyond what TG thinks it is.
Don't say I didnt warn you Tim. And remember to start typing your part after where it says quote on the bottom. It's even more annoying to read your bullshit.
And your naive idiocy makes me angry as well.
I love your responses............really, as name calling and changing the subject is the last defense of a weak argument.
-
hey Tim, Billy Mitchell gave you a shout out at the first Kong Off...thats got to count for something! ;)
8)
To be honest it does, but when I learned how much money these people made it just makes me sick.
-
There you go. You got the quote thing down. I'm just trying to help you out. One last warning don't get into a trolling match against Ken. It won't end well.
-
hey Tim, Billy Mitchell gave you a shout out at the first Kong Off...thats got to count for something! ;)
8)
To be honest it does, but when I learned how much money these people made it just makes me sick.
Some other people I don't think made any money either. Did Roy Schidlt get anything? Did Brian Kuh get anything? Did Mark Alpiger get anything? By the way, I don't think they got paid for the movie, but were paid on a planned up coming fictionalized version of this documentary. That never materialized, but they got paid the same way.
-
hey Tim, Billy Mitchell gave you a shout out at the first Kong Off...thats got to count for something! ;)
8)
To be honest it does, but when I learned how much money these people made it just makes me sick.
Some other people I don't think made any money either. Did Roy Schidlt get anything? Did Brian Kuh get anything? Did Mark Alpiger get anything? By the way, I don't think they got paid for the movie, but were paid on a planned up coming fictionalized version of this documentary. That never materialized, but they got paid the same way.
(http://img.pandawhale.com/79984-fifth-element-OH-SNAP-gif-pEMZ.gif)
You did NOT just call KOK a documentary. Them's fightin' words.
-
I already have. perhaps you can explain how KOK is a documentary based on facts?
I have news for you "administrative rule" goes far beyond what TG thinks it is.
And your naive idiocy makes me angry as well.
I love your responses............really, as name calling and changing the subject is the last defense of a weak argument.
Administrative rule of LAW not TG. TG has no influence on the LEGAL meaning of the word DOCUMENTARY. Follow along son...
I was 100% on point with my argument, you ARE a cry baby, you DONT understand your own fucking question about the LEGAL meaning of a word, you ARE polluting this forum with your BULLSHIT and you DONT KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY USE THE QUOTE FEATURE.
As to your point about money, it is answered by my other on point statement..
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong.
-
I already have. perhaps you can explain how KOK is a documentary based on facts?
I have news for you "administrative rule" goes far beyond what TG thinks it is.
And your naive idiocy makes me angry as well.
I love your responses............really, as name calling and changing the subject is the last defense of a weak argument.
Administrative rule of LAW not TG. TG has no influence on the LEGAL meaning of the word DOCUMENTARY. Follow along son...
I was 100% on point with my argument, you ARE a cry baby, you DONT understand your own fucking question about the LEGAL meaning of a word, you ARE polluting this forum with your BULLSHIT and you DONT KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY USE THE QUOTE FEATURE.
As to your point about money, it is answered by my other on point statement..
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong.
Told ya
-
I already have. perhaps you can explain how KOK is a documentary based on facts?
I have news for you "administrative rule" goes far beyond what TG thinks it is.
And your naive idiocy makes me angry as well.
I love your responses............really, as name calling and changing the subject is the last defense of a weak argument.
Administrative rule of LAW not TG. TG has no influence on the LEGAL meaning of the word DOCUMENTARY. Follow along son...
I was 100% on point with my argument, you ARE a cry baby, you DONT understand your own fucking question about the LEGAL meaning of a word, you ARE polluting this forum with your BULLSHIT and you DONT KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY USE THE QUOTE FEATURE.
As to your point about money, it is answered by my other on point statement..
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong.
Seeing as how you obviously haven't graduated junior high school yet, here is the legal definition of "documentary" you may find useful in your eighth grade mid term this year.
doc-u-men-ta-ry (adj.)
1. Consisting of,concerning,or based on documented facts.
2. Presenting facts objectively "without" editorializing or inserting fictional matter as in book or film!
The second description as key!
Now, I suggest you use the KOK dvd you have as a beer coaster instead accurate reference material and do some research on you own.
Now look at the time line of events on the scoring history of DK starting in 1982.
Pay close attention to the years 2000-2003!
I remember one artical I read at the time describing a "rouge upstart" from n.y."
beat billys 1982 record in 2000.
Now assuming you left the kencade and actually did some research on your own.take the beer of the KoK dvd, wipe off the ring and watch it again.
Now tell me if Kok meets the legal definition provided above.
Nowhere in the definition does it indicate or imply that facts can be omited based on personality conflicts.
Good luck with your eight grade mid term this year
-
I already have. perhaps you can explain how KOK is a documentary based on facts?
I have news for you "administrative rule" goes far beyond what TG thinks it is.
And your naive idiocy makes me angry as well.
I love your responses............really, as name calling and changing the subject is the last defense of a weak argument.
Administrative rule of LAW not TG. TG has no influence on the LEGAL meaning of the word DOCUMENTARY. Follow along son...
I was 100% on point with my argument, you ARE a cry baby, you DONT understand your own fucking question about the LEGAL meaning of a word, you ARE polluting this forum with your BULLSHIT and you DONT KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY USE THE QUOTE FEATURE.
As to your point about money, it is answered by my other on point statement..
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong.
This is your worthless opinion not fact.
Where in the legal definition of "documentary" or its "statutes" as you indicate, does it say omission of historical facts is acceptable based on personal preference?
Told ya
Told me what? if this is the best intellectual argument anyone can put forth against mine I feel sorry for them
-
He told you not to get into a flame war with Ken, and I have to agree.
And I'd love an answer to this:
What would it take for you to feel that the wrong done to you has been rectified? A reshoot of KOK? $10,000? Everyone in the CAG community to show up at the doorstep of the creators of KOK with torches and pitchforks demanding justice?
In other words, what do you feel you are owed to make things right?
-
He told you not to get into a flame war with Ken, and I have to agree.
And I'd love an answer to this:
What would it take for you to feel that the wrong done to you has been rectified? A reshoot of KOK? $10,000? Everyone in the CAG community to show up at the doorstep of the creators of KOK with torches and pitchforks demanding justice?
In other words, what do you feel you are owed to make things right?
The wikipedia entry on KOK updated as it is misleading and makes me out to be lying about the actual version of events, and what ever payment billy or steve recieved for taking my place would be nice along with an engraved apology from Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham.
Otherwise anytime the subject comes up, I will not hesitate to debate and give a history lesson in my defense.........oh .......I forgot............ this type of defense is just considered being "a cry baby"
yea, I almost forgot, here in america standing up for ones self when they are in the right both historically and factually is being a "crybaby"
Those that fought the revolutionary war and all those civil rights demonstrators in the 60's were just "cry babies too were they not?
This type of linguistic brain washing and programming doesn't work on me.
-
(http://i948.photobucket.com/albums/ad328/xelnia/aQXng_zps98a4e8ea.gif) (http://s948.photobucket.com/user/xelnia/media/aQXng_zps98a4e8ea.gif.html)
-
Those that fought the revolutionary war and all those civil rights demonstrators in the 60's were just "cry babies too were they not?
This type of linguistic brain washing and programming doesn't work on me.
I don't think you can compare being omitted from a movie with being a revolutionary or a civil rights activist. To quote one Jules Winnfield, "...ain't the same ballpark, ain't the same league, ain't even the same fucking sport."
Yes, complaining about being left out of a movie makes you appear to be a crybaby. People who fought in the Revolutionary War and civil rights activists didn't sit around with this "woe is me" attitude and complain to anyone who would listen; they actually did something about it. Therein lies the astronomical difference.
Of course this may all just be a big conspiracy, among the ranks of 9/11, the moon landing, and the Kennedy assassination. THE POWERS THAT BE ARE TRYING TO WRITE YOU OUT OF THE HISTORY BOOKS!
Take off your tin foil hat and man up.
-
(http://i948.photobucket.com/albums/ad328/xelnia/aQXng_zps98a4e8ea.gif) (http://s948.photobucket.com/user/xelnia/media/aQXng_zps98a4e8ea.gif.html)
(https://dviw3bl0enbyw.cloudfront.net/uploads/forum_attachment/file/69967/toystory3popcorn.gif)
-
The wikipedia entry on KOK updated as it is misleading and makes me out to be lying about the actual version of events...
Um... this you can fix yourself. Hint: This is the wrong website to be posting on in order to fix this!
...and what ever payment billy or steve recieved for taking my place would be nice along with an engraved apology from Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham.
Not sure how we can help you here. Seems pointless to burden us with anything more than just presenting your case.
But if you're really expecting this sort of compensation, why not just sue them?
-
delete, delete, delete, crap I pushed the button three times and it still didn't delete.... effing delete when I hit effing button!
-
The wikipedia entry on KOK updated as it is misleading and makes me out to be lying about the actual version of events...
Um... this you can fix yourself. Hint: This is the wrong website to be posting on in order to fix this!
...and what ever payment billy or steve recieved for taking my place would be nice along with an engraved apology from Seth Gordan and Ed Cuntingham.
Not sure how we can help you here. Seems pointless to burden us with anything more than just presenting your case.
But if you're really expecting this sort of compensation, why not just sue them?
It takes money to sue.
So your basically telling me the DK community doesn't care if someone gets cheated out of a DK score and financial remuneration that comes with it?
Again I am willing to debate the facts and legality of KOK with your best, so far what I've seen here in defense of KoK ammounts to a childish "I know you are but what am I?" response.
-
No offense Tim, you achieved something huge back in the day, and i appreciate your accomplishments, but i'm afraid you're totaly overreacting.
Of course, you were the WR holder back in the day, and yeah, your name should have been mentioned, but honestly, the movie would have failed, if we had this triangle between Billy, Steve and you.
The movie tells the classic story, good vs. evil, so you wouldn't fit in, even tho you were the current WR holder.
I don't know what you try to achieve here, do you think everybody will fall onto their knees praising you as former WR holder? Do you want to convince the producers to reshoot the movie, or to give a statement that they kept you out of it on purpose?
Somehow i got this feeling, that someday, with his dying breath, Tim's last words will be "i was the guy cheated out of "The King Of Kong"."
-
So your basically telling me the DK community doesn't care if someone gets cheated out of a DK score and financial remuneration that comes with it?
What exactly do you want out of the DK community? What exactly do you want us to do. Do you want us the next time one of us sees Billy or Steve Wiebe to tell them that Tim has a message for you, and then flip them off with both hands?
Do you want us to tell them "Hey, you really should cut Tim on a piece of the pie. Don't you think it would be fair if Tim would get $10,000?"
Do you want us to do a letter writing campaign to Seth Gordon demanding that you be "renumerated"?
Do you want us to boycott the Kong Off since it's associated with Billy Mitchell and Steve Wiebe?
See that is the thing. Some of us have already said. "Yeah, you should have been included." What more do you want from us Tim?
-
Just come to the fking Kong Off 3. Otherwise, all of your talking will go to a dead end.
-
So your basically telling me the DK community doesn't care if someone gets cheated out of a DK score and financial remuneration that comes with it?
Setting a score on an arcade game does not entitle you to any money, especially if that score was recorded over a decade ago. Sorry you didn't get that memo.
If you really want to get paid for playing DK, go to the Kong Off and win. It's that simple. Or hang out on this forum, complain, and get NOTHING, because the KOK ship sailed a LOOOOONNNG time ago.
-
Just come to the fking Kong Off 3. Otherwise, all of your talking will go to a dead end.
^^^^^^^ THIS
-
It takes money to sue.
Then it seems like either
1) You don't care enough to put the money forward to back up what you're arguing (in which case, stop being so insincere), or
2) You just don't think you'd win (in which case, either you're actually wrong about the legal rights concerning 'documentaries', and you know it... so, again, stop being so insincere), or
3) you don't have the money to fight it (in which case, what do you want us to do? give you money to do this? sorry, but I don't think we can help you here...since most people, though they empathize, think you are overreacting)
So your basically telling me the DK community doesn't care if someone gets cheated out of a DK score and financial remuneration that comes with it?
I never said that, nor did I necessarily imply it. However, if you want an answer, it'd be this: Most people empathize, but most people also think you are overreacting and would not fair well in a legal court if you sought compensation.
Again I am willing to debate the facts and legality of KOK with your best, so far what I've seen here in defense of KoK ammounts to a childish "I know you are but what am I?" response.
Can you point out when this form of argumentation ("I know you are but what am I?") has been used? I seem to have missed it. I have no clue how that sort of argumentation would even be applicable in this conversation, to be quite honest.
Also, I'm with Ken, I think your arguments as to the imposition of a dictionary-strict definition of 'documentary' onto the film industry, legally speaking, is untenable. There are so many loosey-goosey things that go on with fair-use and copyrights that I'm fairly certain that the term 'documentary' does not, by force of law, have to include every aspect of the history being filmed in a 100% truthful way. The simple economic factors alone make this impossible in many cases.
How's editing wikipedia going? ;D
-
How's editing wikipedia going? ;D
If/when this happens, could someone please let me know? Thanks
-
It takes money to sue.
Then it seems like either
1) You don't care enough to put the money forward to back up what you're arguing (in which case, stop being so insincere), or
2) You just don't think you'd win (in which case, either you're actually wrong about the legal rights concerning 'documentaries', and you know it... so, again, stop being so insincere), or
3) you don't have the money to fight it (in which case, what do you want us to do? give you money to do this? sorry, but I don't think we can help you here...since most people, though they empathize, think you are overreacting)
So your basically telling me the DK community doesn't care if someone gets cheated out of a DK score and financial remuneration that comes with it?
Considering the facts and evidence I have as opposed to the response I've recieved from most yes I do get that impression.
I never said that, nor did I necessarily imply it. However, if you want an answer, it'd be this: Most people empathize, but most people also think you are overreacting and would not fair well in a legal court if you sought compensation.
On the contrary I think I would fair quite well, how ever we live in ameriKa land of the coward and home of the sucker where the almighty dollar rules and justice be damned.
Again I am willing to debate the facts and legality of KOK with your best, so far what I've seen here in defense of KoK ammounts to a childish "I know you are but what am I?" response.
Can you point out when this form of argumentation ("I know you are but what am I?") has been used? I seem to have missed it. I have no clue how that sort of argumentation would even be applicable in this conversation, to be quite honest.
I was using an absurdity to illustrate an absurdity. The defense of KOK arguments were so feeble this was the best comparison I could think of.
Also, I'm with Ken, I think your arguments as to the imposition of a dictionary-strict definition of 'documentary' onto the film industry, legally speaking, is untenable.
The definition specificaly states in book or film...........
There are so many loosey-goosey things that go on with fair-use and copyrights that I'm fairly certain that the term 'documentary' does not, by force of law, have to include every aspect of the history being filmed in a 100% truthful way.
I think your wrong here, why else at the end of every film a disclaimer is placed as a CYA stating the events in the film are ficticious and are not meant to represent real people living or dead.
The story of Steve wiebie setting out to beat the old DK score as portrayed in the film is almost a mirrior of what I did before hand.
The simple economic factors alone make this impossible in many cases.
How's editing wikipedia going? ;D
I know its a big joke isn't it. The real Joke is how many people watch KOK and think its a real DOC based on facts......thats the real joke.
-
Documentary has come to mean a style of movie-making. It has nothing to do with the truthiness of the subject matter. Kind of like all those horror movies nowadays that are trying to present themselves like "look what I filmed by accident on my camcorder and security cameras." It's just an angle, an attempt to capture the public's imagination. Also professional wrestling, with the kayfabe gimmicks that are presented as real. I don't think you can sue Vince McMahon for claiming wrestling is real. Suing Vince might make a great hook for a wrestling feud one day, though.
A new pretend documentary where Tim sues the King of Kong crew might be a big hit! No one will know what's real and what's fake anymore. It'll be like Andy Kaufman all over again.
-
Tim, I'm serious about the editing Wikipedia. You could do it fairly easily, and if anyone there has a beef, you can defend your case there. If you so choose, you can at least fix that element of this issue. Again, it's not that hard to do, so long as you do it in a very non-trollish and polite manner.
Ditto what George said. You didn't hear KoK winning all sorts awards that are conditioned on truthfulness, did you? Other docs win those sorts of things because they claim to be accurate -KoK didn't. And even those that do win awards that are ultimately supposed to be based upon accuracy are, often times, found out to be quite phony as well.
-
I have spent a lot of hours at Funspot and got to know the employees really well. Some of them were there when it was filmed and they told me what they saw. It is obvious that KOK is a movie and not a documentary, because what really happened is different from what was shown for the sake of telling a story of Good vs Evil. Honestly playing at Funspot and hearing people talk about it all the time gets old after a while. This is where Im coming from and when I see it being posted on here in such a hateful way, it's like enough is enough.
-
The real Joke is how many people watch KOK and think its a real DOC based on facts
That's the thing, I don't know one single person who watched KOK because they wanted to see a documentary about Donkey Kong that's 100% factual, but I know a ton of people who watched it because they wanted to be entertained. I can guarantee that everyone who isn't into CAG (which is about 99.9% of the population) doesn't give two shits if KOK is the entire truth. It's not like someone will write a master's thesis about Donkey Kong and use KOK as his sole source of research.
-
Tim, I'm not going to argue about the process and philosophy behind storytelling and filmmaking, because a person can only discern that kind of stuff themselves. Nobody is going to convince you, with the bias that you have, that it made artistic sense to omit you from the movie. You either get that or you don't. No argument can transmit that understanding. And while I don't know what the "legal" definition of a documentary is, I know that it is not the responsibility of a documentary to be encyclopedic or comprehensive. Documentary filmmaking is an art, not a science.
You asked for fact-based rationale behind why you were omitted, so I'll be more black-and-white about it. You can ignore the facts or engage them, up to you, I'm just posting this for your edification because it's been a while since anyone introduced anything new to this discussion, at least in terms of specifics and primary sources (though some great points are being made).
In any case, you need to stop dropping the entirety of the blame on Ed and Seth for your score not being mentioned. Not only are they not solely responsible, I would go further to say that, of all the players involved, they were probably the LEAST responsible.
The fact of the matter is this: while the filmmakers didn't acknowledge you, the people in the scene didn't acknowledge you either, and that is, without a doubt, a major contributing factor for why the filmmakers made the determination that they made.
Let's start with their official position:
Here's the quote from the old KoK official site (which is now gone BTW):
"While our movie focuses on the rivalry between Billy and Steve, one other gamer has a very high-score in the Twin Galaxies database on Donkey Kong, Tim Sczerby. After repeated investigations into the validity of Tim's score, and after finding one dead end after another in our Twin-Galaxies-assisted attempts to reach Mr. Sczerby, we determined that his consistently disputed record was impossible to verify and did not merit inclusion in the film. The experts on the subject of Donkey Kong, especially Brian Kuh, always referred to Billy Mitchell as the reigning champion and maintained that his unrivaled skill put him on top of the record holder chart."
So are they telling the truth, or is this smoke-screening bullshit?
The cynical view is that it's bullshit, but it's not that simple.
Some direct quotes from the movie:
Greg Bond:
"Steve deserves a lot of credit for that because he also... He also broke the record on Donkey Kong Jr. So he--he took two--He took two of Billy's titles, like, right away from him. And l don't mean to sound, you know, crude or anything. But he did. He did. Officially, he did."
Brian Kuh:
"Um, for years and years, it was believed that Billy's record of 874,000 in 1982 was really the highest score anyone would ever get. And in fact, some of us have played this game every day or every week or every month since then, and no one's gotten close to that."
Roy Shildt:
"That was the last world record that Bill ever had. That was the last one to go. He had five world records in 1985, he had the Donkey Kong, and then Steve Wiebe took it away."
Billy Mitchell:
"The people who could get, besides myself, that have been seen getting to the end of Donkey Kong? Gee, now that I think about it, I don't think anybody has."
And then we have Robert Mruczek, quoted earlier in this thread, who didn't exactly give your score a ringing endorsement. He talks about it in this shadowy, mysterious way: "I've never seen it, I don't know who verified it," etc.
With how suspicious Robert tends to be about everything and everyone who isn't known to the scene, I would not be surprised if he had an off-camera discussion with the filmmakers where he cast doubt on the score.
In any case, that's five people from the scene who say, in no uncertain terms, that Steve was the one to take Billy's 1982 record.
That doesn't make it true of course, but THE FILMMAKERS WERE RELYING ON THESE PEOPLE FOR THEIR INFORMATION.
When they hear "Billy was the champion until Steve came along", from one person after another, is it not understandable for them to come to the conclusion that this might be true? When not a single person from the scene acknowledged you (until of course after the movie came out and everybody in it wanted to complain about how "inaccurate" it was for pointing cameras at them as they said things that they later found embarrassing), what did you expect the filmmakers to do, other than to decide that it was probably best to stick to what they could be sure of, and steer clear of your score?
Or were all of those quotes scripted? What, was everybody in on the conspiracy?
It wasn't a conspiracy, and there was no malice either. People either didn't realize, didn't care, or had forgotten that you'd beaten Billy.
Even in this very tight-knit DK community, not everybody is aware of everything (to put it mildly). I see over and over, and am often surprised by, how much gets missed. The extent to which you have to smash people over the head with even the simplest things to actually get them into everybody's line of sight can be very frustrating.
In any case, not everybody always knows who beat whom, where everybody stands on every high score list, etc. It's a lot to keep track of.
The Donkey Kong world record was not on many peoples' radars in 2000. CAG as a whole was very "sleepy" at the time. Beating a (top-hammer only) world record by 5K was not huge news, and at least a couple of the people I quoted probably weren't even aware that it had happened.
Nobody sent Greg Bond or Roy Shildt or Brian Kuh certified letters letting them know that you had squeaked past Billy (and even if they had, all of them knew that Billy's PB was higher than 879K anyway).
And then in 2003 the "Billy vs. Steve" thing started, which was not, by the way, manufactured by the filmmakers. It was exaggerated and stylized a little, and simplified a lot, but it was definitely underway long before the movie was even a concept.
This interview is from Classic Gaming Expo, 2004 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4). Two years before KoK. You were not mentioned in this interview either.
(Incidentally, Billy got 933K live at that very event, putting both Steve and Billy way ahead of you by the time the documentary got rolling.)
Skip to 13:00. Steve describes his history with DK.
Wiebe:
"I was scoring in the 900 thousands, encountered this kill screen, I go, 'well I have to get to that level again to see what happens'. The next time I got there I had two men so I was killed twice. So then I said, 'well what's the point of continuing?', that's probably what Billy thought. So I sold it, and I was always curious what the high score was so I looked on the Internet, about 5 years ago, and Twin Galaxies had a list of scores, and I saw it was 874,000 by Billy Mitchell... and I said 'well, I know I can beat 874,000' so I went and I bought another machine off Ebay."
Steve isn't lying or covering you up here because this interview is from 2004 and he said that he checked out the record 5 years before, which would be 1999, before you came along, and when Billy was still on top.
And again, he's saying this before any movie of any kind had ever been thought of, so he's not strategically avoiding mention of you for the purpose of some grand scheme. There was no cover-up, because at that point there was no reason to cover anything up. Steve bought the machine and went after Junior and DK with the understanding that it was Billy's scores he was coming after. You came along inbetween.
Also, at 14:05, Steve says he bought his first DK machine in 1990, meaning that he was scoring in the 900Ks in 1990. Ten years before you took down Billy's 1982 score. I've said this before and I'll say it again: you never had the highest DK score, and you were not the first to beat Billy. Just because you appeared at the top of the TG list for a few years doesn't mean that you were the true record holder. This really is important.
In fact, omitting your score is not so much a lie as a simplification, one that actually serves the truth. The real-world fact is that Steve was ahead of you the whole time. They did a lot of condensing of reality in that movie, like combining what was actually four world record submissions into one, because it was completely necessary to do that in an 80-minute film aimed at non-CAG people who don't want to hear a bunch of boring details about Double Donkey Kong that they can't even understand.
So there you go. Ed and Seth didn't think that you were a significant part of this because the community didn't regard you as a significant part of this. Most in the community were (evidently) either unaware of you, or had forgotten you by the time the documentary got rolling. Given the circumstances of what was happening then between Billy and Steve, it's not hard to see why.
-
I've actually been working on a shot-by-shot, line-by-line analysis of everything inaccurate or questionable in this movie.
What's incredible so far isn't how many items I'm finding, but how few.
It's freaking staggering how much CAG people exaggerate this movie's "fraudulence."
I should post the spreadsheet that Robert Mruczek sent me, which is basically a list of shot-continuity errors, mismatched B-roll audio, and things people on-camera are saying. You haven't lived until you've seen Robert argue with Roy Shildt through Excel.
-
Ya, what Chris said.
To summarize...
You have been told MANY times why you were left out of the movie, you just dont believe it. There is nothing compelling or entertaining about you, your score or your part in the history of Donkey Kong.
-
Oh no you didunt!
The best reverse-trolling is always done through simple logic and facts! Love it, Chris! ;D
-
There are actually 2 places in KoK where Tim Sczerby is "in" the film. Shortly after Wiebe set the live score at Funspot:
1- Brian Kuh says: "Steve Wiebe has become the third person to reach Donkey Kong's kill screen." In fact, in an early release of the KoK, there was a caption saying Wiebe was actually the 2nd. This inconsistency is what clued me into discovering Tim the first time I watched KoK.
2- When Walter is entering Wiebe's new score into the database, a snapshot of the TG scoreboard appears for a couple of frames. You can see Tim Sczerby's name if you pause at the right time.
Anyhow this does show that the producers/editors were aware of Tim Sczerby's existence and that (at least one of) the players did acknowledge Wiebe wasn't the one who beat Billy's score. My personal theory is that Tim was edited out to make for a better and simpler story. It's a much more compelling rivalry without a 3rd wheel.
-
Wow, Chris, that is an awesome post. I honestly did not know some of that stuff and to be honest I need to go through it again. :) Without knowing all of that stuff I could not logically address any particular argument, all I could do was to address the mannerism involved. Thank you Chris, I actually like this thread now. Tim troll along so we can look at this logically together. :D Perhaps I should have had more faith in the communities ability to address this situation. Sorry for the poll, lol.
-
Hank, just for the record on that "the third person" line, if you listen to the audio commentary on the DVD during that scene, Seth Gordon says that Brian Kuh was referring to himself there. (According to Seth, Brian was claiming to have done it in private, but he wanted to be the first to do it at Funspot.) Take that with a grain of salt, because I have no idea if he was right, but according to Seth, Brian was talking about himself.
I have to admit, it makes sense to me. Does Brian seem like the kind of guy who (at the time) would acknowledge anyone other than Billy or himself as a top DK player? He had a chip on his shoulder about it from the minute Steve walked into Funspot. "He'd like to tell you that he's the Donkey Kong champion, but all of us have not seen him play Donkey Kong." (And, of course, the silly backroom dissection of Steve's gameplay that we all saw on YouTube, which any KS-capable player should have known was totally legit, unless their judgment was clouded. "This isn't Level 5 behavior!" Oh please. You may have a point with the extra joystick clicks, but a room full of gaming experts, including Brian, seriously couldn't recognize that the barrels were properly "aggressive" on L5, or acknowledge that wild barrels can be leeched safely? GTFO.)
I've also seen that early screener cut (go to 56 seconds in on this clip (https://youtube.com/watch?v=k4mNx8DGKWk) for anybody who wants to watch), and yes, they (wisely) deleted that onscreen caption from the final cut. Maybe they didn't want to accuse Brian of lying, or for some other reason, but it was definitely the right thing to do.
Steve Wiebe mentioned (maybe it was during his talk a couple months ago at that event in Washington(?) that there's actually a longer version of the movie that exists somewhere, just not publicly. Like a 2-hour cut with Double Donkey Kong and everything. That, obviously, is a holy grail.
The producers were definitely aware of Tim. I'm certainly not disputing that! But the fact of the matter is that you have several people in the movie saying, on camera, and with no possibility of editing, "Steve was the first to beat Billy". It wasn't just those onscreen graphics. So I just can't hold "the usual suspects" (KoK producers, Walter, Billy, Steve) solely responsible. The community clearly didn't assure the movie guys that Tim was legit. When nobody is talking about Tim, and Robert is expressing skepticism about Tim's tape because he never saw it, what are the filmmakers supposed to conclude, other than it was, indeed, "consistently disputed"?
I honestly believe that the omission happened in good faith, or at least, not in bad faith. Everybody just plain dropped the ball.
And while it definitely made the movie better, and definitely figured into their decision (since it's their job to make the best movie they can) the fact remains that Tim never actually had the highest DK score!
Let's say Hank had never officially submitted his 1,138,600, but it was known and acknowledged that it happened, even uploaded to YouTube or something, and Vincent had beaten his 1,127,700 score last January when he got 1,135,900. Vincent would have been "the world record holder" on TG, but would anybody have considered him the actual world record holder?
Leaving Tim out was just shorthand for the fact that Steve (and Billy) had beaten Tim long before Tim got the "record."
-
Attached is Robert Mruczek's report on Steve's original 947K submission from July 2003.
Search through this PDF and you will find no mention of Tim Sczerby (but several of Billy).
Again, in an article about a record that Steve is taking FROM TIM, *Robert doesn't even mention Tim's name*, and this is years before KoK is a gleam in anybody's eye. Seriously, blame Hollywood all you want, but the community had a major part in this.
-
Attached is Robert Mruczek's report on Steve's original 947K submission from July 2003.
"Overall, Steve's average per "Elevator Stage" was approx 9,300, adjusted for loss of life."
Somebody call Dean; there's another 37k to be had just on the springs! 8)
-
Also, "mine carts." :D
WTF Robert??
-
Leaving Tim out was just shorthand for the fact that Steve (and Billy) had beaten Tim long before Tim got the "record."
I don't want to muddy the waters, but since MAME has become pretty important in the evolution of this game (yeah, yeah...insert derogatory comment from the arcade purists here) it should also be noted that Ben Jos Walbeehm posted a 893,400 score on MARP on September 12, 1999. Donkey Kong was added to the MAME games list on February 13, 1997.
Ben Jos discusses the effect his 893k (September 12, 1999) and 904k (November 30, 2001) scores had on the DK community here:
http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,1437.msg23404.html#msg23404 (http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,1437.msg23404.html#msg23404)
The INPs for those two games are attached to this post. If any one can get the older MAME versions working so I can watch them, let me know. ;D
MAME version for 893k game, according to MARP: win35
MAME version for 904k game, according to MARP: m35tg3b
-
They should have called it a Donkeymentary.
-
They should have called it a Donkeymentary.
This play on word brings me tears to my eyes. It takes a genius to think about that! ;)
-
Ben Jos discusses the effect his 893k (September 12, 1999) and 904k (November 30, 2001) scores had on the DK community here:
http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,1437.msg23404.html#msg23404 (http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,1437.msg23404.html#msg23404)
The INPs for those two games are attached to this post. If any one can get the older MAME versions working so I can watch them, let me know. ;D
Ben Jos's 904,100 game*:
http://www.twitch.tv/stormdata/b/470396183 (http://www.twitch.tv/stormdata/b/470396183)
http://www.twitch.tv/stormdata/b/470400789 (http://www.twitch.tv/stormdata/b/470400789) (from 5-3)
*replayed with m35tg3b.exe in Windows 98 :)
-
Hank, just for the record on that "the third person" line, if you listen to the audio commentary on the DVD during that scene, Seth Gordon says that Brian Kuh was referring to himself there. (According to Seth, Brian was claiming to have done it in private, but he wanted to be the first to do it at Funspot.) Take that with a grain of salt, because I have no idea if he was right, but according to Seth, Brian was talking about himself.
When Vincent, Craig, and myself met Brian Kuh at Funspot this past tournament, he actually brought that up. He told us that he hit the killscreen in 2000 I believe, and it was done on his machine at home. He wanted to be the first at Funspot and he was a serious contender at the time. I believed him, because he said that about hitting the kill screen in such a sure way. But then he was afraid to tell us little things like how he once jumped 3 fireballs and said he had to check his notes first. Obviously now he doesn't go to Funspot other than the tournament and he doesnt post on the internet, so some things I guess we will never know.
-
Tim, I'm not going to argue about the process and philosophy behind storytelling and filmmaking, because a person can only discern that kind of stuff themselves. Nobody is going to convince you, with the bias that you have, that it made artistic sense to omit you from the movie. You either get that or you don't. No argument can transmit that understanding. And while I don't know what the "legal" definition of a documentary is, I know that it is not the responsibility of a documentary to be encyclopedic or comprehensive. Documentary filmmaking is an art, not a science.
You asked for fact-based rationale behind why you were omitted, so I'll be more black-and-white about it. You can ignore the facts or engage them, up to you, I'm just posting this for your edification because it's been a while since anyone introduced anything new to this discussion, at least in terms of specifics and primary sources (though some great points are being made).
In any case, you need to stop dropping the entirety of the blame on Ed and Seth for your score not being mentioned. Not only are they not solely responsible, I would go further to say that, of all the players involved, they were probably the LEAST responsible.
The fact of the matter is this: while the filmmakers didn't acknowledge you, the people in the scene didn't acknowledge you either, and that is, without a doubt, a major contributing factor for why the filmmakers made the determination that they made.
Let's start with their official position:
Here's the quote from the old KoK official site (which is now gone BTW):
"While our movie focuses on the rivalry between Billy and Steve, one other gamer has a very high-score in the Twin Galaxies database on Donkey Kong, Tim Sczerby. After repeated investigations into the validity of Tim's score, and after finding one dead end after another in our Twin-Galaxies-assisted attempts to reach Mr. Sczerby, we determined that his consistently disputed record was impossible to verify and did not merit inclusion in the film. The experts on the subject of Donkey Kong, especially Brian Kuh, always referred to Billy Mitchell as the reigning champion and maintained that his unrivaled skill put him on top of the record holder chart."
So are they telling the truth, or is this smoke-screening bullshit?
The cynical view is that it's bullshit, but it's not that simple.
Some direct quotes from the movie:
Greg Bond:
"Steve deserves a lot of credit for that because he also... He also broke the record on Donkey Kong Jr. So he--he took two--He took two of Billy's titles, like, right away from him. And l don't mean to sound, you know, crude or anything. But he did. He did. Officially, he did."
Brian Kuh:
"Um, for years and years, it was believed that Billy's record of 874,000 in 1982 was really the highest score anyone would ever get. And in fact, some of us have played this game every day or every week or every month since then, and no one's gotten close to that."
Roy Shildt:
"That was the last world record that Bill ever had. That was the last one to go. He had five world records in 1985, he had the Donkey Kong, and then Steve Wiebe took it away."
Billy Mitchell:
"The people who could get, besides myself, that have been seen getting to the end of Donkey Kong? Gee, now that I think about it, I don't think anybody has."
And then we have Robert Mruczek, quoted earlier in this thread, who didn't exactly give your score a ringing endorsement. He talks about it in this shadowy, mysterious way: "I've never seen it, I don't know who verified it," etc.
With how suspicious Robert tends to be about everything and everyone who isn't known to the scene, I would not be surprised if he had an off-camera discussion with the filmmakers where he cast doubt on the score.
In any case, that's five people from the scene who say, in no uncertain terms, that Steve was the one to take Billy's 1982 record.
That doesn't make it true of course, but THE FILMMAKERS WERE RELYING ON THESE PEOPLE FOR THEIR INFORMATION.
When they hear "Billy was the champion until Steve came along", from one person after another, is it not understandable for them to come to the conclusion that this might be true? When not a single person from the scene acknowledged you (until of course after the movie came out and everybody in it wanted to complain about how "inaccurate" it was for pointing cameras at them as they said things that they later found embarrassing), what did you expect the filmmakers to do, other than to decide that it was probably best to stick to what they could be sure of, and steer clear of your score?
Or were all of those quotes scripted? What, was everybody in on the conspiracy?
It wasn't a conspiracy, and there was no malice either. People either didn't realize, didn't care, or had forgotten that you'd beaten Billy.
Even in this very tight-knit DK community, not everybody is aware of everything (to put it mildly). I see over and over, and am often surprised by, how much gets missed. The extent to which you have to smash people over the head with even the simplest things to actually get them into everybody's line of sight can be very frustrating.
In any case, not everybody always knows who beat whom, where everybody stands on every high score list, etc. It's a lot to keep track of.
The Donkey Kong world record was not on many peoples' radars in 2000. CAG as a whole was very "sleepy" at the time. Beating a (top-hammer only) world record by 5K was not huge news, and at least a couple of the people I quoted probably weren't even aware that it had happened.
Nobody sent Greg Bond or Roy Shildt or Brian Kuh certified letters letting them know that you had squeaked past Billy (and even if they had, all of them knew that Billy's PB was higher than 879K anyway).
And then in 2003 the "Billy vs. Steve" thing started, which was not, by the way, manufactured by the filmmakers. It was exaggerated and stylized a little, and simplified a lot, but it was definitely underway long before the movie was even a concept.
This interview is from Classic Gaming Expo, 2004 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pw1QTGamo4). Two years before KoK. You were not mentioned in this interview either.
(Incidentally, Billy got 933K live at that very event, putting both Steve and Billy way ahead of you by the time the documentary got rolling.)
Skip to 13:00. Steve describes his history with DK.
Wiebe:
"I was scoring in the 900 thousands, encountered this kill screen, I go, 'well I have to get to that level again to see what happens'. The next time I got there I had two men so I was killed twice. So then I said, 'well what's the point of continuing?', that's probably what Billy thought. So I sold it, and I was always curious what the high score was so I looked on the Internet, about 5 years ago, and Twin Galaxies had a list of scores, and I saw it was 874,000 by Billy Mitchell... and I said 'well, I know I can beat 874,000' so I went and I bought another machine off Ebay."
Steve isn't lying or covering you up here because this interview is from 2004 and he said that he checked out the record 5 years before, which would be 1999, before you came along, and when Billy was still on top.
And again, he's saying this before any movie of any kind had ever been thought of, so he's not strategically avoiding mention of you for the purpose of some grand scheme. There was no cover-up, because at that point there was no reason to cover anything up. Steve bought the machine and went after Junior and DK with the understanding that it was Billy's scores he was coming after. You came along inbetween.
Also, at 14:05, Steve says he bought his first DK machine in 1990, meaning that he was scoring in the 900Ks in 1990. Ten years before you took down Billy's 1982 score. I've said this before and I'll say it again: you never had the highest DK score, and you were not the first to beat Billy. Just because you appeared at the top of the TG list for a few years doesn't mean that you were the true record holder. This really is important.
In fact, omitting your score is not so much a lie as a simplification, one that actually serves the truth. The real-world fact is that Steve was ahead of you the whole time. They did a lot of condensing of reality in that movie, like combining what was actually four world record submissions into one, because it was completely necessary to do that in an 80-minute film aimed at non-CAG people who don't want to hear a bunch of boring details about Double Donkey Kong that they can't even understand.
So there you go. Ed and Seth didn't think that you were a significant part of this because the community didn't regard you as a significant part of this. Most in the community were (evidently) either unaware of you, or had forgotten you by the time the documentary got rolling. Given the circumstances of what was happening then between Billy and Steve, it's not hard to see why.
Why was my previous post on this where I just shreaded your arguments here deleted?
-
Wow, Chris, that is an awesome post. I honestly did not know some of that stuff and to be honest I need to go through it again. :) Without knowing all of that stuff I could not logically address any particular argument, all I could do was to address the mannerism involved. Thank you Chris, I actually like this thread now. Tim troll along so we can look at this logically together. :D Perhaps I should have had more faith in the communities ability to address this situation. Sorry for the poll, lol.
Too bad my response to it got deleted as I blew his awesome post right out.
-
Wow, Chris, that is an awesome post. I honestly did not know some of that stuff and to be honest I need to go through it again. :) Without knowing all of that stuff I could not logically address any particular argument, all I could do was to address the mannerism involved. Thank you Chris, I actually like this thread now. Tim troll along so we can look at this logically together. :D Perhaps I should have had more faith in the communities ability to address this situation. Sorry for the poll, lol.
Chris your post was crap as I just nailed every argument you gave with facts but for some reason it got deleted. I will take the time to respond again.
Too bad my response to it got deleted as I blew his awesome post right out.
-
Chris your post was crap as I just nailed every argument you gave with facts but for some reason it got deleted. I will take the time to respond again.
I'm literally giddy with anticipation, like a drunk school girl on prom night (without the tears).
-
Why was my previous post on this where I just shreaded your arguments here deleted?
No posts have been deleted from this thread.
-
Why was my previous post on this where I just shreaded your arguments here deleted?
No posts have been deleted from this thread.
Then why did my post showing step by step disassembling every aspect of Chrip's argument not show when I posted. I will take the time to do it again.
-
Why was my previous post on this where I just shreaded your arguments here deleted?
No posts have been deleted from this thread.
Then why did my post showing step by step disassembling every aspect of Chrip's argument not show when I posted. I will take the time to do it again.
It's possible that there was a server hiccup as you were posting or maybe you hit the "Preview" button instead of "Post"?
It's a good idea to make very long posts in Word or Notepad and then copy and paste them in the forum when ready to post.
-
Hank, just for the record on that "the third person" line, if you listen to the audio commentary on the DVD during that scene, Seth Gordon says that Brian Kuh was referring to himself there. (According to Seth, Brian was claiming to have done it in private, but he wanted to be the first to do it at Funspot.) Take that with a grain of salt, because I have no idea if he was right, but according to Seth, Brian was talking about himself.
I still maintain that Brian Kuh was probably referring to Tim as the third person to killscreen DK. Obviously the only that truly knows is Brian himself and that's a question someone should probably ask him. My reasoning:
1- If Brian Kuh was referring to himself as the third person, there would have never been a caption saying that Steve was actually the 2nd. Certainly the camera person/filmmaker would have asked Brian 'Who was the third?' and Brian would have cleared the air by saying it's himself. The fact that a caption was placed later indicates the editors felt Brian was wrong (which by the above reasoning can't be) or they were excluding Tim intentionally.
2- The KoK producers inserted their own scoreboard throughout the film (see [noembed]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWaQhChOH_U[/noembed] at 0:40). They include Brian's 2001 score and Leo's 2004 score. Certainly they would have seen Tim's score which was set before both of these scores. They not only excluded Tim but several other players (there were several 700K official scores as well). I believe they made the scoreboard look like that to make it seem like no one was even close.
I do agree that the players' statements throughout the film exclude Tim. This is probably because Tim only beat Billy's score by a small margin and also there was no back and forth between the 2, so most players probably still considered Billy the better player (given that he did it 17 years earlier and did it live).
As for when Brian killscreened, I'm not sure. I do believe he has killscreened, but his statements as to when seem inconsistent. I don't believe Brian killscreened before KoK was filmed. My reasoning:
1- One of the KoK postscripts is: "Brian Kuh is still in pursuit of his 1st DK KS." Again I'm sure Brian would have bragged to everyone while filming if he had indeed killscreened.
2- Brian even says himself: "And in fact, some of us have played this game every day or every week or every month since then, and no one's gotten close to that." The statement seems to imply that he is in fact one of those people. Again if he had killscreened before filming, I'm sure he would have considered his own score 'close.'
We should probably ask Brian directly who he was referring to as the third person. If he says himself I'd ask him 'What about Tim?' Brian certainly must have known about Tim's score being the DK guru that he is.
EDIT: You cannot rely on the producers' commentary as they are the ones we are accusing of excluding Tim.
-
In any case, you need to stop dropping the entirety of the blame on Ed and Seth for your score not being mentioned. Not only are they not solely responsible, I would go further to say that, of all the players involved, they were probably the LEAST responsible.
Chris, you make a reasonable argument, but I'm not buying that Ed and Seth aren't culpable.
Back in August 2007, I thought I'd check the reasonableness of the producers stated claim that, "After repeated investigations into the validity of Tim's score, and after finding one dead end after another in our Twin-Galaxies-assisted attempts to reach Mr. Sczerby, we determined that his consistently disputed record was impossible to verify and did not merit inclusion in the film."
Finding Tim was very easy, in large part because his last name is very unusual. In google, I searched on "Sczerby" and the first hit was his VAPS member profile which included his current email. It took me a couple of minutes to find him and he replied to an email I sent him within a day. I posted about this on the CAG forums back in '07: http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,174.msg1773.html#msg1773 (http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,174.msg1773.html#msg1773)
http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,291.msg1801.html#msg1801 (http://www.classicarcadegaming.com/forums/index.php/topic,291.msg1801.html#msg1801)
I'm still convinced that since it made a better story to leave Tim out, that's what the producers did and the whole bit about him being impossible to find and it being impossible to verify his score was an after the fact rationalization to defend the omission.
I'm not saying Tim should have had any role in the film (or been paid for anything), but they shouldn't have edited his scores out of the historical high score lists they showed and written him out of history. A main theme of the movie was how wrong it was that "The Man" refused to recognize Steve's scores and give them credit, and then that's exactly what the movie did to Tim's score. Just reeks of hypocrisy to me.
-George
-
I think that they left out those other 700k scores to keep the story and competition between the characters in the film. It's also possible that the producers didnt get permission from those players and wanted to avoid any legal issues or paying for rights.