What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?

[Mary McManus]

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.

[homerwannabee]

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.

[Svavar]

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?

[Mary McManus]

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.

[Mary McManus]

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.

[homerwannabee]

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?

[Mary McManus]

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.

[LMDAVE]

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.

[Mary McManus]

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"

[homerwannabee]

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?

[LMDAVE]

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/

[Xermon54]

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!

[Svavar]

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

[lakeman421]

Here we go again.  Everyone open wide so these already known facts can keep getting crammed down our throats.

[homerwannabee]

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.