Author Topic: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?  (Read 41389 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mary McManus

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 180
    • Awards
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #105 on: October 15, 2013, 11:50:21 am »
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.
Member for 11 Years CK Killscreener DK 1M Point Scorer DK Killscreener Former DK World Record Holder - Arcade

corky

  • Guest
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #106 on: October 15, 2013, 11:53:58 am »
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).

Offline JCHarrist

  • Spring Jumper
  • *
  • Posts: 643
    • Donkey Kong Forum
    • Awards
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #107 on: October 15, 2013, 11:54:18 am »
Why was my previous post on this where I just shreaded your arguments here deleted?

No posts have been deleted from this thread.
Member for 11 Years DKF Founder Former CK World Record Holder - Arcade CK Killscreener DK Killscreener

Offline Mary McManus

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 180
    • Awards
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #108 on: October 15, 2013, 11:59:41 am »
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.
Member for 11 Years CK Killscreener DK 1M Point Scorer DK Killscreener Former DK World Record Holder - Arcade

Offline JCHarrist

  • Spring Jumper
  • *
  • Posts: 643
    • Donkey Kong Forum
    • Awards
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #109 on: October 15, 2013, 12:13:11 pm »
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.
Member for 11 Years DKF Founder Former CK World Record Holder - Arcade CK Killscreener DK Killscreener

hchien

  • Guest
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #110 on: October 15, 2013, 05:13:30 pm »
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.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 05:21:25 pm by hchien »

Offline gstrain

  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 211
    • Awards
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #111 on: October 15, 2013, 06:02:34 pm »
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,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
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 06:16:37 pm by gstrain »
Member for 11 Years DK3 Repetitive Blue Screener IGBY 2014 DKF Team Member Twitch Streamer

lakeman421

  • Guest
Re: What is a "Documentary"? What is its legal definition?
« Reply #112 on: October 15, 2013, 06:24:05 pm »
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.