The King of Kong

If it weren't for the sincerity of it all- or maybe because of it- King of Kong could be conceived of as a mockumentary. But there's no joking with these guys, which sometimes makes it a lot of fun to watch the competition between Billy Mitchell and Steve Weebie (right way to say the name?), where sycophants and idiosyncrasies fly on the former's self-spun empire/network and on the latter just your average suburban housewife and kids going somewhat begrudgingly along the ride. It's a saga though not just about them, but about the world of gaming, of the mind-set that pervades everyone from lawyers to 'Roy Awesome' to little old ladies competing at Qubert, and the nature of competition itself. Not since Rocky- and maybe even better in its exuberance and humility- has one seen a tale of the underdog and the king played out in odds that should seem somewhat silly.

But what's so amazing is how first-time director Seth Gordon plunges the viewer into this world, and it's immediately recognizable to anyone over 18 and under, well, 55 to 100- anyone who's ever gone to play one of the "old-school" arcade games like Donkey Kong or Pacman/Mrs. Pacman or even Pong. We see how the players have to not just go into the games haphazardly by luck; like football, there's game-plans and strategies, and like that sport there are also some obstacles that are apart of the nature of the design of the sport. There's a whole incredible facet one takes for granted, for example, about the technology of the machines, which despite being eclipsed many times over by new systems can still be tampered with, as is the case with Steve's first machine that reaches the top score, and then discredited because of a chip possibly (or not) being replaced or implanted in to give leverage at a non-gamer store.

Yet the more slippery side-stepping for players is what's even more intriguing. Characterization can be a tricky thing for the documentary director to deal with, but in King of Kong it becomes something of a controversy left by the wayside as Billy surpasses Steve's score with a game he played recorded on videotape- while Steve set his score by an official Twin Galaxies referee (Walter Day, to be exact, who's a character in and of himself)- with more than a few skips right were the score should register. Saying it skims the line of reality and mockumentary comes with the territory- after a while watching Mitchell is like watching someone who's improvising as he goes along, hiding behind his perfectionist guise as a world-class champ and purveyor of fine hot sauces with his fake-buxom wife and lackeys watching every move Steve makes.

Aside from it being compelling storytelling as one sees the transformation of Steve from failed baseball pitcher and drummer to a Donkey Kong (and Donkey Kong Junior) champ, making all-time high scores while his kids cry about their poor behinds, it's one of the best kinds of sport-genre features in years. Many times one sees this played out, and it's been parodied in the likes of Dodgeball ("Nobody makes me bleed my own blood" came to mind once or twice looking at Mitchell, and his smart but biased cronies are like classic supporting characters), and the clichés and conventions get the better of the narrative. This time there's no pressure to push it into what's expected: we genuinely care what happens in this battle of the joystick, as Steve sheds genuine tears playing his ass off at all accounts of live events whilst Billy sulks away in his living room hearing the updates on his phone.

As far as triumph-of-the-human-spirit stories go, King of Kong is hilarious entertainment, sometimes for all the strangest (Day's would-be musical career) and silliest reasons (what's so special about the Guiness book of records, Steve's daughter asks), but engrossing as documentaries should get- one of the best of the year in fact.

Maybe the best documentary I have seen in years... A must-see for anyone who loves rooting for the underdog. King of Kong tells the story of two men competing for the highest all-time score in the arcade classic Donkey Kong. Seth Gordon skillfully explores this whole American subculture of die-hard classic video gamers. The fact that this is all real (as opposed to a Christopher Guest style mockumentary) makes it all the more hilarious, but above all this is a true story of inspiration that should appeal to anyone regardless of whether they know anything about video games. In a country dominated by politically-fused documentary/movie propaganda, we need more films like this to remind us of how wonderfully weird we can be. Michael Moore eat your heart out.

This movie proves two things: 1), a documentary really can be about anything, and 2), movies aren't always what they're about, but how they are about, as Ebert puts it. This movie begins by retracing the early video game craze of the early 80's, and it focuses on the 20 year plus record-holder of the highest score ever for 'Donkey Kong'. His name is Billy Mitchell, and he's the Michael Jackson or the Wayne Gretzky of the video gaming world. We learn of other players who helped to define the era, one who no longer plays but gives much of his time away by refereeing video game competitions. Perhaps all that would've made for an interesting doc in it's own right, but in walks Steve Wiebe, a pretty normal guy with a wife and two kids, and we learn how he got into video gaming after a handful of setbacks in his life. As it becomes clear to us that Wiebe is an amazing player in his own right, politics enter the picture and we end up with a fascinating study about the nature of people that gets beyond simple competitiveness and digs a little deeper into the psyches of how we perceive our own selves. I'm so happy to have run into this title. You don't have to be interested or know anything about video games to really care about this movie.

The best movie I've seen this year! I laughed to the point of exhaustion. I'd recommend it to anyone with a heartbeat. Must see!The only thing I can't get over is that this Billy Mitchell guy is a real person. I mean you can't make up a character like this. And Steve Weibe... how humble can you get. I mean the guy is the poster child for humility. (Okay so here is where I admit that I actually know Steve personally. Thing is, he actually IS this humble. No lie. For his recent 20 year high school reunion he listed as his proudest accomplishment: "recieving my teacher's certificate", no mention of Donkey Kong. Now that's the kind of hero everyone should look up to. Especially anyone with a huge ego. And lord knows there are enough of those to go around. So don't walk, RUN to the movie theater and see this movie. You won't regret it. (Just make sure you use the bathroom before the movie starts, you won't want to miss a second!)

As entertainment, King of Kong is quite good, portraying a strange insular world of video game fanatics and a good vs. evil story of a scrappy newcomer fighting to win the record from its sleazy holder.

But as a documentary, it is quite possible that almost everything in it has been twisted in pretzels to fabricate a story.

After I saw the documentary I looked in up on wikipedia, where I saw some fairly shocking claims regarding what the movie altered and left out. I went to the Twin Galaxies website and read more.

Of course, since Twin Galaxies and Billy Mitchell (I found an interview with him in AV Club) are portrayed negatively in the movie there's a possibility that they aren't telling the truth, but since some of the most important claims would be common knowledge within the classic arcade gaming community, they would ruin their reputation by lying, and be instantly refuted, so I have to lean towards believing them.

This is quite frustrating. The movie is entertaining. And it is fascinating to see how seriously people take this tiny little world. But if what Twin Galaxies claims is true, then I was totally mislead on what was going on, and I basically can't trust a single thing in the movie.

Documentaries, in my opinion, should strive to tell the truth more than to tell a good story. King of Kong tells a good story, but its relationship to the truth is highly suspect.