Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Patrick and how Clueless he is both on KOK and film plots in general

Patrick Scott Patterson
20 February near Denton, TX
Noticed that the Wikipedia page for Donkey Kong says the following:

"The original game was the focus of the 2007 documentary The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters."

I have to assume this was added/edited by someone who plays the game.

It's not even close to true.

The King of Kong film focused on the stories of two people (or at least the stories the way they chose to show them). It's focus was on a "common man versus the system" story... a "man versus machine" thing... good versus evil.

Donkey Kong was just the window dressing. It wasn't why the film was made nor why it caught on with the mainstream. It could have been any pop culture-relevant thing these two people were feuding over... with the same story laid out in the same fashion... and it still would have caught on.

The King of Kong wasn't about Donkey Kong. It was about people.

And in a nutshell you have what I have always felt was wrong with a large segment of the "community" that surrounds (yes, present tense) Twin Galaxies.
Like · 
  • 20 people like this.
  • Cat DeSpira Thank you. I was about to pop my Italian cork over much of that nonsense.
    20 February at 14:29 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer Any updates on the twin galaxies web site? Looks like they let the domain name registration slide.
    20 February at 14:31 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I know more than some, less that others... but also not my place to comment on jack. I figure that's for others to answer when they can.
    20 February at 14:35 · Like
  • Cat DeSpira I'm not saying a thing.
    20 February at 14:36 · Like
  • Zoe Howard Wiki was a bad resource made by good promoters. Lol its best to ignore it. Lol
    20 February at 14:37 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Also not the point of my post, Kurt, with all due respect. Was attempting to make a point. This is same mindset that paints me in some eyes as a guy who "reports on world records" rather than a guy who tells the stories of the people who might (or might not have) done such a thing. The game is almost never the focus. The person is.
    20 February at 14:39 · Edited · Like · 5
  • Kurt Mäyer Just wondered if you knew, thanks.
    20 February at 14:55 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson If it was appropriate for me to say what I may or may not know... I would have already done so.
    20 February at 14:57 · Like
  • William McEvoy Scott, you should simply update the article. That is what I do when I find factually incorrect statements.
    20 February at 15:07 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson 1. I have my own project at the moment. 2. If I updated one Wiki article about video games that has errors, I'd have to do them all. I'd be there until I was 109 years of age.
    20 February at 15:08 · Like · 4
  • Cat DeSpira Seriously...
    20 February at 15:14 · Like · 3
  • Kurt Mäyer I think you are picking nits here. The focus of the winter Olympics is the athletic competition. What draws you in deeper are the human interest stories. Same thing for King of Kong.
    20 February at 15:18 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I couldn't disagree more. Neither does NBC, in your example... or they wouldn't spend time selling you on the human interest stories in order to get you to watch the events. Proven in the ratings that viewers tune in to watch specific people, not events without people they are interested in. The King of Kong was a Rocky/Karate Kid story... made even more obvious with the choice of Rocky/Karate Kid music and even more obvious with the fact that they dumped a lot of factual information from the movie in order to paint said picture. DK was the backdrop... not the focus
    20 February at 15:40 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer We actually agree. Donkey Kong was the plot device or focus. But you need human interest to get eyeballs. That's how all good movies are. A good movie needs you to care.
    20 February at 15:49 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Donkey Kong was the window dressing. Take the same personalities and narrative and add in anything competitive and you would have/could have had the same exact story. Nobody got into that movie because of an old video game. It wasn't about that video game. It wasn't about any video game.
    20 February at 15:52 · Like
  • Chris Psaros Good luck getting Tim Sczerby to understand this.
    20 February at 15:57 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer If you took Donkey Kong out of the movie, then it wouldn't be a Donkey Kong movie. From now on we should describe all movies as a human interaction movie.
    20 February at 16:00 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer "Speed" a human interaction story. "Godfather" a human interaction story. "Dodge Ball" a human interaction story.
    20 February at 16:02 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Not saying that, Kurt. But saying King of Kong was about Donkey Kong would be like saying Rocky was about boxing. It wasn't about boxing... it was about Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed. In fact, they are the same f'n story. You either get it or you don't, man. (As for those other fictional stories you mentioned while I was typing... yes, those are human interaction stories to an extent, too. I'm sure the actors in Speed would be upset if the bus got top billing)
    20 February at 16:04 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer Rocky is a boxing movie. The human drama is what made it a good boxing movie.
    20 February at 16:06 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson We'll never agree on this you know. Why keep on with it? Also notice that the story painted in King of Kong was the same damn story as Rocky. Both movies caught on with audiences that watch neither boxing nor care about Donkey Kong. No further since us re-posting the same stuff in re-worded form. We clearly see things from different points of view and that ain't gonna change.
    20 February at 16:08 · Edited · Like
  • Matthew Randall All I can say here is that if you really believe in the truth. Then no matter the effort when you can correct the information being passed on so it is true then do so. The more time we allow the lies or even un-truth (sorry lack of a better word) then the un-truth wins. No?
    20 February at 16:11 · Like
  • Jeff Watters Donkey Kong got me to watch the movie. By the mid-point and into the end, the stories of the people in the doc absolutely took priority. But I was drawn in solely for the DK factor initially.
    20 February at 16:13 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Chris... I've noted and backed Tim's situation numerous times over the years, noting in written and interview form that he failed to get mentioned in the film as an example of how the film left out a lot of information in effort to paint a story. I did so even as he acted out towards others. He recently tore into me anyway on social media, going personal while doing so, in spite of my efforts and the fact that he's never met me, so he can now kiss my big white ass. Please leave him out of conversation with me. Jeff - Geeks like you and me might have been interested because of DK... the mainstream public that made it popular was not. They still aren't unless you tie it to the main characters.
    20 February at 16:15 · Like · 1
  • William McEvoy As I noted in another huge thread earlier (a posting of Richie Knücklez), all one has to do to start an argument these days is mention Donkey Kong. Maybe that game is the one created by the CIA.
    20 February at 16:20 · Like
  • William McEvoy If there is a more accurate source of the world's collective knowledge, please direct me to it.
    20 February at 16:23 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Bottom line is that I deal with this every day. Ironically, the post wasn't even about Donkey Kong... it was about the point. I deal with this when I write feature stories, too. For example, Caitlin Oliver's story (randomly chosen) wasn't about her world record or the game she got it on... it was about HER. It was telling the story of the person who did that stuff. Some totally failed at seeing that and made it about the game or the record, even seeing it as a "report" or "news" when it never was. It was a human interest story. As the person who wrote it, I can assure you that is what it was about... and also why it caught on so much. She could have busted the record on ANY game and the story wouldn't have changed much if at all... and it still would have caught fire in the mainstream like it did. Same diff.
    20 February at 16:23 · Like · 2
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Not sure who that was directed to, Cragster... but since you unfriended me I'll chalk it up to being about me. Perhaps someday you might find the capability to address a complaint like a grown man. Tootles.
    20 February at 16:33 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson And I think what I like most about the apparent reaction to this opinion is that it's probably the 150th time I've posted it here or said it somewhere. Only time I've got this kind of reaction and the only time that reaction disagreed with me about it.
    20 February at 16:38 · Like
  • William McEvoy I didn't mean to stir the hornets nest. I just have really enjoyed Wikipedia over the past few years. Yes it has inaccuracies, but so did traditional encyclopedias. At least now we all can have the opportunity to correct mistakes.
    20 February at 16:47 · Like
  • Kurt Mäyer First time I saw you mention this topic, that's why it got my attention. 

    Our argument was silly. Like I mentioned earlier, we are actually in agreement... we were arguing over semantics.
    20 February at 16:49 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I don't think we are. You still feel it was about DK but the human story made it interesting. I still feel that you can take everything about the movie, replace DK and video games with Rubik's cubes or baseball or circus juggling but change NOTHING else and the movie still would have caught on in the same fashion, because you didn't change what made the movie popular and marketable.
    20 February at 16:58 · Like · 1
  • Kurt Mäyer Let's try this...

    "King of Kong centers around Donkey Kong competition, with a well-framed and developed character investigation, that gives it a broader appeal beyond the video game culture"
    20 February at 17:06 · Like
  • Aaron Laberge It is our community's willingness to fight and argue over every piece of minutia that makes it seem so hostile to outsiders. This is what I've been told again and again by people I've tried to encourage to get into the "scene", they always see it as a bunch of uptight nerds raging at one another. 

    Now that may not necessarily be the case here, but given the propensity for many people in the scene to blow things out of proportion, I cannot say it's an inaccurate assessment.
    20 February at 17:22 · Like · 1
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Well, Aaron... let me pick your brain on that for a second then. Is is the person who posts something or those who react to it in an argumentative fashion that is more at fault? From my seat... there are people who seemingly read everything I post and check out everything I do... only to scurry off somewhere else and bitch about it in a manner that is so far from the truth that I don't even know what they think they read anymore. I'm willing to bet if I looked around out there right now I'd find 1-4 remarks about me or even spoken toward me for any number of things I did or said today. I haven't even taken a peek but I'd bet cash they are there. Perhaps some people would be better off simply not looking at others ideas and move on. Probably get more done that way, correct? Sadly, this takes place across the internet in general. Me? I've never understood the need or desire to spend so much time talking about things one DOESN'T like. Hell, I'd bet cash money at least one or two people think this question is about them.
    20 February at 17:29 · Edited · Like · 1
  • Aaron Laberge I know exactly to whom you refer and I completely agree. But as you know, they do it entirely for the attention they receive and I will say that there are plenty in our community who give them FAR too much attention, even if it is to make a post about how much they "dont bother" them. Point is, the more you acknowledge those trolls, the more they win, even if it's to say how irrelevant and childish they are.

    Also, knowing you're an intelligent man, you know when something you post will illicit a reaction or not, so I am sure that you're not always entirely innocent of provoking heated discussion 

    In this specific case. I wont even take a side, because you both make valid points, however, I think it's silly to argue the semantics of a freely edited wiki article that bears no real consequence on anything of import... seems like a waste of time to me.
    20 February at 17:31 · Like · 1
  • Patrick Scott Patterson That's what funny, Aaron. I wasn't referring to any particular person or people. As far as provoking discussion... this was not a case of that. I'm honestly shocked at the reaction this time, as I've said this here so many times I'm stunned so many act as if it's a new opinion. Craggy seems to have removed his posts or blocked me over it. I'm certain it's moved to other people's walls or forums already, too. All over an opinion I've said before and that speaks to the approach that is making my car payments and allowed us to spoil our kids this past Christmas. *shrug*
    20 February at 17:34 · Like
  • Aaron Laberge Ah well I was thinking of a very specific person because of how insanely out of context they make everything.

    That being said, I can see the case being made for either side to be honest and in the end it really is a matter of opinion.

    Regardless, I'd just love for another more accurate and more important movie about the culture and players to come out, so we can stop referring to that movie as if it were holy scripture worthy of debate.

    It's just a movie.
    20 February at 17:37 · Like
  • Ronnie Dalbianco If Rocky was a movie about "boxing", wouldnt have been called a documentary?!?  Couldn't pass that up! lol
    20 February at 17:41 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson There are many movies about the culture and the players that have come out that are far more accurate. None of them caught on like King did. Chasing Ghosts comes to mind. There's a reason it was passed over by distributors in favor of KoK and a reason why it never did anywhere near as well, despite having many of the same people in it and actually being about the games.
    20 February at 17:41 · Like · 1
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Ronnie. I've never been shy about my feelings toward the "documentary" tag attached to King of Kong.
    20 February at 17:42 · Like · 1
  • Ronnie Dalbianco I hear ya, I just couldnt help poking some fun at Rocky! lol
    20 February at 17:42 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I love most of the Rocky movies. The original Karate Kid, too. The use of songs from both movies in the KoK was not lost on me or where they story was being taken. Still made for an enjoyable film.
    20 February at 17:43 · Like
  • Ronnie Dalbianco I enjoyed KoK. It brought me to a new scene, where I have met some great people.
    20 February at 17:45 · Like · 1
  • Patrick Scott Patterson And sadly that is what is lost to a lot of people. The success of the film brought a ton of eyes to something that wouldn't have received that kind of attention otherwise. A lot of friendships in that particular scene owe themselves to that film's very existence. Do I understand why some directly involved have an issue without it turned out? Certainly I do... but the legacy of the film is far more positive than negative... if anyone chooses to try and look at it that way. On that, I'm bored with this 
    20 February at 17:49 · Like · 1
  • Alexander Bevier Yeah, but by that reasoning, the only way to describe Star Wars is to say it's the Heroes Journey.
    20 February at 17:52 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Actually, the villains are really the main story there. And it's not even an original story. The original real-life one kinda had a big war around it, too.
    20 February at 17:53 · Like
  • Ronnie Dalbianco When I first came into this scene, i had no idea that there would be this these "types of drama" going on. I thought it was gonna be nothing but good times, being able to compete against fellow gamers, all having a good time, meeting some new friends (which I have). I so was not prepared! lol
    20 February at 17:59 · Like · 1
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I thought the same thing, especially when I joined the TG staff in October 2008. I left in February 2011, wondering why the hell anyone would ever do that to themselves 
    20 February at 18:01 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson I make light of it, but it's a dead serious remark. Most don't get it when I say it... but those that have been on the staff sure do, no matter the ownership.
    20 February at 18:02 · Like
  • Ronnie Dalbianco I am glad I came into these scene though. Meeting new people that I can still say are my friends made it worth it to me. Also glad Im on the outside of "the drama!" 
    20 February at 18:04 · Edited · Like · 2
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Hope you stay that way, man. It's annoying when people find or even create reasons to hate you, yet won't stop looking at everything you say and do, creating drama where none needs to be. (Again, not talking about any particular people or person, but I'm willing to bet cash money it fits at least one person within the past hour).
    20 February at 18:05 · Like · 2
  • Ronnie Dalbianco People tend to hate things or people that they do not truly understand. I deal with it everyday for the fact I am a fan of a certain music group!
    20 February at 18:10 · Like
  • Patrick Scott Patterson Truth. A common theme among those types I refer to is that none of them seem to have a true idea as to what it is I do or am... and can't even be bothered to ask and listen. Never figured out why.
    20 February at 18:11 · Like · 2
  • Lonnie McDonald Haters hate
    Lovers love
    And the misguided or uninformed act ridiculously
    21 February at 14:04 · Like
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)