For Sunday I will give you my full thoughts on King of Kong, the questions people asked of my initial posting, and a large variant of tangential subjects. It will be very long, even for me. It required me to waste a number of hours on this subject, followed by watching the stupid movie again, and then do a lot of research (which a lot of people helped me with, by the way).
Whenever I write something long, I run headfirst into the “Too Long; Didn’t Read” crowd, who I am not interested in interacting with under any circumstances. So hello TLDR crowd, don’t read tomorrow’s weblog entry, thank you for visiting.
So here we go, in bullet form:
- King of Kong is a well-edited movie, assuming you don’t care how accurate it is. Basically nobody has watched it and doesn’t get wrapped up in the “story” and cheers or boos as is necessary.
- For some people, they need to know it’s “real”. Those people would be disappointed.
- For other people, it’s just a movie, it doesn’t need to be anything else. We’re done here, you can go home.
- Other people seem to think it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not, yet still insist on heaping abuse on the human beings appearing in the film. These people are Fuck Sausages.
- Some of us care how accurate the story is. I care professionally, others care because they want to think they’re seeing some level of real.
- It is generally accurate except that a few premises are shifted around and a few matters of convenience which add additional tension are not based much on reality.
- Billy Mitchell is not an Angel.
- Steve Wiebe is not Satan.
- People pointing and giggling at the competition and rule controversies in the film apparently haven’t watched enough competitive sports.
- I will never make a movie like this, and I have been faced with the prospect/opportunities to make movies like this.
See? That was easy. Tune in tomorrow when I bitchslap you with a dictionary’s worth of Me.
Categorised as: Uncategorized
Comments are disabled on this post