Film
Movie theaters, reviews and showtimes in New York, plus articles, trailers and more
- Home
- Box Office
- Listings
- Trailers
- Features
Bookmark this page- Edition:
The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters (2007)
Director: Seth Gordon
Synopsis
‘The King of Kong’ is a documentary about the intense rivalry between two videogame enthusiasts. Billy Mitchell is the emperor of the arcade who set the world record for ‘Donkey Kong’ way back in 1982. Steve Weibe is a high school teacher and devoted father and husband who has struggled all his life to make ends meet. A likeable character, he intends to turn his life around by defeating Mitchell’s score, and director Seth Gordon’s quirky film follows his remarkable journey.
Movie review
From Time Out New York
As iron sharpens iron, so one man’s video-game prowess sharpens another’s—or at least until someone is too chicken to compete face-to-face. Here endeth the lesson of this moderately entertaining and ultimately kind of pathetic look at the race to be the best Donkey Kong player ever.
For more than two decades, that crown rested on the head of hypercompetitive Billy Mitchell. When, in 1982, other chumps couldn’t eke out a high score past 200,000, Mitchell racked up a dizzying tally of 874,300. That number stood until 2004, when genial science teacher Steve Wiebe scored a personal best of 985,600. Seduced by Mitchell’s aura of invincibility, official scorekeepers questioned the results and insisted on a public do-over. And so the battle began.
The aggressively nerdy subculture of early-’80s quarter-slingers is explored better in Lincoln Ruchti’s yet-to-be-released Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade. This film’s look at their ongoing exploits isn’t as affectionate or illuminating, simply because their present-day core objective is so deeply trivial, and yet their hunger for recognition is so desperate. Presenting these lives as a parable about the merits of good sportsmanship is even more of a stretch; when the game is over, all that’s left is a low-scoring portrait of human vanity.
Author: Stephen Garrett
Time Out New York Issue 620: August 16–22, 2007
User reviews of this film
-
- alex said...
- Posted on Feb 29 2008 06:50 lovely film and the triviality of the pursuit has got nothing to do with anything. most of what we call games are deeply trivial. it's the way personality is revealed through these trivial pursuits that is instructive and deep.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- witser said...
-
Posted on Feb 02 2008 17:42
"a low scoring portrait of human vanity"...how about a gutwrenching realistic portrait of human diversity...one that transcends generations and brings nerds, jocks, push-overs, and buttheads together....
your credibility has been flushed down the perverbial 'Bubbles' drain. - Report as inappropriate
-
- pigpen said...
- Posted on Sep 18 2007 02:19 I am convinced that the only reason you panned this movie was to increase the number of hits your page gets. Are you getting kickbacks from the advertising department? Kudos to you, it worked. I would have never heard of this "publication" without your ridiculous review of this movie on rottentoamtoes.com. I suggest you re watch this movie. If you happen to stick by your initial review, then well, you sir are a retard.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- brian said...
- Posted on Sep 13 2007 07:01 Stephen Garrett must really suck at Donkey Kong.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Maxwell H. said...
- Posted on Sep 08 2007 01:42 Wow. Really impressive, broseph. One of the best movies in years, and you find it to be "a stretch." I think that quite a few would agree that whatever credentials you present as a reviewer are a stretch.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- John said...
- Posted on Sep 02 2007 02:33 I agree with the reviewer I don't care about no donkey kong man
- Report as inappropriate
-
- BillyChan said...
-
Posted on Aug 30 2007 05:46
I'm not sure what movie you saw, but it wasn't "King of Kong"!
All you have to do to prove that you have any credibility at all, is make a movie yourself.
As it is, your review of the movie is getting "panned" while the movie itself is getting stellar reviews. - Report as inappropriate
-
- Huckleberry Frontal said...
- Posted on Aug 28 2007 03:37 HaHaHa Ha Ha!!! This so-called movie critic "Stephen Garrett" MUST be on either Silly Bitchell's (a.k.a Billy Mitchell) or Brian Kuh's payroll or something?!?! THE ONLY REASON that this film got a 98% freshness rating (as opposed to 100%, which is what it rightly deserves) is because of this Mr. Foolio Disgracias "film critic" extremely LOUSY review..."what a Maroon" (as Bugs would say). I don't often get angry at film critics...I simply don't care what they say...unless I've watched a thoroughly enjoyable movie that's actually worth my ten F***ing dollars! YOU REALL PISS ME OFF, YOU SILLY FARRETT!!! (or was that Garrett?).
- Report as inappropriate
-
- ian maclellan said...
-
Posted on Aug 25 2007 22:03
This was an amazing movie, the characters could not be any more rich. I don't see how you were not entertained or even brought to the edge of tears with how heartbreaking this movie was.
You obviously did not watch this movie or were distracted by something like your new iphone the whole time, managing to miss one of the best movies of the year, - Report as inappropriate
-
- Jordon said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2007 23:06 Haha. I know it's your opinion, but what is your idea of a good movie? Shrek 3? You must have some weird taste in movies. Because this movie, is a great movie. It's funny, and I cannot wait for the fictional remake.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Sebastian said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2007 13:54 Wow. There is nothing more I need to say about how greaat this movie is that has already been said but you sir, Stephen Garrett, suck at life.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Leanne said...
- Posted on Aug 23 2007 08:50 You're a funny little movie critic Mr. Garrett. Your seemingly incomplete review is fuzzy and nearly indicates that you have not viewed the same incredible film that the rest of us did. This movie superbly stands on its own strengths -- it’s not supposed to be “Chasing Ghosts". Perhaps you are a Billy butt-kisser...I would rather be a Steve butt-wiper! That's obviously saying something about my respect for the humble guy who wants to play fair.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Jeff said...
- Posted on Aug 21 2007 03:26 Wow, this movie has ONE negative review on RottenTomatoes, and it's this one. Way to be different from everyone else, you're so cool. Congratulations on being that guy. There's always one ***hole.....
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Ben Coe said...
- Posted on Aug 21 2007 02:19 I myself can't imagine an objective more trivial than that which drives a pretentious New York movie critic.
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Jeff said...
- Posted on Aug 19 2007 15:44 "Presenting these lives as a parable about the merits of good sportsmanship is even more of a stretch." Did you even watch the movie? How could you possibly think that this statement is true?
- Report as inappropriate
Most popular on this site
Features
The American experience
British comedian Steve Coogan gets in touch with his inner Yank in Hamlet 2.
Spanish intuition
Scarlett Johansson and Rebecca Hall flirt away an Iberian summer in Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
Shadows and frogs
Crime pays in Film Forum’s expansive French noir series.
Strip tease
IFC’s new midnight-movie series revisits Hollywood’s groovy ’60s scene.
To air is human
Man on Wire, a new doc about a surreal Manhattan morning, aims high.
What do you think?
Post your review now