Limitations of Genre in “King of Kong: Fistful of Quarters”

I read some critique of the King of Kong: Fistful of Quarters. Although the film grossed over $700,000 globally (not bad for small-budget documentaries) and achieved critical acclaim (Rolling Stone calling it “roaringly funny”) others had their concerns. After some poking around, most critique falls into one of two categories:

1. Subject matter: many critics disliked the movie because they found the topic of video games inaccessible. Ann Hornaday, a film critic for the Washington Post, opens her critique with the question “what is more tiresome than watching somebody play video games?” This type of critique has nothing to do with director Seth Gordon’s movie making ability or the strengths/weaknesses of storytelling, but dismisses the film for its subject matter alone. While I don’t think this is a very salient argument, Hornaday does have a point: King of Kong will most likely not attract non-gamers, regardless of the actual mechanics of the story or art of the film.

2. Unoriginal themes and “lack of depth:” Hornaday criticizes Gordon’s “all too familiar formula” and says that the film’s “structure … has become increasingly hackneyed with the glut of competition documentaries” (She cites Mad Hot Ballroom and Spellbound as probable inspiration for Gordon.) Other critics think the film relies on stock characters and overused themes which make the film one dimensional and unoriginal. Blogger Paul Dean agrees that the story is a simple “story about good pitted against evil.” However, Dean doesn’t think this is necessarily negative, but rather essential to writing a compelling story about video gamers, which most of the world is unfamiliar with.

These types of critiques struck me because they were extremely similar to the type of critique that Lord of the Rings (and the fantasy genre) typically receives: either people can’t connect with the subject matter, or they find the themes elementary. I had not thought of King of Kong as a “fantasy” because of its documentary quality, but now I’m not so sure. Examined under the same critique of fantasy, it appears that Gordon does prey on elements of fantasy storytelling to create his film: he sets up an unfamiliar world, describes the rules of that world, and forces the audience to connect with the characters despite their unique reality. King of Kong: Fistful of Quarters is not a fantasy film, but it invites the audience into a sort of virtual world. To do this successfully, the filmmakers used techniques of fantasy storytelling, and thus are met with similar criticisms. For me, this was an awesome exercise in the possibilities and limitations of genre (documentary, fantasy) and I’m curious to see how some of these critiques are either dodged or manifested in other mediums (film, written narrative, video games) as we move through the course.

-Emma Baker 



2 thoughts on “Limitations of Genre in “King of Kong: Fistful of Quarters””

  1. What a thought-provoking and insightful post! Your connections between King of Kong, and the Lord of the Rings were something that I think were lingering under our class discussion but were never fully fleshed out.

    I’d be interested to see how you feel about the portrayal of women in both this particular documentary, and the fantasy genre. The Fellowship of the Rings is certainly a male-centric narrative. The female characters that are included are presented in poetry, and shown as distant and unattainable, or in the case of Lobelia Sackville-Baggins, are stereotypical shrewish characters (at least through book 1). In King of Kong, women also play a very limited role as supporting characters for the battle between Steve and Billy.

    Can these similarities in gender portrayal be put down to the “stock character” critique of both works, or is there something about creating a fantasy that excludes women from the conversation? Or is it a matter of audience: the works were probably created for primarily male readers and viewers, I think.

    Either way, great analysis!

  2. Great point gutsypidgeon. I definitely see a similarity between The Fellowship’s and King of Kong’s portrayal of women. There is definitely a “stock character” problem, with Steve’s wife playing the nagging “shrewish” woman while Billy’s wife is presented as a airheaded bimbo with obvious camera angles and close ups on her breasts.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s