July 30, 2007 -
Playing Columbine, filmmaker Danny LeDonne's movie about the controversy surrounding his Super Columbine Massacre RPG game, now has a video trailer.
We recognized some familiar faces including Entertainment Consumers Association president Hal Halpin, Smartbomb co-author Aaron Ruby, Manifesto Games head Greg Costikyan and some lawyer from Miami...
Over at Kotaku, editor Brian Crecente has concerns about the focus of the film. Is it about the game controversy or the game maker?
We recognized some familiar faces including Entertainment Consumers Association president Hal Halpin, Smartbomb co-author Aaron Ruby, Manifesto Games head Greg Costikyan and some lawyer from Miami...
Over at Kotaku, editor Brian Crecente has concerns about the focus of the film. Is it about the game controversy or the game maker?
The more Ledonne makes himself the center of the story, the less I believe that [he made the game as a way to deal with the shooting and its aftermath]...
Judging by the rather short trailer, it feels like the documentary is a little too much about Ledonne and not enough about the very real and complicated issues involving both the shooting and the idea of tacking serious subject matters with video games.
Comments
and you cant honestly say you didnt want to exploit colombine then enter the "expressive media" into a contest.
Well done. Very well written post.
Inevitably some people will ALWAYS think I'm out to exploit Columbine, make a name for myself, or some similarly undesirable accusation. This opinion is welcome and understandable. While I am mindful of these critics, I regard them as less important than making a truly engaging film - one that will stand on its own regardless of where the audience is coming from or who happened to make it. One of my chief goals is to make this film as anyone sitting in the editing room with the same footage might - paying attention not to the personalities but to the substance of the story. I've been making films in various capacities for about ten years now but have yet to work on a project that is this personal yet also so large in scope. Thus I am very wary of some of the pitfalls it could encounter and will work to avoid most of them. I will be screening this film to many people over the next six months to gather feedback and sculpt the best documentary I can.
From an editing standpoint, I've found that ironically I hesitate to include myself in the film unless necessary. Pragmatically speaking, given that I shot nearly 80% of the film myself, I'm simply NOT on camera in most of the footage. In January of this year I sent an early draft of my treatment to Ian Bogost for feedback and was advised to make sure this story didn't lose it's personal side - to make sure the purpose and intent of SCMRPG carried through the larger story that the media has so often told. After all, this isn't a cold examination of the issues of videogame violence as 'Moral Kombat' seems to be; this is a film about specific game developers, specific students at Dawson, and a single festival brought under controversy.
I encourage everyone to view the cast page here: http://www.playingcolumbine.com/cast.htm
I submit to you that if the goal were simply to aggrandize myself, I would have wasted thousands and thousands of dollars to interview all these other people. Furthermore I make NO CLAIM to an "objective" film; this film is going to make arguments and is going to include the opposing point of view (such as Mr. Thompson) but in the end I want to make a film that is supportive of the future of games as an artistic medium. Indeed that was the inspiration for taking up the camera in the first place.
Believe it or not, I originally had no intention of thrusting myself this far into the gaming debate. Maybe you'll point out that I was "asking for it" but I could never have engineered all that has transpired since I put SCMRPG online in April of 2005. What has unfolded since is a complex and interwoven story that has been on countless websites, in many magazines, and on several national television and radio programs. I believe I have every right to present this story in my own way, as well. After all, I was a filmmaker far before I ever installed RPG Maker.
Presently, I'm about to move away from Colorado to attend graduate school and work on my MFA so that I may eventually make natural history films - a lifelong dream of mine (I just got back from a wildlife shoot in Kenya). Once I'm done with "Playing Columbine" I will have presented my case to the world and the world is free to blog endlessly about how much of a moron, a genius, or a nobody I really am. I grew up playing videogames and they were an important part of my childhood. As such issues surrounding games in the aftermath of Columbine were very important to me. I see this documentary as my opportunity to present all the arguments I wished people would have made as videogames and rock music were being vilified for the shooting. And much like SCMRPG itself, I certainly won't force anyone to watch this film.
"Had he wanted to make a work of art, he would have picked up some friends, learned an engine, and actually attempted to make something engrossing and beautiful."
Or he has something to say, and wanted to make a point, and didn't want flashy graphics to distract from that. Or perhaps that he didn't WANT to make the game at all "realistic" thereby attempting to mitigate the knee-jerk flames that he was bound to get.
I could easily say that if Picasso wanted to create art, he should have painted elaborate landscapes with near photographic quality. And I'd be an idiot for doing so.
Saying that something is only art if it fits into your mold of what is artistic is just plain ignorant.
Honestly, I don't know why Dennis doesn't just add a filter to the boards that if the forum poster uses that name here, message is deleted as spam.
Grossman never came out and admitted it was a lie. He's just riding the lie all the way to the bank (just look at the book he sells, which still says that Carneal never fired a gun before the shooting).
No wonder Thompson seeks Grossman. Liars seem to always want to stick together. Maybe so they can compare notes and get their bogus stories to match up (remember, these two stooges actually claimed the VTech shooter "trained" on video games, even though no one saw the shooter play video games, and a search of the shooter's dorm found no video games whatsoever).
Nah I think we can judge him. He is some art student or something, that took RPG creator (which has been around on the SNES and PS), and a touchy subject and made a cut and paste game that looks like ass, and plays about the same as something 15 years ago.
This is why i think he was just shooting for his limelight and the controversy. Had he wanted to make a work of art, he would have picked up some friends, learned an engine, and actually attempted to make something engrossing and beautiful.
Instead he uses crappy old sprites, and bad dialog to make his 15 minutes.
Thats why he is a tool
It's good of you to mention these concerns because they're actually going to be addressed in the film itself.
1) the value of challenging/confronting people's notion of what a work of art can/can't be about: a number of "non-gamers" interviewed express the realization that SCMRPG was the first game that got them interested in gaming, in thinking of games in a new way. Is that everyone's experience? Of course not. But filmmakers at Slamdance really took notice of the controversy in the 2007 Guerrilla Gamemaker Competition and have given the medium of games a second thought.
2) exploiting Columbine by entering the game into a contest: the idea to enter SCMRPG into the GGC (which is what I assume you're referring to) wasn't MY idea - it was the festival director's; Sam Roberts emailed me to encourage the submission of the game into the festival (which I otherwise would not have done). It was only upon invitation that I submitted the game and while this was a choice, so have been the speaking engagements I've done free of charge. If anything the "contest" entrance cost ME the flight and hotel in a tourist resort town.
With regard to your last point, the larger question is this: what does the exploitation of a subject such as Columbine actually mean? Has this subject been exploited by Michael Moore? By Brooks Brown? By Fox News? Is exploitation measured by profit margins, notoriety, intention, or something else? Is the treatment of any tragic event in popular media a form of exploitation? There may only be subjective answers to these questions but of course in the end we will all decide for ourselves - and for myself I can honestly say exploitation has never been the objective or intention of my work. So yes, I can honestly say it - and you can honestly choose not believe me. :)
ENJOY. There is an N there jackass. I know, you're so much smarter than us with your law degree and insanity, but think before you type and proofread after.
And don't blame demented people on their experience overseas; post traumatic stress disorder is for the meek and unprepared.
David grossman is just another profiteering massacre chaser...He has people PAY to here his conspiracy theories..and dares to critize henry jenkins for being a prostitute.
But, how can i blame him? He is a soldier, right?
He's probably become demented as a result of what he's experianced overseas...
I feel sorry for him.
Jack Thompson posts a link that leads to youtube but the actual link goes through http://www.btunnel.com/
What is btunnel? It is an anonymizer. So Jack Thompson, the man who often calls people cowards for being anonymous online, uses a website that allows people to be anonymous...
Moreover, by posting a link with the btunnel url, I'm guessing that we now know how Jacko is getting around the ip ban...
@Jack Thompson, AGAIN.
"I’m the attorney from Miami in the movie. Ejoy the T-shirt I’m wearing in the traler which reads:"
Yeah, yeah, we know who you are. Ever since Hot Coffee we can only recognize your ignorant mug from miles away.
Oh, and nice to know that your grasp on spelling is just as good as my grasp on American law. :)
Yes, it is. Last time his face showed up he sent to someone in regards about Paul Huck. http://gamepolitics.com/2007/07/26/yesterdays-gp-article-turns-up-in-jac...
Then he insulted me for not being fluent in legal-ese.
BTW, is that really Jack Thompson?
- Warren Lewis
Consumer responsibility is just as important as Corporate responsibility. So, be responsible consumers.
Since you seem to be responding to this article and since this is at least somewhat pertinent I just have to ask. You have been intimately involved with video games for years now so you must know what a 2d turn based RPG is. You must also know that in such a game all your actions are controlled in such a way that is not at all reflective of reality. In the following link you claim on national television that a Montreal man trained on SCMRPG, even you must know that that would be impossible, so how do you justify that statement as anything but fear-mongering to an uninformed audience.
The link in case you want to pretend you did not say that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weG7A4lTGtg&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fgamepolitic...
I was playing Doom/Quake and many of the other "murder simulators" at an early age. I do not have the skill to use a firearm and thus never have. As far as the will to kill goes, I saw a drunken man smash a window using a woman's head on Sunday night. This made me incredibly angry but instead of going into a rage and killing the man (as certain people might expect me to given that I'm a gamer), I rang the police and gave them directions to where this had happened.
It is unfortunate. With a some alteration, Grossman's statement might be something I would believe. What I believe he should have said is: ""People who have the will and skill to kill are often drawn to violent video games".
On topic, I'm kind of looking forward to catching LeDonne's movie. Watched the trailer, and I'm not sure what Crecente is referring to in his comments. I didn't get the impression Danny was hyping himself.
Do you have anything to do apart from being a Nazi Christian who criticizes people who disagree with you.
Honestly are all you video game activists on drugs or what.
Let me just say that being "conditioned" with Doom is ridiculous at best, seeing as in REAL LIFE, you can shoot up or down, and there are no large spiders/zombies/floating heads that shoot fireballs in REAL LIFE.
“I’m not suffering from mental illness. I’m enjoying it!”
Jack, ever read the Tell-Tale Heart?
For my part, I'd much rather, if these games are to appear, to have them created by someone who's willing to use it as a showcase for how stereotyping is all too easy, than by someone who was simply doing it to annoy people. If Ledonne had created the game and then refused to defend his reasons for doing so, no doubt there would still have been questions asked and accusations made, so it's probably for the best he chose to defend what he created.
If Kotaku can run Video game blog, are we meant to believe he can't find Ledonne's statement about the game? His opinion on Ledonnes "speculated" reasons for making the game or documentary is something twix an Ebert grade idealisation of an artists integrity & a weasely attempt to distance himself & gamers from controversy he doesn't want. GPs extract didn't help matters, it makes it look as if Ledonne actually made the claims Kotaku decided he should have made.
I still haven't played his game properly yet but I've read enough to convince me it's not praising the shooters actions & encourages no other hate & that's enough for me to back it's artistic merit. That I get the impression that it's a genuine attempt to bring some kind of understanding to a difficult to understand event, purposely chosen to be controversial & to self righteously provoke unwarranted outrage is irrelevant. Making a movie somewhat along the same lines may well have been Ledonnes intention all along & more power to him, if he's even gotten gamers ticked at him about the games artistic merit, then maybe more needs to be said.
Show.
See, I can give impossible standards too.
You are a massacre chaser.
I shall be sure to look out for your t-shirt... By the way the thing you linked mentioned Dreamcast, and I'm quite certain none of those games mentioned were made after 1999, try and be a bit more current.
Yeah i haven't played SCMG either but at this point in time I definitely intend to, I very much look foward to this documentry coming out, the trailer looked quite good.
He is the one who vowed never to come back to this site after his stalking of Dennis did not work.
Oh right, Jack never follows through on his threats because he is all talk, and a fucking idiot to boot.
I agree there'll always be a certain degree of self-promotion in a self-made movie about something in which you are intrinsically involved, that really can't be helped. It was good to see that at least the movie seems prepared to see the controversy from both sides, and are willing to present views both for and against the idea of using Video Games to deal with socially 'heated' items.
Watch it with a grain of salt, think about the various viewpoints being offered, and make your own conclusions. As long as Danny is not profiting from the movie I will take a peek at it. This may just give us all an interesting view on what LeDonne was thinking, how others have taken it, etc. Maybe, just maybe, someone with an open mind who believes games create violence will take a peek and see some things that change their views.
Maybe no one will watch. This movie production will not have the same amount of controversy tied to it as the game and it will not be as big of a flash point. I do know that I saw tidbits of Thompson making the Doom accusations, events involving SCMRPG and the shootings in Canada, and I would like to know more about them. Maybe it will delve into the broader issues of games and violence, who knows.
As long as a majority of people refuse to realize that literally just about anything and everything can spark violence including movies, games, TV, cars, money, sex, clothes, jobs, society, etc; video games and other media art will be a part of the controversy. I hope what I just said makes sense, I am not saying that games or movies actually create people who would otherwise be nonviolent into violent people. I am saying just about anything can spark a violent person into doing something violent. The answer to preventing violence does not start with banning anything that could set someone off, it lies with the root issues that lead someone to be violent, to want to commit violence, etc. Sorry about that little tangent... back to the movie...
If it is not for profit, I will take a peek, if there is money to be made I'll just move on in life. It wouldn't be the first movie I have refused to watch (United 93, 9/11, etc. etc.) and it won't be the last.
I realize I just spouted off a bunch of maybes and quite frankly maybe this is just propaganda, but I doubt it. It wouldn't hurt any of us to watch some of this if only to broaden your perspective or even to solidify your own opinions for or against this.
"I'm not suffering from mental illness. I'm enjoying it!"
Jack Thompson
In the end, that's all SCMRPG really needed to do. And that's a good thing.
...And who ever suggested the game or the documentary should be banned? It's called criticism. One person does something, and another person calls it good, or bad, or stupid. Free speech has nothing to do with the matter.
Expressive media.
It's clearly not designed as "Entertainment media". That clearly wasn't it's purpose.
It's not EXACTLY "Education media". This is dealing with a very particular event.
But when you use such a word as "expressive" in conjunction with "media", you can actually list a whole slew of "games" whose intent is to express an opinion, whether that opinion is positive or negative in the eye of the viewer/participant (player).
The Dafur (sp?) game.
Border Patrol.
The long list of flash games about politicians and political issues.
And I'm sure you can mention many others.
Some folks may find the messages offensive, but that doesn't mean they don't contain a message, good or bad.
They don't necessarily educate about the issue. And while appearing in the guise of a "game", their prime purpose seems more to get people talking about the issue raised by the "game".
So, yes, I do quite like the title of "expressive media".
Nightwng2000
NW2K software
I'm so annoyed by this "controversy." It's protected speech, story over.
It would be like if i made holocaust tycoon” then filmed a documentary about americas reaction twords it.
if I’m “detached” by saying a game Created for shock value to make a quick buck is in bad taste, than im glad to not be in your community