This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Scott Pilgrim Versus The World

11516171921

Comments

  • Can we refer to Scott Pilgrim as Pilgrim, instead of just Scott. Johnson is also acceptable.

    k thx bai
    Why does it bother you? Everyone here understands the difference between Scott Rubin and Scott Pilgrim.
  • Why does it bother you? Everyone here understands the difference between Scott Rubin and Scott Pilgrim.
    I'm being silly. You shall now be known as Young Geo.
  • Why does it bother you? Everyone here understands the difference between Scott Rubin and Scott Pilgrim.
    I'm being silly. You shall now be known as Young Geo.
    Okay, fine with me. I am still rather young in mannerisms :D
  • pretty obvious that each of the exes is just better than Scott at the things that Scott wants to do,
    What was Matthew Patel better then Scott Pilgrim at that Scott wanted to do? Bollywood dance numbers?
  • Perhaps the more complex themes were considered too difficult for average audience?
    Disagree, I think it was too difficult to fit into ~2 hours of screen time.
  • pretty obvious that each of the exes is just better than Scott at the things that Scott wants to do,
    What was Matthew Patel better then Scott Pilgrim at that Scott wanted to do? Bollywood dance numbers?
    I think he was better at being one-dimensional.
  • Bollywood dance numbers?
    A man's gotta dream.
    Disagree, I think it was too difficult to fit into ~2 hours of screen time.
    That too. The movie should've been about 30 minutes longer, but it still would've had to be condensed.
  • Disagree, I think it was too difficult to fit into ~2 hours of screen time.
    Yeah, that was what I thought of it too.
  • Johnson is also acceptable.
    Hey can I have kickass video game powers too?
  • Hey can I have kickass video game powers too?
    You lost them when you ate too much bacon.
  • I guess he didn't strike me as Cera level awkward. And yes, while it is the pursuit of the romance which helps him mature, I think the self respect aspect is a single (and for Cera often overemphasized) facet of the overall maturation. What about awareness of consequences past how they affect oneself. Or why other people behave as they do, potentially hurting you. Not blaming others for ones own insecurities.
    My true gripe is that I could not identify with the movie's characters as I did the comic's. That and chauvinism. d:
  • Hey can I have kickass video game powers too?
    You lost them when you ate too much bacon.
    How can something so delicious be so evil? :(
  • edited August 2010
    Okay, I'm starting to re-read through Scott Pilgrim, after reading the 6th Novel and seeing the movie. Is anyone else doing this? I'm starting to see some changes now that my rose-tinted goggles are off and I'm reflecting with the characters. It feels like when you re-read the stories...a lot of things start to become better, but then everything starts to become worse.

    On positive note: I can feel more positivity between the band and Scott Pilgrim himself. The whole thing between them all is kind of charming and the characters do not feel as smug as I thought. I've only re-read through Book 2 at the moment, but I'm still keeping an eye out for things. Scott himself is a better character too re-reading it. When you reflect on him, he isn't really a douche, he's just kind of dumb. And in a way, you can't fault him for being dumb because no one bothers to sit down and talk to him until way late.

    On a negative note: The whole Evil-Exes pitch of the series becomes cheapened, because the series is practically sold as being about it's similarities to video games and the attitude that goes with it. Like, I really wish that Matthew Patel was a much more interesting villain, because him getting involved feels like a glaring omission. He sort of initiates the whole thing in some sort of way. Plus, I'm still wondering on why so many people love Wallace and Kim Pine. Wallace is cool, granted, but he is very smarmy himself and he's a hypocrite. One things that irks me with the comic, is how everyone hated on Scott when they are all kind of dumb and shallow on a similar level. And Kim, granted, had the past relationship with Scott, which explains many things, but their love in a way feels kind of hallow and Kim has ALWAYS throughout the book been very bitter and condescending.

    I'm just curious on how other people feel with this situation.
    Post edited by Nukerjsr on
  • One things that irks me with the comic, is how everyone hated on Scott when they are all kind of dumb and shallow on a similar level.
    I think that part of the point is that none of the characters are infallible. Everyone was dumb and shallow in their own way, really. Everyone was a total jerk at one point or another. In the books, Scott and a handful of other characters REALIZED that they had been total jerks, and tried to fix themselves a little bit. This happens to real people all the time, and as all the characters ARE human, it fits. Humans can be jerks. Humans can be hypocrites, but humans also grow and change.

    I've always liked Kim and Wallace for comedic value, rather than because either of them were beacons of morality. To be honest, in my opinion Wallace didn't get fleshed out half as much as he should have been in the comic, but then again he was both comic relief and Obi-Wan Kenobi, and those types of characters rarely get fleshed out as much as others. He helped Scott along in the beginning when he was too dumb to even figure out that he was supposed to be fighting at all, and faded away a bit once Scott got a clue. I was actually a little disjointedness that Wallace lost a lot of that in the movie he was little more than "OH, A gay slutty character! HILARIOUS." He didn't help Scott out with the exes, he didn't encourage Scott when Envy came to town, and at the points in the comic where he had actual advice to offer, instead he made a flippant or drunken comment. It's not exactly out of character, but it completely leaves out Wallace's ACTUAL role in the story.
  • movie vs comic. You can't expect it to be as nuanced or detailed. It had less than 3 hours to work with.
  • I'm definitely not gonna go through and try to comment or retort peoples comments, but I will say I think people are being awfully harsh on the movie.

    Ultimately, they put a LOT of material into a 1 hour 50 minute time limit. It goes by so incredibly fast, I feel like it hurt the narrative just a little. In the end, though, the movie was incredibly fun, endearing, and was a decent representation of the books. Sure, some character were a little shallow in comparison to their original counterparts, but what an you expect? They jam-packed it to the brim with hilarity, action, an amazing score, and plenty of wonderful performances.

    This is coming from a *hardcore* critic of media adaptations, to the point where I have severe issues with Watchmen. *Watchmen.* I just think the movie is a brilliant piece of a much bigger and better tale.
  • Watchmen
    The movie or the comic. Cause I thought the movie was crummy.
  • Watchmen
    The movie or the comic. Cause I thought the movie was crummy.
    The movie.
  • GeoGeo
    edited August 2010
    Watchmen
    The movie or the comic. Cause I thought the movie was crummy.
    The movie.
    Have you read the comic? If you haven't, why don't you go to Borders or Barnes and Noble and read it this very minute.
    Post edited by Geo on
  • Watchmen
    The movie or the comic. Cause I thought the movie was crummy.
    The movie.
    Have you read the comic? If you haven't, why don't you go to Borders or Barnes and Noble and read it this very minute.
    Oh, trust me, I've read the comic. Three times over, by now. It's one of the reasons I have such a beef with the movie.

    Not because of the ending change, mind you, but because the movie is basically one of the biggest cases of "so close yet so far" I've seen YET in terms of comic book movies, by totally over-sexualizing, over-stylizing, and degrading the whole story down to excuses for gratuitous, over the top violence, action scenes, and slow-motion. Also, hallelujah sex scene.
  • Having never read the comic books, I enjoyed the movie immensely.
  • One things that irks me with the comic, is how everyone hated on Scott when they are all kind of dumb and shallow on a similar level.
    I think that part of the point is that none of the characters are infallible. Everyone was dumb and shallow in their own way, really. Everyone was a total jerk at one point or another. In the books, Scott and a handful of other characters REALIZED that they had been total jerks, and tried to fix themselves a little bit. This happens to real people all the time, and as all the characters ARE human, it fits. Humans can be jerks. Humans can be hypocrites, but humans also grow and change.

    I've always liked Kim and Wallace for comedic value, rather than because either of them were beacons of morality. To be honest, in my opinion Wallace didn't get fleshed out half as much as he should have been in the comic, but then again he was both comic relief and Obi-Wan Kenobi, and those types of characters rarely get fleshed out as much as others. He helped Scott along in the beginning when he was too dumb to even figure out that he was supposed to be fighting at all, and faded away a bit once Scott got a clue. I was actually a little disjointedness that Wallace lost a lot of that in the movie he was little more than "OH, A gay slutty character! HILARIOUS." He didn't help Scott out with the exes, he didn't encourage Scott when Envy came to town, and at the points in the comic where he had actual advice to offer, instead he made a flippant or drunken comment. It's not exactly out of character, but it completely leaves out Wallace's ACTUAL role in the story.
    Okay, just finished re-reading all six books, so I am ready to give it a re-review.

    In terms of the characters, Scott is still my favorite. He's just a moron, but he's well meaning and I appreciate the fact that he really does develop over the series and reflects back on his mistakes. I think the most harmful thing to the character is that, between Book 3 and 6, every other thing he spouts on about is something he forgot or is oblivious too. It's incredibly annoying. I still feel unchanged about Ramona, where she lacks little motive and personal character and I'm still curious to why people love the Kim Pine character so much. Book 3 proved to me how supportive Wallace is, because he was incredibly defensive and understanding towards Scott when Envy came up. I can really see it. But for the others, I saw Stephen Still's development to be incredibly odd and mishandled. I can reflect on how he acted so flaky around Book 4 and changing, but it really just felt crowbar'd in and unimportant to the story. And in the end, Julie, Stacey and Young Neil are just pointless characters. It kills me to say about, especially with Young Niel, because he really could of done something amazing being an observer the whole time.

    Again, I feel like I need to stress it's such a pain that Matthew Patel and the Katayanagi Twins lack character and motive. I feel like the ending of book, it completely makes those three hurt in compared to the other Evil Exes. While Gideon is truly evil, I think you could still hold some sympathy for Chris, Roxy and Todd. Especially since Matthew Patel is the person who brings the super-fantastical elements into series, it's a shame he really just doesn't do much. I think because the movie is so fast, making the whole thing cut and dry, and making all of the exes truly evil, that it makes it feel more complete and understandable.

    The story for this series, however, that I forgot to mention, is incredible. And it is funny as hell and has great moments of style and honesty. However, while the story works as a great metaphor and really works well for people who have acted like the characters...it just gets kind of muddled in the end for me. And I still feel like there's lots of unexplained and unexplored territory within these characters and this whole world. It's a good comic, but I still feel like it has many issues and can be alienating.
  • Not because of the ending change, mind you, but because the movie is basically one of the biggest cases of "so close yet so far" I've seen YET in terms of comic book movies, by totally over-sexualizing, over-stylizing, and degrading the whole story down to excuses for gratuitous, over the top violence, action scenes, and slow-motion. Also, hallelujah sex scene.
    I agree and I'm looking forward to my box of Scott Pilgrim books all the more.
  • Not because of the ending change, mind you, but because the movie is basically one of the biggest cases of "so close yet so far" I've seen YET in terms of comic book movies, by totally over-sexualizing, over-stylizing, and degrading the whole story down to excuses for gratuitous, over the top violence, action scenes, and slow-motion. Also, hallelujah sex scene.
    I agree and I'm looking forward to my box of Scott Pilgrim books all the more.
    Just about everything was wrong with that soundtrack. Some people complained over Simon and Garfunkel or Tears for Fears, but I definitely went WTF over the sex scene.
  • You were supposed to.
  • What sex scene? The one at the beginning that was frame-for-panel the same as the one in the comic? Cus that was the only sex scene I saw, other than Roxie orgasming herself to death.
  • I have now read all six comics, and these are my thoughts overall on the movie's job of adapting.

    The movie did an excellent job of adapting Volume 1. Truly excellent. I feel like almost all of the adaptation energy was put into volume 1, and then they got tuckered out in future volumes. Volume 2 was barely touched upon, although Volume 3 was much more finely adapted. Volume 4 was mostly skipped over, and just about all of Volume 5. Obviously, because they filmed the movie's end before the final comic came out, Volume 6 was not adapted greatly, although I was happy to see some pieces of it in the movie, like the design of Chaos Theater and such.

    Overall, I agree with one of Scrym's comments, that the movie really just gives you all of Scott's development throughout the novels, and skips out on the other characters because it would confuse the moviegoers with a way too wayward plot. However, I'm very impressed with a lot of the casting and acting. Michael Cera did quite well as Scott, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead captured Ramona's aloofness very well, although was a little off on Ramona's more emotional moments, and her happy moments. I also miss Ramona's overall friendly attitude towards Kim and Scott's friends. Knives also did an excellent job, and her actress did a great job of adapting the character. Most of the other actors got two or three main traits of the characters in the comics, and performed those nicely. All in all, I am pretty impressed, looking back.
  • edited August 2010
    Whatsexscene?
    The one in Watchmen. The thread got temporarily derailed.
    Post edited by trogdor9 on
  • Oh wow, totally missed that part. I need to stop posting when I'm tired.
Sign In or Register to comment.