VIDEO: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

We’re sorry...

This video is no longer available due to the shutdown of

In her second requested review (thanks to donor Writrzblok), Sofie takes on Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, starring Michael Cera as a dorky adult-olescent whose life resembles old Nintendo games. You probably think her review will be much different than the dreaded Mr. Mendo review of the same movie, but will it? You gotta watch and find out!

Scroll down to comment on this video...

You may also like...

  • Edgar Wright is one of my favorite directors, and I think he pulled this off VERY well. The concept is hit or miss, people either love it or hate it, so with no middle ground, talking about it is like entering a war zone. @.@ I personally dig it, but don’t tell Mendo <.<

    Also yeah, Ramona is haaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwt!

    • Sofie Liv

       yeah, I also really like this movie, and Edgar Wright, Shaun of the dead? hott fuzz? dude, he is freaking awesome, I personally can’t wait to see what he’ll comes out with next!

      Even I as a straight women thought Ramona was so hot… let the bad fanfic begin.. And I dig the movie itself a lot X)

      • Russell Brin (Facebook sux)

        bad fanfic, you mean worse than My Immortal?  I would love to see Scott Pilgrim kick some vampire ass in Twilight and slap some sense into Bella.

        • Sofie Liv

           hah, lol yeah. Seeing people actually fight for some-thing in twilight, that would might just be mind blowing.

  • Doctorcito 22

    this is the great review ever seen in my lfie

    • Sofie Liv

       aww, thanks :)

  • Hands down one of the best movies of the last ten years, possibly of our generation. It’s one of the few movies I’ve been unable to find any fault in, and believe me I’ve tried. I was so bitter a cynical the weekend it came out because of how much Expendables disappointed me, and I was already predisposed to hate Michael Cera, so trust me I was ready to rip this thing apart just for catching me on a bad week…couldn’t do it. Every time I thought I found a flaw, in the end I always had to admit it was really a subjective issue. You dislike the editing? Find it pretentious? Think the pacing is uneven? Hate Michael Cera? So did I at first, but when you really look at it, the movie is in complete control of all these elements and makes them work for what it’s trying to do. Any problem you may have almost certainly ends up being a matter of taste. If there is such a thing as a perfect film, Scott Pilgrim is it.

    • Sofie Liv

       I always say there is no such thing as a perfect film.

      But yeah, this is a very special film in the way that people dislike it or like it will come down to individual taste, you are absolutely right. And mostly it’s just a fun movie.

      • Kids today!

        It’s also funny the majority of the time, which helps its case.

        • Sofie Liv


    • MichaelANovelli

      But, that control just makes it worse.  With how bad it turned out, then knowing that that was *exactly* how they wanted the film to be?  Every time I learn something new about the behind the scenes stuff for this film, I feel more and more insulted…

      • Not what I meant by “control”. What I mean is rather than these just being random elements, Wright incorporated them into the film’s aesthetic so nothing feels out of place. It’s one cohesive whole. Either you like what they were going for or you don’t, I admit it doesn’t appeal to everyone’s tastes (nothing wrong with that, it’s just a niche film), but you can’t deny that it does what it does well.

        • Sofie Liv

           I agree with this.

        • MichaelANovelli

          I remember, a few months back, I tried to give this film a second chance and watched it again with the Trivia Track on.  Even I was shocked by the language coming out of my mouth…

          • Sofie Liv

            well, that’s your opinion, I still like this movie and support it!

            Yeah this is a “Style over matter.” movie, but the matter aint that bad, and it lifes in its own world, which you either like or don’t, there is no middle ground with this one as Josh said, so it’s perfectly fine not to like it, but I do think it’s a bit presumptuas to say the movie has no merits at all, when clearly it does.

          • Believe it or not Sofie, I think even you aren’t giving this film quite enough credit. Tarsem Singh makes “Style over matter” movies. Roland Emmerich makes “Style over matter” movies. In Scott Pilgrim, the style IS the matter. The video game aesthetics don’t just exist for their own sake, they communicate something. It’s essentially a 20-somethings version of Where the Wild Things are. A story of a lonely, selfish kid journeying through a world of his own imagination that he’s using to re-contextualize and deal with reality the only way he knows how. It connect with it’s target audience (listless generation X-ers) on a very personal level. It’s not just set dressing for a otherwise ordinary indie romance film, it’s a integral part of an uncommonly mature story of love and life in general.

          • Sofie Liv

            Josh.. you should go ahead and make a review of this.

            I hate to say this again and again and bite into it, but boys and girls are different. And well yeah, this maybe is a perfect representation of how a boy sees the world in that age, and you were able to connect with all of those aspects of the movie but.. I am a girl. There are certain things I cannot connect to in Scotts specific journey.

            As I stated in the review, I actually connected to Ramona, that whole thing with turning boys down and they take it personally and turn “you.” the girl, into the villain of the story.. even says. “I need you to be happy, you are my only way to be happy.” and then be the girl whom doesn’t feel that way trapped in that.. where’s my movie about that?
            I didn’t connect to Scott in the same way.. but that’s fine, clearly you did so clearly it touched upon some-thing for you.

            Now, I admire this movie immensly, and I only wish for its cult following to grow and grow so the movie can have retrobution for the amazing thing it is, using the visual medium full-blown, explore things few other movies does, and use an ankle I have not seen any-where else.

            And I also stated, the final point of the movie Scott saying. “I’ll do this for me!” and in the end goes to Ramona asking. “Is it okay with you if I follow you on the way? and well, then we’ll just see what happens.”

            Brilliant! that’s a perfect message showcasing how romance should work.

            I cannot show this movie to my mom, or dad, or uncle.. but I can totally show it to my friends, which makes it a weird movie for me.. but boy am I glad it exists.

          • I’d say this IS your movie about that. I think the movie goes out of it’s way to show that, despite the way Scott might feel in his darker moments, Ramona is not some heartbreaking ice queen. The Exes have no one to blame for who they are but themselves, they’re just selfish, bitter people who used Ramona as an emotional crutch, and then blamed her when reality came crashing in. Sure she may not be the main character, but that aspect of her is a big part of the movies overall point. She’s just trying to make it in the world, always doing what makes sense in the here and now.

            Not sure if I’ll be making my own review about this movie though. I’m not really saying much that hasn’t already been said by someone else, I just don’t think I have much to add to the discourse.

          • Sofie Liv

            It is definetely the closest I have ever gotten to it.
            The movie still never really dwells on any of this though, and you can choose to ignore it as you talk about the movie do you wish. it’s very cool to have it representanted, now I just think it would be cool if another movie started to really dig into it.

            And well, looks to me that you have a lot to say about this movie yourself, you really feel for this one, frankly, I don’t feel as much as you do for the movie, I enjoy it but it isn’t the movie i watch over and over. And it’s not on my list of top ten favourite movies of all time.

            It’s up to you really, we are all busy reviewers having way to long lists of stuff we want to do, know that feeling.

            I can just tell you have A LOT to say about this movie, which I don’t.

    • Delawheredad

      The film is homophobic. The “evil” lesbian ex is an unattractive larger woman. The implication being that a nice straight boy like Scott Pilgrim will keep her Ramona away from the “dark side” of sex with unattractive lesbians. She even wears eye black like a male athlete ready for a game! Of course the film also wants you to believe that if the lesbians in question are super models or look like Ramona, then that it just PEACHY KEEN! 

        Not even the Christian Coalition could get away with that portrayal yet because this movie is edgy and different and a live action video game it gets a pass! Nauseating!

      • Muthsarah

        Roxy’s not unattractive or even particularly large.  She’s not as thin as either Ramona or Knives, but she’s cute (if psycho), and is clearly smaller than Ramona.  It’s been a while, but I don’t recall the movie making an issue of her body shape.  She’s not even depicted as being short in the books, they just cast a shorter actress to play her.

        I think you and Mendo are clutching at straws regarding some anti-“fattie” or anti-Asian agenda.  The guy who created Scott Pilgrim is half-Asian himself.  If you think there’s some anti-miscegenation subtext, I don’t see it.  And even if it’s true that there’s a pattern in movies to having a white person leave a non-honky to shack up with a fellow cracker (and off the top of my head, I can’t recall any of note), that would be an industry-wide thing, and it wouldn’t be fair to hold that against any one work.  Knives is Knives, Ramona is Ramona.  Let them be individuals and not stand-ins for billions.

        I think this is going beyond basic criticisms and defense of the film.  This seems like either hypersensitivity or pure nitpicking.

        • Delawheredad

          Its not really nitpicking when we are told the character of Scott Pilgrim has an infatuation with lesbians. Hence the “Lesbians. Lesbians” line standing in for love, Here he encounters an apparently “real” one as opposed to the fantasy girls in her head and he has to fight her! Romona is apparently not a “real” lesbian but her ex is. She is angry and hostile, more hostile than most of the men Scott fights. She even has  what can be considered eye black under her eyes like a male jock at game time!  Its an adolescent males view of  sexuality and it shows that the director, despite his chronological age, can’t be more than 13 mentally. 

            I don’t have a fatty or anti-Asian agenda I just thought that she stood out like a sore thumb. 

  • MichaelANovelli

    One might be forgiven the impression that Sofie and I are joined at the hip!  ;-)

    • Sofie Liv

      that is in spite we litterately life on two different sides of the world.. well, *high five!*

      • MichaelANovelli

        Anytime, my Manic Pixie Danish Girl!

  • maarvarq

    Personally, despite being of mature years, I really enjoyed this movie, but largely because it’s really funny, right from the 8-bit Paramount logo in the titles.

    • Sofie Liv

       It is a really funny movie :)

    • Monty39

      You mean 8-bit UNIVERSAL logo. ;)

      • maarvarq

         Yes, yes, of course, I did, I was just testing you :-)

  • Monty39

    I’m totally in lesbians with this movie.

    • Sofie Liv

       Well, it’s one of the few movies actually making me want to go love for the leading lady, so yeah.

      Total lesbian <3

      (hope people caught that joke..) 

      • Muthsarah

        The first time I saw the movie, I was taken aback when we see MEW in her underwear.  I know there was a giant screen in front of me at the time, but I was still staring.  I don’t there’s anything unusual about getting googly-eyed over her.  No girl’s THAT straight. :p

        • Sofie Liv

           Not me any-way, apparently <_<

  • Animikean

    Movies that are made with lesbian and fun are few and far between (and should be appreciated)

    btw awesome necklace ;)

    • Sofie Liv

       I don’t see why I as a person should appreciate a movie more because it has lesbians.
      Where’s my gay movies? I need to go to fanfic sites to get prober gay action in front of me… just pointing out, because it amuses me to see mens peoples horriefied faces when I say that.. and all the girls light up.
      Why do you think the Slasher culture exist? so well, in that regard, we aren’t that different.

      Yeah, it’s a nice necklace, glad you like it, I actually have it on in all of my videos, I never take it off, I like to always have it on as a little homage and constant reminder of my danish origin. I’m a dane of heart and spirit, and that will never change :)

      • Animikean

         Sorry, just continuing the joke of replacing the word love for lesbian.

        I think we need to see more characters that are well written and then as part of their being are homosexual, instead of starting out with the idea it would be “cool” “neat” or “funny” to have a gay in the movie.

        And fan-fic gets a bad rap (unless we’re talking about 50 Shades of Grey. Fan-fic of Twilight that becomes a thing should NOT exist) it’s a good place for people to write about things that touch them, and hopefully they become a better writer eventually in the process.

  • Muthsarah

    How come no one here has mentioned Knives/Ellen Wong?  Not a single person.  You all suck!  Best character in the movie.

    I like that Josh has already gotten the taste/subjectivity stuff out of the way, so I don’t have to dust off the Juno Manifesto.  The love-it-or-hate-it nature of this film (and its subsequent financial failure…) is probably both the reason and the result of so much copycatism in Hollywood today.  Transformers made 800 kajillion dollars on a ten-cent screenplay?  Greenlight more movies with giant robots from space, and tie it in another recognizable project or whatever.  People will watch it, they’re sheep.  We know them.  We programmed them to pay $13 to see the same damn thing over and over.  Don’t take any risks whatsoever.

    While this movie was an adaptation of a known work, it was pretty faithful to it, and did everything it could to appeal to its fanbase instead of watering everything down for mass appeal, even if it would inevitably alienate anyone not in tune.  It makes it unique.  I can’t think of many movies that do that.  If it failed financially, it did it in the right way, unlike most of the rest of the forgettable garbage we get offered.  I hope it keeps growing as a cult film and can one day stand alongside Flash Gordon, Blade Runner, or The Quiet American as an adaptation that eschewed the quick buck and kept the quality of the work for all time.

    I went to see this movie without knowing much of anything about it.  I hadn’t read the books, and hadn’t even heard of them until shortly before release (I’m not at all a part of the hipster or gaming scenes).  But I was finally convinced to see it after watching the Spoony/Brad Jones debate.  Even when Brad was trashing the film, he made it sound interesting.  I gave it a chance because it sounded like the kind of work that really deserved it.  I didn’t regret the decision at all, I enjoyed every inch of the movie.  The characters were immature, the pacing and energy were perhaps a little too high to not be a little disorientating, but I still really dug the feel.  I didn’t even mind Michael Cera.  At least not very much.  The movie really needed a stronger main character, though, that’s gotta be the only real criticism I have.  But Ellen Wong and Jason Schwartzman (who’s always in good stuff) more than made up for that.

    De gustibus non est disputandum, so I can’t hold anything against SPvtW’s detractors.  I’m sure there’ll be plenty more giant robots for ya, don’t worry none. :)

    P.S. One thing this and other recent works have me wondering is if hipster is as hipster does.  I like Scott Pilgrim, Juno, anything Zooey Deschanel does, Florence and the Machine, retro for retro’s sake, and generally disdain anything popular (not by design, just by statistics).  Does that make me a hipster, or do I have to want, or deliberately try, to be a hipster?

    • Sofie Liv

       Don’t get me wrong, if the world was fair Transformers had bombed and this had been a massive hit.

      This is what movies should be. First of; clever and entertaining, secondly; an interesting platform for new projects, and clearly a passion project.

      I did say in my video, twice, that the big admirable thing is how it balses out, goes for it, never stops, and never feels like it has to apologies for itself.
      YES! thank you! why aren’t there more movies like that? that’s how movies should work.

      Knifes.. I think she played a lot into the theme of the x’s, and we saw her transform into Scotts private evil X, but also figure out the reason for her turn was because Scott treated her pretty crappy to begin with so. well yeah, interesting character.. still don’t know that much about whom she is and what she is like beyond that whole love obsession.. but that’s pretty much every character in the movie, we never know what any of them would be like outside from the mad situation in the movie. she’s an good character for this plot.

      I have no idea what it’ll require for some-one to be a hipster.. isn’t it just about being just really laid back and not care at all about money or luxuries or fancy things, but just rests back in genneral and stuff like that?

  • MichaelANovelli

    The problem with saying, “We should celebrate Scott Pilgrim because it tried something new and failed,” is that there’s no real difference between that and saying, “We should reward the person who came in last because they showed up!”  That’s a slippery slope…

    • Muthsarah

      You can’t draw a comparison between art and athletic competition.  Box office and athletic competition, sure.  SPvtW isn’t being forgiven for its poor box office (Hollywood will punish Wright and any project resembling this one for years to come), but we moviegoers don’t generally hold box office earnings as being as important as the film’s artistic merits.  We’re fans, not bean counters.  You seem to be the only person here who thought the movie “came in last”.  The rest of us think it ran a near-perfect race, did its best, and should be celebrated for it.

      • MichaelANovelli

        You misunderstand, I feel it came in last, creatively.  It’s unoriginal (everything praised as new and different is something I’ve seen before), pretentious (up its own ass, really), inconsistent (the film can’t even keep its own internal logic straight), and, most damningly, is routinely championed by people I dislike.  Well, OK, that last one is only a fault in my eyes, but, hear me out: if this movie is, as is often claimed, the voice of its generation (*my* generation, I feel the need to point out), why does it only speak to a very small percentage of the age group it’s supposed to be about?  Hell, most people I’ve spoken to have never even heard of this film, so how exactly is it the defining moment of my generation if only a small and incredibly loud chunk of the populace really dug it?  Oh, so they finally made a real movie for the gaming culture?  Great!  Most of us aren’t gamers, so this does nothing for us.  But, getting back to my original argument, sure, this film may do things you don’t see very often, but it doesn’t do them *well*.  You know what other movie did things no one else has ever done?  Zardoz…

        • Sofie Liv

           I don’t feel it is, and I don’t think it failed at all.. yes it did at the box office, but as a movie in its own right, I don’t see how it failed.

          And well, I think this movie does things movies don’t do often AND do them well.

          It’s a niche film though, very much a niche film, I get that, but it is a movie celebrating the visual medium and plays around with the entire concept, it’s a movie that never half asses any-thing and never retrieves as if it feels like it needs to apologies for existing (as so many other films does.)

          Definining movie of our young culture? urh.. no, probably not. If I should make a movie representing my life thus far, oh yeah.. it would look very different, because I am very different as a person, even though I am the exact same age as Scott, we are all different, our modern world is build in a way so even though you life in the same country, even same city, you can life lives as different as night and day, and consequently have compleately different worlds view, that’s our world today, which is why it would be impossible to make a movie or write a book pin-pointing our modern youth culture.

          But take a time-machine, twenty years forward in time, look back at this movie at that time.. well that’s going to be interesting, it is a very current movie having to do with our current time.

          It lifes as its own entity and as a niche film in its own right, I still say we should celebrate different niche films like this.. I rather want a bunch of these instead of all that boring generic crap coming out every year, but what-ever.

        • Who the hell can say that ANYTHING represents THEIR generation?  I don’t know what my generation wants in the grand scheme of things! There’s so many mixed signals and different agendas that it’s impossible to tell what everyone wants overall.

          Also Mendo, this is not YOUR generation. It’s our generation! Don’t be so damn selfish! This is coming from someone who likes you and respects your views, but in this case, that was really arrogant of you to accentuate the ‘my’ with asterisks and I expect better from you.

          • MichaelANovelli

            LOL, must have picked that up from Old Sgt. Bernal…

            “Play ‘Fuck-Around Fuck-Around’ if you want, Novelli; you joined MY Army!”

            Good times…  :-)

        • Where? Where have you seen this before? It certainly draws influence from various video games, anime, etc. but I’ve certainly never seen any of these different elements assembled into anything quite like this.

          Pretentious is in the eye of the beholder. What one person called pretense another calls brilliance. The only way something can be demonstrably pretentious is if the ideas and themes being discussed are shallower than the film makes them out to be. Gerry, The Fountain, these are pretentious films because they raise old issues without discussing them or adding to the discourse. That it not something I think Scott Pilgrim can credibly be charged with.

          And once again, HOW is it inconsistent? It’s the real world as filtered through video game and manga tropes by the imagination of a confused, listless 20-something. I fail to recall any major point where the film violated any steadfast rule about it’s own internal mythology.

          Dude, I’m not a gamer, and I understood exactly where this film was coming from. Because I understand filtering your surroundings through the pop culture media that has saturated your life. I understand the need to escape through fantasy. I understand listlessness, confusion, and loneliness. I understand emotional immaturity and self-obsession mistaken for passion. None of these are even issues exclusive to one generation, so yeah, it mystifies me why it didn’t click with more people. Life’s just funny sometimes I guess.

          • MichaelANovelli

            Well, Wright’s own Spaced, for one.  And that one had likable characters.

            How is it inconsistent?  Well, if having to fight death matches with your girlfriend’s exes is considered normal behavior, why are Scott and everyone around him so shocked when Patel declares his intentions?  And, if this is considered normal, why didn’t Ramona have to fight Knives and Kim or the one chick in The Clash At Demonhead?  Why didn’t the guy played by Superman have to fight Scott earlier?  Why didn’t Wallace have to fight Scott’s sister when he stole her date?

            Also, if Scott is supposed to be a sympathetic character, A) why is he so cool with casually murdering people? and B) why does he let Superman PUNCHING KNIVES IN THE FACE slide, yet he goes ballistic when he insults Toronto?

            If Scott has no idea what’s going on with the exes thing, then how does he just casually pull out whatever super-powers he needs win these fights?

            How is Scott the under-dog if he wins all these fights so effortlessly?

            If Ramona is painted within the film as being the worst possible girl for Scott, why is it painted as such a huge romantic deal when he finally gets her?

            Also, this is just me, but why if everyone so horrified about Scott dating an Asian girl, but a white woman?  She’s fine.  So what if being around her is dangerous to his health?  Can’t let Scott stay with a potentially healthy relationship, there’s the Master Race to keep going!  (And yes, I know I’ve said before that I don’t approve of Scott being with her, either, but lesser of two evils, people!)  I’m sorry, but I’m just tired of seeing movies where the non-white character is just an immature fling, while the hero waits for the proper white mate to come along.  Just my own bug-bear, mind.  :-)

            And don’t even get me started on this film’s messed up views on homosexuality.  The ones in this film are basically treated as pets!

            So, what?  We’re supposed to cheer Scott for switching from one set of self-destructive impulses to a slightly more challenging set?  It doesn’t add up, man!

          • Okay, you’re clearly not in the right mindset here. This is a a person’s life filtered through video game logic. You might as well ask how the Force in Star Wars works, it’s missing the point.

            It’s the conceit of the movie that life is now a video game, or at least that’s how Scott chooses to perceive it. Remove that filter, and the fights would likely be replaced my actual realistic fist fights, or simply a shouting match or some form of him humiliating the exes or getting the best of them in some way. People don’t react like someone just died because in a video game, dying is no big deal. It’s not murder, it’s playing the game. And other people don’t have to battle for dates because it isn’t their story, or their game if you prefer. Superman had to wait his turn because he’s a video game boss, and video game bosses have to wait for the player to come to them.

            And I think you’re a little confused about how the movie views Scott as a character. He’s NOT sympathetic. He’s NOT an underdog. The movie is very upfront about him being a self-absorbed asshole. The reason we follow him is because he’s a believable asshole. We know people like him, we’ve been like him, or we are like him. We understand where his behavior comes from and we watch as he grows out if it.

            It’s a big deal when he gets Ramona because right then, right at that particular moment in their lives, they need each other. Yeah, they probably will break up in a month. So what? What does it matter if Romeo & Juliet were stupid, impetuous kids whose relationship would have never lasted had they lived? Their love was real in the moment. In that moment, Ramona needed a nice guy, someone she could take it easy with for a while. At that moment Scott needed someone more experienced, more complicated, someone to challenge him and make him grow a little bit. It’s all about what they both need right then. Later can wait.

            Um, they were opposed to him dating Knives because she was way to young and he clearly only wanted her because she was easy to manipulate. Her being Asian had nothing to do with it, why would you even go there?

            Pets? Are you serious? Wallace was practically the only character in the movie that fully had his shit together. He was the mentor figure in Scott’s life, the only one that really understood him and was pushing him to get on with his life (his sister did that to some degree, but she clearly didn’t “get” him quite the way Wallace did). Sure, maybe his boyfriends were pets in that they were disposable sex objects to him. What, a gay man can’t be a playboy?

          • MichaelANovelli

            So, Scott is basically Tidus from Final Fantasy X?  Joy.

            So, the emotional crux of the finale is that nothing has been accomplished and this was all a waste of time?  Bliss.  Bliss and Heaven…

            I bring it up because that happens a lot more often than you would think in movies made in the last few years.  Chasing Knives and Ramona are equally poor choices, but people like the idea of him being with Ramona.  I wonder why?

            The Wallace thing?  Wallace is basically just the Morgan Freeman character.  He’s The Gay Best Friend.  I hate to tell you this, but “Gay Best Friend” is not a compliment…

            There are any number of other complaints I might make, but what it boils down to is this: this is a film made for hetero-normative gamers and I am not one of those, therefore I don’t smooth over its flaws by saying, “Finally, I movie just for me!”

            Even if I’m not part of the intended audience, that doesn’t mean I have no right to complain…

          • Muthsarah

             “I bring it up because that happens a lot more often than you would think
            in movies made in the last few years.  Chasing Knives and Ramona are
            equally poor choices, but people like the idea of him being with Ramona.
             I wonder why?”

            The fanbase, near as I can tell, are split between Team Ramona and Team Knives (please take the high road here).  I’m leaning more towards Knives, but I think that’s because of how each actress played the role, and both pairings make their own kind of sense.

            “There are any number of other complaints I might make, but what it boils
            down to is this: this is a film made for hetero-normative gamers and I
            am not one of those, therefore I don’t smooth over its flaws by saying,
            “Finally, I movie just for me!””

            Oi!  Hetero-normative?  I will grant that there aren’t many films about protagonists leaving a heterosexual relationship, hooking up with someone of the same sex, and not dying right before the credits, but that’s a bigger issue, and not one this movie deserves to be saddled with.  Ramona had seven male exs and one female, and we’re supposed to focus on how she spurned the female one and declare this a pro-straight (as in anti-gay) movie?

          • A much less annoying, better written Tidus I suppose (and believe me, I never thought I’d be defending Michael Cera as “not annoying”). I’ve never played FFX to be honest, & I don’t remember much about him from the spoony review character-wise.

            So what, relationships are only worth while if they last?  The whole point of the movie is not to worry too much about the future, just worry about what you need NOW. And they need each other NOW. The fact that they aren’t gonna get married and stay together till they die doesn’t negate that.

            Yes, the “gay best friend” is a thing, but this is a much more mature version of it than we’re used to seeing. Wallace doesn’t have lisp, he isn’t obsessed with fashion, he never eats ice cream with Meg Ryan while they talk about her break up. He’s not a stereotype like we usually see. Yes, it’s not that same as him being the lead, but it’s progress.

            And again I AM NOT A GAMER. I’m not even Gen-X and I still got what the movie was going for, still never found it’s video game logic conceit to be out of place. I genuinely believe that this film does not have nearly as narrow a scope as you’re making it out to be. It’s cool that you don’t like it, I’m just saying this is not a case of “People only like it because it pushed their nostalgia buttons.”

          • Sofie Liv

            I am a straight girl, I still liked the movie.
            I have a lesbian friend whom really enjoys the movie to.

            And well, just one point I can most certainly say.. i think you got down-right wrong. Is knife, the movie tells strongely enough that it is not because she is asien. It’s because she is so much younger than Scott, inexsperence and very naive because of that age, and Scott is clearly using her. That was what was wrong with the relatioship and why it needed end. Why Scott breaking up with her was the right thing to do, even though his way about it was wrong. 

            And she ends on saying. “I am to cool for you any-way.” which indicates, yep, she is pretty damn cool now. lucky guy whom ends up getting her, Knifes will be fine after the movie.

  • Muthsarah

    I can’t speak for the film being a “voice of its generation”.  I’m close to the target demographic I think – I played video games growing up, but the rest of the “hipsterish” indie-rock, club-going crowd stuff, ehhhhh….I didn’t hear of the books ahead of time, and I think it’s clear why: it’s not my scene.

    For the record, I don’t view Scott Pilgrim as having any deep message, or perhaps any real meaning at all beyond what experiences the characters have.  It’s about a group of aimless 20-somethings who see the world and themselves through the media they grew up with.  I see a movie appealing to people who were kids in the late 80s and 90s, the ones feeding the nostalgic/pop-cultural-reference styles of humor and consumerism so common today (Transformers, Family Guy, nostalgic movie review sites…).  I don’t see the film claiming to be anything more than that.  Scott isn’t an everyman, he’s just one guy who starts out a bit of a loser and ends up better off for having finally grown up a little.  The film is larger-than-life, but I think that’s to make it seem like an unreal video game and not as if it’s speaking to something representative of anything outside the story.  If the film’s pretentious, I don’t see it.

    Why does it only speak to a small percentage of the age group?  Well, does it?  I think it could strike a chord with a lot of young people.  Seems to me there’re a lot of aimless 20-somethings out there.  Our generation was first and foremost raised to consume, not to do anything productive or even be responsible.  It’s a generation built for menial work, lofty aspirations and minimal preparation, and wondering why life isn’t more like the fiction we grew up with.  And yes, gaming went mainstream during the 90s as well (though it technically went mainstream first in the 70s, then died for a while).  If the film was pretentious, I think that would have been the point of it, not to splash around in retro gaming culture.  Who’s gonna take THAT seriously?  The bad guys blow up and turn into coins, what pretentious meaning is that supposed to have?  I think the movie was trying to be over-the-top, not anything super-important.  If you’ve encountered a lot of people saying that the movie is “the voice of their generation”, I think it’s safe to say they spent too much time growing up playing video games and not doing enough other stuff.  If you view the world as these characters do…well…you should see to that, somehow.  The movie isn’t supposed to be emblematic of life or deeper truths (there’s nothing philosophical going on), just of a group of people who grew up thinking that retro games are more interesting than life, so that’s what they’re patterning their own lives on.

    What I liked so much about the film is how niche and weird it was.  I could tell it was something that wasn’t meant to have broad appeal, but to give a subculture exactly the kind of movie it has always wanted.  I’ve been a fan of pop cultural stuff, and I’ve been disappointed – nay, BURNED – by half-assed, diluted adaptations.  I think a big reason I liked the movie so much was because of how obscure some of its references are (even though I did get most of them, so I wonder how obscure they were).  I’ve gotten so jaded about Hollywood movies that, to quote Phil Connors, anything different is good.  You say there’s nothing here you haven’t seen before.  I can’t really respond to that, since I don’t know what specific bits you’re referring to.  Maybe you’ve seen more movies than I have; you are a film reviewer after all.  And most of the stuff I watch is either from Old Hollywood, foreign, or just obscure B-level stuff.  I lost interest in today’s Hollywood back in my teens, so I’ve probably missed a lot of stuff that this film could be referencing.  It seemed fresh and original enough to me, and I enjoyed the movie’s overall feel, so I didn’t nitpick.  But I don’t recall having seen anything like this before, I got some of the references, it felt like it was giving SOMEONE exactly the kind of dedicated adaptation I always wanted (I suspect that had read the books before I saw the movie, I’d be ecstatic over Wright’s treatment of it…though also seriously disappointed at how much had to be cut out or cut down to fit the running time, but I’m one of those insufferable purists).

    But you said it yourself: you’re not a gamer.  There’s a big reason it didn’t resonate with you.  I was a gamer, a long time ago (but right in the heart of the era the movie references), so I think that’s a big reason why I enjoyed it.

    As for Zardoz…well, you have to take risks to do something different, and no, it doesn’t often work out.  At least people remember that one, if only for Connery’s prototypical mankini. :p

    • Sofie Liv

       obviously I largely I agree with this.. mostly about how half assed most other hollywood films are and how nice it was for this one just to go for it.

      And uh! that’s another subject I didn’t manage to speak of, but you are right, the movie never dwells on it cause it doesn’t have the time to do so, but it’s there in the back-ground and few other movies.. no hollywood movie I have seen, deals with this.

      I’ve spoken a lot about it, not on the enternet, just in my every-day life, if I should nick-name our specific genneration some-thing. I would nick-name us.. “The aim-less genneration.”
      We are an genneration left with no aim, which is why so much is messed up among us.. and mean boy, do I have stories.

      How many times has this conversation taking place.

      “I don’t know what to do with my life.. what am I going to do now?”

      “Son, you can become what-ever you want! this is a world of dreams where you can go out, and pursue that dream, be what you wish to be, become some-thing great.”

      “Okay fine, that’s very nice.. I still don’t know what to do with my life.”

      And well, that is the people fresh out of colleague whom is in that situation, it’s even worse now with the recession ragin and all that, where young people whom actually HAS an education can’t get jobs… (try and ask Sursum Ursa… boy does she know) and does without education, wauw we are just screwed.

      This, is an interesting problem, which no movies digs into.. why? well, hollywood movie makers has nothing to do with this problem, doesn’t even know it exists, they are all very fancy and up there doing the job we nerds can only dream off.
      And it’s nice for a movie to actually take root in that genneration and do it probably, instead of some tootsie colleage student whom will go straight out and become a doctor or what-ever.. or a rock-star.. cause that’s what happens to all young people in those movies, they become rock-stars.. pretty much sending the message. “No, you are not doing it good enough if you don’t become an rock-star.”

      Pretty much, as you just said.. teaching our genneration about a pretty flimsy life that doesn’t even exist.

      This is side-tracking a lot, but I find it interesting damn you -_-

    • MichaelANovelli

      You’ve said the magic phrase, my friend: “Anything different is good.”  I HATE that sort judgment.  That’s exactly the viewpoint I started my show to take a stand against!  Nothing against you personally, mind, but I just feel that it’s a sad state of affairs that people feel the need to view films in such a binary fashion.  Of course, it also bugs me that people assume that since I hated Scott Pilgrim, I must have really loved The Expendables.  But, I digress…

      Now, I’m one of the people who this film was pitched at: I’m in my mid 20s, I played all the games it makes references to, I’m plugged into geek culture and I do, on occasion, enjoy things that are weird for the sake of weird.  And, everything that was intended to push those buttons just felt like they were ticking off a checklist.  I don’t hold EVERY movie to some impossible film critic standard, but I cannot forgive movies that insult my intelligence, especially when they do it so openly.

      Plus, you know, the whole, “You don’t like a movie I really love so you don’t deserve to be a film critic!” thing.  I get that a lot…

      • Muthsarah

        “Anything different is good” doesn’t mean that I view any movie that feels new to me as a good movie, just that being different is a net positive trait for me.  I tend to equate predictability with laziness on the part of the filmmakers, a low opinion of the audience, and insulting to MY intelligence.  We both seem to be irritated at cinema-by-checklist, we just have different criteria.  Then again, it could just be that I’m more irritated by what I interpret as pandering to the MASSES (a big reason I have issues with the LotR films and have refused to see the new Star Trek) while I probably give movies like this a pass.

        I watched your review from last year, and I do agree with most of your points of criticism.  However, I can say that few of those points actually bothered me, even if I think I understand your reasoning behind it.  In reply to your big question at the end:  No, the film did not speak to me on a personal level, but I liked it anyway.

        Are there any movies out there that you felt were trying to do a similar thing to Scott Pilgrim (not just in the adaptation) but did it far more successfully?  Not just individual bits, the whole movie.

        • MichaelANovelli

          Actually, I could probably name a couple, but the best example, off-hand, is this movie’s spiritual twin: Paul.  Born of more or less the same fusion of Gen-X nostalgia and cross-cultural collaboration, the reason Paul is the superior film, to me at least, is that Paul shows a modicum of restraint and actually paces itself.  I get that a lot of old school NES games started out way too hard, but those were video games, and games are an interactive medium.  Films are not.

          For example, while I enjoyed the Watchmen film, the faults that it had were largely comprised of the filmmakers deciding that, rather than adapting the comic, they were gonna take the comic and film it.  But, a comic is a comic and a film is a film.

          They have different structures and what works for one does not work for the other.  This is why video game movies in general fail and a movie that tries to be like a video game could never work.

          Paul, on the other hand, is a movie based on movies that is intended to be a movie.  So, succeed or fail, it remains consistent.

          For a film that’s *like* Scott Pilgrim that holds up better as an actual movie, I recommend Attack The Block!  :-)

          • Muthsarah

            I thought Sin City did a fantastic job of filming the comic.  I haven’t seen 300 (or Watchmen), though.

            Thanks for the recommendations.  I think I’ll pick up Attack the Block this weekend.

          • Sofie Liv

             Watchmen is awesome.
            And both visually and narratively, it doesn’t go the traditional movie route.

            And again I disagree with Michael, I honestly though this movie DID have a consitent narrative, and it certainly had a consistent theme.

            “Any-thing different is good.” no of cause not.. Movie structures, the three act structure exist for a reason, it exist because it works and is a tool to give the audience the biggest possible experience. An writer, or movie maker is an artist, an artist have tools, it’s just about how the artist uses does tools and if they use it well. in here basic movie structure is an essential tool.
            But having some-thing radically different ones in a while is healthy and helps shaking things up before they become to cosy and comfortable.

            You like Ereaserhead? No, well that’s okay with me, but it did shake things up a lot! and without that there wouldn’t have been any twin peaks.

            Psyko, that was just a movie that screwed with people when it came out, and again, shook things up again allowed for movie culture in genneral to grow.

            Reqium for a dream.. oh god that movie. Still to this day havn’t I felt so hypnotised yet at the same time so disturbed by a movie.. which I believe was the intention, and man did it shake things up back when it came out.

            And well, this movie at least wins in one thing, it’s memorable! which isn’t some-thing I can say for a lot of films.
            Also, it was very consistent in its own madness and build up to the climax pretty well.

            Maybe it could have gained from one or two quiet moments to slow down and take a breather before the next big battle, possible, but that would be my biggest complaint.

      • I wouldn’t say “Anything different is good” but I would say that being different is a good trait in an of itself. The basic idea is that any film with the courage and creatively to make something memorably different should be recognized for that even if what the did didn’t quite work. It’s about encouraging and rewarding courage of vision, essentially. Sure, simply being different doesn’t necessarily make your film good, but it does make it noteworthy, and it’s definitely preferably to a film of comparable “quality” that took a generic effortless paint by numbers approach.

        Example: I hate Wes Anderson movies. HATE them. Never got the appeal, probably never will. HOWEVER, you will also never catch me reviewing a Wes Anderson movie, for the simple reason that I realize I have no legitimate grip with him beyond personal preference. Sure, I may find his relentless quirkyness and unreality (his particular brand of it, mind you, similar approaches by other sometimes work for me) to be emotionally distancing, but clearly it is not so for others. I respect the man as a creative auteur and I respect his work for it bold & creative vision…despite the fact that I still friggin’ hate sitting through them.

        • Muthsarah

          Hmm…here we must part company.  I like Wes Anderson.  Sure, he sticks to a pretty inflexible pattern, but I can’t think of anyone else that makes films like his (Sofia Coppola is kinda close, but Anderson came first).  As long as he’s a unique filmmaker, I give him a pass for trotting out the same kind of mood, and the same camera angles, and the same soundtracks, and the same cast, and the same palette, and the same slow running montages.  Just cuz he’s the only one doing it.  In fact, I think his movies are getting progressively better.

          • Like I said, respect the man and his work. I think he deserves all the praise he gets. I personally just can never get emotionally invested in any of his stories.

        • Sofie Liv

           I don’t enjoy Quinten Tarantino myself, but genuinly is happy he exist and appreciate that his movies exists.

          I am happy he is there.. I don’t go to cinema watching his movies, and i am not going to review any of them.

  • Delawheredad

    “Never boring?” Michael Cera is a complete nonentity who sleepwalks through his role! I never bought him as a real person with real emotions or real desires. He is after the girl because the script tells him to. She is so far out of his league that even if he manages to get her he will only be able to hold onto her for a few weeks at most before she grows bored and LEAVES HIM! Why does  she have so many “evil” exes to begin with? The only thing in common with her failed relationships is HER!  

      She is the tired variation of the”manic pixie dream girl” that spoils so many other movies. She is held up as the model to aspire to. Yet she is an empty, shallow vessel.j And of course in the homophobic touch her lesbian fling is an unattractive overweight woman. The message being of course that a nice straight boy like Scott Pilgrim with keep her away from the dark side. Away from the “EVIL LESBIAN EX!   She is the one who can’t commit yet she is somehow not the “bad guy.” 

      Scott Pilgrim is a shallow meandering soul who learns essentially nothing! For this movie to have been “different” in a meaningful way Scott Pilgrim should have abandoned his quest partway through  the film with him realizing that NO relationship is worth this much hassle or discomfort. He’s twenty-two for God’s sake its not like he’s thirty and dealing with dating single moms with ex-husbands and baby daddy issues.  At twenty-two the biggest lesson he should learn is that a woman with lots of baggage should be avoided at all costs unless she is either Mother Teresa or Elle McPherson. 
      That would have taught both the young men and women who were the target audience of this lesson a valuable, life changing lesson. Instead it failed miserably!   


    • Muthsarah

      One of the bigger problems I had with the movie is how boring both leads were.  I like MEW, but even she was kind of dull and mostly did things to move the plot along; there wasn’t much depth to her, and even in those scenes where she had to show some emotion, she didn’t didn’t emote much, which was disappointing.  But like so many other movies, the supporting cast came through, chewed some scenery in the limited time available to it, and really made a positive impression.  I actually would have appreciated had Ramona been portrayed as a typical Manic Pixie Dream Girl; at least she would have had some personality, indicating why Scott was so into her (another than her obvious beauty and the dream sequences, which were entirely plot-based).

      One other thing:  I can’t speak from…well…too much experience…but at 22, I imagine you’re probably too young to understand that things AREN’T as big as they seem at the time (or so I’ve been led to believe).  You gain perspective with age and experience, and Scott doesn’t have much of either.  I gather from your name and comments that you may be a little older, so you’d have a different outlook on Scott’s situation than he would.

      The big question at the end of the movie was whether Scott was a better match with Ramona or with Knives.  Knives is the easy answer, but sticking with someone so young and such a starry-eyed fan would have probably kept Scott from developing much after the events of the story – he started off a 22-year old high schooler, and he would have ended up back where he started, with maybe a little more self-respect.  Being with Ramona would have been a challenge, and probably would have required both of them to grow up a little bit.  Yeah, maybe they wouldn’t have lasted, but from the point of view of a 22-year old, every storybook love feels like it’s gonna last forever, at least in the realm of fiction and fantasy.  I would have been happy with him ending up with Knives, and I do think there should have been more details on how Scott and Ramona were going to approach their new relationship, but I don’t think it ended too badly, not for a work based on a rather confused young man and his…unique worldview.

      • Delawheredad

        I am older When I was 22 I was already married but even at 21 I knew who I was and what I wanted. Perhaps that is what ticked me off so much about Scott Pilgrim he had no idea how to grab life by the crotch and hang on. He seems clueless as to women and life in general. Not too many generations ago Scott would have already been working and supporting a family. Playing video games is no shortcut for experience despite what this movie tries to tell you.

          I have no doubt that i would have enjoyed this movie more had it not starred Michael Cera  the world’s most coma inducing actor. A young Anthony Michael Hall could have done wonders with this role. He may not have made it a better picture but he would have given Scott the animation he so desperately needs.  

          I would also agree that Knives is a much BETTER fit for Scott. At the very least they cold grow together as a couple for a few years, giving each other the stability they needed. Whether it would have laster long term is another question. One irrelevant to the movie.

        • Sofie Liv

          I am 22, I don’t know whom I am or what I want.
          And I am single.. Also I never had a serious relationship, so yeah I am clueless in that regard. Is that so wrong of me?

          This is not a few genneration ago, this is now, when the youth culture is sadly left compleatly aimless and to their own devices, which poses a compleately new problem.

          How many times has this conversation taken place.

          “I don’t know what to do with my life.. what am I going to do now?”

          “Son, you can become what-ever you want! this is a world of dreams
          where you can go out, and pursue that dream, be what you wish to be,
          become some-thing great.”

          “Okay fine, that’s very nice.. I still don’t know what to do with my life.”

          That is ass of cause, but that is the world, and dude.. if I should count for every wasted twenty-year old I have ever encountered, at least Scott is not stoned for realsies all of the time and gets out of his front door, I can’t say that for every twenty-year old in the world. which is again, ass, but it’s our shitty modern world as it is.

          On a last note, my romantic dream is to do it as good as my parents whom, gasp, are still together.
          Almost all of my friends are divorce kids or second marriage kids, not me, it’s just me and my sister and my two parents. And that’s it.
          And both my parents have told me plenty stories of previous boy-friends/girl-friends they had before they met each-other, i’ve even met some of them, cause they stayed friends.

          I’ll be happy if I can end up as my mom and dad, and they both had to try a couple of different things before they found the right one and were mature enough to settle down, which must have worked as they now have two adult kids and are still together.

          • Delawheredad

            Well Sofie Liv,

             You have far more on the ball than Scott Pilgrim does. Scott can’t commit to anything while you have a media review show on the internet that can be accessed  by millions. You may feel like you don’t know where you are going but you are being very creative while getting there. You have not let language or technical problems get in your way. 

             Do you think Scott could do half as well as you if you dropped him off in YOUR home country?

             As I said in the post above Scott can’t even commit to being a mediocre guitar player. On the other hand I know personally, an 18 year old amateur sound engineer who is already supplementing his income by recording local bands. He knows exactly what he wants to do with his life and how to get there.

             I suppose it is a positive that Scott isn’t a stoner but that really isn’t much to say in his favor. I mean its not that hard to stay sober most of the time.

          • Sofie Liv

             Well.. thank you. I am though very happy it’s not millions watching just yet.. I don’t think I am ready for that kind of pressure oO;

            I don’t know, it’s just that my own life has been so full of duped young people, and duped people older than me whom were genuinly imature and stupid decisions because of.. stupid. That to me Scott Pilgrim is actually a positive spin on it… the guy I share kitchen and Bathroom with is definetley a weed pusher. So erh yeah, my current reality is urh.
            I’m just trying to move on while doing what I enjoy and get the best out of what I have right now..

        • Muthsarah

          That you were married by 22, let along that you knew what you wanted, shows you were already in a completely different place relationship-wise than Scott may ever be.  He’s not you.  He’s a guy who has no idea who he is or what he wants.  He only barely knows how to be in a relationship.  You have to accept that to understand the character.

          The movie never uses video games or any pop culture as a substitute for a healthy lifestyle.  If anything, it points out how cut off Scott and his friends are, not only from each other, but from even understanding themselves.  I think there’s a very clear subtext that dwelling on such ephemera is a BAD thing.  They play it for laughs and hope the audience can join in the fun, but there’s a very real tragedy to these characters.  Some of Ramona’s exes are actually doing far better with their lives than Scott is, aside from their immature, unhealthy (and ultimately fatal?) obsession with her.  Everyone’s messed up in some way.  And Scott doesn’t fix his life by the end, he just takes what could be an important first step to taking responsibility, leaving behind his childish things, and embarking on his first serious relationship.  So I don’t think it’s actually doing anything contradictory to your statements or your experience; you’re just not similar enough to Scott to understand why he’s doing the things he’s doing.

          Knives is a better fit, as I have a feeling that a healthier Scott that has grown a little might be good for her, but I would be apprehensive of his chances to actually grow as a person with someone who adores the way he used to be.  Then again, if she actually grew up as well, they could be a good match.  Ramona is the trickier one.  They both have a long way to go, and we have little reason to believe they’re right for each other (other than, y’know, destiny).

          • Delawheredad

            Its not so much that Scott doesn’t know who he is what his place in the world is, although those do annoy me. The real stickler is his inability to pursue anything! He’s sort of a musician, He’s sort of a gamer. he’s “sort of” like a lot of things. There is no hobby or special ability that gives his life passion. Lots of 21-22 year olds are working as musicians, they are not making big money but they are picking up beer money in bars all across North America. Scott can’t even commit to being a mediocre guitar player!

             On top of that he gets involved with a woman for no good or definable reason and she’s as aimless and misdirected as he is! She can’t breakaway from her past relationships and drags guys and gals who are done with her into her relationship with Scott. On top of being aimless she’s an aimless psycho!

             Knives has the opportunity to   POSSIBLY break Scott out of his shell, get him serious about his music and find some focus to hi life. All Ramona offers is hardship, hard luck and a toxic relationship.   

    • Sofie Liv

      you are supposed to commit as a twenty-two year old? isn’t it more about trying stuff out and learn at that point in our modern society?

      Girls with baggage aint worth any-thing.. girls whom turns guys down because it either didn’t work out or they don’t have the feelings should be avoided like the pest.
      yeah, better avoid me like the pest in genneral then.
      All people gain baggage at some point, life can be harsh that way. How can you even demand that every-one are saints? I mean say. “If you are not Mother Teresa you have no merits in a relationship.” That’s an impossible ideal to put out, and it’s rude to people to say they need to be like that.
      Also, people can change, even if you have baggage, you can chose to learn from it and change, not become Mother Teresa, but become a better person. I believe people are capable of change for better and worse as long as they are alive, and we are all individuals whom all have flaws and a certain baggage.

      What exactly is wrong with trying different relationships out before committing? she wasn’t married to any of them or any-thing, often she tells it was just a one week flirt. The movie never states that Ramona and Scott stays together for-ever and ever, it just tells that they will try this out ones again. Because it makes sense right now, they walk through the door, who knows what comes next? that is what the movie indicated.

      Scott Pilgrimm is a stupid young guy, most of us in that age are stupid, society made us that way, male and female, and he does learn, he learns to take responsibility for his actions and actually consider other people in his life. Like all of his x’s.

      Says. “I’m sorry knife. I was being a dick-head.” and ends on not saying. “Oh Ramona, now that I have you my life is perfect” No he says. “Hey Ramona, I still kind of like you, do you mind if I follow you for a bit? and then we see where it goes..”

      That’s a fine message in my book, that’s life.

      • Delawheredad

        I think you missed my point. There is nothing wrong with trying out new relationships but Scott and Ramona are a bad mix by any measure. Not only is she way above him in just about every sense she also has seven failed relationships in her wake. The fact that she considers one week flings to be “relationships” is indicative of some serious mental health issues going on in her life. I’ve had lots of girlfriends neither they nor I considered one week to mean anything, certainly not a “relationship” no matter how steamy things got.

           Scott should be hearing warning sirens  every minute he is with Ramona. Not only does she have baggage but Scott has to FIGHT the baggage! Michael Cera is no ones idea of an Adonis. Only in the video game format could he defeat ANY of the challengers for Romona. Scott Pilgrim is not just a a “stupid young guy, most of us in that age are stupid” He is almost too stupid to process Oxygen to make his blood flow!, My point about not pursuing her unless she was Mother Teresa or a Super model  was meant tongue in cheek to point out that Scott had no idea WHY he even wanted Ramona! She’s cute but NO CUTER THAN KNIVES and she adores him!  
         There is NOTHING Ramona offers that Knives doesn’t offer in even more abundant amounts. For the movie to have been really “Different” would have been for Scott to realize that in the end Ramona was more trouble than she was worth. We all know people who have one toxic relationship after another. In this movie that person is Ramona!  Scott Pilgrim should be running as fast as he can away from Ramona otherwise he will be yet another of Romona’s “evil exes.” Ramona is such a fruitcake that she can’t break away from her past relationships, male or female, without dragging them into her next relationship!  Seriously who at ANY age does that? Who says the ex’s are “evil” anyway? Ramona describes them that way but we already know that she is an untrustworthy narrator of the events of her own life. 
           Young men and most older wiser men have an expression. “Don’t put your (slang for male organ) in crazy.” Ramona is crazy and if Scott does consummate his relationship with her he will end up with far MORE heartache than if he had just simply, and maturely walked away1 

      • Russell Brin (Facebook sux)

        Look at the world She-Ra lives in (yeah weird I know); she was born in another world, is a real princess but chose to stay in her adopted homeland and improve it, because otherwise it would mean the Horde would rule the world she grew up in.  She-Ra isn’t actually the character to relate to, it’s Adora, she is the character we relate to while She-Ra is the heroine that actually does anything.  It’s impressive that the voice acting changes from Adora’s high-pitched to She-Ra’s sultry commentary. 

        Adora is the character everyone talks to and addresses their concerns, while She-Ra is the character that solves the problems (generally speaking).  It’s an interesting dichotomy, since She-Ra will never lose, but Adora is the one that has to deal with it in the first place.  I think I’ve watched way too much She-Ra to make this analysis that good.

  • Egil Hellá

    Well if you did a review of Scott Pilgrim then can you please do a review of The Twilight Sage Eclipse because that movie should not get of that easy

    • MichaelANovelli

      Well, she said she wouldn’t, because I already did on Movie Skewer…

      • Russell Brin (Facebook sux)

        Who watches reviews from 2011?  That’s so one year ago!  It was a good review though, Twilight is such a chore to watch I don’t know how anyone can enjoy that…

        • Sofie Liv

           If it was a movie I actually felt some-thing about, it wouldn’t have stopped me that Mendo reviewed it in the movie-skewer, but outside of the reviews.. I chose not to feel or be angry, mostly just be amused by the twilight franchise.

          Here’s the thing, the more I bite into the subject of twilight and the “phenomena.” I actually realise why it has become that big a phenomena, there is a reason behind of the madness. I don’t like the books nor the movies, but I see the reasoning.

          And secondly, there’s a lot of people whom I know, love and respect whom enjoys these things. And fuck no I am not going to fight with them over a piece of escapism, the people in my life means more to me than that.

          So mostly, I kind of just ignore when I am not analysing.

          Also Egil, go watch Mendos reviw of it, it’s awesome.

  • TheCrazyFish

    How did you know my
    evil plan to trick you and Mendo into getting involved in a sexy
    catfight? Yeah, that’s right. I said it. I want to see Novelli and Sofie
    in a no-holds-barred jello-wrestling fight to the death!


    the thing I don’t like about the Scott Pilgrim bashers is all the talk of it being a “hipster” movie. I’m aware that Mendo didn’t actually say that in his review, but a lot of others have.

    get me wrong. I find hipsters annoying too. They’re posers. I like
    non-conformists. I view myself as a non-conformist and a lot of my friends have been
    goths, anarchists, and so on. Hipsters, on the other hand…they want
    to be non-conformist but they don’t have the balls or the brains to go
    all the way so they just settle for pretentious instead.

    When it comes down to it, though, the opposite is just as bad. I don’t like the “different = automatically good” philosophy, but I also hate the “different = automatically bad” philosophy. Again, I know that’s not what Mendo said, but a lot of others have and I hate it.

    That said, the one thing I really don’t like about the movie is simply that I don’t like Michael Cera. I think he’s annoying.

    • Sofie Liv

       yeah… no. That one is not going to happen.

      Mostly because Mendo has been in the freaking military and I am a girl, I am pretty chanceless in any such situation, it would just be him throwing around with me and nothing else.
      Ask me if I want to do it with Sursum Ursa or Shock suspect, I think does fights would be much more fair.

      Well, does people are aimless young people whom want to break free, become individuals, be a part of some-thing bigger such as a group, don’t have their own idenity yet and don’t know what to do with their lifes.

      We’ve all been there! I had six months of my life where I was convinced I needed to be a goth, and.. my hair has been dark blue ones.. seriously.  (it was supposed to be black, but because of my natirual fair hair colour it turned out blue instead..)

      • TheCrazyFish

         Hmm….yeah, you and Sursum Ursa would also be acceptable.

        Yeah, I understand wanting to be a part of something but also not wanting to be a part of the mainstream. I say I’d rather hang out with a “freak” than a “normal person” any day, if only because we’re all really freaks and the only difference is the quote-unquote “freaks” admit it. I never tried to dye my hair black, for me it was communism, but I tried to do it in a real way. Hipsters, to me, are like grown-up emos. It’s not about breaking with the status quo or finding their identity, it’s just a plea for attention. It’s one big “hey! Look at me!”

        That said, I think people worry too much about hipsters, and I think that – like with “emo” – the accusation tends to get thrown around a lot when it doesn’t fit. Going through tough times and feeling depressed doesn’t make someone an “emo” and saying you don’t like popular music doesn’t make someone a “hipster.”

        Also, I agree with you: Scott Pilgrim is not a hipster movie. It’s a gamer movie and a young adult movie, and it’s about the awkward years when you’re in your twenties and the world considers you a man but you still feel like a kid. You have no idea what to do, where to go, or how to live, and it seems like you’re having to battle the world because no one understands you. I get that. I’m going through it now. The fact that some hipsters might also identify with that doesn’t make it a hipster movie.

        I think the main reason Mendo hated it is for the same reason my brother hated it: he’s a military guy. The military forces its people to grow up. They don’t go through that awkward “finding their place in the world” phase, because the military tells them point blank: “your place is as a soldier/corpsman/airman/sailor/etc.” So to them, who never went through it, it just looks like a lot of pusillanimous whining.

        • Sofie Liv

           Well I got over it, did figure my natural hair-colour is to nice to hide away and later found out.. dude, I am weird without even trying, so no need to do any-thing else than what I want to do any-how.

          And then even later found out I am actually the cool kind of weird so yeah.. right now I am pretty happy about my place in life, my life is awesome :)

          • TheCrazyFish

             I agree. I’m still kind of trying to find my place insofar as what I want to do as a career, but I’ve pretty much found my identity. Like you said, I discovered that I didn’t need the affirmation of others to be cool, I didn’t need everyone else to be stupid for me to be smart, and I didn’t need to do anything especially weird or freaky to be different.

  • Thomas Stockel

    You know why it was not considered for art direction?  The Academy is comprised of 90% old men, most of them have forgotten what it is like to be 22.  Films that take chances and try something new usually do not do well at the Oscars.  And I know what you mean regarding Alice In Wonderland.  That movie I have seen bits and pieces of on cable and I am not the least bit impressed.  It looks like so many other Tim Burton films.  Also, the Oscars are not only subjective, sometimes awards are handed out as apologies for perceived snubs from past Oscars.  So far all we know Robert Stromberg and/or Karen O’Hara were being given “sorry” Oscars.  Finally, the movie bombed.  Art films are allowed to bomb, they are expected to not make money.  But a movie that is expected to make coin and fails I don’t think is ever considered for Oscar contention.

    Can you tell how much I think the Oscars are bullshit?

    I did not see Scott Pilgrim so I can’t comment on the pros and cons, but I enjoyed the review nevertheless.  And I love all the debate it has generated.

    • Sofie Liv

       You know, to me just all those Awards.. all of them. Are kind of bull-shit.

      It’s just important rich people whom all-ready made it into the exclusive big league, padding each other on the shoulders.
      I would be okay with it, if it was a celebration about movies, and about bringing some movies into the light which would have been over-looked other-wise.
      Our movie culture is so very big today, the independet movies created so very many, and some of them very very good, but will they get acknowledgement? NO! Will the hard-working creators of such movies get any-where? For the most part.. no!
      The awards shows should kind of exists to acknowledge exactly those movies, and give them a chance to be seen by the public, but they don’t, instead they just give a movie which was all-ready big another pad on the shoulder.

      Oh, and all the culture defining movies.. the big game changers we can today look back at and say. “our world of media today genuinely would be different without this.” .. they won jack-shit and weren’t even presented. Well wupti duh, we actually had a new genre defining movie this year, it was called the Avengers, I am willing to bet it wont be nominated for as much as one single award, oi -_-;

      Scream awards.. man it’s some shitty big budged movies and some pretty sparkly kid actors whom gets pads on the shoulders there. Huzzah.

      The only award I am fully behind is the bloody Razzie awards… 

      • Thomas Stockel

         Yeah, the Razzies seem to be the only honest award out there, don’t they?

        • Sofie Liv

           Odd that the people behind the Razzie awards seems to be the people genuinly caring the most about movies out of any award comittee isn’t it?

          I really don’t get the sense that the oscar comittee even care about movies at all. They just care for the names and fame involved, which is the dark side of modern movie culture to me, it’s holding every-one back.. sigh..

          Well, at least the Razzie awards seems to really care about movies, a shame it’s so easy to find razzie winners every year though….

  • Joelkazoo

    I’m not going to go over how much I hate this movie, because as a 34-year-old single guy, I am obviously not this movie’s target demographic. By that same token, it would be nice to see a movie not made for me that doesn’t make me want to claw my eyes out.   

    • Sofie Liv

       Well, it is a like or hate it movie. I do not blame any-one for not liking it, I would never show this to my mother or gran mother.

      But as I reviewd this, it was my third time watching it, and I did genuinly enjoy it so.. urh well, personal preferance I guess.

      Well, Kick Ass was a pretty good movie clearly targeted at a pre-adulscent audience.. urhm. I don’t really watch teenage flicks, I have trouble coming up with good names.. legaly blond was surprisingly good. Absolutely a movie I exspected to hate, but honestly didn’t when I finally saw it. That one certainly is not targeted for you..

      • Joelkazoo

         Actually, I really enjoyed Kick-Ass!

        • Sofie Liv

           there you go.

  • FullofQuestions1

    This will probably sound terrible, but what this movie and its target demographic have shown me is that, in four years, if I still haven’t found my life goals, a permanent partner, etc., it won’t be because I failed at something. I’ll be eighteen in two months, so I haven’t quite reached Scott’s age- this takes away some of the pressure I have right now, even if Scott doesn’t live the best of lives.

    A lot of people my age have this image that, once we’re out of college, we’ll know our whole future, that we’ll have a career, and our lives will be sorted out. It’s a relief to know that we have more than four years to figure all this out.

    • Sofie Liv

       Oh yes they do! and that is ass, because as you just said. Most don’t!

      And those few whom does know.. will all learn a lesson or two about life and discover what they thought it would be like. It is not going to be like.. And some of them will find out that what they thought they wanted isn’t what they wanted at all. Some continues because they feel obligated to do so, and well, that leads to a pretty miserable adult life, so erh yeah, life is way more complicated than that.

      Don’t you worry girl, you are good on your way, and it’s more than okay not to know at your point, as I stated, I don’t know! Well, I know what my dream is. To work in entertainment and spend every day of my life creating stuff, but as it turned out that is not what I am allowed to do right now, so I had to try some-thing else and just see where that one leads… For now..

    • TheCrazyFish

      Yeah, that is totally wrong. I used to think the same thing; that once I was out of college I would magically be a Member of Society (TM) and have a career and all of my social phobias would be magically worked out and everything. That’s possible, I guess, but by no means is it guaranteed. I’m 28 and don’t get me wrong, I’m not some kind of bum or anything – I’m between jobs right now but have been for the most part steadily employed, and I’ve gotten a lot of my problems sorted out – but I still have no clue what I want to do as a lifetime career.

      It’s not something you figure out magically when you hit 18 or 22 or any other age. Your calling will come to you when it comes.

      As for sorting out your personal problems, phobias, etc…that is never really “done with.” There are people in their 90’s still struggling with that stuff.

  • Russell Brin (Facebook sux)

    I hope to Ares that I’m not the only person in their 30s on here, or else I’ll just be a creepy middle aged man…

    • TheCrazyFish

       30 isn’t “creepy old man” territory. Especially not when most of the rest of us are in our 20s. 40’s? Now that’d be creepy.

      • Sofie Liv

        Since when does people automatically become creepy when they get older?

        You only move into creepy old man territory when you actually start saying weird creepy stuff, and then you’ll be creepy no matter what age you have!

  • Writrzblok

    Thank you for accepting my request! I absolutely love this movie (and the graphic novel series it’s based on) and wanted to see your take on it. To be honest, I hadn’t even heard of Mr. Mendo’s review until you brought it up. But I’ll check it out. I, again, thank you for reviewing this wonderful movie.   

    • Sofie Liv

      You’re welcome, thank you for the donation, you really helped bailing me out of my predicament.

      Well, his review of it is rather negative, so brash yourself.. thanks again :)

  • It also has an AMAZING video game tie-in, which is… uncommon, to say the least.