Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (spoilers!)

How would you rate Scott Pilgrim vs. the World?


  • Total voters
    24
I'm also glad I didn't see Planet-man. That would have ruined the entire movie.
Definitely.

I saved you on-screen coin-fetti from the Katayanagi twin battle you *visible censoring effects*!

Well, Planet-Man wins the award for being the first person from this board to be clearly visible in a comic book movie. Props.

I hadn't thought of that.

:D

Anyway, this is arguably the strangest movie-rating experience I've yet had, because I'm watching it as like four different things.

As a comic book adaptation, it was probably the most incredibly faithful ever, at least during the first act. That was really impressive and it's kind of surprising it's taken this long to see something like that. Cera was really good, however I never really saw much of the overconfidence stuff. Scott in the comics seems a bit spunkier and almost brattier to me, and that made for a more unique character than the more traditional average-awkward-guy the movie leaned towards a lot of the time. Kieran Culkin on the other hand kind of walked away with it. I'll be surprised if he isn't remembered as a universal pleaser.

As a bunch of stuff I was there for a year ago, trying to imagine what it would look like and how it would come together(especially the yeti-vs-dragons stuff), spending dozens of hours with all sorts of new friends and just generally getting to experience a full film set for the first time, seeing it tonight was the first really good new experience I've had in ages.

As something that seriously often feels like a bizarrely embellished biopic of me made a hundred years from now, like the comic but even more so, it's this crazy, frantic, frustrating, inspiring, almost unfair experience. This is probably the level that I enjoyed it the most on, or got the most out of it from.

As just a straight-up movie, I thought it was pretty great. To me it really depends on the varying levels of irony or sarcasm you look at almost any moment in the movie with. I think Wright made it masterfully sit on the edge the whole way through(while also balancing in all the traditional fun), and that's the most impressive thing about the movie to me.
 
Also, even with The Expendables to compete with, they sold out at least two shows at the giant theater we went to(however, since it's the actual theater they go to in the comics, people might've gone out of their way to see it there and other places may have been spread thinner than usual). Almost entirely 15-30ers, a few people in costume, loads of hipsters.

Our audience applauded during almost every scene, but not when it ended for some reason.
 
Our audience applauded during almost every scene, but not when it ended for some reason.

It got particularly annoying for me though, when they'd howl with laughter at jokes that earned a minor chuckle at best.

I do think though that in spite of any negativity I might have toward this film, it's still a pretty groundbreaking comic book movie for a number of reasons and it's unlikely that I'm not going to see it at least two more times.

BONUS: The audience's audible disdain when the words "From M. Night Shyamalan" came up on screen (during the trailer for the atrocious-looking "Devil") followed by their reactionary laughter.
 
It got particularly annoying for me though, when they'd howl with laughter at jokes that earned a minor chuckle at best.

I do think though that in spite of any negativity I might have toward this film, it's still a pretty groundbreaking comic book movie for a number of reasons and it's unlikely that I'm not going to see it at least two more times.

BONUS: The audience's audible disdain when the words "From M. Night Shyamalan" came up on screen (during the trailer for the atrocious-looking "Devil") followed by their reactionary laughter.

Lol same thing happened at my show when that preview came up.
 
It got particularly annoying for me though, when they'd howl with laughter at jokes that earned a minor chuckle at best.

BONUS: The audience's audible disdain when the words "From M. Night Shyamalan" came up on screen (during the trailer for the atrocious-looking "Devil") followed by their reactionary laughter.

Same with my audience, and it's also kind of annoying if the scenes were on every trailer already.

People laughed like crazy when M. Night's name came up, and also when Leonardo DiCaprio's name came up in the Hubble trailer.
 
I'm at a loss as to why this movie has been so well received; most of the praise I've encountered can essentially be distilled to enthusiastic shrieks of "it's awesome!". And I'm not quite sure why. Every single scene in the movie was a contrived scenario to introduce a new evil ex-boyfriend, generally providing tedious, successive CGI fight sequences at the expense of character development. Or establishment, for that matter. All of the gags relied on the characters having personalities, which were woefully absent in this film. They worked as references to the books, for those of us who've read them, but make little sense without the movie establishing any sort of precedent. It undermines the entire movie, in fact; Scott fighting for Ramona seems hollow and pointless, because we feel like he barely knows her. We don't understand why the characters act in the way that they do, and the movie expects us to be distracted by the next pointless fight sequence, with an adversary whose sole characterization is their ethnically stereotyped battle motifs.

Was this just popular because the source material was so beloved? Surely that cannot be the case, as bad adaptations are usually torn apart by fandom, and this movie is garnering popular acclaim (if not commercial success). I was reasonably entertained by the movie too, but it was riddled with flaws.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone else think that Kim was kinda cute? I mean obviously Ramona was gorgeous, but I thought Kim was pretty cute as well.
 
I haven't read the Sin City comics, so maybe. I know there was a lot of that stuff, but did the film really have the same obsessive accuracy, even in all the tiniest details, as this did?

Yes, it was exact.

Did anyone else think that Kim was kinda cute? I mean obviously Ramona was gorgeous, but I thought Kim was pretty cute as well.

All of the girls (and the boys!) were cute.
 
It was page for page. 300 and Watchmen were as close to the source material as this was.

Kim Pine was my favorite in the comic, but she wasn't as cute as I hoped in the movie. Ramona's lines sounded too dull and not playful like they seem in the books.
 
Did anyone else think that Kim was kinda cute? I mean obviously Ramona was gorgeous, but I thought Kim was pretty cute as well.

One of the few things with the film that grates on me is that in look and personality she just seems way too far out of Scott's league, let alone someone who's heart was broken by him and stays quiet about it. It was easier to imagine it adding up in the comics, but I don't think it does in the film.

Yes, it was exact.

Fair enough then.

It was page for page. 300 and Watchmen were as close to the source material as this was.

Haven't read 300, but Watchmen, while really close, definitely didn't feel as ridiculously close as this was(at least during the first quarter or so of the film before the compression kicks in).
 
Haven't read 300, but Watchmen, while really close, definitely didn't feel as ridiculously close as this was(at least during the first quarter or so of the film before the compression kicks in).

To be fair though, 300 is a really short book and most of the panels are just half-naked men.
 
Did anyone else think that Kim was kinda cute? I mean obviously Ramona was gorgeous, but I thought Kim was pretty cute as well.

Was Kim the sister? If so, I'm ashamed to say that I noticed how good-looking she was in Twilight, as well.

As for Ramona, I actually thought she was pretty plain and chunky-looking until she took all of her clothes off and revealed her deceptively perfect body for-the-bom-chika-woooooow.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top