Export thread

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/universal/scottpilgrimvstheworld/

Want.

Just...just want. Want right now.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the Trailer

Now I feel all giddy. It's the adrenaline.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the Trailer

http://www.halforums.com/forum/show...the-World-(epic-trailer-of-epic-trailerness!)

Beatcha by THREE minutes dude!

THANK you.

That trailer was rockin'

Hahaha, I didn't even think of that.

I just love so many things about this trailer. It's clear that they actually took the time to READ the books and really captured it.

Things I loved:
-"K.O.!!!"
-The various sound effect text!
-"...eleven evil ex-boyfriends."
"*whiper* Seven."
"Oh, that's not so bad."

Yeah. Want very badly.

I've never read the books, but that looks like a lot of fun.

*awesome* want. NOW.

It looks good, but I think the trailer might be to all-over-the-place + michael cera burnout, and this is gonna flop really hard. I mean. I guess this is the whole story, so it's not like we're hoping for a sequel, but I still am a little worried.

It's by the same people that did Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. That alone is good enough for me.

Apparently, advanced screenings have said it's his best work to date. Which, compared to the above two is going to be one hell of an accomplishment.

I'm not too worried about it being too cramped. The books are honestly pretty fast reads.

ThatNickGuy said:

It's by the same people that did Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. That alone is good enough for me.

Apparently, advanced screenings have said it's his best work to date. Which, compared to the above two is going to be one hell of an accomplishment.

I'm not too worried about it being too cramped. The books are honestly pretty fast reads.

Click to expand...

This trailer makes me really want them to finish the Blood and Ice Cream trilogy.

Still not entirely convinced of Micheal Cera's ability to portray Scott correctly, but the action scenes at least look well paced enough, and it seems like they haven't strayed from the book.

I thought this wasn't going to be the whole story though?

Looks awesome!

escushion said:

Looks awesome!

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Heh. I just realized that if you pause the trailer at about 49 seconds in, (right as Lucas punches Scott and just before he throws Scott into the tower) you can see Wallace Wells for a split second. He's standing next to Ramona holding a cup of coffee. His expression is priceless.

Vagabond said:

Still not entirely convinced of Micheal Cera's ability to portray Scott correctly, but the action scenes at least look well paced enough, and it seems like they haven't strayed from the book.

I thought this wasn't going to be the whole story though?

Click to expand...

Its following the first three books, then spins off on its own.

My list of must-see movies is growing. Predators, Iron Man 2, Kick-Ass, and this... And I'm actually looking forward to this one the most.

Here's a fairly informative look at the trailer:

Saw this trailer a few days ago and want it so much. How good is the comic as I hadn't even heard of it until this trailer

First volume is iffy, and gets better upon rereadings.
Second volume, the series picks up and it stays great from there on.

I picked up Volume 1 after having seen this trailer. It was pretty great, and if it picks up even more, you can consider me sold.

Volume 1 is, by far, the worst, yes. By faaaar.

The first I heard of Scott Pilgrim was when the comic book show iFanboy talked about the series. I was interested but I still haven't read it yet. Probably because they talked about it like it was something that had never been done before, but all the major points they made were basicially describing Megatokyo (american made, manga-style comic that blurs the line between reality and video games) Now, obviously there are major difference between the two, but up until now I'd kind of written it off as the knock-off since Megatokyo came first and I'm a big fan.

The plots are completely different.

And isn't Scott Pilgrim CANADIAN made and not american?

The books are. But what's the issue?

Allen said:

The plots are completely different.

Click to expand...

Calleja said:

And isn't Scott Pilgrim CANADIAN made and not american?

Click to expand...

I'm not saying I was right, I'm just noting what was odd about how Scott Pilgrim first came to my attention (and was nearly dismissed because of a bad impression).

Oh. He was responding the the Megatokyo comparison. For some reason I thought that something else was going on.

CARRY ON!

Meet your new trailer god!

The facebook page where the high res version can be found:

http://www.facebook.com/ScottPilgrim

holy SHIT that trailer is awesome.

*drool* Waaaaaaaaant.

Holy shit, we gotta wait until August for that? Daaaaamn.

That looks pretty good.

I am loving the music in this trailer, especially towards the end.
I am so incredibly excited for this movie.

The original trailer didn't interest me that much. But the new one makes me really wanna see the movie.

I forgot Edgar Wright was directing it. I gotta see it now.

I'm looking forward to this.

Alex B. said:

I've never read the books, but that looks like a lot of fun.

Click to expand...

Yes, sir.

That trailer excites me enough to want the movie playing in front of my peepers.

TwoBit said:

I forgot Edgar Wright was directing it. I gotta see it now.

Click to expand...

Also, this. ^

According to advanced screenings, a lot of people are calling it Edgar Wright's best work to date. This is the dude who did Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. How is that even possible?!

I don't think it's gonna top Shaun of the Dead, honestly.... but that's cause Shaun is one of my all-time favorite movies. It's a whole 'nother monster than a big budget action film.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/06/06/scott-pilgrim-vs-the-world-clip-scott-vs-lucas-lee/

New clip from the MTV Movie Awards pre-show. Enjoy!

Ugh. I can't believe Malaysia doesn't get this film until Frickin' November.

I got excited by the new trailer, so I walked to my comic book store in the pouring rain to spend $25 of the $50 that must last me ten more days on volume 2 of Scott Pilgrim, as well as Lost at Sea, because I heard that it is also very good.

I will be getting volumes 3-5 at my earliest convenience, and then waiting impatiently for volume 6 and the movie in August.

---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 PM ----------

Also, am I the only one who get giddy seeing Scott wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the old CBC gem logo?

For some reason it made me happy. And it made me seek a shirt out. And I might be ordering one of those shirts sometime when I can afford it.

What's that? You want more trailer? We GOT more trailer. International version ahoy!

I'm really on the fence here. Love the director, been hearing the hype, but the premise reeks of twee kawai garbage...

Don't see it.

I went and read volumes 1-5, and it's a pretty good comic, although sometimes I lose track of who's talking since the character designs are so simple. The almost-a-video-game-but-not-quite style of the world is pretty entertaining, and even though I am tired as hell of Cera he's pretty much a perfect Scott. I'm hoping this ends up being a great movie.

---------- Post added at 10:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

Also, BONUS LEVEL

Scott Pilgrim's E3 Trailer Blows Our Pixellated Socks Off

It looks like the guy who makes all those pixelated cartoons worked on this. Definitely the same style.

The first two trailers had me doubting Cera as Scott, but this international trailer almost has me seeing it.

I can't wait for this movie to come out. I was just talking to a friend of mine about it tonight. I finished volume 5 last week, and I'm pretty much going to re-read the whole thing after this busy weekend is over.

This is my big movie of the summer, so I'm hoping so too. Nothing else has this much awesome potential, nor the potential to fail so hard.



Ha, just kidding, The Last Airbender comes out next month. That can totally fail harder than this movie's even aware of. Scott Pilgrim, rock it!

"I dislike you, capice?"
"Tell it to the cleaning lady on monday."
"What?"
"Becasue you'll be dust by monday."
"Umm ..."
"Because you'll be pulverized in two seconds and the cleaning lady, she cleans up dust. She dusts."

Love it.

Rob King said:

"I dislike you, capice?"
"Tell it to the cleaning lady on monday."
"What?"
"Becasue you'll be dust by monday."
"Umm ..."
"Because you'll be pulverized in two seconds and the cleaning lady, she cleans up dust. She dusts."

Click to expand...

"And she gets weekends off. So, monday."

Stuff like this is PRECISELY why I effing love Edgar Wright:
Time Suck of the Day: The Interactive 'Scott Pilgrim' Trailer! - Cinematical

Has this ever been done before? I'm prepared to call this the best trailer of all time.

You know why I love Edgar Wright?

He came to the midnight screenings at the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, Texas, got on the mic and thanked us for supporting his little movie, and then proceeded to give everyone in the theater a high five while they played "Eye of the Tiger".

Also the movie was FUCKING AWESOME.

The Lovely Boner said:

Also the movie was FUCKING AWESOME.

Click to expand...

This is what I was looking for!

Seeing the movie in 4 hours, super excited!

Gusto;427334][QUOTE=The Lovely Boner said:

Also the movie was FUCKING AWESOME.

Click to expand...

This is what I was looking for!

Seeing the movie in 4 hours, super excited![/QUOTE]

WE MIGHT SEE IT AT THE SAME TIME!

Movie time buddies is what they'll call us!

I will be seeing it in just under five hours! 9:45pm EST. Can't wait!

AND IT WILL BE TRUUUUUUE

Fuuuuck, I was gonna see this tonight, but power went out, sick woman, and then family in town... damn.

It won't be here till late september!!! :'(

Saw it, loved it!

For those who read the books, or are interested in reading the books:

I'm probably going to write a longer review soon, but ... for now I'll just say it was rad as shit! Seriously, you need to see this if you like good things.

AWESOME! I can't wait to see it again. Its Edgar Wright, too, so I'm sure there's like 100 things going on that I didn't even pick up on yet.

Gusto said:

Saw it, loved it!

For those who read the books, or are interested in reading the books:

Spoiler

The movie makes use of the same elements and whatnot, just kinda mixes them around and combines them in different ways. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but if you go in expecting the same chain of events to unfold, you might be a little disappointed, if disappointed is the right word.

It's not worse or better, really. It's just different.

Click to expand...

checkeredhat said:

Spoiler

I didn't like the weird Seinfeld parody sequence though. It seemed very unecessary and didn't build up to anything. I didn't see the point.

Click to expand...

I laughed at it, but yeah, it kind of came out of nowhere, even given how surreal the movie felt at parts. I assume that wasn't related to the comics, seeing as it was mostly an audio gag?

Here are my thoughts in general!

Also, am I the only one who thought

Whoops. Scott Pilgrim made only $4m on Friday.

The Lovely Boner said:

Whoops. Scott Pilgrim made only $4m on Friday.

Click to expand...

According to Boxofficemojo, its only in 8th right now. Not a great start. And not the start it deserves.

What's it going up against?

AshburnerX said:

What's it going up against?

Click to expand...

According to BOM, the current Box office leader is The Other Guys. Expendables is currently in second, Inception's hanging on to third and Eat Pray Love in 4th. Dinner For Shmucks, Despicable Me and Salt fill in the gap.

I'd love for the good buzz to allow it to take off over tomorrow and Sunday but I'm doubtful.

checkeredhat;427584][QUOTE=AshburnerX said:

What's it going up against?

Click to expand...

According to BOM, the current Box office leader is The Other Guys. Expendables is currently in second, Inception's hanging on to third and Eat Pray Love in 4th. Dinner For Shmucks, Despicable Me and Salt fill in the gap.

I'd love for the good buzz to allow it to take off over tomorrow and Sunday but I'm doubtful.[/QUOTE]

So basically a smart, nerdy, romantic comedy is trying to compete with the Ultimate Action Movie, a lowest common denominator Will Farrel film, the Ultimate Mind Fuck movie, and some family movies? Yeah, this was just bad placement for them. This should have been released in September, when it wouldn't have had a whole lot of competition.

To be fair, I actually wanna see ALL of those movies. I'm seeing the Expendables tonight. I'm seeing Scotty P V the Dub again tomorrow.

---------- Post added at 04:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:30 PM ----------

This is a good year for movies.

The Lovely Boner said:

Whoops. Scott Pilgrim made only $4m on Friday.

Click to expand...

I guess most people out there don't like good things. :'(

Spoiler Talk:

Raemon777 said:

Spoiler Talk:

Spoiler

To the guy who said "the ending was better," were you referring to the book or the movie?

Click to expand...

Saw the movie last night. I really liked it!

I preferred the ending of the books, and the books in general, but I guess that was always gonna happen.

Gusto said:

I preferred the ending of the books, and the books in general, but I guess that was always gonna happen.

Click to expand...

Overall, the books were certainly better. There was more depth to the characters and the movies cut out virtually all side stories to make room for the main plot, which is all entirely understandable given that it was six books worth of material in a two hour movie, and it worked fantastically. I just didn't much care for the overly serious tone of the final book, as well as the grievances I already listed.

Regardless of which ending you prefer or even which story as a whole you prefer though, I think we can all agree that both are fantastic.

Aside from the weak link of the movie - Cera - I...think I like the movie better, overall. Music is so goddamn hard to pull off in comic form and it definitely made the movie much better in that sense. The music numbers, the acting, the sound effects, etc. And yeah, I kinda liked the ending for the movie better, too. It was more consistent.

The movie is getting a LOT of good word of mouth, though. Here's hoping it does better in the next few weeks.

I will say something a friend said: the movie and the books are different enough that they're separate entities from each other. There's a lot to love about each of them, for different reasons. This was probably one of the better comic adaptations (taking stuff straight from the comic), because it didn't try to be exactly like the comic, but trying to do it a little differently while keeping in the spirit of the comic.

Have you guys seen this? If not, you really should.

Saw the film again last night with a friend, and during the party scene where Scott is asking everyone "What do you know about Ramona Flowers?" she tapped me furiously on the shoulder and said "I went to high school with that girl!"

We stayed until the credits in order to make sure, and sure enough, Marlee Otto, Party Goer 1.

Kind of cool.

Gusto said:

Saw the film again last night with a friend, and during the party scene where Scott is asking everyone "What do you know about Ramona Flowers?" she tapped me furiously on the shoulder and said "I went to high school with that girl!"

We stayed until the credits in order to make sure, and sure enough, Marlee Otto, Party Goer 1.

Kind of cool.

Click to expand...

They make movies in Toronto?!

The Lovely Boner;427999][QUOTE=Gusto said:

Saw the film again last night with a friend, and during the party scene where Scott is asking everyone "What do you know about Ramona Flowers?" she tapped me furiously on the shoulder and said "I went to high school with that girl!"

We stayed until the credits in order to make sure, and sure enough, Marlee Otto, Party Goer 1.

Kind of cool.

Click to expand...

They make movies in Toronto?![/QUOTE]


Just a few

The Lovely Boner;427999][QUOTE=Gusto said:

Saw the film again last night with a friend, and during the party scene where Scott is asking everyone "What do you know about Ramona Flowers?" she tapped me furiously on the shoulder and said "I went to high school with that girl!"

We stayed until the credits in order to make sure, and sure enough, Marlee Otto, Party Goer 1.

Kind of cool.

Click to expand...

They make movies in Toronto?![/QUOTE]


You know it, guy.

Went to see this last night and I loved it. As many have commented, it obviously wasn't an exact copy of the books, but that would be nigh impossible anyhow. The spirit was the same, and I think on the whole it would be difficult to do a more faithful adaptation.

I loved the straight out homage to River City Ransom they did in the trailer. The bit with Simon and the guy telling Scott he was on the roof.

Also, does anyone else kinda want to see a Scott Pilgrim series based on the pre-movie stuff? That was pretty awesome.

Book spoilers.

Ok here's a quick review from someone who has never read the comic.

I thought the movie was pretty good. Not great, but pretty good. My gripe was really with the two main characters, Scott and Romona, who were probably actually the most uninteresting characters in the whole film. Now perhaps many would disagree but I remind you that I have never read the novels and therefore have no previous investment in these characters. All I have to go by is how they worked in the movie. I know how impossible it is for me to view a movie objectively when I'm very familiar with the source material.

Firstly, the two actors really had zero chemistry on screen, or rather weren't even given the time to build any chemistry as the movie zipped along at its frantic pace, something which made the whole romance pretty tough to buy. I also simply never really felt invested in these two characters, and found myself more feeling bad for Knives than rooting for Scott and Ramona, who simply weren't that likeable. This fact could also partially blamed on the two actors themselves. First we have Micheal Cera doing the only thing he can do, which is play Micheal Cera, something that I'm sure most people are pretty sick of by now. It used to be a funny shtick in Arrested Development and Superbad but it's really time for that kid to just go away. Romona really wasn't much better coming off as little more than an angsty hipster chick. Now I'm sure these characters were much more fleshed out in the books, but on screen, little about them worked for me.

What saved the film was the fun and inventive style which led into very fun and inventive fights scenes and an excellent supporting cast. Characters like Knives, Scott's roommate, and the Exes were all a blast to watch and really made the movie entertaining despite it's wishy washy main protagonists. Plus the Vegan Police bit really made me lawl.

All in all I'd call it a movie completely dripping with style and fun fights and one-liners, but a bit lacking in substance. It's lightspeed pacing both helped it by accentuating it's high caliber arcadey videogame style and hurt it by not giving the romance aspect ample time to actually grow naturally making it feel forced. Also, Cera was a bad choice, but I think most people knew that going in.

All valid comments on the film, but I wanted to point out that:

Oddbot said:

[...]and found myself more feeling bad for Knives than rooting for Scott and Ramona, who simply weren't that likeable.

Click to expand...

Is essentially the POINT of the story. Neither are supposed to be very likeable. Scott used Knives for the apparent status of having a girlfriend and nothing more, that's established within 5 minutes of the movie starting, and didn't have the balls to end it properly either. You should feel sorry for her. He's also been playing the victim card even though he's been broken up with his previous ex for over a year.
He's an ass, and he needs to learn to grow up and deal with relationships like an adult, not like a high schooler now.
Likewise with Ramona, who's gone boyfriend to boyfriend, dumping them when she gets bored, before they can hurt her. She needs to learn to take that chance romantically.

I have read the comics, so I kind of think about this stuff more than the pace of the film allows (It really should have been two movies to give it some time to breathe, but they took a gamble on it as is, really). But I've always felt that that's the way to see the story.

I agree with checkeredhat.

Oddbot, your takedown of the movie was pretty similar to mine, and if you want the extended romantic growth of Scott and Ramona (as well as various other characters!) I suggest you read the comics.

I saw it last night and thought it was a very fun movie. I was pleasantly surprised by both Cera and Winstead who ended up being much more enjoyable to watch than I'd anticipated. The supporting cast and music were also excellent and I left the theater contemplating the possibility of reading the comics.

I didn't think Cera was a terrible Scott. He was a little different from book-Scott, but not too much, I didn't think.

checkeredhat said:

All valid comments on the film, but I wanted to point out that:

Oddbot said:

[...]and found myself more feeling bad for Knives than rooting for Scott and Ramona, who simply weren't that likeable.

Click to expand...

Is essentially the POINT of the story. Neither are supposed to be very likeable. Scott used Knives for the apparent status of having a girlfriend and nothing more, that's established within 5 minutes of the movie starting, and didn't have the balls to end it properly either. You should feel sorry for her. He's also been playing the victim card even though he's been broken up with his previous ex for over a year.
He's an ass, and he needs to learn to grow up and deal with relationships like an adult, not like a high schooler now.
Likewise with Ramona, who's gone boyfriend to boyfriend, dumping them when she gets bored, before they can hurt her. She needs to learn to take that chance romantically.

I have read the comics, so I kind of think about this stuff more than the pace of the film allows (It really should have been two movies to give it some time to breathe, but they took a gamble on it as is, really). But I've always felt that that's the way to see the story.

Click to expand...

My wife and I have NOT read the comic, but we are planning to buy.

We both agree that we hated Scott for what he is and did to poor Knives. We love Knives. She is too awesome for words. In the same token, I think that is what made the movie for us. The main characters (Scott and Ramona) need to grow up a lot.

Having come down from my post-theatre euphoria a bit, I still prefer Edgar Wright's previous two movies over this one. But I am eagerly awaiting seeing this film again.

- Philly-B, who is also going to be purchasing the comic ASAP

checkeredhat said:

All valid comments on the film, but I wanted to point out that:

Oddbot said:

[...]and found myself more feeling bad for Knives than rooting for Scott and Ramona, who simply weren't that likeable.

Click to expand...

Is essentially the POINT of the story. Neither are supposed to be very likeable. Scott used Knives for the apparent status of having a girlfriend and nothing more, that's established within 5 minutes of the movie starting, and didn't have the balls to end it properly either. You should feel sorry for her. He's also been playing the victim card even though he's been broken up with his previous ex for over a year.
He's an ass, and he needs to learn to grow up and deal with relationships like an adult, not like a high schooler now.
Likewise with Ramona, who's gone boyfriend to boyfriend, dumping them when she gets bored, before they can hurt her. She needs to learn to take that chance romantically.

Click to expand...

I get what your saying, and I did get that from the movie, but at the same time I found them kind of boring as well. I feel the supporting cast really stole the show from them.

What. The. FUCK?!?

I have now seen both Scott Pilgrim AND The Expendables. How on God's Green Earth is Scott so far below that loud, dumb movie in the ratings?!? I was fucking blown away by Pilgrim! BLOWN AWAY! I hate, hate, HATE Michael Cera and think all of his characters suck and are whiny pussies. But this movie is so damned good I forgot he was a dipshit and just enjoyed the ride. It's such a stylistically amazing film that you have to actively watch. And it was funny! I'll put up a more thoughtful review soon, but for now I have to roll around in the vibes of awesome.

I didn't think Scott was boring, but I thought Ramona was. After the initial amazingly mysterious-ness vibe transitions to him actually, you know, talking to her, I was really underwhelmed. And while I did find Scott fun to watch, I didn't really get why Ramona was into him either. So overall I fall into the "failed as a romantic comedy, but succeeded on plenty of other levels." I appreciated that it at least made an effort to subvert the traditional romantic comedy tropes, but SOME level of chemistry is needed to identify with the characters, even if you aren't supposed to root for them.

My favorite description of Michael Cera:

However, Michael Cera is the noble metal of the Hollywood periodic table; nothing reacts with him. I'm not sure who you'd put against Michael Cera to provide romantic sparks, but I'm pretty sure Angelina Jolie would slide off his Teflon nerdery.

Click to expand...

I enjoyed the movie, but I could see how some people wouldn't care for it. Seems like a kind of niche thing. The often brisk dialogue and sometimes jerky movements--as well as the use of music--reminded me of FLCL. I didn't know much about this before. Checked out one of the books at my local comic shop today. It was pretty cool.

They are showing the Film in Germany in January!!! WTF?! i need my pilgrim fix! on a 60ft screen! goddamn!

Spoony made a hell of a review: Linky

He really got deep into it at points. I think he captured what was great about the story and the character motivations in particular, including some things most people seem annoyed about.

---------- Post added at 09:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 AM ----------

Dave said:

What. The. FUCK?!?

I have now seen both Scott Pilgrim AND The Expendables. How on God's Green Earth is Scott so far below that loud, dumb movie in the ratings?!? I was fucking blown away by Pilgrim! BLOWN AWAY! I hate, hate, HATE Michael Cera and think all of his characters suck and are whiny pussies. But this movie is so damned good I forgot he was a dipshit and just enjoyed the ride. It's such a stylistically amazing film that you have to actively watch. And it was funny! I'll put up a more thoughtful review soon, but for now I have to roll around in the vibes of awesome.

Click to expand...

See, I keep reading that old fogies can't properly enjoy this movie. This clearly proves otherwise.

I'm totally with ya on the actively watch thing. I haven't felt that glued to my seat in a theatre in a while.

Philosopher B. said:

Spoony made a hell of a review: Linky

He really got deep into it at points. I think he captured what was great about the story and the character motivations in particular, including some things most people seem annoyed about.

---------- Post added at 09:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 AM ----------

Dave said:

What. The. FUCK?!?

I have now seen both Scott Pilgrim AND The Expendables. How on God's Green Earth is Scott so far below that loud, dumb movie in the ratings?!? I was fucking blown away by Pilgrim! BLOWN AWAY! I hate, hate, HATE Michael Cera and think all of his characters suck and are whiny pussies. But this movie is so damned good I forgot he was a dipshit and just enjoyed the ride. It's such a stylistically amazing film that you have to actively watch. And it was funny! I'll put up a more thoughtful review soon, but for now I have to roll around in the vibes of awesome.

Click to expand...

See, I keep reading that old fogies can't properly enjoy this movie. This clearly proves otherwise.

I'm totally with ya on the actively watch thing. I haven't felt that glued to my seat in a theatre in a while.

Click to expand...

heh. I think we all agree that the movie was release on a bad time. Too many competition of "common general stuff" that people seem to love to watch but can't afford to watch this great flick (I consider it to be a great flick in my book)

Since the economy is not so great, people can only choose to see so many movies a month (if any) and thus I don't see Scott Pilgrim is going to be any better. I hope the DVD sales would be better.

Yeah, I'm hoping that all the good word of mouth will give it a good second weekend. Is there anything significant coming out in the next few weeks?

Also, has it gone international yet, such as Britain? I know it's been established that few people on this side of the pond know who Edgar Wright is, but that's a different story over there. Hopefully, that'll make a difference. Also, I really hope DVD sales will give it the much-needed boost. Personally, I'm planning on pre-ordering the hell out of it.

I give Cera a pass on this one, because while he wasn't a perfect Scott Pilgrim, I can't think of another actor who would have been any better. Scott's just a really weird character; I think he did the best he could.

Random thoughts:

The guy playing Young Neil looked too old.

Scott and Stacey's ages were each reduced by one year, I guess to make it seem a little bit less creepy that he was dating a 17 year old, or seem less sad that he was still unemployed?

Between reading the books and watching the trailers, I feel like I was spoiled for 90% of the humor. It was still awesome, but it would probably have been a lot funnier if I had come in knowing nothing. I actually enjoyed the parts where the movie branched off and did its own thing more than the parts where they were just reading the comic verbatim.

The girl playing Julie seemed like she was trying too hard to come off bitchy.

They absolutely fucking *gutted* Kim Pine's character. Probably my least favorite thing that got cut. Book Kim was an extremely dynamic and complex character, while Movie Kim is the snarky tomboy who occasionally says something sarcastic.

I didn't mind them cutting out Lisa Miller, except that I have a friend with that name which would have been cool.


I'm not terribly worried about the weekend box office returns; it's the sort of movie that becomes a cult classic and makes most of its money off DVD sales.

Philosopher B. said:

Spoony made a hell of a review: Linky

Click to expand...

That was great, and touched on a few points that I didn't even notice.

Oddbot;429129][QUOTE=checkeredhat said:

All valid comments on the film, but I wanted to point out that:

Oddbot said:

[...]and found myself more feeling bad for Knives than rooting for Scott and Ramona, who simply weren't that likeable.

Click to expand...

Is essentially the POINT of the story. Neither are supposed to be very likeable. Scott used Knives for the apparent status of having a girlfriend and nothing more, that's established within 5 minutes of the movie starting, and didn't have the balls to end it properly either. You should feel sorry for her. He's also been playing the victim card even though he's been broken up with his previous ex for over a year.
He's an ass, and he needs to learn to grow up and deal with relationships like an adult, not like a high schooler now.
Likewise with Ramona, who's gone boyfriend to boyfriend, dumping them when she gets bored, before they can hurt her. She needs to learn to take that chance romantically.

Click to expand...

I get what your saying, and I did get that from the movie, but at the same time I found them kind of boring as well. I feel the supporting cast really stole the show from them.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. I definitely agree that the supporting cast stole the show. Its often the same in the books too. Wallace Wells and Kim Pine rock the books.

---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:28 PM ----------

Philosopher B. said:

Spoony made a hell of a review: Linky

Click to expand...

I watched his Ependables review, and I find the man annoying beyond belief after that. Anyone who says "And that's all I have to say about that" and then continues to babble on for another 15 minutes repeating almost exactly what he has just said, is incredibly annoying.
However, I am intrigued by your promise of his delving deep into the story, and as such I am going to watch this review...

*EDIT*
Ungh, he's STILL talking about the Expendables, and STILL saying exactly what he said 15 times in the last review, and calling it a "recant" of his previous review.

Bergamot said:

Scott and Stacey's ages were each reduced by one year, I guess to make it seem a little bit less creepy that he was dating a 17 year old, or seem less sad that he was still unemployed?

Click to expand...

It is interesting on how age is perceived in different bracket. I was talking with my wife on this. She and I are 7 years apart. I start dating her when she was 20.

she always go back "do you how old I was when you were....."

We look back.
If I was 10 and she was 3, it was cute she said, "I wanna be your bride" like they do in Japanese anime show.
if I was 14 and she was 7, it was kinda weird, but people will think I'm her older brother looking out for her
if I was 16 and she is 9, that is creepy and probably get me into trouble
if I was 18 and she is 11, I WILL go to jail
if I was 25 and she is 18, It looks kinda weird, but won't go to jail
when I was 27 and she is 20, it is ok. (this is when I start dating her, she came to Texas to visit a friend and decides to stay)
Of course as you get older, the age-gap is less of an issue.... weird huh?

Half your age plus seven is still a reasonable scale, except where the male is between 18-22.

Scott (23) dating Knives (17 years old) is iffy at best. But then, they were never really dating.

Gusto said:

Scott (23) dating Knives (17 years old) is iffy at best. But then, they were never really dating.

Click to expand...

No, it's cool. Chill out. It's like in Trainspotting.

Allen said:

Scott (23) dating Knives (17 years old) is iffy at best. But then, they were never really dating.

Click to expand...

No, it's cool. Chill out. It's like in Trainspotting.[/QUOTE]

it is in grieving period

Gusto said:

Half your age plus seven is still a reasonable scale, except where the male is between 18-22..

Click to expand...

I think that last line stops the scale from being reasonable as that is the age range where you would most likely to use such a metric. 23-30 you can kind use it but at that point I would just use an age difference/life experience difference instead.

Telephius;429849][QUOTE=Gusto said:

Half your age plus seven is still a reasonable scale, except where the male is between 18-22..

Click to expand...

I think that last line stops the scale from being reasonable as that is the age range where you would most likely to use such a metric. 23-30 you can kind use it but at that point I would just use an age difference/life experience difference instead.[/QUOTE]
I think Gusto means because in that age range, if there is sex involved, its illegal.
18m-16f
19m-16f
20m-17f
21m-17f

checkeredhat;429873][QUOTE=Telephius;429849][QUOTE=Gusto said:

Half your age plus seven is still a reasonable scale, except where the male is between 18-22..

Click to expand...

I think that last line stops the scale from being reasonable as that is the age range where you would most likely to use such a metric. 23-30 you can kind use it but at that point I would just use an age difference/life experience difference instead.[/QUOTE]
I think Gusto means because in that age range, if there is sex involved, its illegal.
18m-16f
19m-16f
20m-17f
21m-17f[/QUOTE]

Age of consent in Canada is 16. No illegal.

Let's talk some more about fucking high school girls and how legal it is in this thread.

AshburnerX;429882][QUOTE=checkeredhat;429873][QUOTE=Telephius;429849][QUOTE=Gusto said:

Half your age plus seven is still a reasonable scale, except where the male is between 18-22..

Click to expand...

I think that last line stops the scale from being reasonable as that is the age range where you would most likely to use such a metric. 23-30 you can kind use it but at that point I would just use an age difference/life experience difference instead.[/QUOTE]
I think Gusto means because in that age range, if there is sex involved, its illegal.
18m-16f
19m-16f
20m-17f
21m-17f[/QUOTE]

Age of consent in Canada is 16. No illegal.[/QUOTE]
I'm actualy aware of that, but in many of the States it would be. Granted, Scott PIlgrim takes place in Toronto, but I thought we had just gotten entirely derailed and weren't even talking about that anymore.
On that note, lets get back on topic. This movie rocked.

This is opening weekend in the UK, where Edgar Wright is more well known than over here. Think this'll be a good weekend for it?

checkeredhat said:

This is opening weekend in the UK, where Edgar Wright is more well known than over here. Think this'll be a good weekend for it?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know a bunch of my English friends have been itching to go and see it. I actually turned a bunch of them onto it thanks to the game that came out on PS3 and the comics.

Oh, I was mistaken. The UK release is not this weekend. Its on the 25th, apparently.

For all of those crowing about its staying power and the magical strength of word of mouth, Scott Pilgrim's Friday was over 60% down from the opening, which is a huge drop on par with Gigli.

*crosses his fingers for strong DVD sales and/or British ticket sales*

*Shoots self*

So alone...

Look, there wasn't going to be a sequel really. And yes, it does mean there's much less chance of more movies like Scott Pilgrim. That's true. BUT we still have the movie Scott Pilgrim, and be thankful it's in theaters for another week (at most, woof) and you can go see it and love the shit out of it no matter how many other people had no interest in it.

I thought I said that a couple pages ago.

Granted, I hadn't seen the movie then, but it's still true!

I'm looking forward to listening to the DVD commentary around the winter.

Meh... Scott Pilgrim could turn out to be one of those films that gets vindicated one Cable, Like The Shawshank Redemption. Even if it doesn't, how many indie comics out there do you think need a movie?

- The Walking Dead: Already getting a TV series by AMC. No movie required.

- Chew: I don't see how they'd ever get past the cannibal issue without going full-on Black Comedy. Even then, this would be better portrayed as a comedic Police Procedural TV series than a short, 2 hour movie.

What other great indie series are there?

Chew is meant to be a black comedy. It's hardly police procedural at all when his partner has a bionic eye that can hack into any database.

Y: The Last Man and Invincible were optioned, but I've heard nothing about either for ages.

The sad thing is that with Kick-Ass and Pilgrim's lack of success, it means studios are going to chance it on lesser-known comic book properties. I just don't understand why Pilgirm's not doing well. It's a great movie for teens, gamers, etc. Expendables, much to my dismay, destroyed it. Ditto for Eat Pray Love, but that's a totally different audience. Most everyone who has seen it have loved it. It's gotten great reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, far surpassing Expendables.

So yeah, I'm really, really, really hoping it does well on video. A movie this good deserves at least some success.

I've heard complaining about the love story actually, from people who pretty much missed the point and should've seen the Julie Roberts movie instead.

ThatNickGuy said:

I just don't understand why Pilgirm's not doing well.

Click to expand...

Michael Cera. People are convinced that he can only act like himself and that therefore if he's in a movie, he's acting like that same character again. They don't want to see that.

Even though that's not the case, Scott Pilgrim is a slight departure and he does well with it. But that's the main reason. He can't carry a movie as a star. What he needs is a supporting role, that is a large departure from his usual shtick, to show off his chops. That's the only way he's going to break out of his current public perception.

And personally, I wouldn't care if he DID do the same shtick every time. He does it well.

See, the problem with Michael Sera as Scott Pilgrim is simple: Who else would YOU pick for it? I can't really think of anyone else.

Anton Yelchin (sp?); aka, Chekov from the new Star Trek?

Cera.

AshburnerX said:

See, the problem with Michael Sera as Scott Pilgrim is simple: Who else would YOU pick for it? I can't really think of anyone else.

Click to expand...

Oh I think the casting was perfectly fine. But much of the general population seems to have it in for him. I really feel like that's the main reason people are staying away. But I don't blame that on Cera or Edgar Wright's casting choices, the public is just stupid and quick to judge.

People underestimate actors based on their past roles. Especially comedians.

"Jim Carrey only ever does rubber faced, broad comedy, he could never pull off a serious role!" (prior to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)
"Robin Williams only ever does dirty jokes! He could never pull off a family movie!" (Followed by Robin Williams only ever does family comedies! He could never pull off a serious role, prior to Insomnia and One Hour Photo)
Rodney Dangerfield, Tom Hanks, Bill Murray,etc, etc etc.

It takes a REALLY broad change in direction to garner attention though. Scott Pilgrim is definitely a departure and I think he did fine. But I don't think the general public perception of "Really, Michael Cera's palying George Michael Bluth in another movie?!" is going to change for a while.

*EDIT* actually, it all makes me think of the "I didn't do it" episode of the Simpsons. Comedians develop a public persona/ act/ shtick, whatever you want to call it, and if its funny people want to see it, and they don't want to see them do anything else. And then eventually, suddenly, like a switch goes off, all of a sudden it becomes "is this really all you can do?" and suddenly its not popular anymore.
Michael Cera has reached that point with the majority of the film going audience.
"Woozle wazzle" indeed, Bart. "Woozle wazzle" indeed.

I don't think Cera strayed too far from his usual schtick, to be honest. Some of it was a departure, yeah, but not for the most part. I don't know if I would put him in the same category of comedians as the others you listed. I would barely put him in the category of comedian in the first place.

You're right, though, Checkster. Public opinion can change pretty quick, depending on the actor. I would go out on a limb and say Carrey made a believer out of me with The Truman Show, before Eternal Sunshine knocked it out of the park.

Sometimes, though, it's a gradual winning over the public. For example, Leonardo Dicaprio. Hated by anyone over the age of 16 (especially non-female teens) after Titanic, but now? Goddamn, that guy's impervious to a bad movie.

ThatNickGuy said:

I don't think Cera strayed too far from his usual schtick, to be honest. Some of it was a departure, yeah, but not for the most part. I don't know if I would put him in the same category of comedians as the others you listed. I would barely put him in the category of comedian in the first place.

You're right, though, Checkster. Public opinion can change pretty quick, depending on the actor. I would go out on a limb and say Carrey made a believer out of me with The Truman Show, before Eternal Sunshine knocked it out of the park.

Sometimes, though, it's a gradual winning over the public. For example, Leonardo Dicaprio. Hated by anyone over the age of 16 (especially non-female teens) after Titanic, but now? Goddamn, that guy's impervious to a bad movie.

Click to expand...

No it wasn't a huge departure. The action sequences were the biggest departure, but the character of Scott is SLIGHTLY differet. And I'm by no means he's saying he is a comedian or an actor of the Calibre of anyone listed, but using those people of examples of the public mentality regarding comedic actors, as they're very obvious and easy to understand examples of what I'm talking about.

Also, yeah some people were probably convinced by the Tuman Show, but I think it was Spotless Mind that really changed things. Same with Robin Williams, if you look at Bicentennial Man or even Jack, he was changing his career's direction for a while before Insomnia and One Hour Photo. I seem to remember reading that he ALWAYS wanted to do serious drama, actually.

DiCaprio had me convinced after Gangs of New York, even though his accent in that movie was atrocious. But I was referring specifically to comedic actors, who I think get it the harshest.

A more recent example would be Will Ferrel, who was on top of Comedy Mountain after Old School and Anchorman, and then his audience response kind of fell off for quite a bit afterwards with Bewitched, Kicking and Screaming, Semi- Pro, Blades of Steel and Land of the Lost. Even Step Brothers and Talladega Nights as I recall weren't as well received, though I think Talladega might have done well financially... I'm actually glad The Other Guys seems to be doing pretty well.

See, I'm not a big fan of Ferrell, but one of my favourite movies of all time is Stranger Than Fiction. He made a believer out of me, there.

The funny (see what I did there?) thing about comedians is I honestly never assume they can't do drama. An actor friend of mine said that one of the hardest things to do in acting is comedy. It's nost just a matter of delievering the lines with a particular emotion, but there's a timing to that needs to be flawless for the comedy falls flat. It's no surprise to me that some of the best actors out there started in comedy. Or in the same vein, some of the best serious actors who try their hand at comedy wind up being awesome. DeNiro, Morgan Freeman, or George Clooney (who is starting to win me over more and more) for example.

I would definitely agree with that. I think people ASSUME comedy is very easy. We associate feeling better with a more carefree, easy job. Which is weird, because everyone knows what its like to try to tell a joke a friend told you and have it be nowhere near as funny, or describe a stand up comedian's routine and have to add a disclaimer when no one laughs and tell them "Its really more HOW they said it". It is definitely all about the timing.
But its also why you don't see comedy films up for any Oscars ever, even though I think most people would tell you their favourite films are often comedies. The truth is, making people feel BAD is way easier.
Any time a comedian tries a serious role, I always have to tell certain people to shut up and give them a chance. But I didn't necessarily mean comedians switching to dramatic acting either, I just meant that mentality switch from "No no, don't do that, just do this!" to "is this ALL you can do?", which to reiterate and bring it back to the thread topic, I think is why people aren't diggin' on Michael Cera as Scott Pilgrim.

Step Brothers was a huge financial success, especially for a hard-R comedy.

I really don't think the success/failure of the movie had anything to do with Scott Pilgrim. It mostly failed because the movie was just really weird, released in a strange spot, and had no star power compared to everything else.

The Lovely Boner said:

Step Brothers was a huge financial success, especially for a hard-R comedy.

I really don't think the success/failure of the movie had anything to do with Scott Pilgrim. It mostly failed because the movie was just really weird, released in a strange spot, and had no star power compared to everything else.

Click to expand...

Step Brothers was a hard R? Really? I need to watch it again. I know the Canadian ratings are much softer than the American ones, but still. I don't remember it being that raunchy.

Hmm, looked it up on BOM and you are correct about its numbers. Actually very successful. So that is a poor example of what I was talking about, but I think overall the trend still shows.

That it was that successful is a serious shock to me, because the only people I know who have seen Step Brothers are the people *I've* showed it too.

The Lovely Boner said:

I really don't think the success/failure of the movie had anything to do with Scott Pilgrim. It mostly failed because the movie was just really weird, released in a strange spot, and had no star power compared to everything else.

Click to expand...

Honestly, all they had to do was make this a mid-September release and it would have done VERY well. It would have beat the Halloween Monster Mash and November Family/Seasonal Films, as well as waited out the Summer blockbusters.

AshburnerX;430407][QUOTE=The Lovely Boner said:

I really don't think the success/failure of the movie had anything to do with Scott Pilgrim. It mostly failed because the movie was just really weird, released in a strange spot, and had no star power compared to everything else.

Click to expand...

Honestly, all they had to do was make this a mid-September release and it would have done VERY well. It would have beat the Halloween Monster Mash and November Family/Seasonal Films, as well as waited out the Summer blockbusters.[/QUOTE]

Its a combination of things, for sure. And its release time is probably the biggest reason, I think you're both onto something there. But I think the question is regarding the current situation, why aren't people seeing it. Not why isn't it doing so well, but why aren't people seeing it.

But yeah, I just looked up movie releases for the rest of 2010 and honestly from here until Jackass 3D and RED, there's nothing that interests me. And from there its a dry spell until Tron Legacy comes out.

Err, I meant to say because of Michael Cera. That's glowing praise that I just kind of assumed it was him.

Vampires Suck is #2 and Scott Pilgrim is #10 box office this weekend. I hate this country.

Allen said:

Scott (23) dating Knives (17 years old) is iffy at best. But then, they were never really dating.

Click to expand...

No, it's cool. Chill out. It's like in Trainspotting.[/QUOTE]

IMDB says Ellen Wong (actress playing Knives) is 25 and Michael Cera (playing Scott Pilgrim) is 22 or 23.

Whaaaa...

Dave said:

Vampires Suck is #2 and Scott Pilgrim is #10 box office this weekend. I hate this country.

Click to expand...

^I was going to say something along these lines...

But you got me wondering if the Canadian Box office rankings are any different than the American ones. I just looked up last weeks and up until #5 its the same, but afterwards its kind of different. I'm going to check up on it again

escushion;430449][QUOTE=Allen said:

Scott (23) dating Knives (17 years old) is iffy at best. But then, they were never really dating.

Click to expand...

No, it's cool. Chill out. It's like in Trainspotting.[/QUOTE]

IMDB says Ellen Wong (actress playing Knives) is 25 and Michael Cera (playing Scott Pilgrim) is 22 or 23.

Whaaaa...[/QUOTE]

22 or 23? What?
I'm pretty sure he's 22. A guy I worked with last summer went to high school with him and he was two years younger than me, so if Cera was in the same grade as him, he'd be 22 now.

Canadian Box office was surprisingly different from the overall North American one, though the top 10 is all the same movies just in a different order. Scott Pilgrim was 9th over the weekend instead of 10th.
Box Office
The big difference is Lottery Ticket and Piranha 3D. Apparently we went crazy for the Piranhas over the weekend, and Canadian audiences let Lottery Ticket debut in 17th, in stark contrast to the North American 4th.

What is WRONG with people?

escushion said:

What is WRONG with people?

Click to expand...

People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

checkeredhat said:

Canadian audiences let Lottery Ticket debut in 17th, in stark contrast to the North American 4th.

Click to expand...

Theory: Canada is full of racists.

Theory: Canadians don't care about American lotteries because of the vast difference in gambling regulations between the two nations.

HCGLNS said:

Theory: Canadians don't care about American lotteries because of the vast difference in gambling regulations between the two nations.

Click to expand...

Look, it's not my fault their lotteries pay out in bottles of pure maple syrup instead of money.

True story: I have bought exactly one lottery ticket in my life. The woman at the store asked if I had my ticket for the big draw that night, and I thought "Why not?" I forgot that I had one until the day after winning tickets had to be claimed, and though I still know where it is (it's only a few weeks old at this point) I'm afraid to check it and discover that I won something.

Rob King said:

I forgot that I had one until the day after winning tickets had to be claimed, and though I still know where it is (it's only a few weeks old at this point).

Click to expand...

????

You have an entire year from the draw date to claim your prize. At least you're not the newf who had the $30M ticket voided.

HCGLNS;430948][QUOTE=Rob King said:

I forgot that I had one until the day after winning tickets had to be claimed, and though I still know where it is (it's only a few weeks old at this point).

Click to expand...

????

You have an entire year from the draw date to claim your prize. At least you're not the newf who had the $30M ticket voided.[/QUOTE]

...

Well, for some reason I thought it was a week after.

Just checked it, and I got nothin'. Too bad.

Rob King;430959][QUOTE=HCGLNS;430948][QUOTE=Rob King said:

I forgot that I had one until the day after winning tickets had to be claimed, and though I still know where it is (it's only a few weeks old at this point).

Click to expand...

????

You have an entire year from the draw date to claim your prize. At least you're not the newf who had the $30M ticket voided.[/QUOTE]

...

Well, for some reason I thought it was a week after.

Just checked it, and I got nothin'. Too bad.[/QUOTE]

I wonder how vastly different your post would have been if you won, I imagine it would have included "so long suckers".

The movie was phenomenal. I've seen it twice in theatres to support it (though sadly I know it won't help much in the long run) and bought the Soundtrack.

Shortly after I bought the graphic novel 6 book set from Amazon.

I'm a Pilgrim fan for sure, and that's cause I can't stand Cera. Anyonelse think the kid from Zombieland would have done a better job?

Shegokigo said:

Anyonelse think the kid from Zombieland would have done a better job?

Click to expand...

Maybe!

I always felt that guy is trying to be Michael Cera and not doing it as well as Michael Cera does. I think he looks the part a little more than Cera does, but whether or not he could do a better performance? I really couldn't say.

I actually think a large part of the reason Cera was cast was probably that Edgar wright probably wanted to cast a Canadian and Cera's from Brampton. I've seen Wright on his interactive trailer thing and also read in interviews that he made it a point to cast Canadian and American actors, and didn't want to cast any Europeans. The guy that played Mathew Pattal happened to hide his English accent so well that Edgar Wright didn't know he was English until after he had given him the part.

I think Jesse Eisenberg is a better actor than Michael Cera, so he might have been better. I don't think it would have really changed the success of the movie either way though.

I picked up on the metaphor stuff people were mentioning on my second viewing. We were the only ones in the theater for its last night of shows at our theater, so we could talk and stuff.

It's a great movie; it's a shame it didn't do better, but it's got a place in my heart and a place in my DVDs when it is released.