Scott Pilgrim Versus Himself (Some Thoughts On The Scott Pilgrim Movie)
-
Damn, this keyboard has it in for me. Did I pee on its Mom? I bet I peed on its Mom. I pee on keyboards all the time. I get drunk and I’m like, “Yo, is that a keyboard?” And someone’s like, “Word.” And then I’m peeing all over it. Don’t even ask what I do to mice. Like, not even computer mice. Real mice. Cheese-eaters. Big ears. Pants and suspenders.
Sorry. What did you come here for again?
Oh. Oh. Right. I just saw Scott Pilgrim Versus The World, and you want to know what I thought.
I can do that.
In General?
Really dug it. Film has a kind of crazy electricity, a ball-tickling energy that keeps you giggling and shifting in your seat the whole time. Edgar Wright is a master of the form — and by “form” I don’t necessarily mean “film,” but rather, “self-referential stories that transcend the reference material and become something all their own.” Spaced, Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz — all films built on the backs of other work, but films that then use those backs to catapult themselves over a wall and into an entirely different yard.
That said, would Wright rock doing something 100% original? Like, something straight out of somebody’s head, something that isn’t using a pop culture springboard as… erm, a springboard? I dunno. I think so.
Time will tell.
This flick, though: a total blasty-blast.
Scrape Away The Video Game Veneer
And you’ll find a film (based on the comic, a comic of which I’ve only read half) that has a lot going on, which is perhaps unexpected. You think, “Oh, shiny. Video game references! Coins! 1-Up! Comic book stylings, too! And fights! And fun! And colors! And cool music!”
But it goes well-beyond all that. Contained within this story are multitudes and metaphors — one’s past relationships are more than just baggage. Baggage is passive. No, these ex-boyfriends and girlfriends on all sides of the fence represent a kind of trap: it’s more than how we’re weighed down by our experiences. It’s instead how those experiences can haunt us like ghosts, or how they can be weapons used to hurt — barbs and lashes and blades. If we cannot get past someone’s whirling, aggro death-baggage, well, our hearts will be forever doomed.
Further, it’s easy to see that this is very much a film about growing up. My feelings are, each generation is successfully flimsier than the last, like a document run through the copier so many times that the original has lost all meaning. Despite the marketing, this is not a film for the generation that has come since mine: in fact, I’d say it’s a volley across the bow of our damn generation (c’mon, the video game references are generally pretty retro). That volley is a cannonball of condemnations: hey, jerks, you’re self-consumed, self-absorbed, you’re weak and non-committal and bonded to the past, you can’t grow up because you won’t grow up and just in case you didn’t know, you’re basically one big man-child.
It’s not an unfair message. It’s harsh — and peel away the candy-coating of the film, you’ll find this accusation lurking in the sour, lip-puckering middle.
But It Doesn’t Go Any Deeper Than That
And now we come to the “critical” portion of the post — my one concern over the film is that the messages and metaphors and meanings are barely concealed by that candy-coating. These lessons aren’t deep. In story terms, the movie unabashedly “on the nose.” In fact, the lessons and metaphors are more or less smashed into the bridge of our noses with the weight and velocity of Ramona’s big honkin’ hell-hammer.
As a result, it occasionally comes across feeling a little shallow — better had they not asserted this so forthrightly, perhaps? Perhaps.
Mind you, this sense of shallowness doesn’t come across (to me) in the actual comic. Something about the way it’s drawn (and drawn out) suggests an almost literary meandering through these messages: less firm, less overt, less bold-faced Comic Sans smack-to-the-chops. It’s for this reason that the comic will always be superior, though the film has a pretty good go at it.
I mean, I can’t blame ‘em too much — they had a lot to condense, and condense it, they did. I just think maybe if they had pulled back on the reins a little instead of letting the horse go all stompy-stompy the audience might be treated to the dose of subtlety and nuance found on the pages.
It does nothing to diminish the fun of the film, mind you. Still enjoyable from start to finish, though the constant battles get a little weary, and some of the exes are a little more “filled in” than others (in the book they’re more fleshed-out, whereas here they’re generally straight-up caricatures). Anyway. Criticism over.
Meandering Thoughts
Say what you want, but that new Culkin brother (did they just make him out of spare Culkin parts?) is the shit. You heard it here first: Kieran Culkin is star material.
So too with Mary Elizabeth Winstead. Can’t wait to see her again. (Did you know she’s John McClane’s daughter? Er, I mean, she plays her — not trying to get all meta-fiction on your ass.) She owns the Ramona role, but also makes you want to see her again and again: in roles beyond this.
Actually, the whole damn cast was top-notch.
The music was super delightful. All that fuzzy grungy garagey goodness.
Cera does a commendable Pilgrim. Not perfect: I kind of wanted more twinkly-eyed charm and cocky naivete? But then again, I can’t think of anybody who would capture it so well. So, maybe he is perfect? Fuck, I dunno. Did I mention I hate this keyboard? For reals. The shift key is grumpy, so it does not capitalize with any consistency. Punch! Kick! Pee!
The video game references, again, are fairly retro. I think that’s a good thing and I think this speaks very exclusively to my generation — those who played Zelda, Mario, Mortal Kombat, who remember the “You Got Mail!” fanfare from AOL. That’s not to say it won’t play to younger crowds — it will, because it’s fucking fun as shit. Older crowds, I’m not so sure.
Sadly, the film doesn’t look to have performed all that admirably at the box office. With its $60 mil budget, unless it gains some steam you’ll see domestic tally around… what? $25, 30 million? That said, I suspect it’ll gain life after the box office: cult classics like this have a way of becoming legitimate classics over time. [EDIT: Is there something to the thought that the winner of the weekend is a traditional 1980s-era ass-kick-fest? Manly Men being Men as opposed to an 80s-aesthetic video game reference film where Girly Boys need to become Men? I dunno. You tell me. Feels like the faint whisper of something cultural.)
Anyone else see it? Anyone else planning to?
About The Author
ChuckWendig
Chuck Wendig is equal parts novelist, screenwriter, and game designer. He is the author of the novels DOUBLE DEAD, BLACKBIRDS, and MOCKINGBIRD. In addition, he's got a metric boatload of writing-related e-books available, including the popular 500 WAYS TO BE A BETTER WRITER. He currently lives in the wilds of Pennsyltucky with wife, dog, and newborn progeny.
Leave a Reply
- RT @lilithsaintcrow: Best word found today: "hypocorism." http://t.co/km9Hisn7
- Like father, like son. #bdub, not content to merely remove his pants, is trying to fling them out of his crib. "Begone, oppressive pants!"
- RT @byseanferrell: I'm not saying I've had too much coffee, but did you know that if you run fast enough you can see dinosaurs?
- I knew it. RT @Julianwrites: Vodka Delivers Shot Of Creativity http://t.co/yMpCTD9j via @zite
- RT @GrammarGirl: Fantastic post for people who write or self-publish fiction: Why Is My Book Not Selling? http://t.co/QVtoa3jZ via @evoterra
- Flash Fiction Challenge: The Unlikable Protagonist February 10, 2012
- Martha Wells: The Terribleminds Interview February 9, 2012
- No Go For The Terribleminds Kickstarter February 8, 2012
- Two Girls And One Search Term Bingo February 8, 2012
- 25 Reasons That Writers Are Bug-Fuck Nuts February 7, 2012
24 Responses and Counting...
Saw it last weekend, waaaaaaaay before you Americans did, because I’m cool.
I really dug it and thought it was a heap of fun.
But at the same time, I can’t help missing the emotional depth and slower character development of the graphic novels. Not to mention the robot fights in Book 5.
And I still think Michael Cera is wrong for the role of Scott. But apparently disliking Michael Cera means I hate puppies, according to the people I went with, so maybe my review is tainted by puppyhate.
–
Patrick
@Patrick –
Y’know, I’ve generally liked Cera, but did feel like he was playing the same character over and over again. Though, I’ll add that I think SCOTT PILGRIM represents a tonal shift for Cera, if not a major jump forward — while Pilgrim is occasionally whiny, he’s actively so, and further is also something of a cocky ass-kicker. Cera hasn’t really done that before (though I’ve not seen YOUTH IN REVOLT).
– c.
I’d say something, but I’m distracted and hypnotized by the picture up top.
@Shawn:
Then I did my job.
Because I am too.
– c.
I do want to see this movie, and I will, even though it is subtitled in my mind as “The Movie I Will See Despite Michael Cera, Despite The Fact That I Swore I’d Never Take In Another Performance Of His (They Are All The Same).”
See also “The Social Experiment”, a.k.a. “”The Movie I Will See Despite Jesse Eisenberg, Despite The Fact That I Swore I’d Never Take In Another Performance Of His (They Are All The Same And Look A Bit Like Michael Cera If You Squint).”
I read somewhere that part of the problem with Scott Pilgrim’s box office take was that they did too many ‘free sneak previews’ for people before hand. I know someone who saw it like 2-3 times before it’s release day by going to some of those. Which is bad, because y’know, that is 2-3 ticket sales they didn’t get on ‘opening weekend’ due to the fact the guy already saw it.
I did have fun watching the movie. I also had fun watching Expendables, even if it has a much slower start.
I haven’t seen it yet, but I did download the game. Spent hours playing it because it felt like one massive love letter to my childhood. I can’t wait to get a chance to strike out and see it. Especially with the dismal box office take. I think the true target audience is a little too small and, from what I’ve read of the reviews, everyone else doesn’t “get it”
Kieran Culkin’s not new. :-p Just the younger (middle actually) and more talented Culkin. Check out ‘Igby Goes Down’. You’ll see what I mean.
I don’t like Michael Cera. Every performance he ever gives is the exact same one. He’s quickly turning into a comedy version of Clive Owen. Or – *shudder* – a male version of Kristen Stewart. How these people keep landing leading roles leaves me baffled.
As far as the Expendables go … I think it has more to do with the sheer amount of hype around the movie paired with the fact that Scott Pilgrim got so many free showings around the cons.Those that already saw Scott Pilgrim didn’t pay to see it again (shame on them). I don’t know, I’m going to see both in the coming weeks. The lure of Jason Statham and Terry Crews in the same movie is too much for me to stand.
I feel that the only reason SP is not performing well is because of the Expendables. It’s a Michael Cera flick (Joe Moviegoer: muuuuh) competing against a Stallone/Statham/Li/Lundgren flick (Joe: buh-whut?). A person who’s opinion I really value claims the Expendables is actually somewhat disappointing, but we all know that technical and artistic merit do not necessarily go hand-in-hand with box office grosses.
Me? I’m going to watch SP with my GF and the Expendables with my brother. Because movies suck when I watch them by myself.
Hold on, let me get my walker out of the way, hitch my pants back up around my diaphragm and reseat my dentures. There, that’s better. The wife and i were thinking of going to a movie Saturday night – actually went out to the ol’ 30-screen megamultiplex and perused the offerings. Already saw Inception. Wife wasn’t in the mood for a shoot-em-up, so Salt and The Expendables were out. Saw the poster for this Pilgrim thing, and we had seen the trailor for it somewhere along the line, but we both had the same reaction — this was a movie made for our kids, not for us. Last comic book I read was probably at summer camp in 1969, and video games? Does a brief flirtation with Asteroids in 1980 count? Don’t count on much box office from my crowd, I think.
@Dan:
That’s exactly it — I really think this film is generational, and won’t appeal beyond its generation. At least, not now, not for those older. Younger, maybe — and I contend it’s not a film for kids, but a film for the 25-35 set.
– c.
This basically a movie about people my age who played the video games I played who listen to the music I listen to who wear the t-shirts I wear who dye their hair the same colors that I do who do the same jobs my friends and I used to do.
You traditionally spend sixty million dollars on a movie that’s got a wider target. I mean, fuck. When I was a kid, that kind of money would buy you ten Jaime Sommers.
I always find it really annoying when something pretty much designed to make me happy tanks. It’s happened twice from Universal, now.
So, yeah, what you said.
I read somewhere that Care is like his generation’s young Woody Allen. And that guy always plays the same character: himself. So does John Cusak.
@Russell:
I’m hearing with marketing the number is closer to ninety million.
That’s a lot of money for a niche audience.
Loved the movie, but not sure where they thought that was going. Or why/how they spent that much? District 9 was $10 mill (before marketing).
– c.
@Susan –
(Cera, you mean?)
Allen’s maybe not a bad comparison, but Allen was also a writer and director. Allen is Allen because of being an auteur (for better or worse).
Though, I’ll continue to assert that I think Cera plays a non-Cera character in Pilgrim. Too cocky, too fighty, to be traditional Cera.
Cusack’s played very widely, too — I don’t think he’s purely Cusack in his films. Being John Malkovich? The Grifters? He maybe doesn’t utilize it enough, but man’s got range.
– c.
I’d love, love, LOVE to see this movie. I’m waiting to see what the financial situation is when my co-worker (who lent me all 6 books) returns from his vacation.
@Chuck
“Loved the movie, but not sure where they thought that was going. Or why/how they spent that much? District 9 was $10 mill (before marketing).”
Completely uninformed speculation from a friend of mine who works in entertainment law is that this is basically a gigantic portfolio piece. That Universal knew it was a big risk, but executives liked it and thought it would look good to have made it.
I dunno. I’m thinking some conversion tables for ICONS are in order. Maybe call it FRETS.
@Chuck
You say that in this movie Cera is not playing himself… but maybe we are watching Cera himself grow. Maybe he’s taking up the role of a more “fighty” character because he is becoming more “fighty”. Maybe he decided “I do not want to play this character anymore, I will stand up to my execs” and they got him this movie as a compromise.
Dunno, but it would make a cool meta-fictional storyline if Cera’s character actually grew a spine in the course of his various IPs.
I loved the movie, though I felt it was slow at the beginning. I love movies that feature music as a prominent theme though, so consider me a bit biased.
I agree how throughout the movie it felt like Scott really did have to realize that deep down he wasn’t mature throughout the film. I didn’t like how he treated Knives at all, and even at the end I didn’t feel that resolved itself that well. It was definitely a movie that showed how some of the people who complain most about their lives don’t do enough to change it, which is a sentiment that I agree with and yet see myself doing it as well. :/
I kinda feel bad now for ranting via Twitter today about why I hated this movie the moment I saw a trailer for it, and vowed then not to see it. I don’t know that 3 or 4 tweets constitute a “rant” but still . . . I don’t like to be That Guy who pisses all over something that other people love. That’s always stupid and rude. Unfortunately, that shoe often fits me. . . .
Nonetheless, here are a couple thoughts. I feel like I’m one of those people that proper marketing could have made me see the movie. Yeah, I am older than the target demographic (but not as old as that O’Shea character), but I’m still younger than my age in terms of my most prevalent interests. I am an avid fan of comics and graphic novels, and though I’ve never been much of a gamer I’m not automatically turned off by them. Finally, I don’t mind experimental use of technology in moviemaking (CGI, interesting edits, etc.). To a degree.
First off, I loathe that Cera guy. He could be cast in a Conan the Barbarian remake that garnered a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and won Best Picture at the Oscars and I still wouldn’t want to see the fucker. His whole shtick and same-character-over-and-over-again thing has worn me out. Maybe he isn’t that character in this movie, but it sure looked like it to me in the trailer. That put me off right out of the gate. Is it possible for a nerdy geek kid to be portrayed in a way that doesn’t make him look like a total clown? I would hope so . . . because in many ways I was that kid, and I sure don’t related to him as portrayed by Cera! Can we get someone different for that role? Can it be played a different way? Because I’m really sick of the archetype (for the record, I feel exactly the same about Seth Rogen’s “lovable stoner” archetype thing he’s got going, which is making the pending Green Hornet movie a real tough sell for me).
Again, judging from the trailer, it all looked like too much CGI and fancy editing stuff going on. I can see the target audience going for that, but would a little less maybe draw in more viewers without alienating the core group? I’d think so. I got a headache from all the frenetic onscreen stuff just from the trailer. I don’t think I could stand an entire movie’s worth.
And one more point: even though I didn’t see any of the advance screenings, I saw enough target audience gushing about how great it was in enough places to be put off by it. This was the line that set me off that I posted on Twitter: “I thought Scott Pilgrim was full of win, drenched in awesome sauce, and then baked in epic.” Yes, it is very immature for me to get mad at a movie because of the language a fan of it uses in his/her description, but that just pulled the trigger that told me THAT person is the fan the makers of this movie are after, and really don’t care about me and my on-the-fence mindset when I first heard a Scott Pilgrim movie was being made. The lingo alone makes me want to start flailing away blindly with my cane.
So right or wrong (and mostly wrong, I’m sure), I hoped that the awful movie that is The Expendables (which I did see and loved for all the wrong reasons) would crush Scott Pilgrim at the box office. Though not as bad as I wanted it to dominate Eat, Pray, Love (another movie I hate which I won’t see, though in this case it’s at least because I read the book and fucking HATED it). So I’m feeling pretty smug today.
Great write-up. I agree wholeheartedly. Especially regarding keyboards.
I really want to see this movie, but I can’t take Michael Cera. I really hate him. In a viceral “if I saw him on the street I’d threaten his mother” kind of way. I don’t understand his appeal. He reminds me of the buzzard from the old Bugs Bunny cartoons
This one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuN-tFvgRc0
I can’t take him or stomach him at all.
@Chris, @Paul –
I’ll say this: try it on DVD when it shows. Here’s something that a lot of “fans” are missing — the film is actually a not-even-that-thinly-veiled critique of the type of people you’re calling out. Cera plays a dick in the movie. Really. He’s unsympathetic for a good portion of it. Further, the film is very plainly taking geeks and hipsters and all those in-between to task, kind of putting a foot in their ass, telling them to grow up, stop making the world about *themselves* and start looking around at other people.
Seriously. No joke.
Rent it when it hits.
The action alone is worth a watch.
Edgar Wright is a damn fine director: Hot Fuzz is honestly one of my favorite movies.
– c.
Chuck, I’m a Hot Fuzz fan too.
Alright, I’ll watch it on DVD. But if it drives me insane [eyes narrow] . . . then I’m coming for you. . . .
I really want to see this movie, despite Cera.
They crammed two books into it, I guess hoping to press the other 5 into another 2 or 3 movies.
You know who Cera reminds me of? From the 80s? Patrick Dempsey. Possibly John Cusack. Though Dempsey was more physically like Cera back in the day, scrawny, big nose, not the guy you’d expect to get the girl, but generally did in his movies. Maybe one day Cera will be a McDreamy. Doubt it.
SHAUN OF THE DEAD is my favorite Wright movie, and both SHAUN and HOT FUZZ lend a great deal of success to Pegg & Frost, especially Pegg.
I hope to see SCOTT PILGRIM in theatres. Will definitely watch/buy on DVD or Blu-Ray