Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

I will said I take the ending of Scott and Knive for the movie seen Ramona is so kinda....you know, there in the first place.

And really, I never was fan of her actually.

One does not simply damselize Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

Scott and Knives should've ended up together.

Scott only dated Knives because he didn't think he was good enough to date an older, less naive woman. Basically he's with her because he thinks she's too young and immature to realize he's garbage (which is how he sees himself). At the end of his adventure, he realizes Knives didn't like him because she didn't know better; she was able to see something in him that he himself couldn't.

Conversely, Scott wasn't really in love with Ramona, he was in love with the idea of Ramona, i.e. the idea of being good enough to date a self-respecting chick who wasn't afraid to call him out on his bullshit. Scott realizes both of these things when he gains the power of self-esteem, which is why the Knives ending is much more satisfying.

That's how I've always seen it, anyway.

I'd have had Scott end up with neither because it's clear he needs to work on his own issues before he becomes relationship material.

In the comic end kinda that way actualy, neither Ramona or Scott knwo if they are going to last but decide to do it anyway.

it we also have to remenber the movie does even have a differen aseop than the comic: in the comic Scott need is understanding of everything, how ramona feels, knives and even himself, here he is more shy and low self steem.

Maybe is just me, but I feel both the comic and the movie could have a sequel.

I had the misfortune of watching the film first and the comic second.

And boy, how I disliked the film after that.

Whoever wrote this movie reaaaally butchered Scott's character just so Michael Cera could play him. Ramona has zero personality other than "I'm a Manic Pixie Dream Girl" and Knives is an immature brat that can't handle rejection.

Nowadays I tolerate the movie, and can even find it enjoyable from time to time, but man, when an adaptation really fucks up their two main characters you have to wonder if the people doing it were even familiar with the source material.

The size of the source material doesn't help. Scott Pilgrim suffers for the fact that it was made back when sequels weren't a given and filmmakers thought they had to tell the entire story in a single movie. So a lot of stuff got compressed or cut out entirely.

But that doesn't excuse some of the straight-up issues the film has, like the obvious director favoritism towards Knives in the climax or the fact that they don't even try to explain Subspace yet still include it in the film. Ramona literally skating through Scott's dreams is explained as her using a convenient Subspace Highway and then it's never actually explained what that means.

Consequentially, the film is inferior to the comic in a lot of ways. That said, it's still a very entertaining film. Scott Pilgrim is one of those comics where failure to live up to the source material can still produce a great work.

A lot of the changes made to the film both help and are detrimental to it, if you look at them from a certain point of view.

The lack of a Subspace (aside from a throwaway line to apease the fanbase, I assume) removes one more element from a story that, let's be honest, is pretty convoluted to start; it was cut to focus on the story itself. However, all of those Scott Pilgrim elements work because, crazy as they were, they ended up being explained one way or another, so the movies come across as being pretty lazy and non-commited to the source material.

Scott and Ramona's characterization have the same problem. They not being the only focus of the movie allowed a lot of other characters to be more felshed out (the exes, to begin, all feel like they have different personalities; except for the twins, of course). Howevet, both of them are very complex characters in the comics, in their own different ways. In the film, Scott is "Michael Cera in a Scott suit, while playing a Scott-ish Michael Cera". He has nothing of his unearned self-righteousness, nor his general dickishness and he's missing his Unreliable Narrator qualities. In fact, the fact that Scott's kind of a douche is a plot point in the comics! Ramona, on the other hand, was reduced to be a Living Mc Guffin, a character that has no control nor advances the plot in any capacity; whatever happens to her in the entire film is always in reaction to somebody else's actions. Getting mad at Scott? Oh, that was because he was an asshole to her. Going back with Gideon? "Oh, you silly goose, that's because Gideon controls my thoughts! You thought I could take decisions by myself? That's crazy!" She has all the cool things (she's hot, is great at fighting, is aloof and cool) but lacks the insecurities, sweetness, quirks and issues the original had. I blame Wright for that one, since his record of writing women is shitty at best.

Knives is the opposite. She was more important to the film that she ever was in the comics, but all the characterization doesn't feel like it's done right. In the comics she grew up and matured (even more than Scott himself did), and understood that Scott wasn't for her (which led to a very funny kiss scene). In the movie, she's utterly obsessed with Scott, and instead of moving forward with her developmemt, it seems like she takes one step forward and a thousand backwards. Also, what's up with her being mad that Gideon kicked the shit out of Ramona? She hated the girl 30 seconds earlier, and now she's on full revenge mode. If that's not inconsistent then shoot me in the foot.

The big improvement of the movie is the Evil Exes. In the comic, their fights were uninspired at best and their characterization not much better. The fight with Todd, for example, was a blatant Deus ex Machina—sure it was lampshaded and it was funny, but the film did it better by having Scott intentionally and intelligently set him up for defeat.

Like I said, I am disappointed in the loss of focus on all the other side characters, but there's only so much you can fit in a movie. As Tobias said, if they had expected sequels, they probably would have spread it out more and cut much less.

"n the comic, their fights were uninspired at best and their characterization not much better"

And not all the exes have the same wiehgt...in fact, aside from Todd, the rest are kind of forgettable, aside of much of it is being told rather than show(like the fact Ramona aparently date both of them at the same time?..yeah).

"Knives is an immature brat that can't handle rejection." THAT was Knive entire damn charartirzation in the comic,it was pretty much decaff Yuno gasai, she just suddenly get over him in the last issue....ughhh.

"He has nothing of his unearned self-righteousness, nor his general dickishness and he's missing his Unreliable Narrator qualities. In fact, the fact that Scott's kind of a douche is a plot point in the comics! "

I find that a little bit overblow, Scott in comic is less of a douche and more that he is blunt and have trouble understading others, in fact that his the biggest change in both versions: here he lack self confidence while in the comic he lack understanding, this is show in the moment both chararter pick up the sword.

Overall, I feel the movie cut a lot of unecesary things from the comics and rightly so.

I've never read the comic (the art style is a big turn-off), but I don't think I needed Subspace explained to me in the movie. It comes across as a mysterious thing Ramona can do because she's just so otherworldly and super duper cool. That was enough for me.

Having watched the movie first, I was surprised the subspace thing was important in the comics. That aside, there wasn't a point bringing it up in the film at all.

edited 21st Feb '18 12:38:04 PM by Cross

The Exes bar Gideon, Todd, and Roxy are a lot more minor in the comic, but that's because they're largely a Red Herring arc. The true main conflict of the story is Scott improving himself as a person.

Link to Scott Pilgrim contest thing. Retweet if you want your not-a-bobblehead with soulless dead eyes.

edited 22nd Feb '18 12:51:02 AM by Tuckerscreator

Meh. I liked that non-Pop vinyl figure of Ramona with Scott in her purse, but not enough to enter the contest (or however it was that you got that thing).

I like both the movie and the comics, but like others have said before in this thread they're both trying to tell different stories off of the same basic framework. Wright focused on very different plot points than O'Malley ended up doing. But the Knives ending makes more sense in terms of the movie because again, like it's been said, Scott's arc is changed from him realizing he's an asshole and needs to do better to a guy with very low self-esteem learning to give a shit.

Kinda both because of thamt the nex boyfriend become filler, also I think that tyhing the ex to scott grow was the best with todd and the other, the twins for example come as O mally already gotten tired of it and just rushing to Gideon.

The setup for this is hilarious.

The song that Envy sings in the movie - but the original version by a band called Metric.

Hypnotizing vocals.

I fucking love that song. Especially the way Brie Larson sings it.

Bryan Lee O'Malley has been live-tweeting while the Academy (as in the Academy Awards) has been holding a Quarantine Watch Party for this movie. (Seriously.)

Bryan wants the Scott Pilgrim video game to come back. ...And Ubisoft is entertaining the idea?

Just heard about it. BRING THAT GAME BACK MANG.

https://ew.com/events/comic-con/scott-pilgrim-cast-reunion-table-read/

Robert Pattinson Could've Played Chris Evans' Part in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

So instead of Captain America, Punisher, Captain Marvel, Huntress and Superman we’d have had Batman, Punisher, Captain Marvel, Huntress and Superman.

Caught me in a loop about that Superman bit, but then Wikipedia tells me that that's because Brandon Routh was in the cast. And he was Superman in Superman Returns. Doy.

Rather surprising to hear about Pattinson trying for a part in the Scott Pilgrim movie. Maybe he was looking for other roles in case Twilight didn't pan out (which it did, for better or for worse)?

Incidentally, Bryan Lee O'Malley buzzed in on Twitter yesterday saying Ubisoft "reached out" to him.

Real talk, what if these Ubisoft hints are less about bringing back the game based on the movie, but rather a new game that plays exactly like the initial game, but instead tackles the complete and unabridged saga of Scott Pilgrim as it was told in the graphic novels?

Think about it. The movie (and the game based on the movie) was released before the graphic novels had its grand finale. If Ubisoft and Bryan were trying to bring back the game from back then, wouldn't they have to deal with Universal as well?