[quote="AWPJudy"]the trailer makes it look like the screenplay was written by an attention whoring 14 year old girl from deviantart..[/quote]

It's like a committee got together to decide, "What's the most asinine and juvenile plot we can think of?" and then they did it, but it somehow resulted in something people wanted to see. Like "Springtime for Hitler."

[quote="sheerheartattack"]

It's like a committee got together to decide, "What's the most asinine and juvenile plot we can think of?" and then they did it, but it somehow resulted in something people wanted to see. Like "Springtime for Hitler."[/quote]

I thought the same thing, haha.

I [i]really[/i] want to see this movie, but since I just moved back to California, I have nobody to go with.

Seeing a comedy alone though...

I've never seen a movie at the theater by myself, but I don't see anything wrong with it. It's not like watching a movie at the theater is a social activity.

Yeah, I totally went out by myself to see Religulous (Bill Maher's movie in which he goes around to religious crazies and basically goes "get a load of this guy!" Which I'm okay with.)

Had a pretty good time. It's nice to be able to talk to someone about the movie afterward though.

Just saw it. I was a fan/reader of Scott Pilgrim back when it made me cool by giving me indie cred (just kidding, I was never cool), so I was ready to be underwhelmed, as I think most people are when they see a favorite book of theirs transplanted to movie theaters - just because of the differences between everyone's own interpretations of the words (and drawings in this case) I suppose.

So that being said most of what I disliked/was bothered by was due to me reading into a characters tone or physical expressions differently than Edgar Wright did. What instantly comes to mind was how they portrayed both Kim and Ramona not as flippant/sarcastic and flirty, but emotionally cautious (respectively, as I read it), but in an almost constant state of flat boredom. And of course Michael Cera lent his predictable wide-eyed, childish befuddlement to a character that I envisioned more as kind of a loser who confidently and charmingly played things like he was the coolest guy ever. There's of course a handful of other examples that I could list, but this thing will probably be tl;dr enough as it is. Despite these departures from my personal view of the Scott Pilgrim universe, the movie was enjoyable. Kieran Culkin perhaps stole the show as Wallace. Mark Webber, although not acting like him (to my taste), [i]is[/i] Stephen Stills in appearance. Perfectly. The whole video game aesthetic/cartoon-esque cutaways were pulled off well. The soundtrack was overall good, especially with Metric being the sound behind The Clash at Demonhead (I'm hooked on Black Sheep right now).

The only detractor that really sticks with me is the fact that they skipped a [i]lot[/i] of shit from the books. Now, of course movies can only last so long, and therefore can only cover so much ground of the source material. However, I felt like the film might not get people emotionally involved when the share of script that Envy Adams' occupies might as well have been twittered to Edgar Wright, rather than her being the main focus of an entire book. Non-Scott Pilgrim readers seem to like the movie well enough though, so maybe I'm talking out of my ass.

[quote="sleepyhead"]So that being said most of what I disliked/was bothered by was due to me reading into a characters tone or physical expressions differently than Edgar Wright did. What instantly comes to mind was how they portrayed both Kim and Ramona not as flippant/sarcastic and flirty, but emotionally cautious (respectively, as I read it), but in an almost constant state of flat boredom. [/quote]

Funny that you say this, Ramona did seem kinda uninteresting initially and the basis of the relationship between her and Scott seemed pretty flimsy, but then when most of the plot involves battling seven evil exes you stop worrying about these sort of things. I thought Kim seemed a bit sad at times, like she was still interested in Scott.

I suppose I should be able to justify bad action movies in the same way but usually the stupid just overwhelms any sense of fun to be enjoyed from the effects and ludicrousness.

Fun movie, saw it on Friday.

I'm probably going to see it a third time before it leaves theaters.

[quote="h2orowe"]I'm probably going to see it a third time before it leaves theaters. [/quote]


We should both go >_>'

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars ... t-now.html

IRT Metal: If you can find a way to my city, feel free. My car's got a fucked up hood and tire that makes me too paranoid to drive on the freeway over 65 MPH on it, and I'm not gonna risk driving to LA with it, lol.

You said it's by long beach right? I don' wanna go there ...Last time i went i was so scared i was going to get mugged I almost had a breakdown.

Haha, fine, stay where you are, brosky.

I was half interested in this movie, but now I feel like everyone I know is fapping all over and quoting it, so I think it may end up like Napoleon Dynamite for me in that I'll never see it because I'm too irritated by the buzz.

Except that this was entertaining and Napoleon Dynamite was awful crap.

What Mare said. Plus, since the movie was a box office bomb, obviously not [i]that[/i] many people would be quoting it anyway. You just happen to hang out at the very, very few places populated by people who liked or would see the movie.