I would have gone with you 
It would have been fab! Unfortunately there’s the matter of 5 timezones between us.
Feh! let a little thing like that get in our way LOL
If one of you was vegan, it wouldn’t be a problem.
Those vegan police are too damn strict!
hee…
“Crimes against Veganity”
It’s the little lines that I just randomly recall and chuckle over. THAT’s a sign of a great film there.
Despite never having heard of the comic, I went to see this last week and absolutely loved it- I agree with the poster earlier who suggested a double feature with Kick Ass; they’re both fun, quirky films which don’t even try and take themselves seriously.
As soon as I saw the Universal logo done in the style of an early '90s computer game graphic (complete with 8-bit synthesiser music!) I knew it was going to be my sort of film, and it was.
Interestingly, all people I know who have seen the film loved it, but the reviews haven’t been especially good and it really does look like a lot of the reviewers just didn’t “get” the film or the quirky video game/comic-book universe it’s set in.
I’m definitely looking forward to the DVD release, that’s for sure!
I just finished reading the Scott Pilgrim graphic novels, and yeah, highly recommend them. They give you a lot more insight into the other characters (the movie is basically entirely from Scott’s POV, while the comics switch around with the other characters from time to time, so you pretty much miss out on what the others are up to).
Basically, this movie-ization is to the comics what Flight of the Intruder was to the book it was based on (also called Flight of the Intruder, incidentally). Same plot, same characters for the very most part, but a lot leaner, with a lot of the details and depths smoothed over a bit (as opposed to, say, Starship Troopers, which took the concept of the book, and otherwise had very little to do with it).
I do once again recommend any fans of the movie to read the books, they give Scott’s character a lot more depth.
I thought it was pretty “meh”. I started off thinking “what the hell have I paid to see here?” (I was actually considering walking out after about 20 minutes), but it did get better as it went along. There were a few moments that made me laugh a little, but overall it was just trying ridiculously hard to be quirky, self-aware and hipster-ish.
Most of the characters were entirely unsympathetic – actually, I’m not even sure whether we were meant to sympathise with the main character, but anyway, I hated him from the get-go because of the way he treated his first girlfriend. The love interest was equally unpleasant. I was also offended by the stereotypical depiction of the gay flatmate as a promiscuous “sexual predator.” The only characters I liked were the first girlfriend and the drummer.
I also didn’t understand the ending: surely he ended up with the wrong girl? Unless the point was that these two nasty characters deserved each other (presumably he got dumped by the slut a couple of weeks later) and the first girlfriend could do a lot better. Other questions questions that popped into my mind were: “If the characters are unemployed, how do they afford to go to these parties and clubs?” and “Is it just me, or is Michael Cera the spitting image of Harpo Marx?”.
So overall, as a fan of Spaced, Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, I was very disappointed. I wasn’t expecting this film to be a rehash of Edgar Wright’s previous stuff, but having seen it now, I can only presume that he just did it for the money.
Why? We are all promiscuous sexual predators!
To be fair, in the graphic novel, if anything, Scott is made to be even less likeable than he is in the movie. In fact, the revelation of exactly how much of a jerk he has been to pretty much everybody is actually a plot point in the later books (You know the term “Unreliable Narrator”? Let’s say Scott might end up being the picture in the Wikipedia article). The movie also didn’t cover a lot of the stuff with Ramona and Knives (and Kim, and Lisa) dealing with their own issues.
As far as the token gay being a sleaze, it’s again worth noting that the movie trimmed stuff from the books, like two or three other gay supporting characters (either periphery characters, or non-plot-central traits of some of the supporting characters)
Then again, this only helps you so far since you watched the movie, and didn’t read the book, and your opinion is based on what they DID decide to put in the film, the stuff that they presumably felt would make for the strongest movie (and not just the movie for those in the audience with the strongest bladders).
I’ve got a question, I’ve seen folks complain because the film is a “Hipster Comedy”, and I’ve seen others defend it saying “It’s not a Hipster Comedy, it’s a Hipster Satire!”, but I have no idea what a Hipster is. I’m pretty sure it’s not the guys in the turtlenecks and berets snapping their fingers in coffee shops while listening to beat poetry or whatever.
Anybody able to explain to me what a Hipster is, and what Hipster Comedy is? I thought this was basically a geek movie, what with the video game world it takes place in and such.
Haven’t you been paying attention for the last 10 years (and especially the last 5)? Geek is in. It’s cool to be a geek now.
Ask a million different people what a hipster is and you’ll get a million different answers, but it’s basically someone too “cool” for their own good. They spend and unbelievable amount of time and effort trying to make it look like they don’t really care about anything. They wear expensive designer clothes painstaking made to look cheap. They usually listen to indie rock. They liked your favorite band before you did, and they hate them now. They drink “ironic” beers like Pabst Blue Ribbon. The specifics change from generation to generation, but I figure these types have been around forever.
So… what you are saying is that Scott Pilgrim isn’t a Hipster comedy at all then?
I don’t know. I never called it one. But the clothes, hairstyles, video game references, and general club-scene setting of the movie all lean towards hipsterism.
Actually, the only folks I can think of who might fit the “Hipster” definition would be some of the Exes. Gideon definitely (Scott also calls him out as pretentious in the climax), Envy and Todd to a lesser degree. Maybe some of the minor characters, but not Scott and his crew (they’re not presented as nearly cool enough to be hipsters, just some geeks in a band)
Really? I thought it was “Twentysomething Slacker/Uni Student-ism”. I’m pretty sure that Knives describes Ramona as “That American Hipster Chick” at some point, which I thought was odd because I categorised Ramona as “Alternative”.
To me, Hipsters dress like Napoleon Dynamite (or at least get their clothes from the same Op Shop as him) and make stupid “faux-thoughtful” faces in front of cameras at parties. But I digress.
FWIW, I loved the film purely as a very strange comedy- I’m not sure if I’d call it a “romantic” comedy but I think there’s something in it for most people under about 40 to relate to somewhere.
I don’t remember Knives calling Ramona a hipster, but she does call her a “Fatass” a couple of times. She’s not exactly a reliable litmus paper by which to judge Ramona.
Are they mutually exclusive? Seriously though, some people may have tried to narrow down the definition of hipster to something useful, but for the most part, people are using ‘hipster’ as a fairly broad pejorative. And there are definitely large portions of the population for whom hipster means “anything involving Juno, Michael Cera, Napoleon Dynamite, ironic tshirts, or indy music/film”.