Reviews
Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World review
August 25 2010
Although Scott Pilgrim is a hyperactive feast, its greatest strength is its studied literalism.
Edgar Wright’s adaptation of Bryan Lee O’Malley’s comic-book series isn’t perfect, but it exudes the telltale energy of a watershed moment in cinema. Here, on screen, in this electric explosion of videogame imagery, the PlayStation Generation has come of age.
Scott Pilgrim – geek, slacker, egotist, fool – is also a prophet of change. The touchstones of cinema are giving way to a new era; an era in which the bric-a-brac of our twenty-first century lives can no longer be denied their place. Scott Pilgrim is furiously, hyperactively unreal, but in its appreciation of what matters to us now, of how we have been shaped, guided and reborn by technology, it is more intimately connected to the reality of life as we know it than any of its contemporaries.
Director Edgar Wright has triumphantly recalled Pauline Kael’s conviction that junk culture is culture. Scott Pilgrim is a psychedelic 8-bit trip through the mind of a gamer. It is a mind forged by Streetfighter 2 and Sonic the Hedgehog, a solipsistic daydream where love is something that must literally be fought for.
As Scott (played by Michael Cera) overcomes the seven evil exes of girlfriend Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) in a series of extraordinary battles, the film gradually untethers itself from the strictures of cinema, and assumes the structure, speed and vitality of a game – levelling up through a series of challenges rather than progressing down a narrative path. And as it does so, Wright dresses the film in the cheery visuals of both games and comics: power meters, one-ups and biff-bash-bosh sound effects.
For although Scott Pilgrim is a hyperactive feast, its greatest strength is its studied literalism. By refusing to offer a nod and a wink to the audience as Scott performs gravity-defying kung-fu, Wright displays an admirable courage in his aesthetic convictions. This is his world – deal with it. For all that he throws a bewildering array of effects at the screen, none of them offers an escape hatch. Scott Pilgrim takes us remorselessly beyond our comfort zone, speaking to us – indeed, shouting at us – in a new cinematic language.
And yes, at times it becomes too much. If this is the future, some people will be appalled. Scott Pilgrim is a relentless experience in which the few quiet moments are crowded out by the film’s general air of noisy enthusiasm. That is a consequence of its ambition. What Wright is attempting here is so new, and the excitement so palpable, that it occasionally overwhelms the film’s focus. The aesthetic will mature, but Scott Pilgrim is a cinematic adolescent, awkwardly testing the limits of its new form.
Whether or not Scott Pilgrim augurs a lasting change is open to debate. There’s plenty of evidence from the US box office to suggest that it hasn’t connected with a mainstream audience. But that isn’t really the point. The success of a film like this isn’t about numbers or statistics. It’s about developing a new sensibility. It’s about a generational shift. And it should be divisive. There are lines being drawn. The past is on one side; the future is on the other. Where would you rather be?
Anticipation:
Enjoyment:
In Retrospect:
Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World (text) by Matt Bochenski is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
"The first prerogative of an artist in any medium is to make a fool of himself."
Written by Frank on August 27th, 2010 at 12:37
This is a great review! I agree with your point about it being a potentially defining cinematic moment but I am surprised by the growing backlash against it.
http://www.philmology.com/?p=275
Written by Josh Nelson on August 28th, 2010 at 08:09
"There are lines being drawn. The past is on one side; the future is on the other. Where would you rather be?"
Right bang in the middle.
Awesome review!
Written by Anton Bitel on August 28th, 2010 at 14:14
If life was only as simple as a dance machine. We could be a hop skip and a slide away from the perfectly synchronised relationship. Sadly we make bad moves and lose our rhythm along the way. Michael Cera finally shows he has more to give other than the fidgeting yet adorable high school geek. He delivers a confident and mature performance which adds sincerity to a film which could a flown away with its own fantastical agenda. There must have been an immense amount of pressure on Cera to pull it out of the bag which he overcame and superseded. Cera suits cinema, its hard to pinpoint why but it may be because his face cannot hide what it feels and watching him feels like watching someone tell the truth.
Written by teaandtoastblog on August 31st, 2010 at 16:05
Then there is Kieran Culkin who, if I am being truly honest I never knew existed till now. The gay best friend is a comforting role and with a dollop of camp and jotta pad full of bitchy remarks where can you go wrong? Ah ha! As with most of the film there’s a twist. He has a heart, he has a personality and he has it all on his own, bending all stereotypical gay roles ever made. You want to be his friend and what’s more you are glad that he is Scott Pilgrims. Despite his inherent gossip tenancies he knows inside out what the right this is and the film relies on this surprising moral compass.
Written by teaandtoastblog on August 31st, 2010 at 16:06
Edgar Wright has done us proud. His innovation astounds, as every second is filled with something new and something quirky (but not in the sickening Zooey Deschanel style). 200 points here and a new life there, with each KAPOW our intrigue grows and it cements Wright in his path to becoming a Great British Director. The film rarely loses its pace or its heart. There are baddies which are bad and goodies which are truly good and with a plot that boils down to such simplicity where can it go wrong? It can’t because Wright maintain this simplicity and resits the temptation to over do it
teaandtoastblog.wordpress.com
Written by teaandtoastblog on August 31st, 2010 at 16:08
It’s a deeply boring post post modern mess. It says nothing about anything in a boring, soulless trawl through old computer game imagery. There is a line being drawn; meaning and soul versus vapidity. What a bad film
Written by Woodsy on September 4th, 2010 at 00:07
Yes tis fun and vibrant and funny and made with love… but… it’s all surface, no feeling. It’s shiny and bright, but it’s also a bit glib, and – criminally for a frothy concoction such as this – it feels too long, the levels he has to go through start to feel like a chore and it can't even pack the back story for how/why Ramona dated the twins. There are also enough misjudged and wtf moments to sap critical pace and goodwill from the picture (evil ex Todd the vegan punching the Knives in the face apropos of nothing, the flat Bollywood number mid fight, and the vegan police stand out). He also goes home with the wrong girl – Knives' sudden letting Scott go is uncharacteristic and rings very hollow.
Written by adam on September 6th, 2010 at 13:47
Great film. Don't agree with Adam, who says it's 'all surface with no feeling'. It's witty and keeps you on your toes (verbally and action…lly), but it's the heart of the film that won me over. Exhausting the first time, true. But I think it's one that will improve with every watch.
Written by @chris_du_banane on September 8th, 2010 at 17:05
It's get a 5/5 from me, by the way.
Written by @chris_du_banane on September 8th, 2010 at 17:06
To be honest, Wright's done a brilliant job, I'm not going to mouth off like a wantabe journalist or someone who's opinion matters but I'm just going to say obvious and unnecessary comments. If you find yourself lost with the agenda of the film read the actual comic. It, like any book can't be translated completely to film, you'd end up with a 3 hour 3D epic based on Pocahontas that was sorely overrated. Or something actually based on a book…All Wright wanted to do was make a film from something he thought was cool, and him and O'Malley did that. It skips and differs from the comic but it doesn't take away from it, if anything the medium of film just gives it another level, and its a good one. the comic rocks, and the film does a damn good effort, it at least challenges the crap people look for nowadays in the cinema which is an extended Avatar and whatever that new Sandler films called. Britain needs more directors like Wright
Written by @twadecub on September 15th, 2010 at 22:10
I want a spin off series featuring Wallace & Julie. And Young Neil.
Written by DavidDaglish on September 22nd, 2010 at 21:21