In one scene late in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, a background character can be overheard grumbling that the film adaptation isn’t as good as the comic book. It’s a cute meta-moment from cowriter/director Edgar Wright, the best nerd-friendly director in the world (sorry, Joss Whedon, but you know it’s true), possibly intended to preempt the most common comic-fan criticism of them all. But it’s kind of unnecessary: Scott Pilgrim keeps the manic pacing and basic premise of Bryan Lee O’Malley’s comics—Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) falls for a girl named Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and has to defeat her seven evil exes in order to date her—but it pleasantly diverges in several notable ways.

Whereas the comics take place over the course of roughly a year and a half, the movie spans a week, making the cinematic Scott and Ramona’s budding romance less of a journey to mature understanding between adults and more of a movie-friendly puppy-love situation. And while the endings have some similarities—O’Malley was working on the sixth and final Pilgrim volume at the same time that the film was shooting—they’re ultimately different. One doesn’t supplant the other; each can stand on its own merits.

And, boy, does this movie have some merits. The casting is note-perfect, with not one of the supporting actors out of place. After the doltishness of The Losers, it’s such a relief to see that someone knows how to cast Chris Evans (he really shines in slightly self-aware jackass roles), and the normally staid Brandon Routh’s telepathic vegan is probably his funniest work to date. The soundtrack, too, is exactly as it should be: Garage-rock contributions from Beck and Frank Black provide that antsy early-20s vibe even as classic Nintendo video-game sound effects are layered into the background on a nearly subliminal level. The innocence
and charm of O’Malley’s creation survives the leap to the screen, making this one of a handful of truly great comics adaptations.

You haven’t seen a movie like this, because there isn’t a movie exactly like this. Written sound effects appear in the background when a surprisingly physical Cera punches or leaps or even clicks on a light switch. Orgiastic
comic-book battles break out like dance numbers in a Fred Astaire musical. It’s a messy, energetic, expressionistic movie that would probably make a control freak like Kubrick put a hot compress over his eyes for a week or two, a pop-culture feast shoved into a blender and sprayed all over a theater, the way that scores of old men (like Oliver Stone in Natural Born Killers) have tried and failed. The trick, the difference between Stone and Wright, is that Wright comes from a place of love; he adores the world of video games and cartoons and Seinfeld reruns, and so does Cera’s Pilgrim. It turns out that amid all the television in-jokes and the candy-colored garbage of our youth, there’s plenty of room for love to bloom. recommended

15 replies on “Scott Pilgrim’s Bonus Life”

  5. Everyone I know is more excited than I am about this movie, but I love what I’m hearing (and am willing to give it a shot based on Michael Cera).

    I’m out the door to go catch a matinee right now. If Paul liked this as much as it seems he did, I should have a good time.

  6. Hmmm. I’m skeptical. I am not a Michael Cera fan. I thought he was cloying in Juno. I don’t hate him. I just think he’s kind of over-rated, and his shy-nerd schtick wears on me.

    Since the whole movie rests on him, do you think it is possible to enjoy this movie if I am decidedly not a Cera fan?

  7. @6
    As a big fan of the comics I mourned the Cera decision–I was certain it would ruin everything. After seeing the film tonight I have to admit that my dread was unfounded: because the Scott Pilgrim character is intrinsically flawed and fallible, it kind of works if you go into it not liking the actor much. (Plus, you get to see Cera getting beaten up A LOT. Kind of a plus!)

    Also, *every* other character/actor is so spot-on perfect that it eclipses qualms you might have with Cera.

    And that’s my nerdy $0.02

  8. So, I got back from the showing a few hours ago, and, to make it short, found it thoroughly enjoyable.

    Had I realized when I left that this was the same director that made Sean of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, I would have been even more excited when I left. But starting from the 16-bit take on the Universal Pictures screen, I didn’t go more than about one minute between laughs until the credits rolled.

  9. @7 I’m with you. I was worried that Cera would be too low-key and meek to play a character who can kind of a big loud idiot in the comics, but I was pleasantly surprised. He did play it in his usual low-key affectations, but he (and the direction) still managed to pull off the character pretty well. And the other characters were portrayed excellently, so over all it’s all good.

  11. Completely agree with 7. I had the EXACT SAME reaction when I found out Cera was going to be Scott : “urg. Why??”

    But he actually surprised me in this role. I found myself forgetting I was watching Micheal Cera. Not to mention the rest of the cast ROCKED. Super rocked. Everything about this movie (save the end I thought it was a bit lack luster) was AMAZING. LOVE times a thousand.

  13. @6 Disclaimer: I’ve never read the comics.But I have seen Arrested Development, and while I love it, I can’t stand Micheal Cera in anything else. Until I saw this movie. I can’t really explain why–perhaps because the rest of the film is just such a delight. It didn’t make me a Cera convert, but I did enjoy him in this role, and I’ll probably even see it a second time.

  14. “natural born killers” featuring a long list of strong performances by talented multifaceted actors failed… but this camp, full of weak actors doing the same schtick over and over makes it…? it’s a bad idea to bring real films into the discussion (let alone dis them) if you want to make junk like this seem palatable.

Comments are closed.