Books-To-Movies: How I See Them (A Candidate For Worst Title Ever)

(I guess this is kinda an addendum to my Scott Pilgrim review. An additional bullet point, if you will. And you will. So, yeah.)

Being someone who read the complete series of graphic novels before seeing the movie, I had to wonder whether I would be able to follow along as easily had I not.

With a lot of adaptations (book, TV show, movie, etc.), I always find it helpful to have some kind of background knowledge at least to have a good understanding of what's going on. For example, the Harry Potter movies: even when they were first coming out, I knew that it would be best to read the book first to have a complete understanding. However, these movies are top-notch adaptations in that they cover the majority of the books (this is true for the earlier ones, at least). The first movie sets up the HP universe well-enough that someone who, for some weird reason or another, hasn't read the books could still completely understand what's going on.

However, having read the books first allowed me to have free reign to whine about the little things missing. I like having my permission to whine, thanks very much. This is what happens with a lot of movies based on books that I've read. Atonement is widely considered a good movie, but I read the book first. That book is mad dope, y'all. (What does that even mean?!) It was one of the best books I read last year. But the movie just couldn't compare. Instead of enjoying Saoirse Ronan's acting/existence (don't ask) like I should have been, I found myself glaring and saying, "NOPE, BOOK WAS BETTER!" or "THAT WASN'T IN THE BOOK" or whatever. And it was a generally faithful adaptation, too. But oftentimes having read the book first will affect your perception of the movie -- usually negatively.

The thing is, I don't like watching the movie first, especially if it's faithful to the book.. I don't like reading books where I already know everything that happens. I couldn't read Fight Club for this reason, even though I probably would have liked it. It just bored me out of my mind because I already know that Tyler Durden is part of the narrator. (Sorry if that's a spoiler for you. I just read a Shadow of the Colossus spoiler so I understand how upsetting they can be. T_T)

However, with something like Scott Pilgrim, or like Harry Potter, watching the movie is seeing your favorite characters come to life. And I guess everything I just wrote about is really irrelevant, because SP and HP are totally different. The Harry Potter movies, like I said, have really good exposition. Scott Pilgrim vs. the World? Eh.

I think with something as insane as SP, it would be hard to understand what's really going on. The story is very streamlined, and it's not too confusing. It's random and nonsensical, but for someone who hasn't read the comic but likes video games it won't be too implausible. Weird, but possible. The thing I worry about for the non-reader who watches this movie is they're going to have a warped perception of the comic books if they ever to choose to read them later. While having read the books first influenced my opinion of the movie (which you can find here), someone who doesn't know that Kim Pine is more than a misanthropic, cynical jerk with a gigantic stick up her butt might will get the impression that that's who she is. It's not the case. It upsets me. Very, very much. It makes me so sad, so very, very sad. Although apparently some moviegoers enjoyed her depiction. I guess it's their perceptions not matching mine that upsets me.

Also, not having read the comics first, I would be confused about why Envy was so important, I might think Ramona is boring, and maybe even sort of NICE, which is not the case at all, and I might think that Young Neil is more important and socially awkward than is really the case.

In short, not knowing the comics will make you not know the real story. Will the story that appears confuse you? Well, the reviews by people who didn't even know about the comic don't seem to talk about being so confused (although there are people saying "WHY DO THEY TURN INTO COINS WUTWUT"), it's more like they're saying they can't relate. That is something that's lost in the movie, too. As I said before in the review that I will pimp as many times as possible, no one receives real characterization besides Scott. Knives grows up a little bit, too, but aside from that it's all about Scott. It makes sense, since this is Scott's side of the story. But reading the comics, you come to love everyone. In this movie, unless you're one of those weirdos who finds Movie Kim likable, you won't want to root for anyone. That's the biggest loss.

That, and you're missing out on a really good series of graphic novels.

Sorry this was so rambly and nonsensical. What I really just want to know is, for people who did not read the comic books first, what did you think of the movie? Does it make you want to read the comic books now? Did you understand everything without trouble? 

Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World Mini-Review

 

After months and months and months and months and MONTHS of hype, I finally saw Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World yesterday. HOORAY! It's very likely that if you're reading this right now, you know exactly what Scott Pilgrim's about, so I will refrain from saying anything more than 1. the graphic novels set expectations at exceedingly high levels and 2. this movie definitely appeals to a certain "type."

But was this the type of movie for me? The answer is YES YES YES.

Here we go with bullet points:

• The casting was nearly perfect. Knives, STEPHEN STILLS (!!!), YOUNG NEIL (!!!), Stacey, and even Wallace, who I was worried the most about, were all perfect. Guess who else was awesome? Michael Cera as Scott. Haters gonna hate, but I thought he was...I'm trying not to say great because that rhymes excellent. He did not play "himself" (although if you've ever watched this kid in an interview you would know that he's not quite as awkward as you think), he played SCOTT. 
• More on that: Scott was a bit "toned down" from the comics. However, he was still the most enjoyable character to watch for me; maybe this was because he was the one who received the most characterization.
• More on THAT: Okay, so obviously this movie tried to adapt six volumes into one two-hour movie, which is a hard thing to do perfectly. And while I think a lot of the plot changes that were made helped to make it more cohesive and fit better into the allotted time, certain choices were made at the expense of character development. Biggest offenders: Kim, Ramona, Envy. Envy isn't as important, so it's okay, but up until the fight against Todd we keep hearing about how Scott dated Envy and she broke his heart and blah blah blah. But we never delve into their back story, which is the most interesting part, and when Envy shows up you think, "What? How the heck did Scott ever date this girl?" Also, she's just bland as heck and she and Scott don't have any closure or anything. She's just never mentioned again. We got an idea of who Ramona was: mysterious and distant. But that was it. You never really understand why Scott is in love with her and fighting for her. It's like he's just going with the motions. They don't have too much nice alone time, which was too bad, because the scenes where they did were amongst my favorite (their second (?) date, the Seinfeld-esque scene although Ramona technically isn't in that one). Basically, Ramona is flat. 
• The most egregious offense OR more on that AGAIN: KIM. I HATED KIM IN THIS MOVIE. Kim is one of everyone's favorite characters. She's a cynical, misanthropic jerk, but she really does care about Scott and everyone else. In the comics, she has depth. However, in this movie, Kim hates everything and everyone, especially Scott. She is never happy and she is never not being sarcastic. When she sees Scott her eye starts throbbing and that scary, dramatic music even plays. (Those screechy violins, you know.) She HATES him because he dumped her in high school, but the real Kim didn't care about that THAT much. Also, the real Kim was interesting, and that was what made me the most upset. This Kim was boring and I can't remember almost anything she said.
• I missed Joseph. He's one of my favorite characters. Thankfully, they had the guy that Wallace stole from Stacey in a number of scenes, kind of as a replacement. Although he was nowhere as awesome as Joseph.
• Let's talk about stuff I liked again, though. I LOVED the music. Sex Bob-omb were, for being self-loathing and "terrible," really good. I really liked their "Garbage Truck" song. Stephen Stills was a good singer, and Scott was a surprisingly competent bassist. I liked his "Ramona" song, too, although Ramona kind of blew it off. THAT GURL, WAI SHE GOTTA BE LIKE THAT
• The opening credits. The opening credits made my heart race. (I'm a little over-dramatic like that.) The visuals were just very, very cool. I loved the opening scene, too. I don't know, I just found it perfect. 
• The fight scenes were pretty awesome, although I think some of them went on for too long. (Most notably the first one, against Matthew Patel.) I did love that Ramona talked about her relationships with most of them via black-and-white cutscenes. I think my favorite fights were Scott vs. Lucas and maybe Scott vs. Todd. That one was hilarious, mainly because of how it ended. (I loved the Vegan police high-fiving in slow motion.) 
• More hilarity: The Ninja Revolution game, that aforementioned Seinfeld scene, Young Neil's idiocy, Knives' stalkerish tendencies, Scott and Ramona's date, etc. etc. There's a lot. (Oh, also, but this comes towards the end: "Do you know how long it took me to collect all of the Evil Exes' contact information? TWO HOURS!"
• I'm just going to mention it again: Wallace ruled.

ENDING SPOILERS HERE:

• The ending was weird and not wholly satisfying. That last fight went on forever, and what are they trying to say -- they're basically suggesting that Self-Respect > Love, which is kind of stupid and kind of a bad message. I guess they were trying to set up an ending where Scott and Ramona DON'T end up together. Instead, Scott would end up with Knives (word is that that's an alternate ending). I actually kind of like the idea of that, because I really liked Knives, as creepy as she was at times. She was a sweet girl and Scott actually had a rapport with her. However, Knives basically says, "Dude, we just spent nearly 2 hours murdering people so you could make out with this chick for a little bit. Seriously? LYK GO GET HER LOL" so then Scott has to go get her. It was pretty stupid that Ramona STILL hadn't "found what she was looking for" or whatever, instead keen on leaving behind yet another ex. Sister sure is flighty. Which ending do you like better, Scott and Ramona or Scott and Knives? (Look at me, trying in vain to initiate conversation between commentators and myself.)
• Either way, I like the ending that Bryan Lee O'Malley chose for volume 6 instead. That was more meaningful.

ENDING SPOILERS, OVER

The movie's not perfect, but it's about as good as a live action Scott Pilgrim could ever be. I really liked it. Really liked it. I think your mileage may vary, and I don't see many "older people" enjoying this as much although you never know, but it's a sort of ADD-addled film that could possibly define my generation. Although I really hope not. I hate my generation. We don't deserve a movie this fun.

I give Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World 4 Slutty Wallace's Sleeping Next to Various Guys and Scott's out of 5.

P.S. Even though I gave Inception a better score, I think I enjoyed this more than that. It's being a comedy certainly helps. But they're both great so see them!

For the other movies I saw this summer, you can read my Inception Mini-Review here and my quick post about Toy Story 3 here.

Today In Looking For Something To Write About

San Diego Comic-Con was this past weekend. It's the biggest convention around. Like all conventions, it has a TON of dedicated fans who go to buy merchandise and dress up and meet other fans. And, I assume, it's a perfect place for doing those things.

But this article from the AV Club discusses whether or not it should be covered by the media as it has increasingly been over the last five years or so.

I'm not trying to argue myself out of a job or anything, but I do wonder if the amount of ink spilled on Comic-Con is truly necessary. This is an event created to specifically keep people from saying, "Oh, hey, maybe this won't be good, huh?" Aside from all of the big, obvious problems - the long lines, the inability to stop thinking like a small convention when this is one of the biggest conventions out there, the ridiculously overpriced concessions, the fact that the whole thing may move to Anaheim, LA, or Vegas - no one really talks about whether news organizations should even be sending people like me to cover this stuff. Comic-Con started out for the fans, and then Hollywood got involved and tried to make all of the attendees fans of everything it could possibly get them to consume. And now, the event is such a big deal within the entertainment media that it sometimes seems as though the studios are using it to sneak a virus out to the public at large, just another bit of marketing in the long march toward a big opening weekend, but a form of marketing that we haven't yet built up a resistance to, like billboards or TV commercials.

Conventions are supposed to be for fans first and foremost, but also give them a way to meet their idols. An anime convention might have a voice actor come speak, for example. But this writer argues that the big companies go to Comic-Con with the purpose of promotion, and their influence is becoming so huge that we're starting to forget that this is for the fans. Of course, a fan should love seeing the actors there, and sneak previews of movies/shows are undeniably cool. But are they still as cool when you know that you're just being shown this sneak preview for marketing purposes?

Something to think about...Read the rest of the article, which includes a little coverage of panels, here.

New Scott Pilgrim Trailer!

If I haven't made it clear enough yet, I love video games. I love everything about them. I love playing them, watching them, reading about them, talking about them, even singing about them. YES, I SING ABOUT VIDEO GAMES. Poorly!

That's why I like Scott Pilgrim so much. It's this graphic novel series that's about cool people who like video games and anime and manga, and live very video game/anime/manga-esque lives. And they make it seem totally normal.

I would give you the whole synopsis but I'm lazy. Let's let other people do that for me!

Obviously, there is a movie coming out. This is the brand-new trailer for it, released yesterday. It will probably become a huge thing, and I guess that's good if it gets more people reading the comic books. I just hope that people don't just watch the movie and come up to me when I'm talking too loudly about it and they're like, "Scott Pilgrim! I love that movie!" because then I'll give them the stink eye, and no one wants to see that.

Ahem. Anyway, some of my favorite people are in this movie: Michael Cera, Johnny Simmons (HOTEL FOR DOGS SAY HAAAAY just kidding, god, don't ever admit it if you've seen that movie), Aubrey Plaza, etc. So of course, I'm excited, although I would be anyway.

And Edgar Wright is directing! You probably know his stuff (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz); my favorite thing of his is Spaced, which is this hilarious British comedy series that's similar to Scott Pilgrim in that it has lots of video game and other "geeky" references in it. It's good stuff. You should rent it. If you want, I can consider lending it to you...in ten years. OH SNAP.

So, yes. Enjoy that trailer and go out and buy the Scott Pilgrim comics. I'll probably be talking more and more about it as we get closer to the release date of the sixth/last volume and the movie. And then MAYBE I'LL WRITE SOME REVIEWS. Because Google tells me that everyone loves those! And by everyone, I mean the five people who read my blog.

Buy Scott Pilgrim volumes 1-5 here.

(Whoa, lots of caps! And sorry that the videos always get cut off! Stupid Youtube is stupid?)