Scott Pilgrim vs. Scott Pilgrim, thoughts on the books vs. the movie

SPOILERS. There, I said it. So don't read this if you are worried that it might ruin your experience with watching the movie, or reading the books, or both.

Seriously. Don't.


Most people fall into a few categories when it comes to adaptations. The first is "the book was better than the movie". The second is the exact opposite "The movie was better than the book". There's also a rare and lesser category "Both sucked", and an even rarer category "Both were amazing". Scott Pilgrim's adaptation fits into this ultra rare category, and I would go so far as to add on "Both were amazing in their own way".

Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (the movie) is a very condensed version of the series. Director Edgar Wright and writer Michael Bacall managed to find a way to distill the book into something concise, edgy, meaningful, and almost unclassifiable in terms of genre. Now, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World is two hours long, so one could guess that if they had made the film comic frame by comic frame, it would easily be four hours or more. Asides and subplots were cut, the importance of certain characters was diminished, and some were nixed all together, in favor of making the smoothest moving film that could be made about the most basic aspect of the Scott Pilgrim story - That Scott has to defeat the seven evil ex's of the girl of his dreams, Ramona Flowers, in order to date her.

In the film, we meet Scott as a care free twenty something who keeps his life easy and breezy, until he meets and instantly is entranced by Ramona. The League of Evil Ex's soon follows, and Scott, on seven occasions, has to fight these evil ex's. But what's really going on here? Scott is having to prove to Ramona that he isn't going to just cut and run, but we also find out that Ramona is having to do the same. As the ex's get more difficult to defeat, and as Scott gets more overwhelmed by them, it would be much easier for Ramona to cut and run, not have Scott resent her, and not have Scott get hurt by her and her baggage anymore.

The book begins in the exact same way that the film does, but as the book progresses, we get so much more. In the film, little bread crumbs are introduced that never go into the kind of detail that they do in the book, and, honestly, its a shame they don't. In the film, Envy Adams is introduced as one of Scott's ex's, a celebrity who's fame came shortly after they broke up, and who is still incredibly bitter towards Scott. In the books, Envy is fleshed out so much more. O'Malley takes a turn and revisits their past, something that started out with all good intentions, and ended, like most young love does, when Scott and Natalie (as she's known before she takes the stage name Envy) refuse to work anything out anymore. What we learn from the book, though, is that Envy still has a soft spot in her heart for Scott, that fights for supremacy against her white hot burning rage against him. While time hasn't healed all wounds for Envy, there is still a spark there, a memory of their past that would mean something if they could both get over their bitterness towards each other.

We also learn more about Scott's relationship with Kim, which, to me, is the biggest tragedy that the film left out. Scott and Kim were high school sweethearts that broke up when he moved to another city. Kim has never forgiven him for this, even though they play in a band together, and, we find out later, she still loves him, and that her deadpan and sarcastic (and sometimes hateful) attitude is her weapon against him, the way that she pays him back for breaking his heart (even though she desperately wants him back in her heart of hearts). We also find out that he left, basically, without even telling her, treating her as though the relationship they had was like a fine mist, having simply dissipated as they moved forward through it.

In fact, most of the differences between the movie and the book have to do with Scott facing the realities of his past, a past that he has erased and rewritten in his mind, to the detriment of his current life. While, in the book at least, it seems as though everyone is attacking him, we find out that this is for good reason. That he has lived with his head up his ass for so long that he's painted his own reality that is far removed from the authentic world. I feel like this is an interesting point, and one that is very lightly brushed over in the film. In the end sequence, when Scott has to fight Gideon, he sort of makes amends for a lot of things, but some of them seem kind of empty because we haven't really witnessed the back story of all of it. Kim, for instance. In the film, he simply apologizes to her. We are left to infer that their relationship was not the best, but it's not explained in the same way as the book (the fact that Scott cared so little about Kim that he actually told a mutual friend he was moving, and she heard it from this friend before she heard it from her boyfriend).

I think one of the most important things, though, that the movie and the books have kept intact is the parallel relationship between Scott and Ramona. Both are having to grow up in order to save the relationship they've grown to love. Scott is having to face all of the damage he's done to the women he's hurt in his life so that he can gain the self respect he'll need to be the man that Ramona needs. Ramona, meanwhile, has to face the damage she's done to her "evil" exe's in order to free herself from the anger and jealousy that follows her around like a dense shadow, in the form of the League that ruins every relationship she has, and only grows in size as she breaks more hearts. She has to learn not to run from her problems, but, instead, face them and work them out.

There are a lot of little things that you can spend paragraphs and pages talking about, but if you've watched the movie, and not read the book (or vice versa), then its better you discover them yourself. Ultimately, what it comes down to, is that both are amazing in their own way. As far as overall character development goes, which would be my favorite? I'd have to lean towards the books. There's just so much more that makes them satisfying story-wise. But the movie… The movie is an amazing cinematic experience that should not be missed.

Top 5 of 2010

My picks for Top 5 of 2010 -

1. Inception - Christopher Nolan's post Dark Knight follow up was, from the moment it was even announced, in danger of not being able to come close to living up to its predecessor. And, while Inception is a different beast than The Dark Knight, it not only met those expectations but exceeded them (at least for me). Nolan creates a new and unbelievably amazing world, with mystery and intrigue covering every square inch of the story. Watching the film felt like you were seeing something you had never seen before, and with some of the best actors of this generation, along with a story that feels tighter than a steel trap, Inception just couldn't be beat.

2. Somewhere - Sofia Coppola holds an incredibly special place in my heart. I saw The Virgin Suicides when I was on the fence about going to film school, and it was one of the films that pushed me into going. Somewhere continues Coppola's fascination with watching her characters, giving the audience the sense of being a third person, but very present, observer into the lives of characters that transcend the reputations and any "it" factor her actors may have. Her films have become, increasingly, like fashion shoots and obviously are heavily influenced by the commercial world. No matter her push for "realism", her shots are very tightly composed and thought out for maximum effect. It's as though Coppola is trying to sell you the lives her characters are living, and no matter how much pain they may be going through (real or imagined), as an audience member, you're buying it.

3. Scott Pilgrim vs The World - Edgar Wright has been hitting them out of the park for a while now. After his hit BBC show Spaced, he broke into the feature world with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. All three projects centered around Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, and the three seemed to be unstoppable. Wright took a detour, though, in making the film adaptation of the Scott Pilgrim graphic novel series. Wright uses actors of uncanny resemblance to their pen and ink counter parts, and brings balls to the wall effects to the forefront, creating the closest thing to a true "comic book" movie that has ever been made - Not cheesy, but still faithful to the concepts and artistry of its creator, Bryan Lee O'Malley. While Wright excised some of the story from the 6 volumes of graphic novels, he brings the story of Scott Pilgrim to life in a lean and mean (and fun) way that, honestly, I'm not sure very many other filmmakers could do.

4. The Social Network - When David Fincher announced he was going to make a film about Facebook, there was a collective groan from the film loving community. Wait, this is the guy who made Fight Club? Se7en? The Game? And he's going to make a film about Facebook? Yep. And leave it to Fincher to take all that doubted him, put us in a collective headlock, and give us a noogie for not believing in him. The Social Network is tight, funny, and Eisenberg's performance as Mark Zuckerberg is both intriguing, cold, and funny. He proves himself a force to be reckoned with, and criminally underused. Aaron Sorkin's script is one of the most well written pieces I've seen brought to the screen. Leave it to Fincher to prove everyone who doubted him wrong. Again. When will we learn to stop?

5. Exit Through The Giftshop - In a true to form fashion, a documentary that was sold as being about Banksy turned out to be a documentary hijacked by Banksy, and would tell the story of the man who was trying to make a documentary about him - Thierry Guetta. Using Guetta's own footage to tell the story of the film he was trying to make, and how his own ignorance and stupidity brought about the camera being turned on him, Banksy and crew create the film that Thierry was SUPPOSED to be making - a document about the "Street Art" movement, but also tell the story of what happens when someone who really doesn't know what they're doing has too much time and money on their hands, and a whole bunch of "friends", who have spent years perfecting their craft and building their identity, to copy off of. The film is thoroughly entertaining and fascinating, especially for those interested in art and, specifically, the "Street Art" movement.

Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

Bryan Lee O'Malley's graphic novel series Scott Pilgrim was ripe for film adaptation, but its, honestly, a little surprising that someone took it up. With six volumes, Pilgrim would be VERY easy to do wrong. Enter Edgar Wright, the hotshot British director who has won the hearts of a world wide audience with the success of his previous efforts Shaun of the Dead, and Hot Fuzz. When it was announced that he was taking on Pilgrim, there was the normal groans, but the consensus seemed to be that if anyone could do it, he could.

Michael Cera stars as the films titular character, Scott Pilgrim. Scott lives his life in a relative daze, wherein he is the king of his own universe, and all of his friends are simply there to reiterate how awesome he is. He plays in a band, Sex Bob-Omb with his friend Steven Stills (Mark Webber) and ex-girlfriend Kim Pine (Allison Pill). He's going out with 17 year old Knives Chau (he's 22), and living in a small studio apartment with his gay friend Wallace Wells (Kieran Kulkin). His world is turned on its head, though, when he meets Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). In order to date Ramona, though, he has to break up with Knives. This isn't the least of his worries, though. He also has to defeat Ramona's seven evil ex-boyfriends, a league of pissed off guys (who happen to have super powers) that Ramona has left in her wake.

The biggest problem with adaptations is that the fans are always going to scream bloody murder if anything is changed or cut out. I've read the series, and I can tell you right now, I LOVED, LOVED, LOVED this film! Wright did excise some things, but I think it was definitely for the better of the film. All of the parts were cast perfectly, especially Winstead as Ramona. She is the lynch pin of the whole story, the instigator which is the cause of all of the drama. Cera plays Pilgrim with a perfect amount of absent mindedness, narcissism, and light heartedness. Wright uses the old video game motif set up in the graphic novels to amazing effect, and the special effects in the film lend themselves perfectly without being overbearing or ridiculous. Pilgrim is one of the best films of the year, and may go down as being a high point in the careers of many of its actors.