ChrisMoses

Which I don't need. That's about what I thought, thanks for confirming.

Nooooooooooooooooo!

You're that imaginary fan Joey Q is always appealing to! I hate you!

Ughhhh. I will just never understand this mentality.

I definitely agree. Unfortunately, you've got people like Lastjustice complaining that the movie was too long, so they really couldn't spend the time to further develop those concepts.

I disagree about the Cera casting though. He really nailed the insecure, spoiled aspects of Scott Pilgrim, but totally missed the ADD, hyperactive Scott (I feel like I've said this a few times... Go to the other thread for more expansion).

Besides, who would you suggest otherwise? I've come to terms with Cera being the most obvious choice for SP. He even has the Canadian-thing down!

This is what I'm banking on. This weekend to see how it does in Europe. If someone has it, I would appreciate a good global box office tracking website.

Kieran Culkin can carry a movie - He did really well with Igby Goes Down and The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys, but no one has seen those movies so it would be difficult to convince a major movie studio to let him head the 60 million movie. Also, he was great as Wallace Wells, so I would have hated to lose that.

This is a huge complaint that I understand. There really wasn't enough development between the characters. I think that I, and others who are fans, just filled in the necessary details with what we already knew from the books. Just a limitation of the medium, unfortunately. It would have taken a lot more time to establish that relationship, and earlier you were already complaining about the long run-time and the slow beginning (when these things are generally established).

PRO-TIP: In an early script, Scott and Knives end up together. The movie still feels like that is the way it is leading (Scott checks to see how Knives is doing after the fight with Gideon before he checks on Ramon), and takes a sudden swerve.

I would have been fine if Scott had ended up with either Knives or Kim Pine (though there would have needed to have been much more development and flashbacks into Kim's character to validate that ending).

Let us know what you think of the comic.

When Marcian said this:

She (he? sorry) is absolutely right. The book is the same way. It's why he finally apologizes for himself to Kim Pine. It's part of his growing up process.

I think the movie kind of rushes that (it's all within the "1-Up" scene without much build-up. Still, it's a great message and I prefer it to the opposing option that Marcian mentioned.

I saw it a second time on Saturday, and I felt that the first half did focus a little too much on establishing everything. I was never bored, because as a fan of the books I liked to see that stuff (though after my initial viewing mentioned earlier in this thread, I did comment that some of the scenes felt long). I was seeing it with a friend unfamiliar with the subject matter and I was thinking at that point, "oh, I doubt he's enjoying this." However, it turns out that he loved the movie and wants to see it again. He didn't want to read the book after seeing it though, which seems odd to me, just because if there is a book or movie or any other sort of adaptation of material I enjoyed, I'm interested in it. But this friend also played through the game with me, so perhaps between the game and the movie he feels he got enough of the story.

I think he got the skeleton of the story between the two, but there are some subplots missing, such as Scott's job, Stills' "preferences," Knives' father, etc.

Do you recall what parts specifically bothered you (regarding the embarrassment thing)? I never caught that.

I didn't think they were all that bad. Particularly later in the movie, the performances are actually Beck and Cornelius rather than the actors playing (as it is in earlier parts). The fight with the twins I know off the top of my head was Beck.

This again?

I don't know about my favorite film of the year, but I will definitely be getting the blu-ray, for what I'm sure will be an epic dose of special features.

Michael Cera was a great Scott for his self-deprecating moments, but I don't think he was the best ADD-addled Scott. However, I don't think there is a young actor out there who would have been better, and you couldn't cast an unknown to be the headliner of the movie due to the property being licensed.

Hadn't we moved on? It had been quite a few days since this topic was last bumped.

To clarify, my opinion was that if you dislike one actor due to some past similar roles he may have been in, you should still allow yourself to be open-minded enough to see that actor tackle a much different role. I mean, I don't remember George-Michael Bluth (Arrested Development) or Paulie Bleaker (Juno) ever pulling off a 65-hit combo.

And if you're not open-minded, then hey, here are some things you may also like.

I wasn't saying "SEE IT AT ALL COSTS!!!" but merely that if you're interested in seeing it, (an inference made because you're in the thread to begin with - Perhaps an incorrect assumption due to some of the trollish behavior evidenced) here are examples of things you may enjoy. I reinforced this by flat-out saying I didn't care if you saw it, I was just suggesting examples that those on the fence may find interesting.

I think they're supposed to be much worse in the comics than they are in the movie. The record-label deal is never mentioned in the comics because I think they're just plain terrible in the books, whereas in the movie they're presented as at least serviceable.

Would you consider the changes you made necesary? The standard will be smooth playing of CoH on Ultra Mode, as well as whatever capabilities DCU may require.

Did you go with the $20 or $60 cheaper one?