I loved “Scott Pilgrim.” I really did. I also find myself wondering if the director was a fan of “Speed Racer” since much of the storytelling and editing was evocative of that film. I predicted after seeing “Speed Racer” that you were going to see a lot of its techniques showing up in future movies, and this might be the first of them.
It’s hard to believe that a film with as much energy, great acting and storytelling is struggling at the box office, but that’s where we are with “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.” SP received major push at the San Diego Con, making one wonder just how much post-con lift to films a convention presence really translates into. Thus far its major accomplishment is to make “Kick-Úš,” generally considered a disappointment, look like a triumph.
Naturally this will be scrutinized as an indicator of how “comic book” movies do when they don’t feature non-mainstream superheroes. Which is, of course, ridiculous. “Road to Perdition” and “Men in Black” were both “comic book movies.” Audiences just didn’t think of them as such.
Ariel told me something kind of chilling. “Scott Pilgrim’s” target audience is, basically, her peer group, and she said she tried to get up a group to go see it. But she was rebuffed, told by her friends that they didn’t have the money to go to the movies but hey, no problem, they had access to sites on line where they could just watch it for free.
If this is really a prevalent attitude toward movies aimed at that age group, it means that films like “The Expendables” and “Toy Story 3” which skew older (yes, the latter skews older because parents are paying to bring their kids) can still make a mark at the box office but teen movies may be opening with two strikes against them.
In the meantime, let’s hope that “Scott Pilgrim” benefits from the terrific word of mouth it so richly deserves.
PAD
• 
You know, I was thinking the same thing while watching “Scott Pilgrim” this past weekend, that it reminded me a lot of the “Speed Racer” film. I liked and enjoyed both of those movies, BTW. Each give a unique feel (compared to most all other films in the theater’s these days), are fun and stay true to their original source.
Am I surprised that the bulk of American filmgoers are ignoring it?
Sadly, no. I mean, for god sakes, “The Other Guys”, perhaps one of the most boring films ever made (yes, I sat through that snore-fest two weeks ago) made $18,000,000 in it’s SECOND week?????
You know, I sometimes think America deserves the entertainment they get.
I believe it was George Clooney who said something to the effect that a movie’s success was ultimately determined by how good its commercials were.
Sadly, Scott Pilgrim’s commercials, to me anyway, were unfocused and, for a comedy, not particularly funny. Of the various commercials aired on TV, I laughed exactly one time (if you must know, it was the lesbian/lesbians bit that did it). Otherwise, nada.
A real shame considering the film is polling far higher among critics and fans than either competing films released on the same date.
You make an interesting point, Mr. David: Perhaps in this day and age the youth are becoming too comfortable with the idea of snagging material online. “Record/Music” stores are obsolete thanks to the ease of downloading (both legally and illegally) the material. With the rise in popularity of e-books, the rise of illegal downloads is inevitable, and bookstores are now hurting. Movies aren’t immune. They too can be found online, much of it illegal as well. Where will this all lead, eventually? We’ll find out soon enough.
“Ariel told me something kind of chilling. “Scott Pilgrim’s” target audience is, basically, her peer group, and she said she tried to get up a group to go see it. But she was rebuffed, told by her friends that they didn’t have the money to go to the movies but hey, no problem, they had access to sites on line where they could just watch it for free. ”
.
This doesn’t shock me in the slightest. I have a friend whose mother regularly burns DVDs of the latest movies. My sense is that it DOES tend to affect movies that have don’t have some big-name attached, be it actor or character, since those are the movies that tend to get people excited enough to say “I’ve gotta see this in the theater!”
.
Personally, if I’m not excited enough to see it in the theater, I can wait for cable. And ticket prices are an issue; generally the only things I go see anymore are stuff that I have some pre-existing attachment to (eg; Iron Man) or something that my friends drag me to because they have a pre-existing attachment (eg; The Last Airbender).
It’s less in the style of Speed Racer, and more in the style that it’s director, Edgar Wright, honed during his time directing the great BBC series “Spaced”, which is available on Hulu and totally up PAD’s alley.
Yes . . . the famous “BBC” series Spaced . . . the BBC had nothing to do with the series Spaced . . . you may have noticed commercial breaks . . . . maybe it screened on BBC America (I don’t know) . . . but it was made by Channel 4 (yes there’s more than one network in the UK) . . . if you’re going to try and prove your geek credentials . . . at least check you know of which you speak . . .
Oh god. I wrote “it’s” in the above post. Somebody please put both me and my misplaced apostrophe out of our misery and humiliation.
Actually, I think your apostrophe is correct. IIRC, the possessive “its” is the odd exception and doesn’t have an apostrophe while the “it is” contraction does.
.
So, I think it’s OK.
Actually, he was right AND wrong in his usage.
.
Correct usage: “It’s less in the style of Speed Racer….”
.
Incorrect usage: “…that it’s director, Edgar Wright….”
Ach. Didn’t see his second use. That’s probably the one he was referring to.
The commercials were terrible. Admitedly it was a tough sell to get the idea across without it sounding lame. Maybe they should have played up the “From the people who brought you Shaun of The Dead” or something.
.
People rag on Cameron for how unorginal Avatar was but the evidence suggests that trying anything too out of the mainstream is an awful risk (and when you have half a billion dollars on the line you’ve risked enough). One notable exception–Inception. Go figure.
.
I hope Scott Pilgrim gets enough good word of mouth to hold on. It’s not unprecedented for a film to start small and build up with great word of mouth. But I once talked to someone in the industry who told me that these days they decide whether or not a film is a hit or a bomb before the weekend is out and once it’s decided that it’s a bomb they yank advertising and get ready to move it out for the next film.
.
PAD’s idea is very intriguing–a lot of us have complained about how movies and such are all geared toward the youth market but if the youth insist on watching them without paying for them the suits in Hollywood will gladly go back to making films for grownups. Not out of any desire to do so, just because we will be the only ones willing to buy a ticket.
“PAD’s idea is very intriguing–a lot of us have complained about how movies and such are all geared toward the youth market but if the youth insist on watching them without paying for them the suits in Hollywood will gladly go back to making films for grownups. Not out of any desire to do so, just because we will be the only ones willing to buy a ticket.”
.
So maybe it’s a good thing that this movie is failing. And you’re right, the commercials are terrible. I usually don’t like to judge a movie by its trailer, but in this case I hate the trailer so much that I’m going to make an exception. And anyway, I’m pretty sure this movie is Not For Me just based on the premise.
Bill – If they had, I’d probably have gone. I loved SHAUN. As it is the premise of SP was so badly mangled in transmission that it was made to come across as some sort of cross between a teen romance and STREET FIGHTER, so I gave it a miss. Mr. David’s enthusiastic writeup shows its otherwise so I should reconsider.
I love Scott Pilgrim, been following it since the second volume came out and I am eagerly waiting for the last one to arrive on the mail. Been following the movie too, ever since the project was announced, all buzzed up because Wright’s work allways hit me in the right places. And I am not alone, I know plenty of people here drooling over every new teaser or trailer. It even got to interest my less geek-comicbookish oriented friends.
.
So imagine how we felt when just a couple of weeks ago it was announced that the Spanish premiere was moved to the first week of December. So, you bet I will go to see it at the theatre. I go almost every week, sometimes more than once. But I will probably watch it on a stream or download as soon as a good one is avaliable before that. And while I am pretty sure I will still see it on theatres, I also know many people wont… the delay badly damaging whatever buzz internet may have created.
.
Its not the first time Wright’s (and other’s) movies get treated this way tho, Hott Fuzz got delayed more than a year from it’s british premiere. A friend had the american dvd of Hellboy delivered by Amazon a month before the spanish theathrical release and Sky Captain, which I managed to get a lot of people buzzed up about, got delayed multiple times to an 8 months late (and deserted) release.
.
The detachment some agents in the movie bussines have from the present venues from wich people get their entertainment is ridiculous.
They said home video would kill cinema. Then they said online piracy would. Now it seems the net effect is to simply encourage Hollywood to produce movies exclusively for children and degenerates. (I suppose Scott Pilgrim appeals more to the sort of people who would have a harder time getting a group together to see a film, and might as well watch it from the comfort of their computer anyway.)
It is interesting how this movie, dubbed by some as a film for the ADHD, is doing so poorly. I don’t know what to attribute it to. The commercials? Ticket prices? Illegal viewings online?
.
I find the last to be hard to believe, mostly because the quality of such recordings are generally so poor. Unless I’m missing something and everything is available like the Wolverine film was, and everybody is just keeping quiet about it.
.
As for the film itself, I liked it for the most part, although I think it fell apart in the end. I’m not sure cramming the entire thing into one film was the best idea. Also, I’ve not read the comics, but I get the feeling that Cera was miscast as Pilgrim. While he was fine in the action and he gave his lines in a film filled with deadpan delivery, he has no personality.
Peter: One point, about this being a comic-book movie. I think there needs to be a distinction drawn between movies that use graphic novels as a source, like the two you cited, and movies that are more obviously based on comics. This movie appears to be using a lot of the comic book effects, so it’s much more closedly identified.
I presume someone in Hollywood is smart enough to notice that difference. I may be mistaken. But there’s a reason those movies acknowledged but did not promote their connection to comics.
I think there needs to be a distinction drawn between movies that use graphic novels as a source, like the two you cited, and movies that are more obviously based on comics.
.
But how to tell? The subject matter? “The Incredibles,” by all reasonable measure, would appear to be obviously based on comics. But it’s not. The directing? I’m told that the direction harkens back to “Spaced,” and that wasn’t a comic book. Style? “The Matrix” has a lot of comic book sensibilities to it, but it’s not based on a comic.
.
I’m not sure that obvious is so obvious, y’know?
.
PAD
“I know it when I see it.”
I can use fact-specific issues to discard most of those comparisons (Incredibles is animated & perceived as for children, Spaced was a series and a few years ago (? I think?), Matrix was clearly sci-fi). The question was that it will be used to call down non-superhero comic sources. You’re prob right, but the next question is that WHO will be calling them down? Random critics and ‘net blogs? You’re right, it’s stupid, and those opinions should carry all the weight they deserve.
My point is that anyone who matters (those who finance the films) should be able to see the narrower distinctions. Therefore, this shouldn’t damage the odds of making movies such as “Road” (great film, btw) and “MiB” (lot of fun).
So, we do agree, just a question of how much weight we give that particular chattering class. And how annoyed we get by them.
On a tangent: I’ve seen one argument that the characters aren’t all that deep, and Scott’s a real turd for his treatment of one of the supporting female characters, and the particular reviewer wanted to see the World win given the circumstances (otherwise, a largely positive review). Any thoughts, or going too far into review mode for this post?-)
4 separate paragraphs there. Sorry. I get why you put the periods now.
I don’t think a distinction between comic books and graphic novels is useful. How many comics are compiled into trade paperbacks? I’ve only every read Fables in TPB form, should I describe it to a friend as a Graphic Novel? If Fables ever finally makes it to TV, nobody who doesn’t know the source material will be able to tell that it came from comics while True Blood came from novels.
.
The distinction that matters is Superheroes. That’s a genre. The Incredibles did not come from comics, but they’re clearly superheroes.
.
Even the distinction of genre isn’t always useful. If someone doesn’t like superhero movies in general but he does like Brad Bird movies, he’ll probably like The Incredibles. I don’t generally like Westerns, but I can name several that I really liked.
.
In the end, all these distinctions are just minor guideposts. It doesn’t really matter whether something comes from comics, graphic novels or novels, because any time of story can come from any media. All it can do is give people a hint of what the story is about, so what really matters is the story.
.
I doubt that a high percentage of the people who saw the Scott Pilgrim commercials had any idea what the source material was.
“I don’t think a distinction between comic books and graphic novels is useful.”
.
No one’s making that distinction. Iain was talking about the distinction between different styles and purposes of movies based on comics, not the format of the original comics themselves.
This is what he said:
.
” I think there needs to be a distinction drawn between movies that use graphic novels as a source, like the two you cited, and movies that are more obviously based on comics.”
.
If he wasn’t talking about making distinctions based on the source material, then his statement could have been more clear. As it is, I think he’s making a distinction based on source material, which I don’t think is useful. As I said before, nobody can look at many of these movies and tell what the source material is.
It’s a bit confusingly worded, but if you put the emphasis on the word “source” rather than on the words “graphic novels,” his meaning becomes clearer. Or so I infer from his following statements.
Robert’s right, I was using graphic novels and comics interchangably. Apologize, Jason’s right, could’ve made that clearer.
.
Having said that, there’s certainly parallels between the points. But it’s not really material. I don’t THINK most of hollywood’s dumb enough to go “Comic books? Don’t want those! Graphic novels? Sign me up!”
Iain, I think you have a lot more faith of the people in charge in Hollywood than many of the rest of us. 🙂
.
Somebody I know has a great phrase regarding Hollywood (and tv) decision making: “A bunch of uncreative people making creative decisions”.
I almost didn’t go to see Scott Pilgrim this weekend, thinking that I would just wait until the dollar movie or DVD, but three friends on facebook took the time to say how much they loved it on there (one had already seen it twice), so I decided to check out a Sunday matinee. I’m glad I did and will recommend it further.
And then all the teens who said they didn’t have money for Scott Pilgrim will suddenly help make Vampires Suck be in the top 3 movies next weekend (with more money than Scott’ll probably make in it’s entire American run).
Well, as H.L. Mencken said, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
.
PAD
I’m really glad I got to see the movie for a second time today, because I realized that with Vampire Sucks coming out tomorrow, Scott Pilgrim might be the first to leave theatres to make room for that.
I’m still hoping Scott’s in a theatre near me for at least one more week so I can add to this upcoming weekend’s box office.
I think that folks still underestimate the implact that pirate sites is having. But, there may be another problem as well. When my wife & I saw SCOTT PILGRIM (we both enjoyed it immensely), it wasn’t playing at the nice, clean megaplex closest to us; we ended up at the run-down, second-rate movieplex a couple of miles further away. So, I am guessing that a lack of higher-profile venues for the movie is also hurting its box-office take.
Pirate sites no doubt have an adverse effect on movie ticket sales. But then, they can also have a beneficial effect. Were it not for an acquaintance handing me a downloaded copy, I wouldn’t have even been aware of SHAUN’s existence (I watch very little broadcast tv and so often miss the film ads). As it is, five minutes convinced me to find a theatre where it was still playing and, when the DVD came out, I purchased literally a half-dozen copies which I then handed out to friends at Christmas.
.
Never underestimate the power of free advertising. Baen Books very successful ‘Free Library’ is based on that concept. And, yes, I get the difference between that and a pirate site. But many people don’t. Doesn’t make it right, but it can work …
.
As for why *I* don’t go to movies nearly as often as I used to, there’s a variety of reasons not least of which, is the way they crank up the volume in cinemas to where my ears are literally ringing afterwards. I’ve complained, only to have them tell me “It’s the industry standard”. It may be, but I value my hearing and this is not designed to encourage me to go back.
I blame the advertising. If I didn’t frequent sites like this one and ComicMix, I would have had absolutely no idea, based purely on the ads I’ve seen, what the frak this movie was even about. Given the price of movie tickets these days, I for one can’t just go out to see a movie because it has an odd title, without knowing anything else about it.
PAD: While “Spaced” was a british tv show rather than a comic book, its principal character was a comic book artist. The series just oozes comic/sf fanboyism. (And then the star, writer, and director all got together to do Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz.)
Maybe a lot of people just find Michael Cera to be insufferable.
“Maybe a lot of people just find Michael Cera to be insufferable.”
I think more people (myself included) find Julia Roberts to be INCREDIBLY insufferable, and that flick made more $$$ than Pilgrim.
Well, I think more people would recognize Julia Roberts than would recognize Michael Cera. If more people recognize Roberts, then (by default) more people would consider her to be insufferable. (Personally, I find Cera to be just plain annoying–and that’s just based on the commercials and movie trailers I’ve seen. I’d rather watch the worst Julia Roberts movie than a 2 minute trailer featuring Cera.)
As part of the target audience for this movie, Michael Cera was the number one reason my sister and I haven’t seen it yet, and still hesitate to do so. I really really can’t stand that guy. It’s only the positive critical reception that is making me reconsider.
I equate this with the “Doctor Who” 1996 television movie. It did horribly overall in the ratings but did quite well in urban areas that had a certain type of audience (not sure how to describe them. “Hip”?). “Scott Pilgrim” might fail nationally but will likely do well in select markets such as New York.
Speaking as part of the audience the movie is directed to, many of my peers refuse to see it not because it’s based on a comic book, or it had a bad commercial, or anything else of the sort, but simply because they dislike Michael Cera. They complain he always plays the same role and they don’t like “Michael Cera” movies. Now me, I don’t see it as a Michael Cera movie; I see it as an adaptation of a comic book I love. But, you know, go figure. *Shrug.* Doesn’t help that some of my friends give even the comic flack for bland character visuals. Oh well.
Yet, (and this is my guess) they’ll go see the new Will Ferrell film and he plays the same character in every film, TV show, commercial, appearance, etc…..
Eh, “Stranger Than Fiction” was a change of pace; Ferrell’s kind of like Jim Carey in that way. I don’t think the Cera excuse is a valid one; it’s not stopping anyone from seeing a Jack Nicholson movie, a Julia Roberts movie, a Sandra Bullock movie…
Ferrell has a wider range than most people think. Compare his role in Winter Passing to Stranger Than Fiction to Anchorman. Yes, he’s best known for his broad (and raunchy) comedy, but he can also do subtle and dramatic, and do it quite well, when called for.
Cera, however, has made a career out of playing George Michael Bluth in all but name. Ironically, he doesn’t want to get pigeonholed as the real George Michael Bluth, which is why he’s reluctant to do the Arrested Development movie.
As much as I hate to admit it, I can be counted in the “Dislike Michael Cera” crowd. In fact, with a few notable exceptions, anyone having anything to do with Juno has earned my distaste. Still, this looks good enough that had I the time, I’d go see it.
Wait, what now? Seriously? What don’t people like about Juno? Am I not hip enough to recognise when a movie is trying too hard to be too hip?
I enjoyed SCOTT PILGRIM a lot (full review at http://thearmchaircritic.blogspot.com/2010/08/scott-pilgrim-vs-world.html). While it tried amazingly hard to be cool and hip (very little character dev — did Ramona have a personality for the first 90% of the movie, or just hair dye?) the visuals (esp battles) and transitions (literally instantly going from scene to scene without pausing) were stunning. And while people keep mentioning Edgar Wright’s series SPACED, this felt more to me like his two absolutely terrific movies SHAUN OF THE DEAD and HOT FUZZ.
It’s sad that people don’t realize that downloading material instead of paying for it will ultimately kill off the source since, well, no one’s paying for it and so there’s no money to continue. This is further accelerating the decline of magazines (“I can just read the article or look at the photos for free — but I’m sure someone else will buy it to keep it going, so I can keep reading/looking for free”) but it hurts entertainment across the board. And based on my experience working in retail, if/when the parent company does go under the freeloaders will feel absolutely no responsibility towards its demise. (“Aw man, they went bankrupt! Now how will I enjoy their stuff for free?”)
James, you are so absolutely right. Heartbreakingly so, even. This generation seems to have no idea at all that the things they like and download for free do ultimately need money to exist, yet they persist to steal the product thus ensuring the product dies. Colleen Doran has been talking about this, Amanda Palmer has been talking about it, really everyone should be talking about it.
Having said that, even if SPvs.TW “flops” that doesn’t change that its a good movie or that other comic properties won’t get made into movies. But I can totally see this film sliding easily into cult status.
I don;t know if the argument will find any traction–let’s face it, there are enough books, songs, movies etc etc to keep one busy for 10 lifetimes. Even if nothing new was produced you could spend the rest of your life trying to see and hear everything made up til now and you couldn’t do it. the specter of a future with nothing left to experience probably isn’t real enough to scare any one.
.
Making the experience of going to a movie an enjoyable one could help. It has gotten a bit better in that department–for a while I was so pìššëd øff at the yapping and cell phones and general jackassery that i was ready to swear off going to a theater and even now my TV is high def and big enough that it has to be something truly worth the trip and added expense.
.
“Making the experience of going to a movie an enjoyable one could help. It has gotten a bit better in that department–for a while I was so pìššëd øff at the yapping and cell phones and general jackassery that i was ready to swear off going to a theater and even now my TV is high def and big enough that it has to be something truly worth the trip and added expense.”
.
That’s likely a huge problem for lots of people. Beyond the issue of carting two kids around we simply got tired of the hassles at our local theaters. Hëll, I even get to add in the fact that two of the theaters we used to go to have gotten so bad that there are usually three or four off duty police officers working uniformed overtime in the theater to deal with the crimes and wannabe gang violence. The only really good theaters we have to use take 35+ minutes to get to.
.
Throw in the fact that they also charge enough for ticket prices that you could buy the DVD and have change to spare for what you spend at the theater…
.
It has got to be an event movie to get us out anymore and a lot of smaller films or films that we’re iffy on become rents or buys. And I lose very little even with “big screen” movies because of my HD TV and sound system. Oh, and unlike in the theaters I can control the sound levels so that I can hear the movie without having my ears ringing by the time the credits roll.
.
I saw it last Friday and loved it. Thought it was a fun, hilarious movie with lots of energy and a great cast. It’s really frustrating to see it do so poorly. I’m in my early 31 and played Nintendo as a kid and liked the video game references, it’s still accessible to those who don’t. As for downloading movies. My little brother downloads most of the movies he sees off the web and Me, I like seeing the more major movies on the big screen and with an audience.
Did not want to see the film but now I’m going to see it tonight because of this forum. Thanks Peter.
Yeah, Scott Pilgrim is the best movie of 2010 so far. I just loved every frame of it stuffed with some sort of visual extravagance and the overload of videogame and comic references was enthralling. I liked it quite a lot more than Speed Racer just because I thought Speed Racer was ultimately kind of empty, while Pilgrim wears it’s heart on it’s sleeve, and just basically riffed on anime, while Scott Piglrim cribs from, well, everything. Like Star Wars or The Matrix, it takes a hëll of a lot of various influences and mashes it down to something unique. The ton of Canadian/Toronto references were pretty sweet too (Now! magazine, Lee’s Palace, Pizza Pizza), but as a minor quibble Canadians hang out more at Tim Hortons than Second Cup’s, but I guess they picked Second Cup because it looked more like a Starbucks to Yankee audiences.
Tom Jane cameo was way amazing. And practically every line the drummer had was genius. I could go on and on, but I think it’s far and away the winner of 2010 so far. (Runners up are Toy Story 3 and The Ghost Writer)
“(Now! magazine, Lee’s Palace, Pizza Pizza), but as a minor quibble Canadians hang out more at Tim Hortons than Second Cup’s, but I guess they picked Second Cup because it looked more like a Starbucks to Yankee audiences. ”
Second cup was set up by Bryan, maybe he preferred Second cup. Also it’s not like they hung out there Scott’s sister and nemesis work there. It’s a minor location.
I broke one of my rules for Scott Pilgrim. i was late getting out of work, so i still went to see it after missing like the first minute.
I wanted to see this movie bad enough to do that and then see it again.
Honestly I think if you’re going to make a movie for the pirate age market, you have to make it 3D.
I would have gone to see “Scott Pilgrim” but for one thing–Michael Cera. Truly, I was a bit stoked when I saw the first trailer until I saw Cera’s genuinely blank face. (I was able to put aside my distaste for Nic Cage to see “Kickass”–even though I hadn’t read the comic–and got a slightly perverse sense of gratification when Cage’s character is beaten to a pulp and set on fire. OTOH, when I saw Cage was going to be in “Sorcerer’s Apprentice,” that was the absolute killer. But I digress….) On Thursday night, Adult Swim ran a two-part animated “prequel” bit during “Robot Chicken” (similar to the way “The Simpsons” started on “The Tracey Ullman Show”) and I found that fairly enjoyable and engaging. It’s just too bad that the animated Scott Pilgrim seemed more realistic and more genuine than the Scott that we saw in the film’s trailers; as I understand it, Cera did the voiceover for the shorts and it seemed absolutely perfect–almost as good as Lorenzo Music’s voicing Garfield. (Maybe the budget would’ve been better served if the film had been fully animated.)
What is even more depressing than SCOTT PILGRIM’s poor box office, is that it was beaten by both Stallone’s piece of šhìŧ and Julia Roberts’s piece of šhìŧ.
.
Gender movies – movies that appeal to people’s testosterone or estrogen, instead of their brains and hearts – are the bane of Hollywood. Is there anything more cliched than action movies and chick flicks? Bleh. Mindless big explosions and predictably bland love stories that appeal to the baser, more infantile instincts of each gender. These movies debase us a species, gøddámņìŧ.
.
Okay, rant number 2. Most people just want more of the same. I am dismayed by how many otherwise intelligent people march like little robots to see the last more-of-the-same movie. It’s the reason why reality TV, sitcoms, and cop shows always top the chart of most watched TV shows, and original, excellent shows like DOLLHOUSE and DRIVE are cancelled.
.
These people will only try different stuff if they have one friend with more exotic tastes that drags them along. And these occasions, they enjoy the different stuff, but as soon as you leave them alone, they’ll return to watch their reality TV, sitcoms, and cop shows (and Stallone movies and Julia Roberts movies).
.
It’s what psychologists call comfort zone, I suppose. There is room for only so many original movies at the same time, I suppose. INCEPTION made it. Now we’ll have to wait at least 6 months for the next original movie to come along and be sucessful.
.
God, I hate mankind sometimes.
Inception also had a GREAT ad campaign, one that managed to be intriguing without giving anything away. Scot Pilgrim had one that made it look like a dopey teen comedy. Not that I know what they could have done differently, it was a tough sell. Maybe they should have forgone the big roll out and opened smaller and let the great reviews and word of mouth build some momentum but it’s easy to be an armchair general.
It’s the reason why reality TV, sitcoms, and cop shows always top the chart of most watched TV shows, and original, excellent shows like DOLLHOUSE and DRIVE are cancelled.
.
Well, that and airing on Fox. That didn’t help either. Plus they both featured Amy Acker, whom I adore, but seems to be rapidly becoming the queen of short-lived series.
.
Truth to tell, I had some issues with “Dollhouse.” I thought the premise was flawed from the get-go and it was the weakest of Joss’s series. But the latter half of the second season was pretty good.
.
PAD
Just curious, but what issues you had with Dollhouse?
.
The thing that seemed to turn off people the most was the very thing that attracted me to it: the seeming amorality of most of the characters.
.
I think I’m starved for originality, so it was cool to watch a science fiction show where many of the protagonists were not nice guys.
.
I know that the themes of female depowerement were uncomfortable to many too, but I thought it was a nice twisted mirror of the themes of female empowerement in Buffy.
Oh, no, I had no trouble with the amorality. I wrote about it at length in previous entries, but off the top of my head, I believe I said that we were not given any real reason to give a dámņ about Echo. This wasn’t someone who had been forced into servitude and the valiant FBI agent was trying to rescue her. This was someone who knowingly signed on for a gig, which by the way had a termination date to it. I had no idea why the Fed was so invested in her, no idea what she was like as an individual, and no reason to care.
.
Nor did she learn anything from one week to the next to the next. Sure, at the end of 22 weeks, she began to sort of start to have some recollection of who she originally was. But that’s a long way to go for that brief moment, and even then, again–why should I care?
.
Basically I described it as a story about rich men’s toys being told from the point of view of toys that had no point of view. As opposed to other Whedon series where you become immediately invested in the characters, and through them you explore the world, here you were basically given the set up but little-to-no reason to give a dámņ about the people populating it.
.
PAD
You have a point. But I thought the basic concept fascinating enough to keep me interested, regardless of Echo’s past. So I didn’t mind that I felt a bit distanced from Echo, when they have awesome stuff like a woman coming back from the dead in a new body to investigate her own murder.
I also think that making Echo an abductee would give people an obvious reason to care about her, at the cost of making the Dollhouse staff into total villains instead of amoral and grey.
Yeah the FBI angle never flew with me either. I enjoyed the show more watching it on dvd but when it aired on tv I was really frustrated with it. It never felt right. There was a lot of good stuff there but it never became as focused as it should have been.
But I thought the basic concept fascinating enough to keep me interested, regardless of Echo’s past.
.
The basic concept of a woman who assumes a variety of guises has been done well and better elsewhere.
.
What brings a viewer back week after week is becoming emotionally invested in the characters. Yes, there was a certain coolness factor to some of the episodes. but it’s the personal stakes of the characters that bring viewers back week after week. When, at the end of every episode, your protagonist looks around blankly and asks if she fell asleep, everything is transitory. It certainly isn’t appointment television.
.
PAD
I, too would prefer something other than 90% of the crap Hollywood sends down the pike, but I’m realistic enough to know that some of what I like (such as the wonderful AFTER LIFE) has a small enough following that it might not get made unless the studio has tons of money from other films and is willing to take the risk. Frustrating, yes, but I can’t blame those people. ‘Free time’ is increasingly hard to come by, and ticket prices ever rising. Why should they risk something new when they know the same old same old will work for them? By their reasoning, better that than risk blowing an expensive night out on something which may leave them feeling it was a waste of time and money. I don’t agree, but I can certainly understand after wanting to gouge my eyeballs out having watched INCEPTION. If only I’d have known it was by the same director who gave us a Batman movie where they forgot to include the Batman.
.
Why was DOLLHOUSE canceled? Perhaps because in the very first episode, one of the characters admitted that the show’s basic premise made no sense. There were cheaper, easier ways of getting the job done. He was right and I went looking for something else which did make sense. My mistake apparently in that there was something behind the scenes that may have been worth looking out for. But if the writers hadn’t been so ‘cute’ and a little more forthcoming – as they were in the FRINGE pilot, but minus the detestable lead character – I might have stuck around. And so might have a lot of other viewers. JMS understood this when, in his B5 pilot he laid out a series of mysteries wrapped in enigmas, but also strongly suggested we’d eventually get to the bottom of it all. And what a ride that was.
We used to have dvd night once a week in my old flat share. every week I would wheel out my (meagre) collection of World cinema, Japanese animations and Hal Hartley movies and ask ‘what does everyone want to watch?’ And every week the answer would come back ‘Something crap and actiony. Or a cheesy comedy. Anything as long as I don’t have to think.’
.
And these were intelligent, ‘normal’ people. Now I’m not someone to turn their nose up at the occasional cheese fest, and there are plenty of no-brain blockbusters or silly nonsensical films that I love, but week in, week out, that was the request. Never changing.
.
I’m not entirely sure ‘normal’ people actually want good movies. Not even now and then.
True. Depressing, but true.
.
There is a myth that says only dumb people like cliche-fests, but the truth is that most people do, even intelligent ones.
.
I am not opposed to having time to “not think.” It’s just that I don’t do it by watching movies or TV (and I think the bad habit of turning off your brain comes from watching too much TV).
.
I’d rather go to the park and soak up some sun if I don’t want to think. Or browse in the Internet. Or look at pørņ.
.
Watching movies for me is a “serious” sort of fun. I can’t stop myself from concentrating. I have to go deep into it. Mediocre movies keep snaping me out of it, and make me bored and annoyed. It’s sad to think I may be in the minority.
An engineer friend who worked hard at earning her 6-figure salary once confided that she liked to watch light, fluffy fun stuff because, after a long day spent in deep concentration, she liked to be able to just turn her brain off.
Unfortunately, viewing pirated movies isn’t restricted to just kids. Among the people I know of at work who have been watching burned DVDs of films currently in theaters – and at one point, a guy was circulating a list of films people could borrow through the building, so there may be more than I know – the ages range from upper-20’s to mid-40’s. In fact, I believe the man in his forties burns some himself. As far as I’m concerned, this is thievery; but, from my experience, others who were born before the computer-immersed age are adopting some of the attitudes which might be attributed to the internet-world generation.
The ‘net piracy is one of the reasons for the 3-D boom, as well, of course – trying to provide a unique experience which the internet thieves can’t duplicate. (Well, besides the dozens-of-feet-wide screen… But, that alone doesn’t seem to be enough for everyone…) It hasn’t been a draw for me, personally – but then, I’ve been going to the theater if there’s a movie I really want to see, so I’m not necessarily the target audience. (Of course, I’ve never had to worry about things like the possibility of violence at the cinema, either – yikes, Jerry.)
I found a great quote from Grant Morrison’s run on DOOM PATROL that is sadly applicable to the box-office performance of SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD (and, alas, many other great works that fail commercially). Here are the near-last words of Mr. Nowhere:
“God knows I tried as only a chimneypot can try, but they don’t want strangeness or unpredictability in their lives. They tire of it so soon, though they never tire of tedium.”
I would’ve seen Scott Pilgrim except I’ve already seen three or four movies where Michael Cera plays the same annoying mumbling quasi hipster/geek/band member (Hollywood seems to think all three are the same…).
Sorry I couldn’t muster any enthusiasm for a super powered version of Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist.
The billboards were also blah- the tag “an epic of epic epicness” with Cera’s head down as strums on a guitar just annoyed me beyond words. Such a lazy, weak and uninteresting campaign, it actually offended me.
And if the visuals were so mindblowing, the coming attractions really didn’t let me know it. I saw a flaming sword and some hearts floating around as two characters kiss and the new Captain America (Chris Evans, seriously this guy’s Captain America??)looking like a 1980s grunge reject on steroids and Mary Elizabeth Winstead looking like a grown up Hit Girl. If there were amazing visuals, I didn’t see ’em in the ads.
I don’t blame America for not seeing this movie. Not one bit. If you want my money, make it worth my while. For a movie that is supposedly a creative stroke of genius, between the casting, the billboards and the coming attractions, there is no evidence of said creativity anywhere…
I’ve read many reasons why Scott Pilgrim faltered at the box office. If it’s receiving high praise from just a select group could the reason be actually simple?
Just like a long time movie reviewer will seemingly (and for that instant “inexplicably”) give a pretentious, snobby foreign film high praise against equal but regular Hollywood fare, movies like Scott Pilgrim “fail” to ignite the passion of the masses because they really appeal to the tastes of people who are exhausted of seeing endless rip-offs of a specific genre with long since unoriginal material.
For better or worse – the truth ‘could’ be we’ve slowly become something we despised.
In other words: We’ve seen the elitists and it is us.
I will quote Jack Knight here and say that there is nothing wrong with being elite.
.
Really, us geeks despise movie critics not because they’re elite, but because they’re a different elite.
Personally, I *want* the elite running the country. Who do you think George Washington was? One of the guys?
.
PAD
Well, Jack Knight quote aside – while I understand we all practice a form or a certain degree of elitism I guess in Scott Pilgrim’s case (as in others) we can also see how too much sophistication (lacking a better term) can hurt (unintentionally, of course) a project or a movie’s bottom line – not creatively – unless it reaches across the more unique fan base.
But then at what price? Too mainstream, too homogenized; too high-brow or cutting edge, too specialized.
It truly is a gamble and a balancing act.
I loved Scott Pilgrim. I haven’t had that much fun at a movie since I saw Superbad. I’m stunned by the poor performance at the box office. I went to see the Expendables today and I noticed that the start times for Expendables and SP were minutes apart and they were in the same wing of the theater. So I bought a ticket for SP and walked across the hall to see the Expendables. I know one ticket sale like that won’t make much difference but I feel like I’m doing my part.
Dude, we NEED movies like SCOTT PILGRIM, and yesterday I realized just how much we need’em. Yesterday I went to see SALT. I didn’t really want to, but a friend dragged me. And she is a real friend, so I decided to be a gentleman and go with her.
.
I want my two hours back! There is not an iota of originality in SALT. There is absolutely nothing there that I haven’t seen before (and done better) in an episode of 24. And, according to the critics, SALT is one of the “good” action movies, unlike garbage like THE EXPENDABLES.
.
I didn’t realize how creatively bankrupt the action genre had become. The few interesting things in the movie (Salt’s potentially divided loyalties and her marriage) were given short shrift, so we could get to the explosions and chases and fights. I was bored out of my skull.
.
And I didn’t even get to watch a hot woman (yes, sometimes I like that too), as Angelina Jolie is looking thinner than an African famine victim.
.
So, stop complaining about Michael Cera’s face and SCOTT PILGRIM’s uninspired posters, and go watch it. I gotta wait till October for the movie to hit Brazil.
It took until yesterday to see the movie, but I enjoyed it. Part of it was recognizing moments from other stories, such as Puss n’ Boots, Romeo Must Die (a forgettable film, but it was nice to see a new twist on one of its fight scenes), and one of the Godzilla movies with a very special guest star.
.
Absurdity played to good effect, both in the real and the surreal. It also featured good commentary on reputation; the lines about “Natalie” stick with me, even if I suspect I got her name wrong.
.
As for Tim Horton’s, mentioned above, it’s true that there are a ridiculous number of them in Canada, but I prefer Second Cup. It’s always made better hot chocolate, even if it’s stopped selling peppermint and peanut butter flavours. It also offers better desserts. It’s like the moose and beaver; Canada is more than one thing. That said, I still think the 1970s never completely let go of this nation.
.
Back to the movie, I’ll be picking this one up, even if just to pause long enough to read everything that went by too quickly for me. No, there was more than that to it.
.
The weird thing is that it’s a perfectly good, “Turn your brain off,” movie. Then again, I don’t know anything that can’t benefit from watching with the brain on, even it’s just to wonder, “How did they convince someone to make this, and how many stages did it go through to become what I am watching?”
Don’t blame me if the ad campaign and coming attractions are uninspired. And don’t blame me if Michael Cera stays in a comfy zone playing the same exact character in a bunch of different movies.
A movie that does not excite me into paying 12.00 for a show will not get my 12.00 for that show. There are plenty of excellent movies out there that you’ve not even heard of, let alone gone to see.
Have you see Winter’s Bone? Restrepo? Exit Through the Gift Shop? All are awesome and I imagine I would sooner see any of them again than watch a movie that has failed to entice me on all levels.
Fair enough but it seems to me that the single most likely sign that i will enjoy a movie is the personal recommendation of people who have tended to be copacetic in their likes and dislikes for previous films. When so many comics fans, friends, reviewers I respect, etc, all are unanimous in giving high praise to Scott Pilgrim it would be foolish of me to discount it.
.
And it isn’t as though Winter’s Bone, Restrepo and Exit Through the Gift Shop set the world on fire with great ad campaigns, I never saw a single ad for any of them. Despite that, I can recommend Winter’s Bone without reservation, based on the word of someone I know and trust.
.
The fact that the suits had no idea how to sell Scott Pilgrim should not be used against the movie. I mean, who will be punished? It will just be another piece of evidence that the best thing for Hollywood to do is play it safe and easy.
Hello, haven’t seen SP yet but plan to (before it’s too late)- I did not have any problems w/tv ads nor most of my friends.
Unrelated q- Peter, love that you brought Pip back in X-Factor 207 but what’s w/his hands? He had 4 fingers & a thumb- which he doesn’t have- he’s just like Longshot (in this dept.)- 3 fingers, 1 thumb. 208 comes out next week- hope he’s back to ‘normal’- ha ha. Was he just not done transforming or was the new artist Fiumara not familiar w/the character.
You are doing a great job- you are consistently one of the best writers left in comics. When I gave up buying most comics years ago- I still bought ONE book- your Hulk.
Thanks.
It seems truly bizarre to me that people didn’t understand what the movie was about from the trailer. Scott is a guy, he’s in a band, he sees a girl and if he wants to date her has to fight her 7 evil ex-boyfriends. *End of highly complicated plot summary.*