Exactly.

No, not entirely. But I do feel it may be slightly relevant in that the movie didn't set the box office on fire due to its extremely narrow target audience and that I AM that narrow target audience and I still wanted nothing to do with the movie. Also, I was really only piggybacking off of the "Juno for Boys" comment.

Not to justify my comment, but me saying Scott Pilgrim looks stupid has more weight than the numerous times I've seen here people trashing on movies (again, likely without seeing them) that they are completely outside of the target demographic for. I'm betting that anybody on this forum saying the new Julia Roberts movies looks stupid will not get the same amount of defensive action on them.

Wow this entire interaction for the last page an a half has been completely and utterly shocking!

*is not shocked*

I LOVED that game. So much.

I don't think it would be constructive on an "Eat Pray Love" thread either. But i don't plan on ever entering that thread because i don't plan on seeing it.

Again, my point is that your reason for not wanting to see it is not accurate. And you used all caps and were all passionate about it looking dumb (again, you haven't seen it). And you would know it's not accurate if you had actually seen the movie. I'm not trying to convince you to see it. You do what you want to do.

I understand your point about feeling you are in the demographic but that it doesn't appeal to you. Then just say you're not interested in seeing it. But your initial post was awfully combative for someone that hadn't actually seen the movie.

Now, if you saw the movie and hated it, by all means, bash away. Opinions are opinions.

Dammit, did i fall into a PixyJunket trap? I need to post more often... I know Groucho's shtick, but not Pixy's.

Except you didn't really say it looks bad to you or that it looks stupid, you said you've seen enough (in previews and comic panels) to know it's bad. Maybe you really meant to say that it looks bad or stupid to you and that it doesn't really interest you, but that wasn't how it started out, thus the reason for people criticizing what you said more than someone else who might say "I saw the movie and it was stupid."

I think the new Julia Roberts movie looks like a bad movie, but I don't know that it is a bad movie and I will never really know it's bad unless I see it for myself. But I do agree that some movies you can tell they'll probably be bad based on the trailers, but there's always that possibility that you're wrong, which is why most people tend to not post in review threads their opinions on a movie they haven't seen. Just my two cents anyway.

EDIT: Fixed a glaring typo.

By the end of SCOTT PILGRIM, I was convinced that because of its "find yourself" theme it was EAT PRAY LOVE for Gen Y. (Gen Z? Millennials?)

Can we give rep on this forum?

As for the references accusation thing being incorrect or not.. in response to why a band named Clash at Demonhead was supposed to be awesome, someone simply responded with nothing but a screenshot of the NES game.

And I'm welcome to say it looks dumb without seeing the movie. That's the point of trailers.

Er, that specific statement (the excerpt from my post "but I've seen enough of both to know it's pretty bad") was not meant to be indicative of the book or movie's quality but on the amount of "trying too hard" factor and level of references. Sorry for the confusion, I guess it's technically worded correctly but I can see how somebody could see it either way.

I hate to defend PixyJunket and I'm shocked he's not into this as it looks like what I'd expect to be up his alley. However, the trailers totally turned me off to this movie as well. The raves from friends who saw it turned me off as well. Not because they liked it but because I found what they liked about it to be either stupid or uninteresting (to varying degrees). Clearly this is not a property for everyone. I don't even like the art style of the comic and actually hated the demo to the video game (and I love beat-em-ups).

The only reason I pop my head in here is because I like Wright's previous work. But the material he's working with here holds no appeal to me. It looks bad and practically screams "look at me and how cool I'm trying to be".

All that aside, I can't say it's a bad movie as I've not seen it. But I can say that it seems like something I'd hate to sit through.

But not knowing that doesn't change the movie at all. I've never heard of that game, and it didn't affect anything for me. Now, if somebody gets all geeked up about the reference, good for them. But you don't have to know the reference to enjoy it. It's a band name. band's have weird, obscure names.

Pixy, take notes. This is what you should have said. Especially leaving out the Family Guy reference...

Now, Roc, I should point out that you are also wrong.

I don't know what your friends told you, but if they said it was awesome BECAUSE it references zelda or clash at demonhead, etc., i would agree with you. obscure references do not make a movie good.

I just had FUN at the movie. And that's what I told people. Nothing more. They can form their own opinions after seeing it.

How did you not know? I thought the movie went out of it's way to point out those things at every chance and beat you over the head with it.

It's his opinion. It's not wrong.

You should totally be more serious. Just in case anyone has any fun.

I never heard of a Bob-omb (I loathed anything Mario-related growing up and still avoid those games like the plague), or Clash at Demonhead, or any other of these things. Didn't affect my enjoyment of the movie in the slightest. I just thought they were goofy names.

Mountains from molehills, peepulz!

Are smiley faces not valid on this board anymore?

I should point out to you that they are wrong.

I posted the screenshot because that was the reference, a video game. I could have just said "it's a reference to a video game," but chose an image instead.

But there's a difference between a subtle reference to an old video game as sort of a tip of the hat tribute to video game days gone by and something that relies solely on references to make people laugh. In other words, naming the bands after video games is a cool reference, but one that doesn't ultimately affect one's enjoyment of the movie or really matter to understanding the plot or getting a laugh out of the comedy. For those of us that get the references it's a nice easter egg, but nothing more.

Honestly...in no way does a reference make or break the film. If you know wtf a Bob-bomb is...great. If you don't, no biggie. Sex bob-bomb is kind of a dorky cool name. I know probably a good chunk of references it uses but it doesn't hold you by the throat hoping you get them for you to understand. That'd be stupid. It's Edgar Wright...he loves making references. Shaun and Hot Fuzz....chock full of references. On Hot Fuzz alone...I was just happy to see all these things I knew about being homages or at least nodded to.

All I have to say is Scott Pilgrim totally redeems next gen graphics.

I thought it needed more graphics.

It's not about too many graphics or too little graphics. It's about the right graphics.

Wrong. More graphics = more better looking. It's simple math. 100 graphics is better than 95 graphics. See?