Review: Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World

Originally Posted August 14th, 2010 

When you’ve grown up in a word of arcades and consoles, it’s sometimes easy to forget how weird many of the basic concepts of gaming are. Mario is a series about an overweight plumber jumping on the heads of giant mushrooms and turning them into coins. Pac-man has you guiding a yellow circle with a flapping mouth through a maze to collect pellets and fruit, while being chased by a quartet of colourful ghosts. Much in the same vein, early comic book idiosyncrasies eventually became core elements of the medium: visual cues for sound appear out of thin air, and gigantic blocks of text hang in the middle of scenes, yet somehow don’t disrupt it. You may not notice how experimental some of these fundamental mechanics are until you see them applied in a different medium. Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is a patchwork of such elements, set in a world that’s equal parts Nintendo and Marvel. Physical actions are punctuated by BAMS and POWS, and pocket change pops out of broken thugs instead of bones. The absurdity of video game logic playing out as a living comic book is never of question in Scott Pilgrim, you're either on its level or left in the dust, making for an unapologetically niche, but vibrant tribute to these past times.

Set in the fantastical realm of Toronto, Canada, thefilm follows the turbulent love life of the titular Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera). Scott is a twenty-three year-old college grad coasting through life, in a band, but out of work, and spending most of his time hanging out with his band mates, or his new (and much younger) girlfriend. Still reeling from the heartbreak of his last relationship, Scott is content to simply spin his wheels until a mysterious American-Ninja rollerblade delivery-girl begins using his head as a subspace highway (stay with me here). He quickly becomes infatuated with the girl, Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), and as twee romance takes hold of the two, Ramona’s past comes back to haunt Scott in the form of evil exes. See, Ramona’s past lovers have formed a league of evil ex-boyfriends, seven in all, who seek to destroy Pilgrim using kung-fu, mystical powers and veganism (which, unlike ovo-lacto vegetarianism, bestows immense psychic powers). Scott’s wiry frame hides his incredible fighting prowess and so he steps up to dismantle Ramona’s old flames by using his fists, his wits, and the unstoppable force that is a three-piece indie band.

So, Scott Pilgrim is basically a romantic comedy, just one that's spent all its quarters for sanity meds on arcade tokens instead. The world of Scott Pilgrim is an 8-bit one, even though those are real people you’re watching. Based on the comic series by Bryan Lee O’Malley, Pilgrim’s world is much like our own, only it’s been run through a Nintendo cartridge a couple of times times. Scott earns points for daily activities, and even levels up at key moments. In Scott’s world, 1-ups wait for those who earn them and people can store five foot sledgehammers in a purse, Granny tweety-style. There is absolutely ZERO explanation given as to how such a world functions and, you'll either buy the bit and premise, or you won't. The film doesn’t stop for anything, and while it doesn’t take anything too seriously, the interpretive physics and wire-fighting are played straight, without ever seeming like some sort of parody.  The nonchalance everyone shows for flaming katanas and lesbian ninjas lets you know that this world doesn’t care why such things exist, so why should you? O'Malley's knack for blending fan-boy absurdity with the everyday makes for a terrific blend on film; wouldn't every bad date movie find just a little life by throwing in some pyrotechnics for no reason?

While the rules are more or less game-based, director Edgar Wright presents his adaptation as if the viewer is watching a comic book in motion. There are many, many comic book movies out there, but most are a translation of the story instead of the way it gets told. With Pilgrim, Wright has made a movie that feels like a comic book come to life. Shot changes feel like moving to another panel and each scene transition plays like a turning of the page. Most shots are accentuated with little comic book elements ranging from visual onomatopoeia, to HUDs showing vital character statistics. It’s a real treat for the eyes, one that will no doubt benefit from multiple viewings in order to soak up all the hidden Easter eggs. The whole movie is structured like a video game and as Scott’s trials increase in difficulty, so too does the insanity.

It’s not long before the fist-fights become bass battles and sword clashes, which can be a lot to handle. The escalation can lead to fatigue before even half the exes are dispatched of, and the film sags during the second act. Yet every fight brings something new and fresh to the experience, leaving the viewer excitedly waiting to see what’s in store for the next brawl. And it’s during these intense sequences that director Wright really shows his talent for filming complex action, which was hinted at by the 30-minute shootout that capped off his last film, Hot Fuzz. Wright’s always had known how to inject energy into mundane tasks (a trademark he takes time to skewer here) but hasn’t had a chance until now to go all out. Here, his highly kinetic filmmaking is applied to a property that needs a lot of energy, and the results are impressive.

Despite weighing all of 120 pounds, Scott is a 1st class ass-kicker, and Wright’s willingness to go over the top fits in perfectly with the material. Scott will be fighting more than half a dozen foes at one time but the action is never cluttered because the choreography is so well thought out. Most fights contain extensive shots where you can visibly see Cera belting out and taking shots, and you never feel like you’re just watching a stunt double. Even when a battle between the anime avatars of rock sub-genres breaks out, Wright’s measured approach to chaos makes the mayhem effortlessly watchable. As an action picture, Pilgrim is a winner because instead of trying to walk the tight-rope of plausibility, it says “to hell with it”, and instead focuses on being as crazy as possible, back flipping and roundhouse kicking all the while.

Yet, Scott Pilgrim’s success as a comic book/video game come to life means it has substantially more difficulty with an area that is a pitfall for both mediums: character. While O’Malley’s creations are endearing in print, on the big screen, they feel far more two-dimensional. There’s an uncanny valley to real people acting like cartoon characters that’s a bit jarring at first, and the only way to get over it is to realize that these aren’t people you’re watching, but instead the kind of broad archetypes you would find in a comic book. There’s a distinct lack of depth to everyone, including Scott, which makes the introspective elements of the story feel hollow. In fact, the central romance between Scott and Ramona seems incredibly dysfunctional, with Scott being inexplicably obsessed with a girl who’s consistently cold and fickle. Then there’s the treatment of Scott’s high school girlfriend, the inventively named Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). Scott thoroughly mistreats her, an addition to the film not found in the books, and the resolution to their relationship is rushed, leaving you thinking of Scott as kind of a dick.

The lack of depth in the characters will be exacerbated for some people by the film's overt "hipness." Remember, this is a film about young twenty somethings in Toronto, where seemingly everyone is in a band, and the dress code is strictly value village/Urban Outfitters. Be prepared for dialogue that’s steeped in irony and sarcasm, though it helps that its often very funny all the same. Despite its more youthful sensibilities, the complete lack of self-seriousness lets the actor’s words come off as light-hearted and goofy as opposed to obnoxious. A lot of that is due to the fact that the massive ensemble cast is excellent all the way through. Between its two leads, seven villains and a dozen other supporting characters, Pilgrim is bursting with charming and memorable performances that stay true to the source material, which is especially impressive since some characters are on screen for less than five minutes. Stand outs from the supporting cast include Anna Kendrick as Scott’s know-it-all sister, and Kieran Culkin as Scott’s exuberantly gay and equally hilarious roommate. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is perfectly mysterious as Ramona, which makes it a shame she doesn’t have more to do here. But the real star is Cera as Pilgrim, and if anything is going to convince people that he has a future as an actor, this is it. Breaking out of his more nebbish roles, Cera is playing the hero here, one you mostly want to root for, despite his shortcomings. About the highest compliment I can give him is that at no point did a think I was watching Michael Cera, which is a pretty damn big step forward.

There’s really no other movie out there quite like Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. While it may fall short as a love story of fully realized characters, the film manages to create a world of such imagination and energy that it’s almost impossible not to get swept up in it. Staying true to its niche spirit, the movie never settles for broad appeal and knows what it wants to be: a tribute to the wonderfully weird worlds of video games and comic books.

4 out of 5

Directed by Edgar Wright

2010, USA

Review: The Losers

Originally Posted July 23rd, 2010 

In 2010, a crack commando unit was accused of a crime they didn’t commit. Hunted by law enforcement, they promptly escaped to the underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire… The Losers!

Wait, that’s not right. That’s the set-up for the new A-Team movie. Stupid mistake. The A-Team was about an Army Ranger unit that was framed for a crime they didn't commit and had to seek out justice as fugitives from the law.The Losers is about a CIA Special Forces unit that gets framed for a crime they didn’t commit and has to get revenge while fugitives from the… huh. Well what about a van, do The Losers ever drive around in a van? …They do…Well what about an ending gun fight in a downtown harbour, I bet The Losers doesn’t have that! They do?…okay, now this is just spooky.

With The A-Team getting released barely two months after The Losers, comparisons of a Deep Impact-Armageddon variety seemed inevitable. Despite more than fifteen years separating each's source material, the set-up for both films is more or less identical, just with one elite army agency swapped out for another. Both films are sold as being flashy, brainless action romps with quasi-militaristic overtones. They both also feature cartoonishly evil bad guys, and a single female character whose sole job is to provide sexual tension. All these similarities are plenty evident, yet little mention was given when The A-Team rolled into town. That’s probably because The Losers, based on the Vertigo comic series of the same name, isn’t a particularly memorable film; it combines mediocre thrills with a mercifully short running time into a movie you’ll likely forget existed at all, let alone as a piece of parallel programming.

Starting out in the Bolivian jungle, The Losers wastes no time in acquainting you with the titular group of rough-and-tumbles. There’s the leader Clay, played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan (whose charisma is mostly owed to his tailor), the grizzled weapons man Roque, played with unflinching seriousness by an utterly wasted Idris Elba, and a surprisingly enjoyable Chris Evans, who gets plenty goofy as the techie Jensen. There’s also sniper/cowboy hat aficionado Cougar (Óscar Jaenada) and wheel man Pooch (Columbus Short). From the opening poker-game played with weapons instead of chips, it’s clear that no one could decide which character would get the title of “The Badass,” so they went ahead and gave it to everyone. After a bombing run on a drug lord is thrown off by the presence of a literal busload of children, the team, in gallant disregard for orders, intervenes, and winds up getting themselves framed by a mysterious villain known as Max. Just a tip for future reference: if mention is ever given of a change as to who’s going on the last helicopter out of dodge, get as far away from that chopper as is humanly possible. It’s not long before the gang is given means to exact their revenge thanks to the alluring Aisha (Zoe Saldana), who, despite having less meat on her than a starved gazelle, can break bones and chairs with the best of them.

That’s about all the set-up you’re going to get because once The Losers leaves the driveway, it doesn’t stop for anything. What follows is your typical checklist of action movie set pieces across some of the brightest, sweatiest places this side of the Atlantic. The amount of lens flare in some scenes made me feel physically tanner. There are flashes of excitement in most of the action sequences, but they're nothing wholly original. The meet/beat-cute between Clay and Aisha is pretty much right out of Mr. and Mrs. Smith, and is mostly enjoyable because of Zoe Saldana’s complete disregard for the safety and well-being of all pieces of furniture within her five foot radius. And for as built-up as some of the action sequences get, you’re usually just left wondering, "is that it"? If a movie's main selling point is leaving physics and rationality at the door, you need full-blown commitment to lunacy, and The Losers just feels like a series of half-measures. It’s unfortunate, but airlifting an armoured car with a magnet attached to a helicopter just isn't enough these days. Here all you get are a couple of pretty good explosions sandwiched between timid gun fights and some really unconvincing CG effects.

Then again, what aspects do go for broke still find a way to make The Losers a sub-optimal viewing experience. Breaking up the shootier bits are interludes where we check in on our villain, who seems incapable of elaborating on the next phase of his diabolical plan until he’s in a new time zone. This is where any energy that gets generated by the aforementioned shooting runs into the brick wall that is Jason Patric’s performance as Max. Now, The Losers is by no means a serious film, and everybody is clearly having fun with their parts, but Jason Patric wants you to know that he is having more fun than anyone, ever, ever. With a level of restraint that makes Jack Nicholson’s Joker look docile, Patric goes out of his way in every scene to try and be menacing, but it almost always comes off as buffoonish or just plain ridiculous. After reminding his head goon how badly he needs eighteen gunmen in twelve hours, you think that there’s no possible reason that he’d repeat himself it a third time; and then he does. And then in the next scene, he orders those gunmen to be killed. Why? Because he’s evil, that’s why! At one point he responds to a bullet in his shoulder not with, you know, signs of pain, but with a level of mild annoyance reserved for when someone hits you with a rubber band. Oh, and then he sticks his finger in the wound and has a taste of his own blood, which, I imagine tastes pretty good thanks to the Cost-co sized cans of energy drinks he must have been downing between scenes.

As certifiably insane as Patric is, he’s about the only thing that’s aggressively bad about The Losers. Sure there are a myriad of gapping plot holes and unexplained motivations but this is a movie about characters and action, not story. To their credit, everyone else in the cast is competent enough and it can be occasionally fun to revel in their brainless exploits. Chris Evans is the real standout, as he manages to make the most out of every scene thanks to a mix of crass humour and brazen self-awareness. His natural response to the absurdity of bringing a crossbow to a gunfight is simply to declare “that’s right bitches, I’ve got a crossbow.”

The screenplay, written by Zodiac scribe James Vanderbilt, is drenched in these sorts of immature one-liners and really the only word I can think of to properly describe The Losers is juvenile. Every yo momma and dick joke seems perfect for the PG-13 audience the film no doubt hoped would flood cinemas but didn’t. I mean for god sakes, the bad guy’s weapon of choice is called a SNUKE. Even the film’s romantic subplot, which consists of Zoe Saldana showing up with a bottle of tequila followed by immediate boning, is designed to target barely pubescent thirteen year-olds. Which pretty much sums up The Losers; it’s all action, no foreplay and completely forgettable.

2 out of 5

2009 USA

Directed by Sylvain White

Review: The Avengers

It’s pretty incredible that The Avengers is an actual movie and that it came out in theatres today. How many successful movies have been made by combining two separate franchises, let alone four? Comic books have cross-pollination ingrained in their DNA, particularly Marvel’s, but it was hard to imagine an Avengers movie as being anything other than a cash-in starring a bunch of  easily affordable no-names playing some of the biggest names in comics. So when Marvel decided to give each hero their own film so as to set-up the characters ahead of time and actively build towards this one amazing-mega-ultra-team-up, it showed an actual commitment to the idea of turning a super-group of superheroes into the kind of event movie it deserved to be. Getting geek icon Joss Whedon to write and direct the whole thing seemed itself almost too good to be true.

Yet here we are, four years after The Avengers was first teased at the end of Iron Man, with the greatest convergence in cinematic entertainment, pretty much ever, ready to blow audiences away. So, how is it? Well... it’s good, quite good even. That might sound reductive but the fact that The Avengers doesn’t collapse horribly beneath its own ambitions is an achievement unto itself. We have the stars and co-stars of four separate blockbuster franchises all stuffed into one single picture. Robert Downey Jr. is as rakish as ever playing billionaire Tony Stark, who dons the crimson and gold armour of Iron Man once more, but this time he’s joined by supersoldier-turned fish out of water Captain America (Chris Evans), fresh from a nasty plane crash-related hibernation. There’s also Thor (Chris Hemsworth), the warrior prince from another planet who wields Shakespearean verse and a nasty hammer in equal measure, as well as the big green guy himself, The Hulk, being kept in check by Marvel newcomer Mark Ruffalo as the giant’s low-key scientist alter-ego, Bruce Banner.

But wait, there’s more! Increasingly prominent S.H.I.E.L.D director Nick Fury gives Samuel L. Jackson greater opportunity to give grim looks from his one good eye, and has a new assistant (Cobie Smulders) to boot. Superhero scout and franchise connective tissue Agent Phil Coulson continues trying to get his ragtag team of metahumans together, and Thor’s scientist pal Dr. Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) is in tow as well. Then there’s the pair of assassin types, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), who’ve been promoted from cameos to full-time world savers. Phew. Even at an arguably excessive 140 minutes, there is a lot going on in The Avengers, with no less than a dozen characters to introduce, both to each other, and audiences still a bit foggy on which one’s the time-displaced WWII vet and which one’s the Norse god.

Despite all the necessary groundwork laying that would hamstring the film’s leading up to it, The Avengers still has so much to get viewers up to speed on that it makes for a talky opening hour and a half. All the more reason to be thankful that it’s Whedon filling in the speech bubbles, as while his direction is clean and focussed, it’s his words that the movie really needed. Rather than settling for a glossy, one-shot crossover, great effort is made to develop the relationship each hero has with the others, while simultaneously maintaining the personalities established in each solo ventures before bringing them into the greater world of super-dom as a whole.

Whedon keeps things light, if not always brisk, with his trademark brand of self-aware humour, including more than a few riffs on costuming, which is funnier when coming from a guy wearing stars ‘n stripes pajamas. Getting everyone to play nice together is the story’s real conflict, as such varying powers and personalities create plenty of friction aboard S.H.I.E.L.D.’s fancy new flying helicarrier. So once Thor’s mischievous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) steals the Tesseract, a cosmic MacGuffin that’s been popping up all over the Marvel movie universe, with the intent of leading an extraterrestrial army to earth’s front door, the real threat is whether the heroes be able to survive each other long enough to save anybody else.

It leads to more than a few surprise turns to the established Marvel formula. There’s an emotional and political murkiness throughout, as S.H.I.E.L.D.’s intentions are rarely transparent, and the personal conflicts bear out into much more globally conscious ones. The final act is as action-heavy as ever, with a full-blown intergalactic war ripping apart downtown Manhattan, and these setpiece closers were often the weakest link in the previous efforts, but here, it’s the culmination of 10 hours worth of set-up, so the catharsis is almost unparalleled. It’s a whole lot of CG destruction by monsters whose motives are about as vague as their species name, but it doesn’t matter because holy crap, Hulk just punched a mecha-baleen whale in the face! And wow, Thor just chip-shot an Acura into five aliens! With such a diverse array of badasses, the action beats switch fast but hit hard, even at the 2-hour mark. It’s raw spectacle, pure and simple, but because so much care has been put into making us love who’s putting on the show, it makes for one hell of a pay-off.

And through it all Whedon has, quite improbably, found a way to make every member of the all-star line-up relevant and matter. Hawkeye’s bow and arrow looks pretty measly when compared to the 8-foot tall Hulk, but his accuracy helps out in plenty of situations where smashing can’t. Perhaps most surprising is Johansson as Black Widow, who showed up in Iron Man 2 mostly just as eye candy, but now gets to quip and kick-ass along with everybody else. The team spirit that the Avengers is based on manages to not just survive, but invigorate the big screen translation, and you’ll know it once you see the requisite but charming after-credits sequence (of which there are two, so be sure to stick around). The story itself is simple and occasionally contrived (true to comics, mind-control is a big factor), but it’s built on a foundation of wonderful characters whose interactions within that story are what keep you engaged, be they flashy or funny.

It might seem odd to end talking about another comic franchise but the recently released final trailer for The Dark Knight Rises will likely play before your screening of The Avengers. It gives a stark comparison between what Christopher Nolan is doing with Batman and what Marvel has done with The Avengers. While Nolan wants to create a case for artistic filmmaking within the blockbuster framework, Marvel has once again done what they’ve proven themselves best at; making fun, highly entertaining comic book movies that are effortlessly easy to enjoy. Nolan might be pushing the expectations for the genre, but The Avengers reminds us that just because something’s a spectacle, doesn’t mean it can’t be satisfying. Even better, you can bet there will be plenty of new Avengers fan ready to assemble when the team’s next outing arrives in the (hopefully not too distant) future.

4 out of 5