Scott Pilgrim gets dominated.

Recommended Videos

natster43

New member
Jul 10, 2009
2,457
0
0
That's disappointing, Scott Pilgrim was an amazing movie, it is one of my all time favorite movies. Though Expendables does looks fun.
 
Apr 19, 2010
1,544
0
0
dathwampeer said:
Furburt said:
I would see Scott Pilgrim, but Michael Cera's faux awkwardness prevents me from doing so. However, I'm looking forward to the Expendables. Dumb, yes, but fun.

Anyway, I'd say it'll make it back in DVD sales. Those films popular with the indie crowd usually do.
I hate that guy too. I think practically every film he's been in has suffered for it... Well in my opinion.
I think its agreed that it's Michael Cera's fault.
 

mindlesspuppet

New member
Jun 16, 2004
780
0
0
wrecker77 said:
Friends, I bring terrible news. And the worst part is, you probably already know on the inside.

Friday, Scott Pilgrim and The Expendables opened, and Scott Pilgrim got DESTROYED. The Expendables grossed around $35 million, while Scott Pilgrim was took in around $10.5 million.
This pleases me greatly.

I am a bit upset MovieBob reviewed Scott Pilgrim instead though.
 

ProtoChimp

New member
Feb 8, 2010
2,235
0
0
Dammit. I knew that sub par peice of shit would do better than Scott Pilgrim. So what if it has good action stars, it was completley sub par, I know no one expected this to have a great story, but even the actiopn was fucking sub par. AHH FUCKING AHHH!!! I need something to calm me down.
 

RebelRising

New member
Jan 5, 2008
2,230
0
0
HereForFreeFood said:
Jeez, this thread is really starting to make some of you guys seem like a bunch of assholes. It's ridiculous! I have not seen either film and I doubt once I have that I will call them "vomit". Just because you want to watch the expendables, it doesn't make you an adrenaline induced asshole and just because you want to watch Scott Pilgrim doesn't make you a hipster asshole, but if you start talking crap about the other film just because it's not your "thing" THAT makes you a hipster/adrenaline induced asshole. There's my opinion ( like anyone cares ).
You're my hero of the day.

I really should design a medal or some shit.
 

MelziGurl

New member
Jan 16, 2009
1,096
0
0
The Expendables or Scott Pilgrim...I can wait for both to come to DVD so it would be up to my partner.
 

Lullabye

New member
Oct 23, 2008
4,424
0
0
fuck. As a Canadian, I refuse to stand for this! To arms Canada! For once an amazing piece of popculture has been attributed to us and it's not ghastly horrifying(a.k.a Justin Beiber) Even though we face near insurmountable odds(Jet Li, Jason Stathom, the Govenator, Stallone, etc) and we may have sort of lame reinforcements(Michael Cera) We can do this!
off topicish: I just started to read the comic book, and OMG it is amazing! my favorite character is easily Joeseph.(kim's cowerker's gay roomate)
 

blank0000

New member
Oct 3, 2007
382
0
0
Nerf Ninja said:
Oh dear what a shame how very awful that a bad film didn't make money.

It's probably because the target audience are too "hip" to go to the cinema.

It's twilight for guys and most of the people squeeling over it are displaying the same level of obnoxiousness they deride in fans of those films.
Have you actually seen the film?
 

blank0000

New member
Oct 3, 2007
382
0
0
RebelRising said:
HereForFreeFood said:
Jeez, this thread is really starting to make some of you guys seem like a bunch of assholes. It's ridiculous! I have not seen either film and I doubt once I have that I will call them "vomit". Just because you want to watch the expendables, it doesn't make you an adrenaline induced asshole and just because you want to watch Scott Pilgrim doesn't make you a hipster asshole, but if you start talking crap about the other film just because it's not your "thing" THAT makes you a hipster/adrenaline induced asshole. There's my opinion ( like anyone cares ).
You're my hero of the day.

I really should design a medal or some shit.
I second this, get this beautiful bastard a hat.
 

Danzaivar

New member
Jul 13, 2004
1,965
0
0
I've not seen a single advert for the film. You'd think some of that $60 million would have gone on, you know, LETTING PEOPLE KNOW IT EXISTS. That said it seems like the kind of film that will probably do better on dvd rather than cinema. Kinda dumb releasing it alongside the biggest dumbest action movie for ages...
 

8-Bit Grin

New member
Apr 20, 2010
847
0
0
You know, I'm actually kind of surprised.
I know that I shouldn't be; the cheese factor was off the charts.
But plenty of television channels hyped it, and many of my friends wanted to see it.
(Just a note, they are a diverse crowd)
Meh, who cares. It'll be an underground film I'll enjoy. Knock my indie-cred up a notch.
 

lifesucksadapt

New member
Mar 29, 2010
133
0
0
wrecker77 said:

Friends, I bring terrible news. And the worst part is, you probably already know on the inside.

Friday, Scott Pilgrim and The Expendables opened, and Scott Pilgrim got DESTROYED. The Expendables grossed around $35 million, while Scott Pilgrim was took in around $10.5 million.

The most crushing news of all is that it apparently took $60 million to produce.

This CANNOT end well.

And I honestly don't see the appeal of the expendables. Yeah all the great actors, but the movie itself looked sub par.

Its not fair... Now I know how Cabela feels...




Well did you honestly think scott pilgrim would stack up well to a movie like the expendebels, scott pilgrim is definently awsome but its an accquired taste, the expendables can be enjoyed by lots of people plus LOOK AT THE LINE UP FOR THE EXPENDEBELS it's unreal, its like someone wasn't content with just making a B level action movie. No they had to go round up all the best B level action movie stars from the past few decades, im not trying to be a jerk im just saying you shouldn't compare them its way too one sided.
 

Cherry Cola

Your daddy, your Rock'n'Rolla
Jun 26, 2009
11,938
0
0
Axolotl said:
Actually looking at those numbers, is it really that bad? The only thing they ensure is that there won't be a sequel and we don't want a sequel anyway do we?

Besides, I bet Terry Gilliam would kill for success like that.
This is actually the best comment I've read here. MINE SHRIVELS BEFORE IT!

Because really, how does it matter? It's not a dick waving contest. Are you upset that people didn't go see a film you think is really good? Well I'm upset that Cannes films don't get shown in mainstream cinemas, but it's not that big of a deal. Are you upset that a film you think is worse than the one you like is performing better? You should be more mature than that. Are you upset that this will mean that there will be no sequel for the movie you like? Why would you need a sequel when the film is probably better of without it?

The Expendables outperformed Scott Pilgrim, so what? You still saw it, and you still enjoyed it. That's what matters.
 

V8 Ninja

New member
May 15, 2010
1,902
0
0
Two things:

#1. Don't go up against competition.

#2. Make sure your targeted audience isn't about 2% of the American population.
 

Dapper Ninja

New member
Aug 13, 2008
777
0
0
What the hell, guys? Does anyone who has bashed Scott Pilgrim in this thread even know what they're talking about?

First of all, I'd like to address the comic-haters. Do you know what "indie" means? It's short for independent. As in, independent comic. Something being indie does not automatically mean that it is nothing but smug hipster douche bags telling you how inferior you are to them. It means the comic is not being published by a major company like Marvel or DC. Scott Pilgrim is a comic that is written by a nerd, for nerds. It's basically a great big celebration of gaming and nerdiness. What part of that description says "smug hipster douche bag" to you?

As for the movie itself, it's written and directed by Edgar Wright. The guy who made Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. What more incentive do you need to see a movie? And the movie is a faithful, high-quality adaptation that preserves the quirkiness and originality of the comic. You're honestly going to not only avoid, but condemn this movie because it stars an actor who had some roles you didn't like in it? The lead actor does not write the script and film the movie. So what if Michael Cera was typecast in some bad movies? He isn't even playing the same character in Scott Pilgrim. People, at least see the movie before you bash it.
SalamanderJoe said:
Tinneh said:
SalamanderJoe said:
Scott Pilgrim hasn't opened in the UK yet, but I'd imagine it'll do well seeing as it's directed by Edgar Wright, who wrote and directed Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. And those two are British classics.
If it isn't good, I plan to chase Edgar Wright around the garden with a bit of wood.
Oooh, I got it! Anyone else got the reference yet?
I don't think anyone missed it. Isn't it a law or something that to join the Escapist, you have to watch Shaun of the Dead at least five times?
 

BatOtaku13

New member
Nov 9, 2009
52
0
0
as disappointing as this news is, scott pilgrim is a movie that is destined to live a long life on dvd long after its theatrical run. it is a shame this didn't open bigger though, seeing as everything i've heard about the expendables is mediocre at best and awful at worst.
 

Sporky111

Digital Wizard
Dec 17, 2008
4,009
0
0
I would have gone to see Scott Pilgrim, but all showings were sold out in my area.

Expendables likely did better simply for virtue of it being a testosterone-filled-action-movie against a nerdy-graphic-novel-based-movie
 

Warforger

New member
Apr 24, 2010
641
0
0
wrecker77 said:
Friday, Scott Pilgrim and The Expendables opened, and Scott Pilgrim got DESTROYED. The Expendables grossed around $35 million, while Scott Pilgrim was took in around $10.5 million.

The most crushing news of all is that it apparently took $60 million to produce.

This CANNOT end well.
Yes, but if after a few weeks it keeps selling and the dvd comes eventually its going to go over 60 million. First week sales don't mean anything in the long term.
 

wrecker77

New member
May 31, 2008
1,906
0
0
Axolotl said:
Actually looking at those numbers, is it really that bad? The only thing they ensure is that there won't be a sequel and we don't want a sequel anyway do we?

Besides, I bet Terry Gilliam would kill for success like that.
...Y- yes. Those numbers are very bad! 10 million to produce and 10 million weekend!? Thats BAD. And its a shame too.

Michel Cera is actually one of my favorite actors. He always plays the same roll, and thats me. I am Michel Cera's career, personified, and the only other example of this, is Scott Pilgrim. He was BORN to play this role.

Seeing all the comments, I realize most of you are right, It will live a long life and make most of its money on Dvd and Blu ray sales. But it deserves so much more than that.