Tuesday
Aug172010
Review: Scott Pilgrim Movie
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 Filed in Discussions ;)
Scott Pilgrim is a movie. Scott Pilgrim is a book. Scott Pilgrim is Canadian. Scott Pilgrim is a douche. We love Scott Pilgrim. He may be with fault, but they are fults we can live with and though we may complain once and a while we’ll stand by him. This week we review Scott Pilgrim. Don’t believe me, then listen for yourself.
Runtime: 1 hour 12 minute 57 seconds
The Dollar Bin audio player requires javascript to work. Please enable javascript or use the download link below to listen to our show.
Find out more about Independent, Ted, Tee, adam, heather, movie, review, scott pilgrim, shawn
Independent, Ted, Tee, adam, heather, movie, review, scott pilgrim, shawn
Reader Comments (26)
Would you categorize Howard Wolowitz from "Big Bang Theory" as a womanizer? - Um, hell yeah. Have you even seen that show?
Brandon, womanizers don't have to brag to their friends or even do what they do intentionally. And all women hook up with womanizers willingly...otherwise we're talking about rapists, not womanizers.
You've got Barney Stinson in your head as the definition of a womanizer and that's only the cliche type. What Scott does to Knives & Kim is even worse since he doesn't even seem to realize they have feelings that can be hurt.
What Wallace does is manizing. What Scott does is nothing like what Wallace does. Scott doesn't hook up with that many girls. He hooks up with 1 in the entire span of the story. As far as I can see he hooked up with one prior (Envy). He is a sociopath and a skeezball, but that doesn't qualify him as a womamnizer.
I'll just agree to disagree then...
Man, it'd be nice to get this kind of traffic over at the forums!? I guess we need to discuss Rulk and Scott Pilgrim more often! ;)
"Hold on a second, you mean like in Vol. 6 when he asks three different women to have casual sex with him in the space of about 10 pages?"
But none of them did. And that's why it's funny. Also, a womanizer wouldn't do that because they would get women to have casual sex with them without mentioning the casual nature of the sex. 3 isn't many. 3 is "a few." And they're all women he had previously dated. I think. The whole casual sex journey was supposed to teach Scott the lesson that he still loves Ramona and needs to stop screwing around and fight for her. Because he's NOT a womanizer.
"But Terence, the meaning of words change all the time."
No, they don't. Words get used incorrectly and they become slang terms. The meaning is still the same, but there is now an alternate type of usage. When you use a slang term, you have to be prepared for people not knowing what the hell you're saying. If everyone just used words they way they are defined, we wouldn't have this problem. You can't just change the term "womanizer" to mean what you want it to mean. Well, you can, but you can't expect people to agree with you because it doesn't fit the established definition. Look, I can argue with you all day about language. You won't win because I won't give up. For example, gay still means happy. It doesn't mean homosexual or bad. Homosexual means homosexual. It's a word created specifically to describe that sort of relationship. Use it.
"Maybe change womaniser to man-whore and you'll have a more accurate description of Scott."
Not even close. Man-whore still fits Wallace and not Scott.
"You've got Barney Stinson in your head as the definition of a womanizer and that's only the cliche type"
No, Barney is a womanizer AND a cliche. You don't have to pick just one.
"He is a sociopath"
He's a social idiot. Sociopath is taking it a bit far.
If, as a culture, we're going to continue to be so obsessed with labels and name-calling, we need to damn well use words properly. Obviously, when someone misuses a term, it results in an argument, and that's pretty much the state of the world right now. We argue with each other over everything and accomplish nothing.
Scott is not a womanizer. Bill Clinton did say it best because he was answering a question truthfully in response to the way it was asked and not the way it was intended. Not his fault he's smarter than the people asking him the questions. When being critical of Scott Pilgrim's behavior, you can say Scott treated the women in his life poorly without having to label him a womanizer. There are even plenty of hyperbolic terms which could fit the situation without stretching all the way to a new word with an established definition which doesn't fit the truth of the situation.
This is why we need a volume 7: Scott Pilgrim Vs Tiger Woods. BG +7!