Who the frick asked for this?And why did they bring the cast from the movie back for this? Oh yeah I really wanted a bunch of 40 year old hags voicing female teens and young adults.
Here’s the thing about Scott pilgrim, the source material, in all my years of lurking here, has never been posted on Cinemaphile Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile
You're kidding, right? Cinemaphile is what made Scott Pilgrim popular in the first place. That thing was posted up and down, readalongs, best girl threads, but this was in 2006 or something.
I like Scott Pligrim because it makes me nostalgic for that brief period in my late teens when Alt-rock music was cool and parties consisted of hanging out at some random dudes house to drink shitty beers and play old nintendo games.
Then clubs became a thing again.
>Scott Pligrim makes me nostalgic for that brief period in my late teens
Yeah. Really captured that zeitgeist back then. And I bet the movie gays are a younger generation, or something, who can't relate to the comic.
Playing alt rock and some old video games with a close-knit group of bros is 10 times better and more fulfilling than clubbing to loud Black person music with a bunch of degenerates.
Frick doing all that just to get some boring airhead hoe to sleep with you.
Agreed, he honestly looks like what I imagine a rat turned into a human by a witch would look like. That said I thought he was unironically great in the Scott Pilgrim movie and it's probably the best performance he's ever given.
Why does this need to exist?
I'm not being facetious here, I'm genuinely asking.
Do they feel that their adaptation or performance was lacking and now they need to remake it in order to faithfully recreate the vision that they couldn't with the live action version?
Or did some marketing executive somewhere run some numbers and focus groups and see that primary financial providers in the age range and low churn social groups would have nostalgic feeling for Franchise #39742 so a remake would contribute healthily to their added value proposition?
It's a rip off because there's no artistic reason for it to exist.
how do they get away with bob-omb without pissing off nintendo
associate vice president #17 needed to shit something out to pad his action items list
>watch scott pilgrim
i dont follow
I can't believe how many butthole spam the comment section under it saying "it's what was needed about the franchise".
There's no "franchise" you stupid frick.
Just watch the movie again child.
>There's no "franchise"
Comics, movie and games don't count, huh?
Just frick off to Reddit again, bozo.
shut the frick up child. those were also a rip-off.
only the movie is good.
>only the movie is good.
The movie is the worst.
Go to bed, Brie.
shut up animeboi
The Xbox 360 game was pretty good
It was lost media for a while there until they released it recently
Who the frick asked for this?And why did they bring the cast from the movie back for this? Oh yeah I really wanted a bunch of 40 year old hags voicing female teens and young adults.
anime doesn't even try to show young adults, those drawings look like children. it seem netflix try to profit from pedo coomers lol.
Everything about this is gay
i will only watch it to see knives again
Looks cute AF and brings back all the actors for voice. I juat wish they'd bring back Anamanaguchi for some original tracks.
And I would've love a spinoff or continuation istead of just a remake.
Because Micheal Cera is shit and ruins anything he's in.
>Michael Cera and Brie Larson return
Automatically shit.
Here’s the thing about Scott pilgrim, the source material, in all my years of lurking here, has never been posted on Cinemaphile Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile
Like what the frick?
It's some gay weeaboo wannabe-anime le quirky xD video game comic no one cared about until the movie was made.
it's le ultimate reddit
>has never been posted on Cinemaphile Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile
>years lurking
x doubt
Pretty sure Cinemaphile has discussed the overrated beatem up.
You're kidding, right? Cinemaphile is what made Scott Pilgrim popular in the first place. That thing was posted up and down, readalongs, best girl threads, but this was in 2006 or something.
??????? Cinemaphile had multiple threads about Scott pilgrim mostly waifu wars
I like Scott Pligrim because it makes me nostalgic for that brief period in my late teens when Alt-rock music was cool and parties consisted of hanging out at some random dudes house to drink shitty beers and play old nintendo games.
Then clubs became a thing again.
>Scott Pligrim makes me nostalgic for that brief period in my late teens
Yeah. Really captured that zeitgeist back then. And I bet the movie gays are a younger generation, or something, who can't relate to the comic.
Playing alt rock and some old video games with a close-knit group of bros is 10 times better and more fulfilling than clubbing to loud Black person music with a bunch of degenerates.
Frick doing all that just to get some boring airhead hoe to sleep with you.
Michael Cera looks disgusting. It's why I haven't rewatched it, despite liking the comics a bit when they first came out.
Agreed, he honestly looks like what I imagine a rat turned into a human by a witch would look like. That said I thought he was unironically great in the Scott Pilgrim movie and it's probably the best performance he's ever given.
I bet Brie will be an even worse voice actor than she is a regular one.
>desperate ripoff
>it's actually the more faithful adaptation
Dishonest thread, OP.
>desperate rip-off
its made by the same people who did the live action version
Why does this need to exist?
I'm not being facetious here, I'm genuinely asking.
Do they feel that their adaptation or performance was lacking and now they need to remake it in order to faithfully recreate the vision that they couldn't with the live action version?
Or did some marketing executive somewhere run some numbers and focus groups and see that primary financial providers in the age range and low churn social groups would have nostalgic feeling for Franchise #39742 so a remake would contribute healthily to their added value proposition?
It's a rip off because there's no artistic reason for it to exist.
The movie is like 10% of the comics. It's like getting mad at HBO doing a series adapting Jurassic Park properly.
10% of shit is still shit
I can say the same about whatever crap you like too, your argument is just that moronic.
for some reason, you dont say this shit about x-men cartoons vs x-men live action
Because now they can actually adapt a full volume that didn't went to live action
>Scott Pilgrim: Michael Cera
The movie doesn't cover everything in the books.