This Scott Pilgrim review is worrisome.

The reviewer liked it a lot, but…

It doesn’t matter if older critics like The Hollywood Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt don’t get it, because they’re from a generation that’s largely incapable of “getting it”. That’s not a knock against the 40 and older folk—it’s simply a cultural incompatability, as proven by nearly every single negative review of the film. (No, seriously, check their ages. The majority of them are over 40.)

I mean, I’m forty.  And I’m trying to get together enough free time to see it this weekend.  So I find this news problematical.


  • Maladorn says:

    Fear not. You’re just 25 trapped in a 40 year old body. Or something.

  • Just Dave says:

    I wouldn’t say the reviewer liked the movie, so much as he seemed to like his own self-importance, and the sound of his own voice.


    The whole “if you don’t like this, you’re just not cool, man” vibe I get off the review makes me want to stay far, far away.

  • Nerds never age, Moe. They always get video game references.

  • Mike says:

    I thought it was pretty good, and I’m 50. Not a gamer either, by any stretch. But my wife is a lot younger, is a devoted game geek, and I probably wouldn’t have seen it at all if it hadn’t been for her dragging me out to it. So I guess maybe it all evens out.

  • Annette Bennett says:

    Just saw Scott Pilgrim with my husband, I’m 43 and he’s 42 and we both loved it. We probably raised the average of the people in the theater. It was very much a geek movie not a hipster movie.

  • MikeCG says:

    I wouldn’t worry, Moe. The reviewer himself couldn’t very well come out and say you can’t trust what reviewers say about movies (that would kind of undermine his whole employment), so he had to play the age card to explain the discrepancy between the quality of the film vs. the negativity of the other reviewers.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by