Take a look at this...
Why does it seem as though these titles are all getting switched up?
Which came first, the chicken or the Easter bunny?
Perhaps the first clue goes back to before the movie was made...
The comic, from which the film was based, features a title that alludes to another familiar title. Turns out, Bryan Lee O'Malley's "coming of age" comic series, has Smashing Pumpkins references all over the place. That's because he was heavily influenced by them growing up. Here's a helpful review with the author: http://www.fluxblog.org/2010/08/interview-with-scott-pilgrim-creator-bryan-lee-omalley/
In it he mentions briefly his influence by the band, as well as other life situations gathered around him at the time of writing his epic SP story. He also talks about Edgar Wright getting a hold of it and beginning the brainstorming process that would eventually become his famous title. This has no real relationship with what I'm going to tell you though. It says nothing about the gigantic cock-up Edgar Wright was really dreaming about.
HAVE YOU SEEN SCOTT'S SHIRT?
That heart shaped SP doesn't stand for Scott Pilgrim, in case you didn't know. That is one of the first logos for The Smashing Pumpkins if not THE logo. Was it just intended to be a pun for Pilgrim's initials? Or because of some wacky connect-the-dots symbolism Wright decided to throw in?
I don't know about anyone else, but there's a cliff hanger here to me, a drop off, a silence hushed over with a finger neatly pressed against it's lips. But then perhaps that's because I know something you don't. If Edgar wanted to put parallels between his film and the original, then why leave it empty? The problem is that there is discontinuity in referencing a reference from a comic book when there's a lack of content in the film.. I mean... HE'S JUST WEARING THE SHIRT!
Perhaps fans have taken this in stride for only being a hint of the idolization Scott carries for the Smashing Pumpkins. Or maybe it's just the director's simple stylization after the comic itself. Either way, it's vague.
What I'm trying to point out is that, to the viewer, Edgar's only playing with the idea behind the comic series. So far the relationship with the Pumpkins is comical, and I do mean that as only having the comic series to support any notion about the band. It's Bryan Lee O'Malley's love affair with the Pumpkins that's shining through, but only on TWO T-SHIRTS?
There's no context without the dialog as is featured in the printed series. By all rights it appears to be a shoddy attempt to link the two works together. It's almost as if it's a joke. A weak one. If you read any kind of source from the Smashing Pumpkins side of the fence, you might find that to a real fan of their music, this is a turn off.
In the movie, Scott doesn't really talk about his interests. Apart from being goo-goo for Ramona, there's not a whole lot to go on as to why Scott's a Smashing Pumpkins fan, or anything else attributed to them for that matter. After knowing how much time Edgar spend on the set directly with the actor's parts, creating very specific parameters for them to work in, it would seem that he would of put a lot more though into it.
Why would the director so explicitly include such references as vague as the ZERO shirt? Is it to compliment Bryan O'Malley's love of the Pumpkins? Is it because Scott like's Coke Zero so much? Does the movie not deserve to get the same transcendental love experienced by the comic author when he was first writing the series?
Could it be that there's more to it than it appears?
No comments:
Post a Comment