Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is a 2010 romantic action comedy based on the comic book of the same name, originally created by Bryan Lee O’Malley. Though the film was a box-office bomb in spite of its highly successful cast (including Michael Cera, Brie Larson, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and Aubrey Plaza, with direction from Edgar Wright), it later gained traction amongst a different audience and soon developed a steadfast reputation as a modern cult classic.
While devout fans of Scott Pilgrim may defend some of the more controversial elements surrounding the film’s plot lines and character portrayals, it stands to reason that a film based on a comic book from 2004 may struggle to evolve with the changing attitudes surrounding women, race, and masculinity in the mainstream media. With this in mind, it could be argued that there are various elements to the film that have not held up well since its original release. Here are the arguments for and against the notion that Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is problematic from a modern day perspective.
MOVIEWEB VIDEO OF THE DAY
Problematic: Fetishizing Asian Schoolgirls
Universal Pictures
The character of Knives Chau, the 17-year-old wide-eyed former love interest of Scott Pilgrim, is one of the most beloved elements of the Scott Pilgrim vs. the World comic and film franchise. Though she originally starts off the film with an innocent and boy-crazy demeanor, her character soon falls prey to the film trope of ‘older men teaching younger women a thing or two about life,’ with Scott quickly developing a complicated and unique infatuation with her. Unfortunately, the age gap of the couple, while not illegal in Canada, is enough to sour their otherwise pleasant connection into something bordering on predatory, with Scott being at least six years older than his teenage girlfriend.
Though she is a unique character, the premise of an adult man dating a minor (who, through her being desperate and girlish, creates a consistent source of punchlines) is both uncomfortable and unfunny to witness on screen, especially factoring in Scott’s obsession with enforcing unhealthy relationship dynamics like infidelity and deception. If you remove the fast-moving comic book style and quirky humor, it becomes abundantly clear that Knives is too young, inexperienced, and blindly in love with Scott to be a truly consenting party within the relationship, not to mention the fact that Scott’s friends of a similar age directly disapproved of the couple. At one point, Kim even stated, “Are you really happy or are you really evil?”
While relationships come in all shapes and sizes, the premise of “ulterior motives” should not be one of the primary topics of discussion when meeting a friend’s significant other, and it is representative of a larger problem in Scott’s personality that he feels the need to continuously pursue women who reflect something he feels insecure about in himself as a man. This is also especially significant due to the continuous representation of Asian teenage girls as hyper-sexualized, obsessive, or secondary to their white counterparts in the mainstream media, which are all characteristics that Knives is forced to uphold in her role as “insecure stalker ex-girlfriend.” Ultimately, Scott doesn’t deserve a pass in taking advantage of young women on the basis of his own role as self-appointed male protagonist.
Not Problematic: Scott Isn’t A Hero
There are very few films that contain perfect characters who never experience any form of personal growth (or alternatively, maybe there are multitudes of these films, but no one seems to be watching them). Why should Scott, as a complicated and well-rounded protagonist, be expected to uphold the moral values of his audience, when it’s likely that the majority of his audience aren’t even doing that? Some of his actions may be justifiably questionable from an external perspective, but it could be argued that Scott’s representation as a post-adolescent male who believes he is the leading man in everyone’s lives is an accurate testament to the lived experiences of actual real-life “quirky” young men. How many characteristics do you have that you would dislike if you saw them on the big screen?
If we were to refuse to acknowledge any hints of poor temperament amongst our central characters in favor of perfect people, the notion of “character development” would fly out the window, alongside the notion of dramatic narrative structure. It’s also important to note that Scott does receive his “just desserts” for his self-absorbed actions towards the third act of the film; he loses his girlfriend Ramona, is forced to reveal that he cheated on her and Knives simultaneously, and is eventually killed by Ramona’s evil ex-boyfriend Gideon — all of which could be taken in a metaphorical context as acknowledgement that his insecure perspective of women with sexual histories was in fact a weakness that would ruin his life.
Conclusively, yes, many examples of Scott Pilgrim’s behavior were inherently problematic and reflective of a wider cultural issue, but a character behaving in an imperfect way is one of the most significant methods of commenting on an immoral behavior. It’s not necessarily justified to dismiss an entire film as “problematic” on the basis of one of its characters, especially when several other characters were continuously expressing their dislike of Scott’s unprincipled actions in the first place. Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is a film where critical analysis of its protagonist is vital in understanding the depth of his identity.
Problematic: Entertain Me, Manic Pixie Dream Girls!
Why should female characters have to bear the brunt of Scott Pilgrim’s immoral actions to accurately represent his “depth of identity?” With Ramona Flowers being portrayed as a two-dimensional emotionally unavailable sex object, Knives Chau as a childish and erratic stalker, Envy Adams as the evil, jealous succubus who wants to see Scott suffer, and Kim Pine as the embittered ex-girlfriend, there’s very little opportunity for the film to depict any true nuance when it comes to its female characters, so why should Scott receive justification for his actions?
In fact, even stepping away from the sexually predatory nature of Scott’s relationship with women, the characters represented through his perspective have no redeeming positive characteristics whatsoever. Even Ramona, the supposed love interest with whom Scott immediately develops an infatuation, has no traits beyond a very shallow perception of what women “represent” rather than what they actually are. For example, she dyes her hair wild colors, she used to live in New York, she has a penchant for unconventional men, not to mention the fact that… surprise! One of her evil ex-boyfriends actually turns out to be an evil ex-girlfriend! Who needs a fully fleshed-out female character when you can just let your male viewers project all over her?
Some male characters in the film are unique and for the most part halfway tolerable, like all-time fan favorite Wallace, but the “Manic Pixie Dream Girl” trope of undercooked female characters coming into male protagonists’ lives in order to teach them something, or save them from the monotony of their normal existence, is so tired. It just results in female characters being pigeonholed into the ways they benefit men, and the film doesn’t somehow hold the right to further that cycle on the basis of Scott eventually learning from his mistakes. Female characters should be allowed to be complex in a way that isn’t attractive to men or as part of a grotesque caricature of womanhood.
Not Problematic: Unique Gay Characters
Maybe it could be argued that Scott Pilgrim vs. the World has the potential to be problematic in its depiction of women, but it’s certainly not the case that the film negatively depicts homosexuality or only represents stereotypical gay characters. In fact, the character of Wallace Wells has previously been described as “the cool gay roommate” of the friendship group, with many of his scenes being some of the most memorable and quotable of the entire film.
There are some jokes that are played for laughs on the basis of Wallace’s sexuality — he and Scott sleep in the same double bed, he occasionally expresses some romantic interest in Scott (though throughout this film, who doesn’t?), and at one point he manages to steal his female friend’s boyfriend, but Wallace’s identity as a gay man is only a small facet of his personality, rather than a box in which to restrain his character. Given the fact that so many writers and directors struggle to accurately portray gay characters even amongst the social awareness of the modern day, the public acceptance of Wallace’s character within the LGBTQ+ community itself is a testament to the distinction of a film released in 2010.
Verdict
Ultimately, it’s true that Scott Pilgrim vs. the World has some seriously problematic elements, especially factoring in the extreme cultural shift surrounding expectations of diversity portrayed in film from 2010 to 2022, but determining the value of an individual character on a film’s long-standing reputation is a choice that can only be decided on the basis of the individual audience member. Films can be problematic while still retaining elements of their comedic, reflective, or subjective merits, and only you can decide whether Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is worth overlooking its more controversial elements for the sake of good comedy.
