Scott Pilgrim Takes Off Slyly Remixes the Cult Film's View of Romance and Autonomy
What if Ramona Flowers bears some responsibility for creating her seven "evil exes" in the first place?

For nearly the entirety of its first episode, Scott Pilgrim Takes Off plays a trick on the audience.
Most people tuning into the new Netflix anime series probably know in advance that it is a spin-off/remake of Edgar Wright's 2010 film Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, which bombed at the box office before becoming a cult hit. Similarly, most are likely aware that nearly the entire original cast of the movie—including some, like Chris Evans and Brie Larson, who have achieved stratospheric fame since then—returned to provide voices for the animated series.
With those assumptions about its audience baked in, Takes Off delivers exactly what seems to be promised: The first 25-ish minutes of the series are an almost exact reproduction of the first act of the film. A shot-for-shot, nearly word-for-word remake, simply rendered as animation instead of live action.
And then—with a suddenness so jarring I had to rewind and watch it again to make sure I understood what had happened—it becomes a very different story.
At the center of the original Scott Pilgrim movie (and the graphic novel upon which it is based, a series by Bryan Lee O'Malley, who served as a co-writer on the movie and the new series) is the relationship between the titular protagonist and Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the aloof and melancholy love interest. It is Flowers' seven "evil exes" who serve as a series of video-gamey antagonists, each more threatening than the one before. Scott (Michael Cera) must defeat them in combat to get the girl, or so they tell him.
One way to look at Ramona's character in Wright's movie is as a deconstruction of the so-called "manic pixie dream girl (MPDG)" trope that had, by 2010, already become passe. Nathan Rabin, a film critic, coined the term in 2005 to describe a female character who "exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures."
At first glance, Ramona seems to check all the boxes. She is cool and different, a transplant from New York City who has just moved to Scott's drearily rendered Toronto, bringing with her a splash of colorful hair and a love of music. Most importantly, she is literally the girl who appears in Scott's dreams—thanks to some light sci-fi elements that are delightfully never fully explained beyond the hint that popping into Scott's dreams a side effect of Ramona's seemingly supernatural ability to warp space and time (see also: the cartoonishly large hammer she can easily squeeze into a tiny satchel).
Scott appears at first to be the other half of that trope: a sad-sack 20-something who is perpetually crashing on his friend's air mattress, playing bass in a crappy band, and half-assing a relationship with a high school girl because he lacks any motivation to be a better version of himself. Until, of course, he meets her, and his life changes.
As the movie progresses, however, it becomes obvious that Wright and O'Malley are playing at something more clever. It's not Ramona's admission of love that allows him to win the boss fight at the end of the movie, but "The Power of Self-Respect"—delivered, naturally, as an arcade-like power-up that comes with a sweet sword.
Indeed, if you set aside all the stylized violence and humor, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World is about a guy learning that he can't find the solutions to his problems in a relationship (which inevitably brings its own unexpected complications), but only by asserting control over his own life. Despite all the MPDG trappings, Ramona doesn't exist to fix Scott—and he can only be with her once he's come to terms with that fact. She's also pretty clearly unhappy about the whole "being pursued by seven toxic ex-lovers" thing, and the lack of romantic autonomy that comes with it (a point driven home when the worst of her exes literally uses a mind-control device on her near the end).
But that was 2010, and this is 2023. Using a goofy action flick to wink at silly romantic-comedy tropes is no longer that clever. Audiences have evolved. We expect protagonists of both genders to have agency, and to reflect on how their actions have affected others. Now, even Neo goes to therapy. We expect remakes and spin-offs not only to entertain but to question the meaning (or even the existence) of the original.
And we know that sometimes it takes two to create a toxic past relationship.
All that goes into Takes Off, which spirals away from the first episode's twist into a snappy little story full of meta-jokes and remixes of the original. Scott Pilgrim is still in the title, and still has things to do, but Takes Off brings Ramona to the center of the story without turning her into a pandering and under-developed female lead. In a way, it's reminiscent of how the writers of Sony's animated Spider-Verse movies transformed Gwen Stacy from a sidekick/love interest into a full-fledged co-protagonist in the second film of that series.
Here, it is Ramona who has to answer the big question in the wake of that jarring first episode ending: What happens if one of the evil exes succeeds in defeating Scott? (They think it means one of them will win her back because they ignore Ramona's agency, which is what makes them the bad guys.)
But with greater agency comes greater responsibility for one's choices, of course. The emotional center of this story is Ramona coming to terms with how her own faults and insecurities helped create the evil exes in the first place.
"Everybody needs closure. That's why they call it closure," the perpetually deadpan drummer/video-rental clerk Kim Pine (Allison Pill) reminds Ramona after her first showdown/hug-it-out session with an Evil Ex. "Now you're one step closer to the dumb boy of your dreams, and you buried the hatchet with an ex. Multi-tasking."
That thing about having to heal yourself before being ready for a fulfilling relationship? Turns out, that trope doesn't only apply to guys.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The pathology of modern producers feeling that they need to hide what the story they made is really about.
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com
To you it's pathology. I love it. If I can figure out a plot or a theme too easily, who needs the movie?
That's why I recommend Barbarian and The Empty Man among recent releases. Going back a little more, One Small Favor.
It is a pathology that they sell the story as one thing, when they have written something else entirely. As if they have no confidence that anyone would watch the story they did write if they were honest about it.
Multiple, multiple pathologies. Frequently inherent.
Rian Johnson can't help but invoke "don't believe you're lying eyes" at all kinds of levels up to and including shooting scenes without characters and then injecting them into the scenes in flashbacks.
Gwen Stacy's character arc through "Across the Spiderverse" is she killed (her universe's) Peter Parker and her Dad takes the whole movie to learn how to forgive her, and he does it almost entirely off-camera.
I suspect it's an issue of trying to bring the audience to the hero as opposed to bring the hero to the audience in the background of somebody else's plot.
I saw a couple of episodes. Not too bad. This writeup makes it sound much more lame than it is
Thanks...because in reading this review it sounded pretty lame and something I should actively avoid.
Is bohem responsible for pushing for Biden and creating a totalitarian gov regiem?
Yes he is.
Quit working for reason.
He’s still working hard at making the world a worse place to live.
"We expect protagonists of both genders to have agency, and to reflect on how their actions have affected others." *Gasp* BOTH genders? I can't even.
Plus, it seems most protagonists these days are females. Everyone knows they're stronger, more skilled and badass than any man.
Nothing like fluffing the sanctimonious sensibilities of the "modern" audience.
At least in this case it's true to the source material. Ramona has always been the center of this story.
Scott started both the comic and movie at a despicable and truly hateable protagonist. I personally couldn't get through the first trade paperback because I genuinely disliked him so much.
like Chris Evans and Brie Larson, who have achieved stratospheric fame since then
Only in the quickly crashing House of Mouse.
Leopold the Cat
I hated Ramona in the film. She absolutely knew that dating her contained a serious risk of death, but didn't choose to tell him or give him any help. Frankly I thought the best ending would be Scott realizing this, then telling her how horrible a person she is and leaving. Ideally he would come to the realization well before the end but fight on to defeat the exes so he could save other men from them.
Let's get real, the only reason Scott kept pursuing her was because her colored hair and her body count indicated that she was FAR more likely put out when they got together.
Apparently in the graphic comic series, he goes back to Knives, which to me is a serious problem because she's psychotic.
“One way to look at Ramona’s character in Wright’s movie is as a deconstruction of the so-called “manic pixie dream girl (MPDG)” trope”
That’s such an unrealistic trope, unlike fighting a woman’s seven super-powered boyfriends. That’s quite realistic.
What’s the deal with these unrealistic tropes in fantasy cartoons?
(Seriously, men getting inspired by women to Do Better has kind of been a common theme in works of fiction, and sometimes even in reality. Maybe it’s aimed at a male audience – after all, why would women be interested in watching a man inspired by love trying to improve himself? – but at least it inspires the male audience to greater heights of achievement. Though I suppose men would be equally interested in a male protagonist who holds the woman’s purse while she does the real work.)
A woman inspiring a man to do better? Like mcbeth
One could argue that Daisy Miller and Judy Jones were the original manic pixie dream girls.
I'm waiting for
Scott Pilgrim - the eighth evil ex.
Which is kinda obvious, since what are the odds that all eight of her previous exes were evil.
Waiting for Suderman's take. Let's either leave the pop culture media critiques to the true professionals or learn to code. Shit.
Now, even Neo goes to therapy. We expect remakes and spin-offs not only to entertain but to question the meaning (or even the existence) of the original.
For god's sake, not everything has to include metacommentary. Not everything has to be a deconstruction. I'm exhausted by movies trying to wink at the camera.
Just give us a good story with a strong narrative. Sometimes I just want characters I can get immersed with, and not have the movie continually remind me that I'm watching a movie.
Not just a metamovie, but a movie which is embarrassed by its own source material. Don't forget that part - it's a sure guarantee of popularity.
The best thing the movie did was inspire the best punk song of the 2010s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSKizLRFbTo