Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World

Reviewed by my fellow-writer and true FilmNut, Michelle Welker Scott.

Scott Pilgrim is in love. Again. Although he’s already in a relationship and has a long trail of broken-hearted women behind him, he’s pining for someone new: a girl with hair like ‘this’ and whom everyone says is way out of his league. But Scott doesn’t care. In fact, he’s willing to battle his new love’s seven, evil ex-boyfriends in order to win her.

Admittedly, it’s not much of a plot, but it isn’t the story that makes this movie special. It’s everything else. From the eye-popping special effects that turn the movie into a kind of a comic book to the wonderfully overblown fight scenes to the general, overall goofiness, Scott Pilgrim versus the World is a genuinely fun flick.

Some of the best elements come from the supporting cast. Sweet and sassy Ellen Wong, who plays Scott’s high school girlfriend Knives Chau, is full of boundless energy. With her large eyes and hilariously over-animated expressions, Wong could have leapt from the storyboard of an anime cartoon. Wong makes a great contrast to Kieran Culkin (McCauley’s younger brother), Scott Pilgrim’s jaded roommate who offers up scene after scene of deadpan one-liners. 

The only weak link in the movie is Scott himself who is played by Michael Cera. Audiences have seen Cera in so many roles as the adorable, bumbling misfit that it is almost impossible to envision him as the hard fighting, heart breaking Pilgrim. Although it’s nice to see Cera try something different, he can’t really carry the lead.

But everything else about the movie is dazzling. Even those who don’t understand the subtle jokes relating to video games and anime comics, will enjoy the punchy dialog and furious action sequences. Scott Pilgrim Versus the World is a sweet ending to the summer movie season.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Reviewed by Michelle Welker Scott

Throughout the past five episodes of the Harry Potter series, the young wizarding student has battled evil in the form of basilisks, abusive family members, giant spiders, corrupt authority figures, and – most importantly – He Who Shall Not Be Named.

But in each of these movies, Harry has been an innocent. He’s dispensed his share of violence, of course, and he’s been forced to make many tough decisions, but through it all, he’s maintained a sort of blamelessness. In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, however, Harry becomes less of a victim and more of an instigator. And like Adam and Eve, Harry learns that sometimes good and evil are so closely intertwined that it can be impossible for us mortals to know the difference. If the entire Harry Potter series embodies a coming of age story, The Half-Blood Prince is the pinnacle of Harry’s journey into adulthood.

Not everyone would call this movie a success.

The plot winds around more than the hallways at the Ministry of Magic; even the well-initiated can get lost. But in all fairness, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was a book with a story line so labyrinthine that it could hardly be encompassed by a movie. Even so, the film falls short. Despite the fact that this is one of the better directed pictures of the series (surpassed only by Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix), it is still less than a success.
Yet, the movie has its moments.

The humor here is wonderful, revolving around those episodes of teenage angst that plague, or have plagued, all of us. Love is in the air. There are giddy crushes and love triangles; secret admirers and jealousy. Hogwarts is one festering bed of hormones, yet there is nothing lurid or prurient about these encounters; the movie maintains a very sweet and innocent tone. Another bright spot is that director David Yates took great pains to let the teenagers act like, well, teenagers. In this movie, Hogwarts seems more like your local high school and less like the stuffy, too-good-to-be-true, British boarding school. It’s a more real Hogwarts. One that you or your offspring might actually attend.

The most wrenching scene comes when Harry must accompany the headmaster, Dumbledore, on his quest to find a horcrux (an object of dark magic). Before setting off on the journey, Harry swears that he will do whatever the headmaster asks of him, no matter how terrible, and when put to the test, Harry fulfills his obligation.

But his actions come at a great personal cost. In one of the finest bits of acting that the Harry Potter movies have to offer, Harry coaxes, bullies, and eventually forces his beloved teacher to drink every drop of a vile potion in order for the two of them to access the horcrux. It’s a gruesome scene. Perhaps too ghastly for younger viewers. But the book never shied way from depicting the terrible power of evil, and – to its credit – neither does the movie.

The ending will come as a surprise, or not, depending on how well you know the series. Unfortunately, like the rest of the movie, the final scene suffers from an overload of images. Instead of reacting to what is happening on the screen, the audience is scratching its head and asking, ‘huh?’

The Half-Blood Prince is a movie rife with controversy. Devotes of the books argue that the movie takes too many liberties and leaves out too many details. Movie viewers who are unfamiliar with J. K. Rowling’s original series find it confusing and clumsy. But, despite its faults, the book’s spirit still shines through.

Watchmen - reviewed by good friend Michelle Welker Scott

I am delighted to welcome a guest reviewer - fellow filmnut and excellent writer, Michigan's very own, Michelle Welker Scott.

Watchmen is not your parents’ superhero movie. While Spider-Man gives its audience the scrubbed-faced, boy-next-door hero of Peter Parker and Batman offers a brooding-yet-sensitive Bruce Wayne, the good guys in Watchmen are, well, not so good.

Based on the 1986 limited comic series by Alan Moore and directed by Zack Snyder (of Sin City and 300 fame), Watchmen takes place in a 1986 that never existed. Richard Nixon, having won the Vietnam War by unleashing the destructive capabilities of Dr. Manhattan, has been re-elected for a third term. The cold war is in full swing, with Russia and the U.S. poised on the brink of nuclear annihilation. In the United States, pandemonium reigns in the form of massive demonstrations and social unrest. Things, to put it mildly, are a mess.

In such a chaotic world, the death of a single man, Edward Blake, doesn’t seem like much of a tragedy. But when Rorschach, a hot-tempered socially-maladjusted crime fighter, delves into Blake’s death, he uncovers a diabolical plot that is putting the entire world at risk.

What makes Watchmen such a fascinating movie is its penetrating look into human nature. The movie takes such a dour view of humanity that even a hard-core Calvinist might blanch at its depiction of total depravity. Surely people aren’t that bad! Yet there’s hardly a likeable character on-screen. The hardened, embittered Rorschach, though apparently on the side of ‘good’, is as cruel and ruthless as the villains he captures. And the Comedian, whose sardonic nature is personified by the bright yellow smiley button he wears, is both avenger and savage murderer; lover and rapist.

Divinity, too, is called into question. Dr. Manhattan, whose matter-bending abilities make him nearly godlike, is an odious creature. With glacial calm, he dismisses the world of humans, shrugging off their imminent doom by saying, “A live body and a dead body contain the same number of particles. Structurally, there's no discernible difference. Life and death are unquantifiable abstracts. Why should I be concerned?”

Not every character is abhorrent, however. Some, most notably the Night Owl and the Silk Spectre struggle bravely against nihilism. They fall in love; they act heroically in the face of danger; they even attempt to reach out to their wretched comrades. But, in the end, these acts of decency are simply far too puny to stop the impending Armageddon.

Yes, Watchmen is a grim film; a twenty-first century update of classic film noir. Nearly all the scenes are set in seedy apartments and squalid city streets. Yet the highly-stylized cinematography makes the movie a visual delight. Even violence is elevated to a kind of grotesque poetry.

And there is plenty of violence. People die in massive numbers. Arms are cut off, limbs are broken, skulls are hacked apart with cleavers. In one horrific scene, a pregnant woman is gunned down by her lover. The sound-effects alone can be stomach churning. Watchmen is no Spiderman. Even The Dark Knight pales in comparison.

Watchmen has other drawbacks as well. The movie is, at times, terribly confusing, especially to the uninitiated who have not read Alan Moore’s comic book series. Flashbacks and multiple points-of-view needlessly complicate the narrative. Additionally, the length (three hours) is astounding. Even hard-core fans of Watchmen feel the need for editing.

Yet, overall, the movie works. Despite its hard-core cynicism, there is salvation at the end. It is poor and wretched and comes at a magnificent price, but it is there. Billions of lives saved; millions are lost. Some relationships are restored while others are irreparably damaged. The good die for the causes they believe in, allowing humanity to enter a golden age. Yet, as the curtain closes, there is an undeniable sense that society will once more revert to its darker nature.