"Sounds like you got some issues to work out, there, John. You shouldn’t take a fictional character’s behavior so personally."

You're right. I see now that advocating fictional violence against a fictional character is deeply, truly wrong. I feel every bit as bad as I did when the vet couldn't save my virtual pet.

Although I should say that you're right that I gauged the age thing too low. I should have said "am I surprised a nearly 40-year old wasn't blown away by Scott Pilgrim". I'm just a young scamp who has no respect for his elders.

Scott’s 23; he’s not a moron.

One does not imply the other. As someone who's nearly 23, I can tell you that most of my peers are definitely morons.

Owly would so kick Scott Pilgrim's arse, btw.

So, I dunno, maybe it's just a matter of taste, and a bit of a generational thing. My wife, who isn't really a comics fan but occasionally reads stuff that I foist upon her, also loves the series, so take that as you will. Also, I know Greg's exaggerating a bit, but I would disagree with his putdown of video games. I think they're just as valid a storytelling medium as anything else, and they have the ability to add an interesting level of interaction to the proceedings. Sure, not every game tries to do so (sports games, for instance), but the ones I like can make for a fascinating experience. Plus, they're fun.

Am I surprised that a 30-something year old wasn’t blown away with Scott Pilgrim? No, not really. Its not written for you. Its for a different generation facing different problems.

I don't know how true this is. I'm smack-dab in the middle of being 34 and the River City Ransom allusion he makes in the flashback opener for Vol. 2 recalls a game that came out my freshman year of highschool. Actually, pretty much everything in the books made sense to me and even recalled my own sense of the zeitgeist of the mid-'90s when I was Scott's age.

I read an interview somewhere with O'Malley that the idea was just, his and his friends lives, but elevated to an entertaining ridiculous level instead of a boring mundane existence.

Which about sums it up for me.

Doug: Shoot, you’re right. I think the only time he mentions her last name is on the third page, when he’s telling his friends about her. It’s obviously a “u” when I look at it now, but it could also be an “li.” “Chau” makes more sense, of course.

Nah, her full name gets mentioned all the time (as well as her age).
It's just your old man-ness showing through again.
Give it a re-read with a warm blanket around your legs, and a water bottle at your feet and you'll probably find it a lot more enjoyable.

I didn't like the movie, either, but there are many other, more valid reasons to fault it.

I would want to see Scott Pilgrim lose, lose badly, wind up in the hospital, and die

Sounds like you got some issues to work out, there, John. You shouldn't take a fictional character's behavior so personally.

Burgas-

remember when people reserved judgment until they read or saw the thing in question?

Nope. That's never been the case. It's just that the internet made it easier for people to voice ignorant opinions where everybody could hear them.

(O’Malley has made fun of people in interviews for still saying that the Smashing Pumpkins are their favourite band ever, as he thinks they are a band you grow out of. So either that’s why he named the volume about dealing with an ex that, or he’s a hypocrite I guess).

Ok. That might absolve him some.

At least enough that the Neko Case reference makes up for it.

Then Matthew attacks, and the book turns into a video game.

Actually, it turns into a Bollywood musical.

And then there’s the whole “Naming your book after a Smashing Pumpkins” album thing…..

I think that was a comment on the fact it was Scott dealing with misery from his past.
(O'Malley has made fun of people in interviews for still saying that the Smashing Pumpkins are their favourite band ever, as he thinks they are a band you grow out of. So either that's why he named the volume about dealing with an ex that, or he's a hypocrite I guess).

It’s never going to be deep as Daniel Clowes or Adrian Tomine.

Thank christ for that!

Then I heard about it in a bit more detail, and I was like, “It’s about a guy who’s already dating someone, and he strings her along while trying to get with another girl, but first he has to fight her seven ex-boyfriends? That sounds like everyone in the comic is an unsympathetic prick, and if it’s being presented as a wacky comedy, then I must be fundamentally out of tune with the writer’s logic, because I would want to see Scott Pilgrim lose, lose badly, wind up in the hospital, and die.”

That's not really what it's about at all John, and in fact, that plots dropped early into the second volume.
(Of course, the jilted girlfriend goes for revenge and comedy ensures... either way, it's nothing at all like you describe it).