I have not seen Scott Pilgrim VS the World. I don't ever leave the house, so it will have to wait until DVD, though I posted the trailer some time ago because I thought it was cute and looked fun. I also don't let reviews decide me on which movies to see, and generally don't read reviews of any kind at all, unless I am definitely not planning on seeing the movie. But I quite enjoyed this article by Linda Holmes on NPR, regarding how Scott Pilgrim is being reviewed:
I also think it's so heavily stylized that it's bound not to be everyone's favorite film. It's not aiming to be liked by all; it's aiming to be adored by many. If director Edgar Wright weren't okay with the film's being polarizing, he'd have backed off from some of its delightful little quirks.Emphasis mine. I think anyone who reviews anything should read her article. I stopped reading comic book reviews a long time ago, when they stopped being about the comic itself and started being more about how much snark the reviewer could pile on the creators. For some reason, certain people are incapable of separating "I don't like it" from "It's incompetent/horrible/shouldn't have been made/etc." They've become incapable of stating why they don't like something without being insulting. Hostile and condescending are the right words. Read the whole thing.
But I have to say to those reviewing it: what's completely unnecessary is being hostile and condescending about the target audience — and I can say that, because I'm emphatically not part of it.