I wouldn't say "connected", but studios started to pay heed to internet culture after stuff like Ain't it Cool News and other rabid online Batman fan audiences started vociferously derailing all the marketing and review press of Batman & Robin. Studio's realized after that that vocal online audiences were a demographic that they couldn't ignore even if they made up a relatively small part of of the audience.
Scott Pilgrim will always be a niche thing. It just doesn't have mass market appeal, but that's not always a bad thing. I love both the comic and movie for different reasons.
There's not a lot to me that suggests some kind of weird videogame nerd fanservice movie would be more successful today. By the same token, Mallrats would probably tank too.
Michael Cera simply cannot carry a film to commercial success. Studios took the wrong lesson from Superbad and let him headline a bunch of films, nearly all of which tanked. He is the Jason Biggs of the millenial generation.
So wanting to date another person who's not underage makes him less of a creep? Alright then let's let all the child molesters who dated or married adults out of prison- wait.
If you want to reduce Scotts affection to Knives to her age alone, you gotta explain why he was willing to drop her the moment Ramona skated trough his dreams.
If you wanna point out how weird and creepy it was for Scott to "date" a 17-year old, then right away, even the movie itself does it.
But if you want to paint Scott as a child molester creeping on underage girls like you do in your posts, then i'm sorry but i think you are discussing the wrong movie.
I love Scott Pilgrim, my favorite Edgar Wright movie after Hot Fuzz, but there's no way that movie would ever make a billion in the box office no matter when it was made or how it was marketed.
I think Scott Pilgrim, the comic, is really a product of the 00s, before or during the start of millennials as a culturally visible social group, so it won't resonate as much today.