V For Vendetta: The Movie

allright I'm leaving this thread before this devolves into another ally/tombot internet bully gangbang - have fun

criticism can be snobbish... or not!

i think my point re gainsborough stands, though this might not be the thread for it. 'hokum' is exactly the word critics used for it; and that word is pretty much always snobbish, ie a judgement on people-who-like-the-film: it rests on unstated prejudices about what we should be enjoying.

wtf

WMBB television reporter Nadeen Yanes told her station that the man came up to the podium at the Bay District School Board meeting and said he had a motion. He then pulled out a can of red spray paint and painted a V with a circle around it.

Yanes told the station he pulled out a handgun and started talking. She said school board member Ginger Littleton hit the gunman with her purse and he pushed her to the ground and started firing randomly.

^^ a great example of why concealed weapons should NOT be legal

Ghonim, who comes from an affluent Egyptian family, said the activists who organized the January 25 protests intentionally designed their movement to be anonymous and faceless, without a clear leader. He cited the movie "V for Vendetta" as a source of inspiration.

we live in a strange world

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/15/anonymous-hackers-to-ben-_n_877337.html

so should I see this movie?

it's all right

this movie was fucking terrible, so no.

sadly it's still the best moore adaptation of them all.

no surprise that the graphic novel's better & I should read it first.

this just seems to have become a visual touchstone for a lot of recent protests, not just Anonymous, so my curiosity's peaked

the graphic novel is also okay

tbh I got bored and never finished it

i was never too fond of the comic - i've reread it multiple times and cant even remember huge swaths of it - i cant imagine that the movie's anything less than awful

the book is good! i mean it's still overdramatic and hokey and purpley prosed in places but its got a good vibe. (that the movie totally blew out to look like every other overlit slick action thing.)

i mean a v for vendetta movie should ideally look more like i dunno an early mike leigh film than transporter 3 but whatta gonna do.

This movie isn't awful, but it doesn't even come close to doing the source material justice either. I think it would be a lot lot better by casting someone else in the Weaving and Portman roles. I really love Stephen Fry in it and the visual presentation of the High Chancellor and his cronies was pretty cool.

strongo OTM here

the ending is really badly botched, and no one in the film ever utters the word "anarchy", which is kind of amazing given the source material

what i never get about moore adaptations is that the original stories almost always have really strong slow build suspense lines and they basically come pre-storyboarded for you in terms of things like pacing. i know there are a lot of factors that can go into botching a film, but the original build-up to the public's unrest is one of the strongest and most natural parts of the book and ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT THE PICTURES TO SEE HOW TO STAGE IT.

and no one in the film ever utters the word "anarchy"

that goes in the plus columng, imho

but yeah tacking on a trad fist-in-the-air we-the-people ending to a story that ended on a vague, disquieting, totally unresolved note was always gonna be an ugh.

haha on the plus side we were spared stephen rea's lsd revelation at larkhill

i love alan moore like a crackpot grandpa but dude never did get over the 60s

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT THE PICTURES TO SEE HOW TO STAGE IT

tbf it doesn't sound like this worked so well with Watchmen... (I wouldn't know, as I have no interest in exposing my eyeballs to any of the horrible abortions Zack Snyder puts on screen)

Moore's work is not aging well at all imo.

watchmen is great, i haven't seen this, can't muster up any enthusiasm for it.

well the thing about "staging"/"pacing" in comics is that yr brain still has to do the fill in work between panels. moore's 80s stuff reads really "slow" to me (not a bad thing and totally fitting with the stories) as much to do with the art style as anything. but i guess if yr zach snyder you read that inexorable one panel at a time gibbons pacing as slsmbangpow action, prolly because zach snyder sees everything in life that way.

anyone got any insight as to why the imagery from this film keeps getting adopted by several revolutionary / protest movements across Europe / Egypt / US? I skipped it because it looked horrible, but it seems to keep coming up on news sites so it's looking like something I've got to see

Well, the imagery is arresting.

AND the movie made over $130 million, so a lot of ppl saw it.

also natalie portman does a full-nude striptease to motorhead

right, there's that

anyone got any insight as to why the imagery from this film keeps getting adopted by several revolutionary / protest movements across Europe / Egypt / US?/

it has a scene in which unarmed protesters successfully face down tanks and armed men, bringing down a brutal authoritarian regime.

I quite like the film. In some ways it is like the book, and in other ways it is not.

also this was a surprisingly middle-class revolution and they are internet nerds

Moore's work is not aging well at all imo.

re-read his Swamp Thing run recently and that is still a ton of fun

it has a scene in which unarmed protesters successfully face down tanks and armed men, bringing down a brutal authoritarian regime.

uh unarmed except for a train loaded with dynamite that blows up the houses of parliament

(a sequence which - in case it wasn't obvious from my comments above - is most definitely NOT in the book)

i remember seeing that sequence and thinking "yknow all this needs is more slo mo and a moody pixies song"

anyone got any insight as to why the imagery from this film keeps getting adopted by several revolutionary / protest movements across Europe / Egypt / US? I skipped it because it looked horrible, but it seems to keep coming up on news sites so it's looking like something I've got to see

― Milton Parker, Wednesday, June 15, 2011 3:43 PM

u mean the grinning mask? feel like it was first adopted by 4chan/Anonymous as their way of hiding their identity when protesting against Scientology and then spread from there

looooooool

@ justen

movie's not over until something's blowed up amirite