V For Vendetta: The Movie

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (674 of them)
This is the thread where ILC opens up a can of whupass.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Sure thing, Rusty Brown. Oh wait.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:01 (eighteen years ago) link

"Many critics will doubtless admire McInerney's pompous literary efforts, in the same way that Stone's 'serious' movie will probably attract a degree of earnest respect. Personally, I feel more at home with the honest exploitation of V for Vendetta, which proves once again the radical power of trash."

Mark Kermode on V for Vendetta

Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:02 (eighteen years ago) link

Superhero with mask and knives, baddies wearing Third Reich-esque uniforms of red and black, allusions to escapist-romantic classic (The Count of Monte Christo), falls in love with heroine and is "redeemed" = El Pulpo.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:03 (eighteen years ago) link

Exactly, Alfred - folks are disagreeing w/ your definition of pulp & not your condescending dismissal of it.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:06 (eighteen years ago) link

"since it's based on a graphic novel, why should we take this hokum seriously?"

arggghhhhhhhhh - way to dismiss an entire medium out of hand. very astute of you.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:09 (eighteen years ago) link

I thought I made it quite clear that it's this film I disliked -- how it garnished a series of pulp totems with a sprinkle of high thought -- and not the source material itself

Now I'm going to reread The Watchmen.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:37 (eighteen years ago) link

You're a glutton for punishment.

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:47 (eighteen years ago) link

if you don't like the pulp, maybe you should read a graphic novel that isn't about superheroes.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 22:50 (eighteen years ago) link

points to kv_nol for finding this amusing review

Time Warner promotes terrorism and anti-Christian bigotry in new leftist movie, 'V for Vendetta'

kingfish da notorious teletabby (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 23:02 (eighteen years ago) link

Hunting for rightwinger reviews is entertaining:

Gospelcom.net: One gets the distinct impression from this film that the true threats to the freedom of man are the adherence to Christian and conservative philosophies..

MensNewsDaily: Too many great quotes from this one to count. Moore was not really writing about Thatcher, Nazis are really Socialists, etc etc

kingfish da notorious teletabby (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 21 March 2006 23:23 (eighteen years ago) link

that last review is truly weird, and yet, not entirely wrong about how Moore developed the story/character in the book.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 22 March 2006 00:45 (eighteen years ago) link

WND: While sitting through this cacophony of neo-Marxist, homosexual-promoting pagan gibberish, I could not help being struck by how entertaining it all was: at least at a certain level. The characters were good, the acting and dialogue were sound, and the visuals were simply stunning.

WND: Ironically, points out Baehr, a homosexual character who owns homosexual pornography also owns a banned copy of the Quran.

IRONY!

Plugged In: Nevertheless, V makes blowing up buildings look very cool and very justifiable. It's hard to measure or predict the impact such images and ideas might have in today's culture, where blasting buildings to make political statements has become a raw reality.

(tho the last one is a bit more even-handed/level-headed)

kingfish ubermensch dishwasher sundae (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:18 (eighteen years ago) link

...

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:20 (eighteen years ago) link

on I Love Comics someone said it was unwise to link to that review.

I say BRING ON THE MENTALISTS!

DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:21 (eighteen years ago) link

are any of these reviews surprising or particularly outrageous? right-wing people don't like a left-wing movie! how shocking! i wonder what they think of michael moore!

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:22 (eighteen years ago) link

this movie is so toothless. they should have gone further!

honestly the idea he tosses off in the last paragraph about a US-centric story sounds 100% better than whatever the Wachowskis have come up with

otm!

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:36 (eighteen years ago) link

if the filmmakers had real balls they'd extrapolate from now and set a story in that.

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:39 (eighteen years ago) link

this movie is not marxist its hegelian. and stupid.

ryan (ryan), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:52 (eighteen years ago) link

saw this the other night, it seemed weirdly claustrophobic to me. like, all the outdoor scenes seem real fake. i guess a lot of it was actually shot in germany?

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 23 March 2006 17:53 (eighteen years ago) link

right-wing people don't like a left-wing movie! how shocking! i wonder what they think of michael moore!

i'm not posting these due to them surprising anyone, i'm linking them b/c they tend to be funny, revealing, and in the case of that MND one, really weird. It's like documenting the batshit War on Christmas stuff; watching these guys get themselves into a froth over a not-too-sublte cultural jibe holds a bizarre fascination for me.

Also, the one from Plugged In(the movie review site linked up to Focus on the Family, is surprisingly charitable.

kingfish ubermensch dishwasher sundae (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 23 March 2006 18:04 (eighteen years ago) link

The best part of the WND review is how they get Fry's character's name completely wrong. I don't think there's ANYONE named "Baehr" in the movie.

Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:04 (eighteen years ago) link

They probably walked into The Hills Have Eyes by mistake.

Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:15 (eighteen years ago) link

wow. best film i've seen in a long, long time. i knew next to nothing about it in advance, which i'm glad of, but... wow.

toby (tsg20), Sunday, 26 March 2006 00:44 (eighteen years ago) link

V for Vendetta is the Mrs. Dalloway of utopia/dystopia films. That said, I really liked it.

fields of salmon (fieldsofsalmon), Sunday, 26 March 2006 01:24 (eighteen years ago) link

Explain, salmon.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Sunday, 26 March 2006 01:32 (eighteen years ago) link

It means Alan Moore shouldn't walk around with rocks in his pockets.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 26 March 2006 01:33 (eighteen years ago) link

i have no idea what that comment means. on the other hand i really live both v and mrs dalloway, so maybe there's something to it.

toby (tsg20), Sunday, 26 March 2006 11:27 (eighteen years ago) link

I wonder what will happen if this is successful. Are they going to turn this into a "it was always meant to be one, honest!" trilogy too?

V for Vendetta
W for Wrevenge
X for Xtremism

StanM (StanM), Wednesday, 29 March 2006 15:14 (eighteen years ago) link

Saw this last night, enjoyed it quite a lot, with a few caveats. Here's some thoughts:

*As I expected, they downplayed the anarchist themes, which was unfortunate. It's easy to make a story where someone opposes an evil fascist government, but for better or worse I think Moore's ponderings on anarchy is what separates the comic from other similar dystopies. So the V's telly speech about how it was the people's own fault for letting their leaders guide them was toned down drastically, the monologue with the justice statue was changed, etc. The only hints of anarchism in the movie were rather subliminal, i.e. the shoplifter saying "It's anarchy in the UK!" and the fact that V's symbol is almost like an upside down anarchist "A".

*The ending with the Houses of Parliament blowing up was probably the weakest part. The comic ended with angry folks uprising against the fascists, which was a much stronger finale. In the film, the bombing carried an enormous symbolic weight, but it was symbolic of what exactly? The failings of parliamentarism? If the film would've included the comic's anarchist themes, that might've been an option, but now the symbolism was kinda weak. Of course V's speech about how bombing a building can be revolutionary act was a brave move, but still... The comic ended with the explosion of Downing Street, which was the fascist government's operational center, but I'm not sure if the movie ever implied the government resided in the Houses of Parliament.

*The scenes with the V masks and the ending with people taking them off was a very nice touch, one of the changes to the comic that I think actually played out fine.

*Another thing where I felt the film improved upon the comic was the final scenes with V and Evey. V says that he must leave the final choice to Eve, and that his work is done. This I think was a better ending than in the comic. In the film V is more of a counterforce to the fascists, a necessary monster they've created, and once the fascists are dealt with he must perish too, and leave people's fate into their own hands. Whereas in the comic Evey becomes the new V, and it feels like her job is to watch that people don't stray from the narrow path again, which is against the very idea of anarchism. Of course, a single person deciding the fate of a nation is rather anti-anarchist too, but since V is supposed to be a symbol of anarchy rather than a real person, it's sort acceptable. Evey, however is clearly a real person and not a symbol.

*Stephen Rea was very good as Finch, but he wasn't given that much to work with. The humanizing scenes with Finch that were in the comic were mostly left out. I can't say whether Natalie Portman was good or bad, since in the film he was mostly V's puppet, and had very few scenes of her own. Again, a lot of the stuff that fleshed her out in the comic was left off. Obviously they couldn't have included everything from the comic, but what I missed the most were all the subplots with characters like Rose Almond, which showed the banal side of fascism. Now, the actual analysis of the workings of fascism was kinda thin, though maybe you shouldn't expect that much from a Wachowski brothers film.

*I'm glad they kept Evey's prison scenes from the comic almost intact, since that obviously was the true climax in both versions. The scenes with Evey reading Valerie's letters actually made me cry. I like Alan Moore the idealist more than the disillusioned cynic he later turned into.

*The human dictator in the comic was more interesting than the Big Brother one in the film. John Hurt's Hitler mannerisms were okay I guess, but it felt kinda silly that he had to use them to his closest men and not just in his public appearances. It was a nice touch that we never saw him in real life until his final scene.

* The Benny Hill tribute was great!

Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:20 (eighteen years ago) link

hmm I don't think Moore is really a cynic. I mean have you read "Promethea"?

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:28 (eighteen years ago) link

"The scenes with the V masks and the ending with people taking them off was a very nice touch, one of the changes to the comic that I think actually played out fine."

I liked that too, but I was beginning to think I was the only one.

Soukesian, Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:29 (eighteen years ago) link

Okay, I don't really know Moore's work that well, but if you compare V to Watchmen, you can see a transition from an idealist anarchist to someone who still believes in liberty but is rather disillusioned with the human condition. Maybe he's changed his views again after that? Though From Hell or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen didn't much suggest so.

(x-post)

Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:34 (eighteen years ago) link

Less of a cynic and more of a stodgy formalist.

elmo, holy helper (allocryptic), Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:41 (eighteen years ago) link

he blames the overall dark tone of Watchmen on having a "particularly depressing year" (tho yeah the tone of "From Hell" is even darker). But I think once he finished "From Hell" he kinda turned a corner, came out of the emotional wilderness - the stuff he did immediately after it (the 60s Marvel/Kirby tributes, Tomorrow Stories, Promethea, Tom Strong, etc.) have a real fun, exuberant tone to most of them. But I'm sure part of that was also down to him having real creative freedom for the first time in his career.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 30 March 2006 16:43 (eighteen years ago) link

60's tributes = 1963? That sort of happened in the middle, in between the first few issues and the last 11. Though I didn't think it was "see the joy in early comics" so much as "These guys would really consider the Image comics to be assholes"

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 30 March 2006 17:45 (eighteen years ago) link

aw maybe that was the overall message at the end, but the tone of that 1963 stuff is so goofy and over-the-top, Moore was clearly enjoying himself. The Dr. Strange knockoff (Johnny Beyond?) alone is hilarious.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 30 March 2006 18:07 (eighteen years ago) link

Doing work-for-hire superheroes for DC is hardly "having real creative freedom for the first time in his career" especially when you're comparing it to From Hell!

kit brash (kit brash), Friday, 31 March 2006 01:00 (eighteen years ago) link

uh, Promethea, Tomorrow Stories, Tom Strong, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen were not "work for hire" for DC. And the 1963 stuff was for Image, whom, if I'm not mistaken, were not owned by DC.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 31 March 2006 01:17 (eighteen years ago) link

1963 was in 1993, four years before From Hell started and five years before it ended (as Andrew noted). And Tom Strong and Promethea and Tomorrow Stories are 100% "work for hire" for DC!

kit brash (kit brash), Friday, 31 March 2006 06:35 (eighteen years ago) link

You sure? I'm almost positive From Hell started years before 1963. It was originally serialized in one of those Steve Bissette horror anthologies, Taboo?

Quickly designated "a melodrama in sixteen parts," the prologue first appeared in Cerebus #124, published by Aardvark-Vanaheim in 1989. The chapters proper began appearing in Taboo, edited by Stephen Bissette (Alan Moore's former collaborator on Swamp Thing) beginning in Taboo #2. Taboo was published intermittently and stopped publication with #7, which featured chapter 6 of From Hell.
These early episodes were collected in From Hell volumes 1-3, first published from 1991-1993, alone with Moore's appendices. After the demise of Taboo, this series continued with new material, beginning with volume 4 in 1994.

Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 31 March 2006 07:24 (eighteen years ago) link

and Wildstorm/America's Best Comics is somehow owned by DC, which I don't quite understand because I always though Moore promised to never do work-for-hire again years ago, of course he said he was never going to do superheroes again either, this before Top 10, Supreme etc.

Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 31 March 2006 07:28 (eighteen years ago) link

yeah I meant after, obv. (1989-93 = 4 yrs), oops.

DC bought Wildstorm once the contracts were signed and development work done, first issue or so drawn etc. Moore stuck around because it would be depriving a dozen artists of work if he flounced off on principle. He'd been doing work for hire solidly for six years at that point (Spawn, Violator, Bloodfeud, Badrock, WildCATs, Majestic, Fire For Heaven, Vampirella, Supreme, Youngblood, Shadowhawk, Glory), largely because he needed the dosh after going broke on Big Numbers. [Note to small business owners: when publishing a comic book that comes out once every three years as your sole source of income, do not pay regular salaries to your wife and her lesbian girlfriend for running the office.]

kit brash (kit brash), Friday, 31 March 2006 08:21 (eighteen years ago) link

man's gotta have his entertainment.

kingfish ubermensch dishwasher sundae (kingfish 2.0), Friday, 31 March 2006 08:28 (eighteen years ago) link

allright, I've broken down and am going to see this tonight with the wife. expectations are low.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 31 March 2006 19:48 (eighteen years ago) link

not sure how I feel about the movie. The book is much better, but whether or not the movie works on its own is tough for me to decide. I wouldn't exactly say that my low expectations were exceeded.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Sunday, 2 April 2006 14:39 (eighteen years ago) link

the more I've thought about this the more I think Moore's assessment of the film's politics is essentially correct - its not that the movie is bad, its just that if they wanted to make a movie about the contemporary political landscape (US, War on Terror, Iraq, etc.), then the only ostensible reason for using the UK/V plot as a basis for the film is because they're pussies. Cuz really the book and the movie are about almost completely different things - the only function the graphic novel material performs is as a cover, as bet-hedging ("see we aren't saying BLOW UP THE WHITE HOUSE, this is a fiction, about the UK, etc."). That annoys me.

Independent of that, as a movie on its own, a little comic book thriller - yeah I guess it was okay.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 3 April 2006 18:51 (eighteen years ago) link

five months pass...
saw this last night

how can you manage to make a bad film when for £10 off amazon you can get 200 pages of ready-made storyboards? FFS

The Real DG (D to thee G), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 15:04 (seventeen years ago) link

saw this last night

how can you manage to make a bad film when for £10 off amazon you can get 200 pages of ready-made storyboards? FFS

The Real DG (D to thee G), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 15:05 (seventeen years ago) link

saw this last night

how can you manage to make a bad film when for £10 off amazon you can get 200 pages of ready-made storyboards? FFS

The Real DG (D to thee G), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 15:05 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.