I saw it. Controversy with the topic of terrorism? There shouldn't be. A man uses violence to rebel against a regime similar to that of Nazi Germany -- almost anyone can see that taking those kind of measures to end a situation like that would be acceptable. The main controversy, if any, will probably deal with how the movie paints the conservative right. No doubt the more anti-conservative of the liberal population will latch onto this movie as what the conservative party might eventually become. Unlikely it ever will, of course -- but nevertheless the movie is effective in it's subtle comparisons to today's world. All of our fears and worries about the future are confirmed in 2025(I think?) England. Think Brave New World, 1984, Fight Club, A Clockwork Orange, and Phantom of the Opera...all rolled into one. It's a smart, well acted, visually beautiful, and sometimes frightening movie that never fails to entertain. I wasn't bored for a minute. Worth the 8 or whatever bucks to see.
I like artsy pictures like that. I love natalie portman and who ever played the lead. Very controversial issues, I guess thats art.
Ever notice that so many of the movies today are very similiar in content and effects? So many of them that it makes anything "new" suck.
ohhhh GOD yeah!! they all seem to use tHAT dREAMwORKS spcial effedcts. there is no creativity anymore. it is gross. i am not saying i am unimpessed wit compuer special effects--if thats wat you mean-and content of course--but it gets TIRED ...! i remember pre-tat when Directors had to use imagination. as do low budget films--few and far between
hey, there's another thread created specifically for the topic on which you are speaking! anyway, V for Vendetta is in no way formulaic.
Hugo Weaving played V. I love the movie. The scene between Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving first meeting is written with great wit and talent. Most people in the theater were left scratching their head after his extremely verbose speech.
This looks like something you'd expect to find scrawled in a five year old's school notebook. Can you colour in inside the lines Duendy? I bet the answer is no.
I completely agree. Every opportunity they had to do something typically stupidly hollywoodish, they didn't. Awesome! Highly adult and intelligent film.
Is it me or did the chancellor look a whole lot like Saddam? I thought the movie kicked ass -- not as good as the original Matrix, but very fun to watch. I look forward to watching it a few more times, because I'm sure there's a lot I missed as I gaped at Natalie Portman. The style and execution was distinctly Wachowsky. I saw a lot of parallels, from the fighting to the dialogue (the verbose 'conversation' V had with Evey after he rescued her from the gestapo and the talk Neo had with the architect), though the feeling in the movie was a bit more personal and emotional than the Matrix, I found as well as funnier and more lighthearted in places. Really cool story.
Government should be afraid of its people. V4V was said to be one of the closest renditions of a TPB. It by far was not. Sin City to me, although not perfectly accurate, is by far the closest I have ever seen to an accurate depiction of the original story. In fact the original writer of V for Vendetta (Alan Moore) outwardly disdained the movie, and refuded to allow them to include his name in the credits. Regardning the movie, which had much great dialogue that the original TPB didn't have, it is definitely as not intricate as the TPB. Hugo did an excellent job playing V. I think they had originally cast somebody else as V, but it didn't work out. I cannot begin to think that anybody else could have done nearly as good a job. The movie alone was a movie about freedom and lack of freedom. Furthermore, acting with a mask on in part of the movie is not an easy task much less doing so throught the entire movie. That's why Spiderman keeps taking off his mask throught the Spiderman movies for no apparent reason. The reason is that they need the actors face on the screen in order for the character emotions to be accurately depicted. V is a villain in the same way The Punisher is a villain. Running around murdering people, and what he did to Evy was abuse and malicious. His cause however was noble. His character was appealing. Spiderman in the movies should come off with such an appeal. Unfortuantely, he is played by crappy Toby McGuire. The government was very extreme. They used fear, media manipulation, coersion, and culture suppression to a high degree. They depicted every aspect of government and media as curropt. They plagued the population just so they can not cure but medicate them. V blew up the parliment. But what would be the consequenses. When the World Trade collapsed, the media succeeded in angering the American public. They blew it up because they were angry, and in turn we retaliated because we were angry. The fuel of war. The characterizations were extreme in this movie. Unlike the movie Crash which attempted to give all the characters a certain duality, V4V characters were all one sided, and extremely one sided at that. Overall, the movie wasn't all that captivating. It was definitely worth watching. Probably even more than once just because of the fantasy aspect of it. But I have personally seen much much better stories, and much much better situationals/action sequences. If anything this movie excelled at it was Hugo playing V. Although I felt some flaws in his acting, it ultimately was phenomenal.
I was enthralled the most with the following: 1. How the actual motivations of V were expressed. 2.The power that one idea can have when it is brought to the masses in a concise, well thought out plan. 3. The personal sacrifices one must make to give life and vitality to that idea to live on after one has expired. His idea that the people should not be afraid of the government was his vision. His rage against the injustice done to himself and the woman in the cell was the energy and power to endure and persevere to accomplish his goal. The rose was the symbol of the good and right that replaces the bad and wrong. His sold out commitment to his idea of liberation from the government even unto death, but making sure that even in his death he had groomed one disciple to take his place to continue what he started, was his confidence that he would succeed. What intrigued me most was the character growth of Evey and the transition from being fearfully weak to being courageously strong. What changed her was something beyond herself. It was love. Yes, love is a universal theme but I thought this was a powerful look at it. Risk everything for it. There is no new theme under the sun. What makes a good novel or movie is a new fresh different look at those themes of the human spirit. I found the juxtiposition of hate and love as pillars of the themes an enjoyable refreshing complexity. I find it interesting that we are reminded that it will take a deep hate of something to affect change for the good. I will go watch it again to discover more subtlties that I missed having been mesmerized by the powerful statements of the strength and harmony of oppositions of the emotions of love/hate, fear/courage in the characters growth. I say the political controversies may overshadow the human spirit themes, but I hope they do not.
i don't think evy's character changed that much. She was pretty strong at the beginning of the film to be so nonchalant with some masked stranger in an alley, and other things she did (not giving it all away). She didn't change into a noble and strong person by the thing that happened in the jail cell, she was that kind of person already.
You have a point there. It makes me realize another thing I liked about that movie. The human spirit is strong. How strong is it? How far can we push it? When we do push it, does it become stronger or does it falter and collaspe? I think this was where her character growth took place in answering those questions. She also changed her stance from not wanting to help V to being his disciple.
she definitely got pushed in deeper by the situation, but only in crisis is a hero going to be shown a hero. I loved that about the film, it describes the human spirit - almost unbreakable.
Yes, It stirred within me that strength of spirit that is undaunted even in the times of most need and despair.
Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a bygone vexation stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V. ^^^Not only does that make sense, but it is grammatically correct. V for Vendetta has some of the greatest dialogue in cinematic history. Two thumbs up from me.
