V for Vendetta

thanx for the great review Holden.


i of course am in favor of the SNA in Moore's novel.

__________________
We're a generation of men raised by women. I'm wondering if another woman is really the answer we need.

I'm disappointed to hear that the Wachowskis made changes for no reason. The source material may have been problematic to translate, but I won't know until I see it.

I loved it actually. I think the Wachowski's made changes that worked well for film. They stayed closer to the trade than I had anticipated so kudos to them. Very good movie.

Best movie for 2006 for me i think. See the Movie Tab for my comments on it. It'll be hard to be beaten, but i'll enjoy watching this years other releases try.

__________________
Pumpkins scream in the DEAD of night!

I was really really really really impressed with this movie. I was getting chills during like 18 parts of this thing. Awesome stuff. Hugo Weaving's delivery of the dialog at the beginning is amazing. 9.7/10

P.S. Stephen Fry is awesome.

__________________
Remember, remember, the 5th of November
I'm afraid I must bid you adieu.
He woke up one night with a terrible fright
And found he was eating his shoe.

He really is. I love that man.

Glad to hear you enjoyed this zeppelin. I'm very eager to see this. Mm-hmmm.

What movie was everyone else watching? Did we see different prints or something?

I've already written about it in another thread, but I'm still baffled as to how this movie is garnering any such praise. It is pathetic filmmaking with little to no sense of how to manage the material it is dealing with.

__________________
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.

I'll flip ya. I'll flip ya for real.

This movie kicked ASS.

And NOT just because it was short on action and long on ideas. NOT just because Hugo Weaving did a great job acting without a face.

I say it kicked ass because it is a movie with ideas, and ideas are bulletproof.

Bring it on.

Anytime the material threatens to become actually thought provoking, McTeigue just drops the ball. The subject matter seems to be influencing everyone's take on the movie. It treds on volcanic ground and I think that alone clouds one's judgement and allows people to forgive all the faults the movie has - and faults there are plenty. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, no?

As for the politics of the film, does it really have any? Does the movie actually say anything? No, it doesn't. It projects the concept of V on the audience, it diefies him, but it doesn't validate him. It only introduces social problems, it never actually examines them. It isn't horrorific enough to ever justify the message the film is convinced it is portraying. In a movie that glorifies political symbols and revolution, it itself is not symbolic or revolutionary. It clings to ideas greater than itself.

A great quote from Jurassic Park that perfectly applies to the Wachowski's script. It only correlates popular thought, notions and attitudes towards the governments of our world without actually formulating any opinions or original thought of its own. It hides behind the guise of bigger and better ideas.

Small spoilers ahead:

The narrative is all over the place. Emotions are up and down, left and right, but never real - never truly motivated. People wander in and out of scenes with only the vaguest of official reasoning. The entire story is on the edge of being daringly honest to itself, it just never is.

Stylistically, it is a complete mess. It feels like a plate of leftovers from what got cut out off the Matrix sequels. I'd say that the 'god in the rain' shot was the most disorienting shot in the movie, stylistically, but it isn't; a sad diagnosis for a film which is supposed to be about unwavering vision.

The editing was jagged at best. Flashbacks were innappropriately spliced in with scenes in which they didn't belong - repeatedly, actually. Natalie Portman's range is wasted here, as the character she is playing is the most interesting character in the movie. V's mysterious, deus ex machina love for Portman is painfully contrieved to the point of being laughable. Their kiss is the most unromantic thing I've ever seen.

It begs the audience to take it soooo seriously, but the movie itself only puts up a shadow of seriousness. It busts out with a heavy scene, only to negate how heavy it was with the next scene - again and again. Example, the shooting of the spray-painting girl only to have her miraculously resurrected during the march/unmasking.

A complete joke of a film that has a build up of contempary and very real social issues, but fumbles the delivery of the punchline again and again.

Just to throw this out there, I love this movie for it's entertainment value, not the politics. I'm not in tune with politics to the degree most others are, so my extreme liking of this movie is solely based on it's entertainment value. (as I repeat myself 50 times)

Congratulations to Larry and Andy Wachowski, James McTeigue, Hugo Weaving, Natalie Portman, and the rest of the cast and crew for proving me wrong.

You call that a review?

Ok, this was better.

But why are you complaining about all the film's style and editing? You missed the entire point of the film.

You can't deny that the film is thought-provoking. And if you can, if you can honestly say the film didn't provoke any thought in you, then you have bigger problems.

No, because I never once called it a review. Nor was it posted in a thread called reviews. Nor was it posted in even a sub-forum called reviews. But I dare say it was more of a review than, "This movie kicked ASS."
I'm complaining about the film's style and editing because it is a movie and two components of movie making are style and editing. I did not miss the entire point of the film. They're called motion pictures for a reason, because the pictures themselves matter. The composition of those pictures and how they're combined together is the very language of a film.

A film is no different than a novel or any piece of literature, it is just told in a different medium. Having an appreciation of a film's style and editing is no different than having an appreciation for a novel's grammar and sentence structure. A good story written poorly is just that. Just because you may think the story is untouchable, if it is written with little to no understanding of the English language, it is still a failure. Likewise, a movie that is constructed poorly, irregardless of the "point" of the film, is still a bad movie.

Direction, style, editing, blocking - these things all matter. They matter dearly and in a movie that is begging to be taken seriously because it is dealing with a very serious issue they should be expected to be up to par. But they aren't. They're incosistent throughout and it hurts the "point" of the film because it needlessly made the wrong choice time and time again. The point of the movie is that the issues that V stands for are reflective of issues that we all experience in society and that they should be remembered, they should be paid their due respect and I find it hysterical that the film itself pays no such respect.

I didn't "miss" the point of the movie. My apologies for having an ability to divine the difference between **** and **** covered in cologne.
I never did deny that the film was thought-provoking, did I? In fact, I criticized the film several times for being genuinely thought-provoking, but then failing to pursue those very thoughts to completion.

The point of the movie is to inspire those same senses of patriotic responsiblity in the audience that plague the life of V. I have no doubt that the film did this for many, many people, but it did it in a way that was sloppy and often times just plain silly. Do you really need someone to tell you to vote? Do you really need to hear someone say the words, "The government isn't telling you the whole truth" to actually believe it? Do you really need to be spoonfed an exagerated fantasy world to fulfil your own ideas that the governments of the world out of control in some totaliterian power play?

If you need a voiceless film like V for Vendetta to convince you governments aren't infallable, you have much bigger problems.

The film has only been out a day and already I'm tired of people acting like it revealed some secret no one else on the planet knew. Mediocrity and common sense already got over praised last year with Crash, is it so soon that we need a repeat performance?

Yeah, that was symbolism...if you notice, a lot of other dead characters appear in that scene too. The woman who wrote the letter and her girlfriend are there as well.

I liked V for Vendetta a LOT. I may even go so far as to say I loved it. I have read the comic, and that's brilliant, and yes, the film takes liberties with it, but the tone of the story is the same, the voice is the same. I applaud the filmmakers for so aggressively pushing people's buttons with this one, daring them to think. Also, I've never cried during an action film. This one? Twice. So thats something too.

__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/

Ah, she was the only dead character I noticed, thus thinking it was a simple goof.

I'm glad people really are loving it, I just don't see why at all. :-\

V for Vendetta

I liked it, I didn't love it. First the good parts...Hugo Weaving was very good as the masked V. Stephen Rea was very good as Finch. The scene when V enters the bedroom to kill a doctor who participated in past dastardly deeds ...to find she has a conscience and maybe even welcomes death is...terrific and something that is seldom seen. V's dialogue and speech when he took over the tv station about liberty and individuality are stirring and relevant in today's environment of diminished liberty in the face of mounting fear. There is much to like about V for Vendetta but I had the feeling it was good when it could have been great.

The citizens aren't portrayed as brainwashed robots of the new order. They're portrayed more as victims than co-conspirators of an authoritative government that seized power thru fear and maintains it by demanding conformity. On this point, the movie could have shown a little more of what living under the oppression was like.

Natalie Portman...a vast improvement over her performance in Sith. But I have to wonder if a top quality British actress wouldn't have been better. Why be distracted by an American attempting a British accent when there are so many Brits with authentic British accents? Was Portman there for her "star power and box office draw?" Portman was ok and it's hard to judge if the film would have been better with someone else. But my feeling is a great performance in the role of Evey (as opposed to Portman's ok performance) might have lifted this movie up another notch.

This movie is more about dialogue and ideas than action and violence. It doesn't insult the intelligence of the viewer. Normally that's a good thing and it's a good thing here but...I could have used a little more action from V. The bulk of the action is in one dazzling fight scene. A 2 hour plus movie could have squeezed in a little more action without tarnishing the movies' integrity.

John Hurts' Chancellor may have been a little over the top but maybe that was necessary for the Big Brother/Hitler image. I think I preferred the icy cold amoral villainy of Tim Piggot-Smith as Creedy.

Evey undergoes a "surprising twist" in the film that leads to an epiphany and a transformation. I'm not sure I bought that whole concept but maybe some did. Sort of the political equivalent of a religious experience. ;-)

All in all, I was entertained. It hit on about 6 of 8 cylinders and hit them very well.

Weaving, Rea and the intelligent concept...A-

Portman and being a little short on action...B-

Overall...B+

__________________
My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.

I had issues with the film's editing myself, but not to the point at which I would mention it here or condemn the film entirely for it. In fact, I would argue that the writing, art direction, and much of the cinematography make up for any pitfalls of the film. I would also argue that, given that the film was being adapted from an existing graphic novel (which is always difficult), any problems with editing and direction (it was the director's first lead job) are somewhat forgivable.

The graphic novel was written in the 1980s, so your criticisms, I think, should be directed toward the Wachowskis for releasing it in 2006. I don't think this film should be viewed under the precedent for 2006 politics. V for Vendetta is merely fantasy: an intelligent evaluation of the concept of revolution, of control, and of the responsibility to act. Of course no one needs to be told what V for Vendetta delivers. But no one needs to be subjected to half the senseless crap they show on TV and in film these days. In that respect, V's message - I would argue - is a welcome one.

I should like to hear what you think "silly" about the film. Not that I'm denying any silliness...I've just noticed that people whose sensibilities lean closer to politics have found the film "silly" and "absurd," as if it even claimed to be reality in the first place. As I said, V for Vendetta is pure fantasy set in the near-future, and the story itself operates largely upon symbolism. Call it pretentious if you like, but in the realm of fiction, symbolism is a writer's (and a viewer's) best friend.

To me, the message was worth delivering. I don't think it's revealing some secret for anyone - it's merely engaging them on a level they're not used to experiencing in a 2-hour sitting. Blame television, the great tranquilizer of our society, for that - not the film.

REPEAT:

V for Vendetta was not made to get people to do or think about what they should already be doing or thinking about. It was made because the source material was excellent, and well worth the cost of getting it to the big screen.