Movies: V for Vendetta (2005)

Peanut Gallery (Comments)

Title Message   If you're the sort who finds torture 'kick-a$$' and 'elite'... By TheOneArmedMan @ 07:02 PM June 4 2006 [Reply] ...you would naturally be disinclined to like this movie, whatever the quality of the acting or the flat characterisation. What made this movie amazing is that it WAS so simple and corny, and yet could carry its message. I can't think of a way to say this that doesn't ring pompously--I thought about it for a long time after leaving the theater, while most movies give me about fifteen minutes of ponderable depth. What makes this movie important is that a significant factor of its depth is not on the theater screen, but the context of the world OUTSIDE it. Many directors attempt to have this effect and fail miserably; somehow the Wachowski Bros. succeeded. Usually a film is its own universe--the characters, and the actors/actresses portraying them, and the script they are speaking the lines of, and the camerawork, soundtrack and the direction and editing thereof--all these elements, and the chemistry of their combination (or lack thereof), are solely what determines the movie's potential effect upon us. With V for Vendetta, the film itself could have easily fallen into the "mediocre" box in my mind, but for one thing that was highly important: <i>that the film was made and released at all in the Hollywood blockbuster milieu</i> (Warner). It openly advocates the decisive action of citizens against their own government if and when that government descends to the point of it being an abject danger to its constituents. When it gets to the point where certain atrocities are routinely and shamelessly practiced by it...when it comes to take away all your freedom instead of giving you choice in the matter of how you live your life...When lots of disturbing camps and compounds start showing up...it is going to be the citizen's responsibility to respond to the threat against them, or end up spending the remainder of their lives as its pawns and slaves. But also, counterbalancing this grave imperative with a reminder that when you begin to challenge the enemy, sometimes you can end up becoming like your enemy...and that your comrades can be victims in your revolution, not just your enemy. It does not instruct, but holds the situation within closer view than any Hollywood movie I ever saw. It is a movie for the 'least common denominator', with a simple plot line, a lot of corny symbolism (roses, white masks, etc.) and romance, and heavy emotional content with a laugh thrown in here and there and a fight scene there and here. It works subtly to convey that message. And the reason it works is that it is the message that has to be heard now in the United States. The situation in the US is obviously behind this future England, in which a theocratic "Christian" High Chancellor has risen to power by creating a problem, and then, offering the remedy. It doesn't matter poo what kind of plane or missile hit the Towers and the Pentagon, but what does matter is that FAR too much of the 9/11 story doesn't match what could have possibly happened. Whoever had ultimate responsibility, it sure the f*ck wasn't al-Qaeda. (Google "al-Qaeda" prior to 2001, and THERE IS NEVER A REFERENCE TO AL-QUAEDA EVEN though it was supposed to be this big-deal terrorist training organisation that's been around for years. It was manufactured to be the enemy to replace 'the commies', since that issue is moot...an enemy without a country that can therefore be used as a pretext to invade ANY country...All this done to get the people of the US scared and feeling patriotic and wounded on a ma$$ scale, shouting for retribution. In Hitler's Germany it was the burning of the Reichstag, which was done by the Nazis, who then blamed it on the opposing Socialist parties as a pretext for eliminating the competition. In the USA, September 'THE' Eleventh, as King George puts it, served a similar agenda or agendas...a horrible, scary, thing that killed lots of people and which it is constantly said only your "Dept. of Homeland Security" can help us avoid having happen again. And <i>V for Vendetta's</i> government had its own "create a problem and a solution" strategy. Wars benefit corporations, and among them, media corporations, who sell much more newsmedia. So generally, the ma$$ media, which is neither 'liberal' or 'conservative' so much as it is 'whatever will profit', supports the government's decision to make war. In making THIS film, one of the tiny handful of ENORMOUS megacorps controlling most media broke ranks and chose to deliver a message, not just to the people, but to the government itself: "Maybe you should tone down the fascism...Your citizens don't make good customers when they're stripped of rights, live in fear of torture and have, because of unbalanced economic distribution, no money to spend...and due to cuts to government services to support more war, no way to learn to earn more of it." But this "message" was wrapped into a simpler message, which was "The American people are sick enough of this poo enough that we are distributing this film, since a large enough chunk of the population will be able to relate to it personally, that we'll at least break even". And THAT is what I mean by the depth is off the screen, because that's the first time I can remember ANY big time media film going that far with its script. Your review was of it only as a film, and some points you made, I view as somewhat or totally correct. Especially the acting...though because of the maskedness, the facial expressions were missing from V, and this was a problem, apparently, for the actor playing him gave up halfway through the filming, finding it hard to convey everything through words alone. And Natalie's acting probably was affected by this too, though I've not seen other movies with her so your a$$essment may be true. Incidentally, "cashing in on the comic book thing" doesn't seem to be the motive here, since this graphic novel was not that well-known (in contrast to Marvel/DC type stuff) although Alan Moore's other work is. Alan Moore actually didn't like how the script deviated from the original. Normally, I hate it, too. But in this case, it allowed for the relevance and context to NOW. The original was from the 1980s, and wasn't as tuned to the contemporary nightmares. Sorry if this is torturously long-winded, but I felt this flick deserved my defense; I can't tell but it would seem you are of a mind to think living under a truly fascist government would be 'cool' or something. I think it's 'cool' that despite how bad things have gotten, we're obviously NOT FASCIST, yet, or the Wachowskis would've been offed or imprisoned. Stuff to think about, that's all... dude By TheOneArmedMan @ 09:09 PM August 3 2006 [Reply] ur messed up, try looking into getting some kind of special help. Whats Her Nme By TheOneArmedMan @ 09:00 PM September 7 2006 [Reply] i dono what the girls name ids but im trying to get ot gor my projec so whats her name??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????"??????????????????? ????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!! Re: Whats Her Nme By rupy @ 03:21 PM November 16 2006 [Reply] Natalie Portman? Re: Whats Her Nme By TheOneArmedMan @ 09:12 AM November 29 2006 [Reply] lern how ot tpye You're an idiot By TheOneArmedMan @ 09:42 PM July 22 2008 [Reply] The fact that you think Kiera Knightly is an accomplished actress is evidence enough. Moron - probably think Paris Hilton deserves an Oscar for wax. ps - people are hanged, meat is hung. By TheOneArmedMan @ 11:45 PM July 28 2008 [Reply] fuck u nigga that shit was raw