"V For Vendetta" Talkback (Spoilers)

[Juu-kuchi]

What I miss is the rather jarring scene from the comic where V gives an ironic death to Lilliman by giving a poisoned Communion wafer. In the movie it's implied but the graphic novel shown it in more detail.

Although Weaving does his best, V I agree falls flat when he tries to be emotional.

 

[ManicWebb]

It was a really serious misstep to try and humanize V for the movie.

snip

I can understand the sentiment that he's the hero of the movie and we ought to feel some sympathy for him, but I think that's wrong on multiple levels. First of all, he's NOT the hero of the story -- Evey is (and, arguably, Finch is as well). Second, he's not SUPPOSED to be human. He's a monster. He is a twisted, sinister, malevolent, manipulative, and psychotic force of nature. He's significantly less bloodthirsty than he is in the book, which removes the need for Evey in the second half of the story. The whole point of his character is that he ISN'T human and DOESN'T think like we do -- we're really not supposed to sympathize with him as a person, even if we can sympathize with his message.

These attempts to make him human are a symptom of the general lack of courage throughout the movie. I feel that demonizing Adam Sutler and humanizing V expresses a lack of faith in the audience's ability to absorb and process ambiguity, which runs counter to the goals of the book AND the movie. If you're going to make a thinking man's action movie, then why are you trying to avoid showing me something that will actually make me think?

Perhaps attempting to humanize V was a mistake considering his malevolence in the comic, but it wasn't done due to a lack of courage. Evey's narration during the Guy Fawkes scene made it clear that getting to know V as a human being was one of the film's missions from the start. I don't think this was done out of a lack of faith in the audience's ability to think, but the Wachowskis' actual attempt at making V more than just a walking vendetta.

Now, I never read the comic, so I don't know how accurate your "twisted, sinister, malevolent, manipulative, and psychotic force of nature" comment was, but if V in the movie truly wasn't meant to be human in the comics, then I guess I really will have to make buying the comic one of my main goals. You make it almost sound like a different character.

 

[zmanjz]

Hmmm....

An interesting movie.

I reminded of some pertinent quotes....

No government, no matter how it is structured, can be depended upon to not vote itself more power, more money, and more control.

Yet there is no way that anarchy can exist without the weak becoming subject to the strong

Therefore a balance must be enforced.

Also:

"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject."

A person can only do what they can do, yet is still responsible when responsible... and even when not.

Are you responsible when it's possible? Or do you care for responsibilities naught?

A person must be cautious because with so many conflicting interests in the world, one can never know when right is right or wrong is wrong until you know yourself and what you believe is right, and not what others have told you.

and remember. A riddle's only a a riddle for those that don't know the answer.


ok, enough of that.

Now as for the Characters, I liked that the Villains that were true villains were stopped, but I thought it unfortunate that V killed the Doctor. It was both Sad, sweet, yet such a loss.

For those that do not seek redemption for their evil a quick end seemed just. But for the female Doctor, it just seemed as though she should have been given the opportunity to redeem herself.

The Inspector was excellent. The man in the midst. The "Good man doing his job" and doing it exceptionally well. The final Domino, Was it his? Was it Eve's .... or were they the two dominos put intoi motion, but unfelled while supporteded by the Unfallen Domino? ...until the last one was removed?

Or does living underground leave too much time on one's hands to not play with Dominos?


Now why couldn't Lucas have used Natalie to this level of potential during Star Wars?

I vote 4.5

 

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

Now, I never read the comic, so I don't know how accurate your "twisted, sinister, malevolent, manipulative, and psychotic force of nature" comment was, but if V in the movie truly wasn't meant to be human in the comics, then I guess I really will have to make buying the comic one of my main goals. You make it almost sound like a different character.

Well, you can still see the comic book version in the movie, but I feel like it's more of an "inspired by" kind of character. The book is well worth your time, regardless.

Let's put it this way: I used to think that V for Vendetta was Alan Moore's take on a Batman who decided he was going to do something really big and substantial. It's all there -- the trauma of a younger age, the big cape, the theatricality, the secret hideout, the ability to see 4 steps ahead of everyone else, the funding that seems to come out of nowhere, and the single-minded drive. Over time, I've decided that it's the right family but the wrong character. V isn't Batman. V is the Joker, without so much randomness and slightly more on the side of the "good guys."

And, if you can take spoilers from the first few pages of the book:

Spoiler

V doesn't just throw around the Fingermen who catch Evey at the start of the story. He kills every last one of them. None of this, "I had no quarrel with them" stuff he tries to pull in the movie, trying to separate the oppressors from their underlings. That neatly glosses over the fact that these underlings were going to abuse their power to do really nasty things to Evey and get away with it.

-- Ed/Ace

 

[ManicWebb]

And, if you can take spoilers from the first few pages of the book:

Spoiler

V doesn't just throw around the Fingermen who catch Evey at the start of the story. He kills every last one of them. None of this, "I had no quarrel with them" stuff he tries to pull in the movie, trying to separate the oppressors from their underlings. That neatly glosses over the fact that these underlings were going to abuse their power to do really nasty things to Evey and get away with it.

Uh...

Spoiler

He killed them in the movie, too. In the scene where Evey discovers V used her ID badge to kill the Voice of London, he remarks that she didn't see any problem when he killed the Fingermen in the alley.

Still, I'll check out the book as soon as one of my 3 local book and comic stores receive more. All of their previous copies miraclously disappeared off of the shelves as soon as the movie came out.

 

[Juu-kuchi]

Still, I'll check out the book as soon as one of my 3 local book and comic stores receive more. All of their previous copies miraclously disappeared off of the shelves as soon as the movie came out.

I really wonder what'll be everyone's reaction to the graphic novel anyway. Will they like it better than the movie or not? Will they be more uneased at the atmosphere of what is written and drawn than what is acted upon a stage?

 

[Strollymonster]

Just saw it tonight, finally got around to getting my free pass to see it.

I'm quite satisfied, as it was by a wide margin the best movie out this year so far.

The message is one that couldn't be more timely, and it's doesn't try too hard to preach to us. Rather, it simply demonstrates what happens when people give into their fear for the illusion of security.

If nothing else, the history major part of me is glad that more people know the story of Guy Fawkes now. And hopefully, that spirit of noncomplacence will live on in just a few more people. After all, as V said, "ideas are bulletproof."

 

[silverwings]

Just saw the movie last night, at the last possible showing here before it leaves the theater.

It was amazing! Hugo Weaving gets more acting credit now for being able to give emotion and feeling to V when you can't even see his face.

I haven't read the comics, either, but I might pick them up if I find them (and they aren't expensive).

Also, the 1812 will never be the same for me again.

 

[Eddie G.]

I've decided that it's the right family but the wrong character. V isn't Batman. V is the Joker, without so much randomness and slightly more on the side of the "good guys."

I agree with you that V and the Joker are similar but only in the same way that Batman and the Joker are similar. All three characters are theatrical and are counter-establishment.

If you read V really carefully, you see that the guy isn't just killing people, everything he did had a grand altruistic purpose* of trying to free mankind from governments that by their very nature eventually fail, become facist, or both. The Joker is a being of chaos who wants to prove to the world that there is no such thing as good, there is only the cosmic joke. V may be a dark character but when you get into it, his views on anarchy are really optimistic. He believes left on their own, humanity would, for the most part, do the right thing. The Joker believes that when you take everything away from humanity you just end up with The Joker.

Really though, V's an altruistic terrorist, not a superhero. The only time he actually acts like a superhero is when he saves Evey but that's not so much for doing the right thing as much as him completing part of what he felt was needed for the anarchist revolution.

*That's the one thing that bothered me about movie V in relation to comic V. In the comic, V never fails. There's no point where V's revolution was in trouble, every single thing that happens in the book goes according to the plan.

 

[Yojimbo]

Releases in select theaters on October 30.