Vendetta....

[t1mpani]

I don't disagree with you, but as a side note Harry Potter is Warner Brothers--filmed in England but the money is coming from the U.S.

 

[HoB]

Agreed, and Vendetta is in conjuction with DC Comics. Just noting that they all had very strong britsh influence. Feels at least like it. The last real big hit to come out of Hollywood (Disney) seems to have been Pirates of the Caribbean, but maybe that is just an impression.

 

[eojk]

Just noting that they all had very strong britsh influence. Feels at least like it.

The comic is British. A recurring quote from it is "England prevails." It is also no commentary on current politics, as the original comic released in 1988, I believe. As for hollywood losing out, I say that's fine. Videogames are now the preeminent source of media entertainment revenue nowadays.

 

[untamed]

Just saw it the other night. Good movie and recommend it.

FWIW, to certain guys who want to be "political" about it:

1. It JUST a movie based on a good comic book that reflected just a PARTICULAR writer's ideas/musings at PARTICULAR point in time.

2. The situation and overall condition suffered by the British people described in the film WAS indeed hellish (mirroring, if not surpassing what we went thru here in the Philippines some decades back). Hence, the "hero" of the film was a "terrorist" in the point of view of that government.

 

[t1mpani]

2. The situation and overall condition suffered by the British people described in the film WAS indeed hellish (mirroring, if not surpassing what we went thru here in the Philippines some decades back). Hence, the "hero" of the film was a "terrorist" in the point of view of that government.

It is very difficult to say this without sounding like I condone terrorism, but the plain and simple fact is most terrorists feel that what they're fighting for is worth dying for--that's why they die for it. I'm not saying that they're saintly and governments are awful, I'm just saying that there are very very very very few true villains in the world--people who look to their own actions as being evil and exault in that. Their morality may be a convenient one, but I can guarantee that the majority of these people who put themselves at risk for being imprisoned, executed, shot, blown up, or in a plane heading at high speed for a collision are doing so because they think that what they're doing is right. What is worth fighting/killing/dying for is an extremely personal question.

I realize that the movie probably makes who is "good" and "bad" very clear so that audiences can enjoy themselves and have no doubt who to root for, but those two terms are largely fictional outside of movieland and books, at least in terms of having a universally agreed-upon definition. My Great Aunt spent most of her life working with troubled children and gave most of her money beyond basic living expenses to charity, and I'm sure that the world is full of people who would have considered her evil because she was Catholic/white/American/etc...in other words, because she was different from them.

 

[maximus otter]

As to the glorification of the terrorists: It seems to me that condeming the movie on these grounds without having seen it is a bit silly. The german resistance during the second world war fighting as best as they could against their own regime (Hitler) at great peril to their own lives were nothing but terrorists, using very typical terror tactics, but I would never occure to me to condemn them for their actions. Quite the opposite they have been lauded for their actions as they should.

To compare the German resistance movement with the IRA demonstrates a breathtaking want of knowledge.

The IRA is not smiley Richard Harris in a trenchcoat with a Mauser rifle "begorrah"; it is a Marxist terrorist organisation deeply involved in murder, torture, extortion, drug running and victimisation of any who dare speak against it.

Imagine a film starring the wife of Timothy McVeigh and depicting the blowing up of the White House.

maximus otter

 

[Artfully Martial]

The IRA isn't in the movie, so, the comparison isn't necessary....compare those resistance fighters to the V followers in the film and it'll work better.

You shouldn't avoid the film because of a distaste for the IRA....they just have nothing to do with it.

 

[fishface5]

This is my favorite comic ever. Can't wait to see the movie - from the trailer, it looks like they have perfectly captured some of the most compelling panel illustrations.

The comic is quite thoughtful, at least I thought so when it came out. I think the reaction against it by some for "promoting terrorism" is misguided; as others have noted, whether you are a "terrorist" or a "freedom-fighter" depends which side you are on. Although it is possible to partially assess either status by questioning whether the actor seeks to throw off a yoke of oppression (as in this comic) or to impose a yoke upon others (al queda islamofascists).

It is important to recall that almost all significant political advances, until very recently, have come about through armed struggle (e.g. the formation of this country by terrorists). Therefore the mere use of the word "terrorism" should not end the inquiry into the legitimacy of the terrorists' aims. Although since Ghandi and MLK, the track record for nonviolent protest has gotten pretty good (I often wonder why the Palestinians haven't picked up on that clue). But it's pretty clear in the comic that a sit-down strike would have been bloody and very short-lived . . . .

 

[HoB]

To compare the German resistance movement with the IRA demonstrates a breathtaking want of knowledge.

The IRA is not smiley Richard Harris in a trenchcoat with a Mauser rifle "begorrah"; it is a Marxist terrorist organisation deeply involved in murder, torture, extortion, drug running and victimisation of any who dare speak against it.

Imagine a film starring the wife of Timothy McVeigh and depicting the blowing up of the White House.

maximus otter

Well, maybe you should see the movie after all, before you accuse me of "breathtaking want of knowledge". If you had, you would have realized that I was actually comparing the character of "V" to the german resistance during the second world war and NOT to the IRA. A comparison which is hardly avoidable. Beyond that, its indeed rather questionable to compare a character of fiction with people who have risked their lives for real. I could very much return your statement above if you think that the german resistance was a bunch of actors in trenchcoats with Mauser rifles... .

 

[tyr_shadowblade]

I'll wait for the DVD . . . don't get out to the theater unless it's something truly extraordinary. Next time I'll go will probably be in July, to see A Scanner Darkly.

 

[Artfully Martial]

I'm super excited for a scanner darkly. I've been trying to get the theme song for days now.....

The dialogue looks brilliant.

 

[puukkoman]

The IRA isn't in the movie, so, the comparison isn't necessary....compare those resistance fighters to the V followers in the film and it'll work better.

You shouldn't avoid the film because of a distaste for the IRA....they just have nothing to do with it.

And even if the movie did have anything to do with the IRA, the point here is that, just as early Americans felt the need to use any means necessary to extricate themselves from the rule of the British and therefore thought their actions were justified, the members of the Irish independence movement feel justified.
There is no real, solid, black & white "Good" or "Bad." It always (in every scenario) depends on which side of the fence you're on, and what you personally, subjectively identify with.

 

[Monocrom]

Are we all talking about the same film?! The guy who wrote the original graphic novel, hated the movie! It's blatant, liberal propaganda. V himself is less than heroic, to put it mildly. He's actually a psychotic lunatic! Here's just a few of the less than heroic things he does:
1) Kills a bunch of security guards who are just doing their job.
2) Blows up buildings that he knows are filled with civilians.
3) Kidnaps and tortures someone, for several months.

Yeah, V likes to use knives..... But he prefers explosives a lot more!

For those of you who still don't get it, V is a freaking terrorist. The movie tries, unsuccessfully, to make him look like a hero.

Take your $10 and flush it down the toilet, it'll be a better use of your funds.:thumbdn:

 

[Metis]

the morals were pretty heavy-handed. i don't think we need to have "gays good / church bad" hammered into us any more. we get it, regardless of which side you take on either. but that's Hollywood.

V was a terrorist -and- a hero. but only because of the movie's point of view. you could easily make the same movie from the opposite perspective.

all history is revisionist.

beyond that, i thought it was great. Hugo Weaving's performance, especially having to act behind a mask, should get an Oscar nod. even if he had to play off Portman who was useless. will definately see it again on the big screen.

 

[tgw914]

The movie is good. Just go see it, if not in the theatre then when it releases on DVD. This is the only movie I've ever seen that is smart and blows up lots of stuff. It's relativly real(for an action movie) and makes you think.

Can anyone lead me to an online graphic novel emporium that would have this.

 

[Mark Nelson]

Are we all talking about the same film?! The guy who wrote the original graphic novel, hated the movie! It's blatant, liberal propaganda. V himself is less than heroic, to put it mildly. He's actually a psychotic lunatic! Here's just a few of the less than heroic things he does:
1) Kills a bunch of security guards who are just doing their job.
2) Blows up buildings that he knows are filled with civilians.
3) Kidnaps and tortures someone, for several months.

Yeah, V likes to use knives..... But he prefers explosives a lot more!

For those of you who still don't get it, V is a freaking terrorist. The movie tries, unsuccessfully, to make him look like a hero.

Take your $10 and flush it down the toilet, it'll be a better use of your funds.:thumbdn:

That is pretty much the same "V" that was in the comic book. Like the comic haven't seen the movie, but make no mistake the "V" that Moore wrote was not a fun, bunny loving kind of guy.

 

[JCaswell]

I think a large part of what constitutes a terrorist (as compared with a freedom fighter) has to do with the chosen targets. Did the German resistance blow up schoolbusses full of kids as we've seen many times in Israel, or did they capture a school and slaughter about 400 kids and teachers as happened recently in the former Sov. Union? Can you imgine George Washington slicing off some non-combatant's head on tape while a hooded Tom Jefferson and the boys prance about chanting over the screams?
I probably wont see this movie (I see very few anymore). I've spent a lot of time in Hollywood and can tell you that the prevailing world view is postmodern (the rejection of, among other things, the concept of objective morality). It strikes me as strangely perverse for folks that say right and wrong are nothing but perception to create so many moral plays that use moral axioms, faulse association, distortion and the like to demonize people and ideas they think are wrong.
From what I've read about it, there are two things V is intended to do. One is to portray a "terrorist" as hero and in so doing challenge our image of real life "terrorists." This, I gather, is done by showing V killing bad guys and calling it terrorism.
Second, there is a strong visual-association element depicting essentially current Western civilization as evil, oppressive, etc. I know, I know, it's fiction, but the image is there and, I think will endure longer with the viewer than any other element of the movie.
Don't want to step on any toes, just my 2 cents.

 

[fishface5]

The problem with relying on the use of the word "terrorist" is that it reduces a huge amount of complexity to a soundbite. I just saw the movie and loved it. It is indeed thoughtful. While it does portray V as a "hero," he is also a self-admitted "monster."

The reason he is a hero is that he is standing up to opression and corruption, in the name of freedom and human dignity. Since these were the principles that this nation was founded on, for which the nation ostensibly exists, and which purportedly form the basis for "western civilization," I think it is a big stretch to interpret it as an assault on westen civ.

It's important to remember, in terms of "intent," that the comic was written in 1987-9 as a response to what were perceived as fascistic overtones of Thatcherite Britain; it has nothing to do with "let's understand that islamic fundamentalists have a viewpoint that should be respected as much as our own," or some such. Although no doubt the Wachovsky bros. were influenced by the monarchistic behavior of the current administration when they made this film.

The movie does exhibit a respect for individual differences as opposed to repressive and violent assurance of conformity, but again that too was a very basis on which the country was founded. As opposed to, say, the credo of the terrorists who currently occupy the public attention. So again, not really an assault on the ideals of our civilization. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, "a little revolution every now and then can be a good thing" (taken as needed to insure that individual liberty prevails over hidebound institutions of privilege and exploitation).

CAVEAT - (for the Homeland Security/NSA guys) this post by no means endorses the blowing up of houses of parliment or other government installations.

 

[JCaswell]

The reason he is a hero is that he is standing up to opression and corruption, in the name of freedom and human dignity. Since these were the principles that this nation was founded on, for which the nation ostensibly exists, and which purportedly form the basis for "western civilization," I think it is a big stretch to interpret it as an assault on westen civ.

I don't think I said anything about the character or his actions being an assault on western civilization. Since you got that from my post, it's doubtless my fault. What I meant was the imagery of the West as corrupt, fascist, etc ... 'bad-guy" troops outfitted as current British or American troops ... doing terrible things. These are powerful images designed to make a socio-political point today. That's all.

The movie does exhibit a respect for individual differences as opposed to repressive and violent assurance of conformity...

Again, haven't seen it. Just commenting on trailers, reviews and synopsis, but is that the dicotomy in the movie? Respect for individual differences (I suppose that means homosexuality) or fascism? That seems awfully black and white.
By the way, I like complicated character studies. I thought they ruined the Count of Monte Cristo in the remake by removing some essential complications which arise during his quest for revenge... making him less of an anti-hero. Sounds like they didn't make that mistake with this one.

Love the Jefferson and the caveat, smart!

 

[Monocrom]

That is pretty much the same "V" that was in the comic book. Like the comic haven't seen the movie, but make no mistake the "V" that Moore wrote was not a fun, bunny loving kind of guy.

I never said he was. But the producers of the film took the character of "V" and transformed him from a controversial freedom-fighter, into a psychotic lunatic! ..... He actually becomes a bigger threat to the people than the corrupt Government that he's fighting against! Ooops!

Forget about the fact that he's good with knives. In the film, he prefers to use explosives!:thumbdn: