Vendetta....

[SpyderJon]

If the author of the probably excellent comic V feels that the movie is a political commentary on U.S. politics, he's just wrong, however. Maybe he should see the film too?

So just so I'm completely clear, when the Director of the film says the can be taken as a criticism of the present administration then HE'S wrong too?

 

[HoB]

Sorry, but the guy who actually wrote the graphic novel and created the character of "V," disagrees with you.

I don't really understand what you are arguing here. Alan Moore was upset about the movie because the film was not ENOUGH of a political commentary and that V in the movie was not sufficiently consistent in his violent behavior.

And again, especially after Alan Moore explicitly stated, that he didn't want anything to do with the movie, how can you continue to bring up the comic book to proof an agenda of the movie?

Even if the director had a political agenda, who cares, really, most directors of most films do. I usually don't read up on somebodies agenda when seeing a movie. I still maintain that you can watch Vendetta simply for entertainment and that it is a good show.

When I am willing to look for political agendas I usually open the newspaper and don't go to the movie theater to watch a movie with knife content.

I am just surprised how many people are willing to take the fun out of their lifes for political reasons. You go to watch a movie and instead of saying:"Hey, I like the movie" or "Bah, that movie sucked", it goes like:"Wait, I am detecting a political agenda that is not aligned with my own, let me go online to see if I find some information that verifies my suspicion, with which I then can go on and condemn and trash that movie!" That is way too much for a simple mind like mine.

Maybe this tread should be moved to the political arena.

 

[SpyderJon]

Perhaps it should be in the political forum. I'm going to see the movie, and intend to do so just because I've heard its a great film. I don't personally care about the politics of the film, and you're right that there IS usually an agenda in play. Its not usually called an agenda, though, but usually a perspective or a voice. The thing is to not be caught up with the politics of it. Aristotle said that the mark of an educated mind is to be able to entertain all ideas without accepting them. So to with this film.

You can't, however, claim that you are right and the director is wrong when it comes to THEIR vision- which is what ends up on the screen. To my mind when HE claims it has an agenda, you can't say it doesn't- though you certainly don't have to accept that agenda or let it ruin a good film.

I've seen so many crappy movies come out this year that a good one will be a joy if not a novelty.

 

[Monocrom]

If the author of the probably excellent comic V feels that the movie is a political commentary on U.S. politics, he's just wrong, however. Maybe he should see the film too?

Oh man, you got to be kidding me, "....see the film too?"
Okay, perhaps this never occurred to you; when Hollywood makes a film version of ANY book, the Producers bring in the Author of the book to work VERY closely on the film version. Not only has the creator of "V" already seen the film, but he was there while it was being made! He could probably tell you the exact moment, during filming, when the producers of the film turned his controversial freedom-fighter into a psychotic lunatic and his graphic novel about facism, into blatant liberal propaganda. Yes, some of the scenes are very entertaining..... but that's one of the things a good propaganda film is supposed to be!

Let me guess, you're still going to make the ridiculously arrogant claim that the creator of "V" is wrong about the film; even though he knows more about both the film and the graphic novel, than YOU do..... right.

 

[HoB]

Very well put, SpyderJon.

 

[Artfully Martial]

I believe that the liberal propaganda is your projection. Not insult, I honestly believe that.

I believe that virtually all people will see this movie differently than you do. And similarly to me.

Based on this, I think that people should see the movie.


In regards to the author's commentary of the movie. I believe he's wrong. I don't believe that his poor taste in films should interfere in my theater enjoyment. Being a good author is not necessarily connected to understanding film.

Because the film is so greatly unlike any political commentary of the current day (at least, in the U.S.), I consider it far more probable that there's something different going on with the creators of the film. I can't find another way to make sense out of the two things I consider facts: that, according to you, the creators of the movie call their film political commentary or some equivalent (and one should remember, political commentary is different than liberal propaganda--that the film has neither has little impact on this distinction according to the creator's commentary) and that the film actually has nothing to do with current U.S. politics at all.

 

[SpyderJon]

Ummm.....yeah. Okay. Sure...

 

[hardheart]

Oh man, you got to be kidding me, "....see the film too?"
Okay, perhaps this never occurred to you; when Hollywood makes a film version of ANY book, the Producers bring in the Author of the book to work VERY closely on the film version. Not only has the creator of "V" already seen the film, but he was there while it was being made! He could probably tell you the exact moment, during filming, when the producers of the film turned his controversial freedom-fighter into a psychotic lunatic and his graphic novel about facism, into blatant liberal propaganda. Yes, some of the scenes are very entertaining..... but that's one of the things a good propaganda film is supposed to be!

Let me guess, you're still going to make the ridiculously arrogant claim that the creator of "V" is wrong about the film; even though he knows more about both the film and the graphic novel, than YOU do..... right.

knowing at least something about Alan Moore and the way he works would help you out a bit

 

[Chadilac]

To me, the film seemed more a commentary on where society could go if a government gains too much control over its people. I can't speak for what was intended, but that's what I got, which is very similar to the "warning" message in 1984.

I saw it as an imaginative "see what could happen? -- so don't be fearful and give in to everything your leaders feed you until they've taken control without your even realizing it" kind of message.

But I enjoyed the film....V was a sicko! But he'd had a lot of rough experiences for sure...

 

[ocelot777]

Anyway guys, back to the knives . . .

 

[Chadilac]

I like knives....

 

[wuyeah]

Great film, great idea adopting tradtional motor race tail light effect inter-connect with knife fighting. Its also fresh a Hero will die after hard work of fight.

Any way.....V's knife looks very cool every time he does the spin. What kind of knives are those?? Are they also custom knives just for the movie??

 

[SSCamaro99_3]

I saw it last night. It reminded me very much of 1984. Any political commentary I took from it was to be wary of how much trust you place in government, and how much you rely on them to control your daily life. I thought it was better than most of the crap that comes out of Hollywood. As for the choice of knives, I thought it fit his character. He seems to be classically inspired, and a classic blade seems appropriate.

 

[David Schott]

I dunno if i saw the same movie, but I thought it was terrible...borderline unwatchable.....I understand the comic book feel they wanted to give it, but the main character is totally undeveloped, is washed over by poorly written poe-esque lines that sound slike they came out of a soap opera writer's scrapbook...are we supposed to be moved and feel romantic when natalie portman kisses his mask? Give me a break. I thought the whole this was a terribly written, acted, and filmed movie that hides its terribleness with a contorversial and hot topic plot....people are spending so much time analyzing the frame of the move that they miss the fact that the movie itself is worth about as much as the comic it was ripped from....but thats just my opinion.

 

[Artfully Martial]

Yeah, you definitely saw a different movie. Double check your ticket stub.

 

[David Schott]

I did...same movie....

I almost walked out half way through, I thought it was so poor. To each his own, I guess.....They really needed to decrease the cartoonish lyricism of the main character and make him more human, or make the movie more fantasy that it was, and sylize it. To have such a character just thrown into a plot of other more normalized acting and characters just seemed to me too forced to be ignored.

 

[HoB]

I can see the reasons you didn't like it TicToc. I probably know quite a few people that would say the same thing. Me, personally, I don't need much plot to keep my simple mind happy. If the visuals are right, I am fine, even with a bad movie . I must say though, that I usually go to the movies with a different expectation, if the movie is based on a comic book. I don't expect from a comic book the level of character development as in War and Peace either . Good to read a negative review that isn't politically base though. And, yes, when Natalie Portman kiss his mask, I was close to vomiting too, oh well

 

[RedEdge77]

TikTok i'm sorry you didn't like the movie,

I saw it over the weekend with my dad and thought it was one of the best movies i've seen recently. I liked everything about it from plot, to how the characters reacted.:thumbup:

 

[Revolvergeek]

I saw it last weekend and loved it, but then again I loved The Three (and Four) Musketeers ('70s version), The Count of Monte Cristo, and that little guy with his bags of groceries that stood in front of the tanks in Tiananmen square. It is Anti-Fascist/Totalitarian, and a revenge flic. If the government in this movie resembles any other governments past, present or future, then shame on them.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

What fiction "says" is much the reader as the writer, you can take from a work many things, often the intention of the creator is largely irreleveant, they may succeed or fail, so in the above what a director / writer says is intended isn't actually an arguement for anything outside of their abilities.

They really needed to decrease the cartoonish lyricism of the main character and make him more human...

I always saw V as an extreme representation of an idea, he isn't developed beyond a basic outline of what made him, Evy is more of the adaptation of that idea to a person, she struggles and adapts. I think the movie changes several fundamental aspects of the themes but was a decent run at the book, there are a lot worse out there.

You could even argue that the absuridity of his character itself is a commentary in contrast of the realness of the other characters/ideas as the theme would be very different otherwise, such as with Osterman in Watchmen, who is also very much a terrorist on a broader scale and a character very much like V (Rorschach) opposes him.

-Cliff