V for Vendetta is actually extremely similar to:
-Fahrenheit 451 as said before: V had to do with censorship as mentioned in the basement of th major TV personality/homosexual whom Portman's character stays with in the middle of V.
-The Matrix series is also similar to this movie as both focus on a charater(Neo and V) who leads a group in rebellion against a corrupt system of government.
-1984: agreeable on this one
-It is also similar to Equilibrium in that, once again it focus on a government system controlling its citizens(I do think Equilibrium is much better than V simply b/c it dives much deeper into the struggle of the main character).
-I think the meaning that the movie is completely different from the graphic novel is meant to say that the plots are different, not the adaptation.

V for Vendetta is also an extremely unfocused movie and it seems as though the Wachoskis are simply throwing anti-gov't, anti-US propaganda at the viewer. First, the movie cites the Avion Flu as the cause of this new world, then the war in Iraq, then the rise of a fascist gov't structure in Britain, then a pharamecutical experiment gone bad.

Secondly, the scenes of Portman in prison were very illogical based upon scenes prior and make the script seem as though it was rewritten so Natalie Portman could stay around longer.

The movie could have grabbed more attention if it had included more action scenes to cope with the dialogue and levity of the issues being portrayed. Plus, the Wachoski Brothers, in my opinion, failed to deliver when it came to the build up to the climax as they had in Matrix: Revolution.

The movie wasn't as revolutionary as stated b/c it seems like a fusion or love-child of a lot of opinions and ideas in existence today and it is definitly a one-sided film contrary to the opinion of the actors and directors of the film. There is no denying the fact that the movie really leaves no room for opposing interpretation.

I loved that movie!!!!!!

It was very thought provoking and the plot was excellent. not to mention the action . Plus it had a lot of good actors. If you've ever seen Blackadder or British comedies, Stephen Fry (the guy who played the television talk show comedian host) was hilarious and perfect for his role. Also, the guy who played Creedy did an excellent job. I like a good bad guy, and he played a really good one. Best of all perhaps was Hugo Weaving. I agree with Euterpe!

quote:

Originally posted by st13245:
I said it sucked...in truth it did necessarily suck but it was a RIP OFF of many other works from literature and film and strays completely away from the original graphic novel.

Well no shit. The graphic novel does not lend itself to a direct film adaptation. It is too dated and too complicated to make itself friendly to film. So before you criticize the adaptation, learn a little about the difference between a piece of literature or a comic and a screenplay.

quote:

-Fahrenheit 451(The book, not the cr@ppy Moore movie)

Wrong. Fahrenheit 451 (Which WOULDN'T be confused with the "crappy Michael Moore movie" because the movie was called Fahrenheit 9/11.) is simply about the repression of knowledge through books. V4V was about the use of fear as a tool of power.

I won't discuss Equilibrium 'cos that was a piece of psuedo-scientific-intellectual shit.

quote:

-Matrix(yes I know it was created by the same people as the Matrix, but come on, V was basically a third installment of the Matrix if you think about it)

Wrong. Nothing like the Matrix, and there already IS a third installment of the Matrix. Hence the term "matrix trilogy."

quote:

-1984

Good call on this one. It is very similiar to 1984. It only differs in its biggest message: 1984 showed the almost near hopelessness of revolution; V was the antithesis to that. He embodied the righteousness and pride in revolution.

quote:

Clockwork Orange

Yeeeah not so much. Just because it had brainwashing? Please.

quote:

The original graphic novel is about the Nazis winning WWII(basically the Wascoski Brothers wanted the title character)

Well clearly it had to "rip-off" the graphic novel: IT WAS BASED ON IT. And I don't know about you, but I feel Nazis are a little outdated. We get it, they were evil. It's much more interesting to see it happen to another country through a different type of ruthless dictator. ...Or maybe that's just me and my crazy mind.

I said it sucked...in truth it did necessarily suck but it was a RIP OFF of many other works from literature and film and strays completely away from the original graphic novel. An example of the works it has ripped off:

-Fahrenheit 451(The book, not the cr@ppy Moore movie)
-Equilibrium
-Matrix(yes I know it was created by the same people as the Matrix, but come on, V was basically a third installment of the Matrix if you think about it)
-1984
-Clockwork Orange
-The original graphic novel is about the Nazis winning WWII(basically the Wascoski Brothers wanted the title character)

I left the theatre saying, "it was good, not a lot of action and didn't necessarily agree with it, but good."

My opinion of it changed after I really thought about and the fact that the plot was ripped from other works.

"Not great but NOT terrible"

If you guys want a really good movie that mildly criticizes Middle East foreign policy(I don't neceassarily agree) and delivers a good plot, stars Robert Redford and Feye Dunaway, SEE 3 DAYS OF THE CONDOR.

this movie rocked my face off, i love seeing intellectuals rebel.

One of the best movies I've seen in a long time, but i disagree that it is 10 times bettter than 1984, maybe only 2 or 3.

-----"""Hell, RENT was PG-13 ONLY because they took out ONE clip of Rosario Dawson actually injecting herself with heroin."""---

You know the part in Kill Bill when The Bride is hacking up all those Japanese dudes, it shows her eyes, and then switches to black and white for a few minutes? That was done so Tarantino could show it in theatres with an R rating; it was considered too graphic in color. So, because the blood isn't red, it doesn't count. The animated parts were animated and not filmed with live actors for similar reasons. Stupid/amusing, no?

quote:

Originally posted by piratechic:
calmly? he killed people and blew up historic monuments/landmarks. I loved this movie about as much as anyone else, and I LOVED the character V, but he wasn't completely calm in expressing what he needed to tell the people.

I was referring to the video he taped and projected across the country. He himself only blew up one landmark. Evey (and in a sense, the entire city of London) blew up Parliament.

The rating is irrelevant. It is not meant for children, nor could its message have been conveyed if it was. (Which is what rating guides are designed to do. Your religious beliefs are moot; ratings are designed to help prevent the young from seeing "inappropriate" things.)

Which is bullshit anyway. Because R doesn't necessarily mean graphic sex/violence. It just means there could literally be ONE thing preventing it from a PG-13, but that aspect might be so important that the film refuses to take it out. Especially in the case of V For Vendetta. There is no reason to remove important material so a 14-year-old punk can watch and not appreciate a movie too mature for him/her.

And PG-13 doesn't necessarily indicate the pinnacle of decency, either. "SWAT," "Titanic," "Moulin Rouge," "Pirates of the Caribbean," "Chicago," "The Hot Chick," all the Austin Powers movies, "Tomb Raider," "Charlie's Angels," "Just Married," "Solaris," "Ace Ventura," "A Beautiful Mind," "The Cider House Rules," "Aeon Flux," "The Bad News Bears," "The Dukes of Hazzard," "The Exorcism of Emily Rose," "Memoirs of a Geisha," "Prime" (why a movie about an older woman having an affair with a younger man needs to be marketed to kids, I don't know), "Proof" (again, a movie about a genius? To a 14-year old?), "The Producers," "Redeye," "Stealth," "War of the Worlds."

More than half of those movies were originally given R ratings, but may have taken out a curse word, OR in some cases, only had to go some negotiations and no changes, and became PG-13. Ratings mean very, very little. Hell, RENT was PG-13 ONLY because they took out ONE clip of Rosario Dawson actually injecting herself with heroin.

I found it entertaining. And I don't think it was supposed to be entirely realistic.

It wasn't that good. At all. Nor realistic or entertaining.

[QUOTE]...He tells the people (calmly) that the government THEY elected is a dangerous and oppressive one. And all they have to do is peacefully protest together, unified, and they will be able to take back their country.
QUOTE]

calmly? he killed people and blew up historic monuments/landmarks. I loved this movie about as much as anyone else, and I LOVED the character V, but he wasn't completely calm in expressing what he needed to tell the people.

You didn't put a category for me...it's rated R. Can't see it. Sorry. I've heard it's good though. They should have toned it to a PG-13, then I might have gone. But I guess they don't want to cater to us 13 million Mormons.

Yeah V was pretty durn good. The character himself is just entertaining and atypical and good, Weaving's voice is perfect. I think it's funny when he's cooking breakfast in the pink apron. Natalie Portman looks cool with a shaved head and she does a great job. I also liked the Valerie montage. It was really cool looking, and that kiss with the sun behind it was beautiful.


However there's one issue I had with the movie. A friend made me and a few others read it before we saw the movie, and the movie does a pretty good job of changing and interpreting things---except in one area. It adds a romance between V and Evey in, which is stupid since it pretty strongly hints that V is not into women in the novel. When he said "Evey, I love you"...we all groaned. It just seemed not very well developed, just stuck in there for the hell of it, a cliché attempt at making it more dramatic. As if it's just too difficult to imagine two people in comparable roles not falling in love.


Oh, and if you didn't catch it, there's a SWEET Indian/rockish/techno song that plays during the credits. It's called BKAB by Ethan Stroller and snippets of speeches by MLK and Gloria Steinem are in it. My friends and I stayed in the theater and danced to it until it ended. Ooh that was cool.

quote:

Originally posted by piratechic:
I loved this movie!! I thought it was awesome how V was portrayed as both a hero AND a terrorist. I'm going to own this movie on DVD, just you wait and see.

I, two, L-O-V-E tha movie. When does it come out on DVD?????


P.S. There is blood shown. Which makes it better too. ^-^! ^-^!

I saw it (duh) and loved it.

I think it actually had a really deliciously political message. There's a lot to be said about this movie, but I really think it was revolutionary. A lot of people are oppressed by their governments, and it can (and probably will) change. That's an amazing message right there.

'Nuff said.

I saw it! I thought it was really good, and my friend liked it, too. It was really interesting. I loved the music that plays over the PA system and thought the domino scene was just awesome.

Who saw "She's the Man" instead??!!

Sweet description, Euterpe. Now you're making me want to see it...

But for the most part, terrorists use the thought of overwhelming and immediate, almost imminent danger. V does not. V is a revolutionary. He tells the people (calmly) that the government THEY elected is a dangerous and oppressive one. And all they have to do is peacefully protest together, unified, and they will be able to take back their country.

Really, until you see the movie...you'll see him how we as Americans see our revolutionary fore fathers. Terrorists and insurgents to Britain, heroes to us.

The trailer is very strange. I plan to see it soon, just because I heard so many good things about it.