Film: V for Vendetta

[Pander Bear]

X-Men movies were awesome IMO. So far, i think those have been the best comic-to-movie films made.

I'm not familiar with the comic either, but I loved the saturday morning catroon. Ya, I was unimpressed. Some of it was the casting, most of it was the fact that, like in the fantastic four, so much time was spend in exposition, setting up the universe, and doing a half-assed job with the characters, that there was very little room for character depth and for the plot. I think Spiderman has succeeded where X-men failed. I really feel like peter parker/ spiderman is an interesting character, and the basic theme of the character, the sacrifices Parker makes to be Spiderman, and the Dilemas of a double life, are well told. X-men just looks like a Cash grab compared to it, IMO.

i think as far as comic adaptations go the x men movies were very good, spider man was alright, the new batman and the original burton batman were great, from hell and sin city were awesome... but pretty much everything else has been fairly shitty

From Hell was awesome? I have to strongly disagree there. The *idea* is awesome. The movie sucks massive ass. It looks like it was filmed in a garage. Did somebody not bother to tell the crew that London then was a filthy shithole? Its so stark. The streets are dirty, but in a very clean way, if you can follow what I'm saying. I didn't much like the way the dreams were shot either. I can see why Depp dug the script. Its good, but I doubt he is very satisfied with ther final product.

^ yeah it's been obvious knowledge that Alan Moore has put himself as far away from the V adaption as possible.

atlas: man, you didn't like the X-men movies? I thought they were fun and accurate.

I'm sad about moore not being involved with V that way Miller was so tied in to Sin City. I don't think V is going to be the next fucking fucking awesome comic book franchise, but I think it could be if they do a good job of it. Maybe Alan just isn't comfortable being shoulder to shoulder with the transexual wachowski sister.

X-men fun and accurate? Ya, I think you're right. They were both. I think its a basic requirement of a comic book adaptation to be accurate, so it doesn't win any points from me there. Fun though. I mean, Men in Black was fun, the first one, at least, but that doesn't stop it from being a shitty popcorn flick that feels shorter and less dramatic than a Law and Order episode.

 

[sixpartseven]

I'm not familiar with the comic either, but I loved the saturday morning catroon. Ya, I was unimpressed. Some of it was the casting, most of it was the fact that, like in the fantastic four, so much time was spend in exposition, setting up the universe, and doing a half-assed job with the characters, that there was very little room for character depth and for the plot. I think Spiderman has succeeded where X-men failed. I really feel like peter parker/ spiderman is an interesting character, and the basic theme of the character, the sacrifices Parker makes to be Spiderman, and the Dilemas of a double life, are well told. X-men just looks like a Cash grab compared to it, IMO.

Those are good points. X-Men i just found to be entertaining. When i watch a movie like that, im not really focused on details, im just having a good time. But you are right about Spiderman. I was going to mention how great that was but i forgot to. Peter Parker was a really interesting character in that movie for sure. They did do an excellent job going in depth with him. Not to mention the movie was just fun as hell to watch.

 

[Finder]

I'm not familiar with the comic either, but I loved the saturday morning catroon. Ya, I was unimpressed. Some of it was the casting, most of it was the fact that, like in the fantastic four, so much time was spend in exposition, setting up the universe, and doing a half-assed job with the characters, that there was very little room for character depth and for the plot. I think Spiderman has succeeded where X-men failed. I really feel like peter parker/ spiderman is an interesting character, and the basic theme of the character, the sacrifices Parker makes to be Spiderman, and the Dilemas of a double life, are well told. X-men just looks like a Cash grab compared to it, IMO.

I'm not too big on comic-book-come-movies, but how is Spiderman not a cash grab? Two installments already, a third on the way and already talk of two more. I mean, come on.

 

[wizekrak]

Aren't all films a cash grab, if they weren't profitable they wouldn't be made.

That said there are very few comic books turned movies that I enjoy. Granted I'm not into comic books but I did enjoy both the X-men franchise as well as Spiderman, and the Hulk (improperly advertised). Although I think Sin City takes the cake in this category.

 

[JerryBlunted]

what i liked in from hell was the cinematography, in that i mean the use of color and the creation of a particular atmosphere

the graphic novel itself is far more deep than the film, but i felt the film conveyed much of the feel of the novel in a more abbreviated format

 

[Daisybabe]

Quote:
Alan Moore, co-creator of the "V For Vendetta" comic, has publicly disassociated himself from the upcoming Warner Brothers movie project based on the comic book and written and produced by the Wachowski Brothers. And as a result, he has cut his remaining ties with DC Comics, including future volumes of the "League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen."

and

Quote:
Alan On The "V For Vendetta" Movie

Alan gave some details about bits of the V For Vendetta shooting script he'd seen. "It was imbecilic; it had plot holes you couldn't have got away with in Whizzer And Chips in the nineteen sixties. Plot holes no one had noticed."

What Moore found most laughable however were the details. "They don't know what British people have for breakfast, they couldn't be bothered. 'Eggy in a basket' apparently. Now the US have 'eggs in a basket,' whish is fried bread with a fried egg in a hole in the middle. I guess they thought we must eat that as well, and thought 'eggy in a basket' was a quaint and Olde Worlde version. And they decided that the British postal service is called Fedco. They'll have thought something like, 'well, what's a British version of FedEx... how about FedCo? A friend of mine had to point out to them that the Fed, in FedEx comes from 'Federal Express.' America is a federal republic, Britain is not."

--------

I'm sorry, but that sounds like sour grapes. It sounds like he didn't get to control every single little itty bitty thing when it came time to make it a movie, and therefore is off in a corner sulking.

I saw this tonight during a free sneak preview, and I can tell you that, "eggs/eggy in a basket" is completely unappetizing whether it's the US or the UK that cooks it! Who cares if they didn't research what British folk eat for breakfast? It was made by Americans, for an American audience, and everyone knows Americans can't be bothered by what's going on past the tips of their noses. And they changed FedCo, it's now like BritEx or BritCo or something as equally inconsequential.

All that really matters is that it is a great movie. Very political, very thinly veiled homophobia and rasicm = Hitler = Chancellor. It's not simply a big bang shoot em up action movie, it actually makes you think and question the propaganda that everyone is fed. Lots of shades of 1984, and also lots of pre-Matrix themes that you could see being developed. I would definitely recommend it.

 

[Infinite Jest]

All that really matters is that it is a great movie. Very political, very thinly veiled homophobia and rasicm = Hitler = Chancellor. It's not simply a big bang shoot em up action movie, it actually makes you think and question the propaganda that everyone is fed. Lots of shades of 1984

Well, that was the whole point of the original comic. If the film didn't have those elements, it wouldn't even qualify as an adaptation - it'd be a film with the same name as a comic

"eggs/eggy in a basket" is completely unappetizing whether it's the US or the UK that cooks it! Who cares if they didn't research what British folk eat for breakfast?

Well, but the UK doesn't cook it. Which is kinda the point. And I think details are important. Because V for Vendetta (the comic) is extraordinarily detailed and subtle. There are allusions to all sorts of things, from Punch and Judy to Thomas Pynchon to Cabaret. The day-to-day details of Evey's life are important, they help drive the story. If you don't get those references right, or you gloss over those details, you don't end up with the same story, and you've lost a lot of the richness that made it such a compelling story in the first place.

 

[human]

Bump. Saw it last night.

I thought it was good until the end, at which point I didn't really like how it deviated from the book. I mean, I can see how Evey taking the role of V wouldn't go so well in a medium where voices can be heard, and I can see how the final scene of the book would be too open ended for a film with no sequel. Lemme rephrase: I can understand (the Wachowski brothers) wanting to close/end the story. The book leaves you wondering about the future of its world, the movie not so much. Oh, and they left out the line "Give me a viking funeral." It was a simple line, and it's one that I remembered from the book just because it explains the situation perfectly. I know I'm nitpicking talking about shit like that, but I dunno it would have been nice to hear.

Hundreds of thousands of Vs storming parliament? Thumbs down. I just thought "Yeah, I get it. Despite his unique history and what he became, V is/represents the everyman." Then as if it's not clear enough, Evey beats it over the head of the audience saying the "He was my father...my mother...my brother..." lines. I dunno, just seemed way too overt for a story about putting the pieces in place.

Another difference from the book and the movie (not that there weren't many, but this one comes to mind) is how Mr. Finch allows things to continue. In the book, he believes he has killed V. When asked where the killing took place, he blames the acid he took for the inability to recall where it was—even though it is made clear to the reader that he remembers it was Victory Station. This behavior from the book is much more passive than his behavior in the movie. When I saw that things were setting up so that he'd run into Evey, it was just weird to me. I mean I knew that she had to pull the lever, and I knew that she had to live. Either she kills him or he lets her continue. I would have been more satisfied with her having to kill him (though I don't know what means she would have used). When he let her continue I was just like WTF?
You see, the difference in film-Finch and book-Finch is that film-Finch starts making connections (with regards to how horrible the government may really be) that book-Finch never does. But on the other hand, he filpped out beacuse he bought the lies that V told him. At that point I didn't know what his beliefs were about the government, and beacuse of his outburst was led to think that he believed that the government was good. So when he lowered his gun in the scene with Evey, I guess that means he thought the government was worth letting go? I dunno that whole aspect of his character just felt awkward throughout.

Overall, I liked it, I thought it preserved the spirit of the book, but didn't care much for the ending.
I'm sure I could ramble on more, but I've said enough for now.

 

[sixpartseven]

^ i think you should put a spoilers warning in that post. the movie came out yesterday, not many people have seen it AT ALL. you ruined it a little for me.

 

[Dtergent]

I saw it last night, and liked it, although I wish Natalie Portman had spent less time crying. Fidelity aside, the Wachowski brothers have redeemed themselves to me.

I'm not a big fan of comic book adaptations. I thought all the Marvel ones were terrible. From Hell was another cheesecake. Hellboy was slightly more bearable. I don't buy it when people say "it's supposed to be like that... it's a comic book adaptation!" whenever a movie sucks. Maybe it's because I'm a girl and action sequences alone don't get me.

 

[DigitalDuality]

^
it's not the gender, action sequences alone are boring, as is CGI, if the plot and character development, along with themes ..both blatant and underlying.. aren't present.

GOing to see this tonight. If i see a kid or cellphone, i'mma kick someone in their skull.

 

[DigitalDuality]

Just saw it tonight... and i went to it without seing a single trailer, never hearing about the comic book, and the only things i read about it beforehand was a couple posts in this thread. . So basically i had no idea what it was about except a goofy masky, the Wachowski bros, and a possible Orwellian theme to it and that it was comic book based (a comic book i've never heard of).

And i must say i'm impressed. It reminded me some of Equilibrium, but alot more romantic and poetic, and the world of course, was much more realist and not so sci-fi. It's definately now probably one of my top 10-20 films.

I can see where political commentary about the film says that it "glorifies terrorism". For terrorism and revolution for freedom, are normally one and the same, perspective depends on what side you're on.

I did like how it was very 1984-ish, but in a very modern context. Even the most political apathetic could easily draw conclusions between the High Chancellor and Bush or Blair in some instances, and horrible tyrrants Hitler/Stalin in others. The head tv commentator to the likes of Pat Robertson, or Bill O'Reilly. It takes the prophetic messages we've seen from literature through out the times, and makes it readily accessible to the masses who for the most part...are too stupid to understand a book, or too lazy to pick one up in the form of an action flick. Much in the same way the Matrix did for alot of breifly skimmed philosophies.

I do see this being a favorite of conspiracy theorists though who will somehow draw metaphorical reference to "bush blowing up the towers". Which will be equally as annoying as the conservative pundits who say it "promotes terrorism".

I did enjoy the fact homosexuality was broached in the story.

I dunno, all i can think of for those who says this film supports terrorism.. must not have been a fan of America's fight for independence and freedom. This was exactly international networks and terror cells funded by illegal trade killing innocent civilians hoping to make a dent. But showing the powers of symbols, the human need for freedom, the actions of all governments and what they eventually evolve to to some degree. There's alot of timeless themes to it..the same timeless themes we see scattered in alot of art work in music and literature.

I was thoroughly impressed and glad this wasn't just another dumb kid comic book turned into a CGI laden action flick. It appealed to both the liberal and libertarian in me and gave me a new found hatred of bad british teeth

 

[Infinite Jest]

DD: you should definitely look up the original. I think you'd like it. The impression that I'm getting is that the book is more extreme (e.g. the govt is blatantly fascist and describes itself as fascist). So it's more about the struggle between totalitarian fascism and anarchism. I've seen a coupla criticisms of the movie that it basically reduces this to 'liberal vs neo-con'.

The other thing is that it hardly glorifies V's violence - there are periods when you think he's basically a psychopath; by contrast, Finch is a sympathetic character, even though he's on the wrong side.

But anyway, you're convincing me to see the film. I think you should definitely check out the book

 

[miss starry]

I saw this yesterday, and I thought it was a great film. I have to admit I've never read the book and hadn't heard much about the plotline before going to see it. I like Natalie Portman and my husband had wanted to see the movie, and there wasn't much else to do on a Saturday afternoon .

I've found that 99% of the time if I read a book first and then see the movie, I am disappointed with the movie. I prefer reading the book after seeing the movie, so that I can enjoy the extra details and storyline that were omitted from the film. So....I will probably want to read this book now.

I usually don't go for comic-book adaptation films, and I was kinda worried that I would be totally bored. I was not bored at all; the movie kept me so interested I didn't even get up to go to the bathroom (and pregnant women usually have to go like every 30 minutes ) I thought the 1984-esque theme could have easily been done in a cliche'd and contrived manner, but it wasn't. The focus was more on the individual characters and how they developed into who they were. I also really enjoyed how the pieces of the story describing how V came to exist slowly fell together throughout the entire movie. I would definitely recommend this movie; it exceeded my expectations and I enjoyed it.

 

[Banquo]

P for Poll Added %)

 

[DigitalDuality]

Simon: book was ordered before you posted

 

[DigitalDuality]

oh and... I happen to agree a bit with Allan Moore's take on the adaptation. I haven't read the book but i can see where he's coming from. Here's a pretty good interview with him over the matter:
http://www.mtv.com/shared/movies/interviews/m/moore_alan_060315/

 

[Dtergent]

It reminded me some of Equilibrium

Yes me too

 

[Manic Star]

Fantastic film. I got into the comics before it came out and felt that while it wasn't an entirely faithful adaptation, this is by no means a negative thing as some things had to be changed for it to work well as a film. I felt that the balance of political issues, character interactions and all-out action was handled better than in a large proportion of films, and it was a challenging and enjoyable watch. Voted 5*

 

[sixpartseven]

finally saw it. id give it 10 stars if i could.

I actually saw it a few days ago but didnt really have time to post what i thought about it. Ive never read the graphic novel so i have no idea how accurate it was to that, but despite not knowing that, there wasnt one thing i didnt like about this film. Its the first film ive ever sat through the whole time and not at anypoint feel like i wasnt interested. I couldnt look away.

A few weeks ago i saw the movie 1984 for the first time. I noticed quite a few similiarities to it, such as how in 1984, Big Brother was only ever seen on the TV screens, and in V that chancellor was also only seen on the screens (except for the end). Also, the way they went back and changed the news stories was another thing they had in common.

Ive read articles and interviews of people saying when you walk out of this movie, its hard not to think about the things going on today. I thought that was BS, because i figured id be able to watch it just as a piece of entertainment. I was wrong. There were a lot of allusions towards current events, such as the wiretapping thing going on with Bush; in the movies those vans would drive around the streets with the radar type things on top of them, listening to peoples conversations in their houses. basically wiretapping their conversations, even if they werent on the phone. Also how they kept reffering to the US as "the former United States" and reffering to the war in Iraq and how it spread throughout Europe eventually.

Besides all the ideas and subtle messages ("we should not fear our governement. the government should fear the people") the visuals and sound of the movie were fun-fucking-tastic. In the scene where V kills all the people before they can even reload their guns was amazing with the sound effects of the knives swirling in his hand, and the pseudo-bullet time visuals. Stunning.

Overall, best film ive seen in a looooooong time. Could possibly be my new favorite.