“V for Vendetta” is going to confuse a lot of people. Nevertheless, and fabricate no mistake about it, this is movie making of the highest order, combining all the finest elements of large storytelling into a potent roller coaster of a movie filled with gigantic action,intellect and above all, ideas. Its message can - and will - easily be dismissed by naysayers as sophomoric or too “out there,” or “anti-american” but there is also an earnestness here that will resonate strongly, and perhaps, frighteningly, to many viewers who will not fail to ogle the correlation between this fictional chronicle and the plot the world we live in works.
Buy,Download, Or Stream V for Vendetta! Click Here
Filled with stereotypes and archetypes, “V” is unapologetic in its essaying of morality and in its strongly held sentiment that this record is “for the people, by the people.” Brothers and writers Larry and Andy Wachowski (of Matrix fame) have infused their screenplay with the inflame, confusion and hope captured in Alan Moore’s fresh graphic modern - and it’s better looking as a result.
I truly gain that many who gape “V” will be upset by it, but hopefully more of us will be inspired by its valiant, blatant message and steal a pleasurable hard examine at ourselves and the intention the world works around us and seek that, with sacrifice and thoughtfulness, the world can be changed.
Buy,Download, Or Stream V for Vendetta! Click Here
As Evey, Natalie Portman is cast in something of the “victim” role, but she makes us route for her, and to her credit she goes beyond that making the transformation of her character not only believable, but in the slay, advantageous.
Hugo Weaving - the man leisurely the shroud - gives a performance that can only be described as mesmerizing. As “V” he exposes all of the strength and weakness of a character that is equal parts savior and villain.
The physical production is fair in its realism as it paints a nightmarish world of the not-very-distant future (2020) and is chilling in its depiction of governmental power, socio-political corruption and, ultimately, the complacency of its citizens. Weaving’s “V” challenges, and ultimately changes all of that, as he expeditiously unravels the fabric of civilized society, capturing the public with his gallant ideas - and with the promise and permanancy of change through rebellion and political uprising.
Most chillingly, the film invokes the anxiety once feared in “1984″ but with a renewed vigor that drives home the horrors Orwell foresaw, and composed loom tall in our comfy recent world. Chilling? You betcha! For those who know the original, there is microscopic skimping, and, given the fresh world spot, one must absolutely applaud the filmmakers for “going there” as far as the ending is concerned. This is film making at its emotional and captivating best.
Are there flaws? Of course there are, but ultimately “V for Vendetta” rises far above them in its presentation of a world filled with ideas that have forever been debated, and does it in a tale well told, beautifully acted and stout of hope for humankind. Not unpleasant work for a movie. Actually, it’s ravishing.
Alan Moore’s decision to want his name off the final credits for the film adaptation of V for Vendetta now makes sense. Moore has had a hate/hate relationship with Hollywood and the film industry in general. They’ve taken two of his other works in The League of Fabulous Gentlemen and From Hell and bollocks’d them up (to borrow a term weak quite abit in V for Vendetta) . Outside of Watchmen, Alan Moore sees V for Vendetta as one of his more personal works and after reading the screenplay adaptation of the graphic current by The Wachowski Brothers his decision afterwards was to examine his name be removed from the film if it was ever made. Piece of this was his hatred of the film industry for their past mistakes and another being his wish for a perfect adaptation or none at all. Well, V for Vendetta by James McTeigue and The Wachowski Brothers is not a perfect film adaptation. What it turns out to be is a film that stays correct to the spirit of Moore’s graphic recent and given a unusual, up-to-the-current news retelling of the world’s residence of affairs.
V for Vendetta starts off with abit of a prologue to clarify the relevance of the Guy Fawkes hide primitive by V throughout the film and the significance of the date of the 5th of November. I deem this change in the epic from the source material may be for the attend of audiences who didn’t grow up in the UK and have no conception of who Guy Fawkes was and what his Gunpowder Space was all about. The sequence is short but informative. From then on we go on to the commence of the main fable and here the film adheres halt enough to the source material with a few changes to the Evey character (played with skill that more than makes up for her Amidala performances) but not enough to raze the character. Caught after curfew and accosted by the ruling government’s secret police called Fingermen, Evey soon encounters V who saves her not fair from imprisonment but rape.
Right from the begin the one thing McTeigue and The Wachowski Brothers got dead-on was casting Hugo Weaving as the title character. Verbalize silky, velvety and sonorous, Weaving infuses V with an otherworldly, theatrical personality. Whether V was speaking phrases from Shakespeare, philosophers or pop culture icons, the bid gave a character who doesn’t reveal his face from leisurely the enternally-smiling Guy Fawkes veil loyal life. I’d forgiven the makers of this films for some of the changes they made to the fable and some of the characters for keeping V as terminate to how Moore wrote him. Once V and Evey are thrown in together by the happenstance of that nightly encounter their fates became intertwined. Portman plays the reluctant explore to V’s acts of terrorism, murders and destruction in the beginning, but a poignant and emotionally noteworthy sequence to initiate the second half of the film soon brings Evey’s character not powerful towards V’s blueprint of doing things, but to opinion unprejudiced why he’s doing them. This sequence became the emotional punch of the whole film and is literally lifted word for word from the graphic fresh. I heard more than impartial a few people sobbing in the theater as the scenes and chronicle unfolded.
The rest of the cast seemed like a who’s who of the British acting community. From Stephen Rea’s stubborn and dogged Chief Inspector Finch whose quest to catch V leads him to finding clues about his government’s past actions that he’d rather have not found. Then there’s Stephen Fry’s flamboyant TV demonstrate host who becomes Evey’s only other ally whose secret longings have been forbidden by the government, but who’s awakened by V’s actions to go through with his acquire fabricate of rebellion. Then there’s John Injure as High Chancellor Adam Sutler who’s seen chewing up the scenery with his Hitler-like performance through Colossal Brother video conferences (an ironic bit of casting since John Afflict also played Winston Smith in the film adaptation of the Orwell classic 1984) . I really couldn’t gather any of the supporting players as having done a awful job in their performances. Even Hurt’s Sutler may seemed over-the-top to some but his performance unbiased showed how grand of a hatemonger Sutler and in the ruin his Norsefire party really were in order to cease in power.
The yarn itself, as I mentioned earlier, had had some changes made to it. Some of these changes angered Moore and probably exasperate his more die-hard fans. I count myself as one of these die-hards, but I know how film adaptations of classic literary works must and need to desirable some of the chunky from the main body and theme of the chronicle to fully translate onto the silver hide. The Wachowski Brother’s screenplay did honest that. They trimmed some of the side stories and tertiary characters from the sage and concentrated on V, Evey and Inspector Finch’s pursuit of both and the truth. This adaptation is considerable closer to how Peter Jackson adapted The Lord of the Rings. As a fan of Moore I understood why he was sorrowful with the changes. But then Moore is also an avowed perfectionist and only a perfect adaptation would do.
Already critics on both sides of the aisle have called V for Vendetta revolutionary, subversive, audacious to irresponsible, propagandist. All because the film dares to ask serious questions about the nature and role of violence as a obtain of dissent. But the granddaddy quiz the film brings up that has people talking is the question: terrorist or freedom fighter? Is V one or the other or is he both? Obtain no mistake about it, V for all intents and purposes is a terrorist if one was to consume the definition of what a terrorist is. The makers of this film goes to large lenghts to portray throughout the film objective how Sutler and his Norsefire (with its iconic Nazi-like symbols and fundamentaist Christian thinking) party rose to power in the UK. Partly due to what seemed like the failed US foreign policy and its subsequent and destructive decline as a superpower and the worldwide scare and fright it began as a result. V for Vendetta also ask objective who was to blame for allowing such individuals to rule over them. V has his reasons for killing these powers-that-be, but he also points out that people really should honest glimpse in the mirror if they need to know who really was to blame. For it was the population — whose desire to remain profitable and have a semblance of peace — gave up more and more of their basic liberties and rights for a return to order. If one was to glimpse at the past 100 years they would peer that it’s happened before. There was the regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia, Milosevic’s Greater Serbia, and the king of the hill of them all being Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Inner Circle.
Another thing about V for Vendetta that will surely talked about alot will be the images frail in the film. Not objective images and symbols looking so distinguished like Nazi icons, but images from the original events sweeping the globe that has been shown time and time again in the news and written about in magazines and newspapers. The film shows people breeze and hooded like prisoners from Abu Ghraib. The reason of the war on dismay ragged time and time again by Sutler to interpret why England and its people need him and his group to protect them by any means valuable. V for Vendetta seems like a timely film for our original times. Even with the conclusion of the film finally accomplishing what Guy Fawkes failed to do that night of November 5th some 400 plus years ago, V for Vendetta doesn’t give all the answers to all the questions it raises. For some I’m obvious this would be something that’ll frustrate them. So distinguished of people who go to see thought-provoking films want their questions answered as clearly as possible and all of them. V for Vendetta doesn’t acknowledge them but gives the audience enough information to try and work it out themselves.
In final analysis, V for Vendetta accomplishes in bringing the main themes of Alan Moore’s graphic fresh to life and even does it well despite some of the changes made. It is a film that is clear to polarize the low left and moral of the political pundits and commentators. But as a portion of thought-provoking and even as a politically subversive film, V for Vendetta does it job well. It is not a perfect film by any respect, but the myth and message it tries to swear in addition to its value as a allotment of entertainment mor than makes up for its flaws. V for Vendetta more than continues the unusual cleave of seriously done funny book fillm adaptations (Batman Begins, X2, Sin City, and A History of Violence) but it also shows that Alan Moore’s work can be adapted well to the cloak when given to the good people. It may not be perfect and it may not create Alan Moore satisfied, but it comes discontinuance and more than makes up for LXG and From Hell.
