Remember, remember the 5th of November

[Mr March]

While Darren Aronofsky was attached to the Watchmen project, there was a very good chance that he understood the source material well enough to make a proper, unconventional film. That was just the sort of director a project like Watchmen called for. Sadly, he's now out.

Currently, Paul Greengrass is attached to the project. While the Bourne Supremacy was a fun film, it's not exactly deep. One bright spot is the fact Greengrass did Bloody Sunday, which was a very good film and very deep in character and ideology. Sadly, I feel Greengrass will exit as well eventually and Watchmen will befall the same fate as the faltering X-Men franchise.

[bsu legato]

So can somebody give me the TV Guide summary of V For Vendetta? From the trailer, it looks like its about some guy (?) in a mask fighting against your typical fascist police state. Am I close?

[Duke Togo]

So can somebody give me the TV Guide summary of V For Vendetta? From the trailer, it looks like its about some guy (?) in a mask fighting against your typical fascist police state. Am I close?

316850[/snapback]

Ayup.

[Mr March]

Yeah, what Duke said. But keep in mind, this is a film version. I haven't read V for Vendetta, but I know enough to be a little surprised by the fighting-focused trailer that was released. Makes the story appear more like a summer box office action flick than what V for Vendetta is actually about.

[Guest Bromgrev]

All the scenes in the trailer look like scenes from the comic. However, most of the comic consists of complex, tense lead-ups to those few action scenes, which make them all the more shocking when they happen. I hope this is just typical trailer editing, and all the atmosphere and tension haven't gone out the window.

[areaseven]

March 17, 2006 is the new release date.

http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/

[Ladic]

TIME Magazine Review:

From the Magazine | Arts

Can A Popcorn Movie Also Be Political? This One Can

By RICHARD CORLISS

SUBSCRIBE TO TIMEPRINTE-MAILMORE BY AUTHOR

Posted Sunday, Mar. 05, 2006

The first thing a film critic (this one, anyway) should say of V for Vendetta is that it's a terrific movie. I love the look and the verve of the thing, the confidence of its epic design, its smart use of half a dozen noted British thesps, lending weight and wit to the supporting roles. Hugo Weaving gives the finest no-face performance since Eric Stoltz in Mask, and Natalie Portman, always an eye magnet, does her sharpest film work yet. In her sobbing scenes, when her will must be broken, then forged anew, she comes darn close to acting.

Which is to say, Vendetta is up there with the Wachowski brothers' first Matrix film, which anybody could see had more on its agenda than aerobatic martial arts. The brothers, who wrote the Vendetta script that James McTeigue spiffily directed, are back in top form--not larding political meaning on an action plot but finding a seamless blending of the two. Whether you're mindless or Mensa, you'll find stuff here to challenge and trouble you, the way a good piece of speculative fiction should.

The second thing: yes, it is weird that the original 1980s comic book, an updating of the Guy Fawkes tale ("Remember, remember, the 5th of November"), should so eerily foretell the 2001 bombing of another famous building (Remember, remember, the 11th of September). It's more audacious still that the Wachowskis, rather than scrubbing their script clean of 9/11 references, would emphasize the connection, proposing a dapper quasi-hero who is part Zorro (with the fancy swordplay), part Phantom of the Opera (but with a jukebox in his underground lair instead of a pipe organ) and just a smidge of Osama bin Laden (but with tastes more aesthetic than ascetic).

That a government should literally poison its citizens, and that a terrorist should be considered a hero, is a pretty nervy premise for a mainstream film. But that's dystopic fiction for you. (In his novel Winter Kills, Richard Condon posited that the brains behind the J.F.K. assassination was--Joe Kennedy!) These days, with many millions around the world seeing every evil in Bush and Cheney, a film like Vendetta is, at least, timely. And if the villains are the big guys, the hero can be a terrorist--or should we call V an insurgent?

That is surely an apt subject for a movie--even, and especially, a popcorn movie. If a cheapo '50s fantasy called Invasion of the Body Snatchers could also be a rich parable of conformist paranoia, and if The Matrix could clue kids into mathematics and philosophy, then a film as bold and thoughtful as V for Vendetta is allowed to stoke a multiplex debate on the use and abuse of state power. The best works of popular art get to play by their own rules.

From the Mar. 13, 2006 issue of TIME magazine

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1169916,00.html

[Apollo Leader]

'V' for very careful

It is funny how Hollywood won't touch real places of tearany (sic), fear, and death like Saddam Hussein era Iraq, Iran, Kim Jong Il's North Korea, Fidel Castro's Cuba, the Soviet Union (especially Joseph Stalin who was as bad if not worse then Adolf Hitler), Islamo facism, etc., but of course it's the good ol' USA (in the case of this movie, Great Britain) and George W. Bush that get thrown under the bus. If the movie had come out some other time, I would probably be a lot more interested in seeing it, but clearly there is an agenda in it being produced and shown now.

I believe it was Christ that said, "...cursed are those who call evil good, and good evil."... I've noticed Hollywood's ticket sales have been down the last few years.

Anyway, not going to see this steaming pile of poo. Larry Washowski will have to get the money for his sex change operation elsewhere.

[Mr March]

I'm glad to hear the movie isn't as action filled as the trailers lead one to believe, since I just finished reading the action-light graphic novel.

As for the politics surrounding the release, there could be no better time than to produce a film like this. Especially in such a pro-censorship environment as the west and britian currently suffer, this film should speak loudly as a sign of the times. Would have been such a strong statement if the House of Lords actually blocked a movie whose subject matter is about oppressive policies. Kudos to them for growing up.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

'V' for very careful

It is funny how Hollywood won't touch real places of tearany (sic), fear, and death like Saddam Hussein era Iraq, Iran, Kim Jong Il's North Korea, Fidel Castro's Cuba, the Soviet Union (especially Joseph Stalin who was as bad if not worse then Adolf Hitler), Islamo facism, etc., but of course it's the good ol' USA (in the case of this movie, Great Britain) and George W. Bush that get thrown under the bus.  If the movie had come out some other time, I would probably be a lot more interested in seeing it, but clearly there is an agenda in it being produced and shown now.

I believe it was Christ that said, "...cursed are those who call evil good, and good evil."... I've noticed Hollywood's ticket sales have been down the last few years.

Anyway, not going to see this steaming pile of poo.  Larry Washowski will have to get the money for his sex change operation elsewhere.

378163[/snapback]

The original story was concieved in 1983 and and was against the thatcher parliament. The story in the movie was changed to reflect today's political climate. This is my main beef with the film. I HATE how hollywood tries to change good stories just to make them relevant to present time. Its like adding an F-22 into the pearl harbor movie, is just something that SHOULDNT be done.

[Apollo Leader]

I'm glad to hear the movie isn't as action filled as the trailers lead one to believe, since I just finished reading the action-light graphic novel.

As for the politics surrounding the release, there could be no better time than to produce a film like this.  Especially in such a pro-censorship environment as the west and britian currently suffer, this film should speak loudly as a sign of the times.  Would have been such a strong statement if the House of Lords actually blocked a movie whose subject matter is about oppressive policies.  Kudos to them for growing up.

378172[/snapback]

If you want to talk about REAL censorship, move to North Korea, China (Google is gladly helping the Communist Chinese government) crack down on people they don't like [pro-democracy supporters, Christians, etc.], but Google won't help the US government go after pedophiles and terrorists), and pretty much the entire Middle East.

For all the bitching, moaning, and lies being spouted out by the likes of George Clooney, Michael Moore, and now the Wachowski's, if the US and West have become such a dark, "facist", "police state" place, why do these guys have no problems getting their movies and messages out and making fools of themselves if this is indeed the case? It is wise to remain vigilant and make sure that the tools that we are using to fight the bad guys of today aren't used and misused in the future on our own population, but what these guys in Hollywood and the far Left are doing by the way they are always throwing George Bush, our troops, and our country under the bus all the time and giving moral support and comfort for the enemy solely for the purpose of political gain is just down right wrong and evil.

...and again, Larry Wachowski will have to fund his sex change operation with someone else's money.

[Apollo Leader]

The second thing: yes, it is weird that the original 1980s comic book, an updating of the Guy Fawkes tale ("Remember, remember, the 5th of November"), should so eerily foretell the 2001 bombing of another famous building (Remember, remember, the 11th of September). It's more audacious still that the Wachowskis, rather than scrubbing their script clean of 9/11 references, would emphasize the connection, proposing a dapper quasi-hero who is part Zorro (with the fancy swordplay), part Phantom of the Opera (but with a jukebox in his underground lair instead of a pipe organ) and just a smidge of Osama bin Laden (but with tastes more aesthetic than ascetic).

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1169916,00.html

378151[/snapback]

Just read that article again... the guy writing this piece for Time is an idiot and just doesn't get that he is making apple and oranges comparisons.

In the case of what happened September 11th, 2001 here on US soil was an act of TERRORISM committed by FOREIGNERS motivated by HATE of this country and of its people -

1) The attack on 9/11/01 was aimed at not only hurting the government of the US but at hurting all of its people. Besides attempting to assassinate George Bush (either with plane#4 or with the one that ended up hitting the Pentagon was thought to have been going after the White House) and hitting various government buildings in Washington DC, the buildings that make up the World Trade Center were aimed at and attacked... this was done for the impact of killing a whole bunch of people, taking down two of America's largest buildings (status symbols), spreading fear throughout the land, hurting the US and others economies. Besides the direct death and devastation that occurred that day, during the next few months and years ahead, how many jobs were loss, how many businesses ruined, and how many "freedoms were lost" (either potentially lost or "just made up" losses) because what happened?

2) Not only do you have the death and destruction on the ground, but you also have the fact that these guys that commited the act, took CIVILIAN commercial airliners loaded with innocent CIVILIANS and flew them in a SUICIDE attack on all these buildings. Again, this wasn't aimed just aimed at a government or a few government heads, this whole attack was aimed at the United States and all its people by a group of hateful fanatics from a foreign land.

[Twoducks]

I'm glad to hear the movie isn't as action filled as the trailers lead one to believe, since I just finished reading the action-light graphic novel.

As for the politics surrounding the release, there could be no better time than to produce a film like this.  Especially in such a pro-censorship environment as the west and britian currently suffer, this film should speak loudly as a sign of the times.  Would have been such a strong statement if the House of Lords actually blocked a movie whose subject matter is about oppressive policies.  Kudos to them for growing up.

378172[/snapback]

If you want to talk about REAL censorship, move to North Korea, China (Google is gladly helping the Communist Chinese government) crack down on people they don't like [pro-democracy supporters, Christians, etc.], but Google won't help the US government go after pedophiles and terrorists), and pretty much the entire Middle East.

For all the bitching, moaning, and lies being spouted out by the likes of George Clooney, Michael Moore, and now the Wachowski's, if the US and West have become such a dark, "facist", "police state" place, why do these guys have no problems getting their movies and messages out and making fools of themselves if this is indeed the case? It is wise to remain vigilant and make sure that the tools that we are using to fight the bad guys of today aren't used and misused in the future on our own population, but what these guys in Hollywood and the far Left are doing by the way they are always throwing George Bush, our troops, and our country under the bus all the time and giving moral support and comfort for the enemy solely for the purpose of political gain is just down right wrong and evil.

...and again, Larry Wachowski will have to fund his sex change operation with someone else's money.

378669[/snapback]

We are talking about a movie based around a comic that criticized a right wing democratic government of the time it was written in. Today the most representative right wing democratic country, like it or not, is the US. If they intent to make a movie for the general public (who mostly don't even know what a Margaret Thatcher is), the idea of using the current political situation is the most business wise and true to the original work.

If you feel offended by this, I recommend you read or re-read the original V for Vendetta, you won't see any direct reference to the United States, Bush or whatever regarding the current situation of things that could upset you (criticism regarding the abuse of power and the danger of cutting down liberties, among other things, will still be there tough).

Now, if we want to discuss about Hollywood’s political tendencies or how the US is portrayed, this is not the place. We will only see this thread closed if we do this. So lets stick to the usual “this movie raped my childhood†rants because this movie is veeeery politically charged .

Edited March 9, 2006 by Twoducks

[Mr March]

If you want to talk about REAL censorship, move to North Korea, China (Google is gladly helping the Communist Chinese government) crack down on people they don't like [pro-democracy supporters, Christians, etc.], but Google won't help the US government go after pedophiles and terrorists), and pretty much the entire Middle East.

For all the bitching, moaning, and lies being spouted out by the likes of George Clooney, Michael Moore, and now the Wachowski's, if the US and West have become such a dark, "facist", "police state" place, why do these guys have no problems getting their movies and messages out and making fools of themselves if this is indeed the case?  It is wise to remain vigilant and make sure that the tools that we are using to fight the bad guys of today aren't used and misused in the future on our own population, but what these guys in Hollywood and the far Left are doing by the way they are always throwing George Bush, our troops, and our country under the bus all the time and giving moral support and comfort for the enemy solely for the purpose of political gain is just down right wrong and evil.

...and again, Larry Wachowski will have to fund his sex change operation with someone else's money.

378669[/snapback]

Don't loose your venom and hatred on me Apollo Leader. I'd appreciate this topic remain open (ie. light on the banned topics like politics).

[Guest Bromgrev]

An Alan Moore interview was aired on UK TV yesterday. Predictably, he referred to the movie as "the latest thing Hollywood has inflicted upon me". The interesting points, though, were the rarity of the event (I don't recall moore ever appearing on TV) as well as the fact that the establishment sems to be recognising the genius that is Alan Moore and the fact that 'comics' can be a serious art form. The interview was shown on the Culture Show on BBC2 (can't get more establishment than that), right next to a piece about Michelangelo.

Mind you, he still looks a right weirdo.

And, yes, please keep real-world politics out of this thread. Trust me, you do not want to know my political views, and I certainly do not want to hear anyone else's. Let's stay on topic so this thread doesn't get locked before we all have a chance to whine about the movie when we've actually see it.

[myk]

This movie sucks! Oh wait, I thought this was the Ultraviolet thread...

[Southpaw Samurai]

Its like adding an F-22 into the pearl harbor movie, is just something that SHOULDNT be done.

378225[/snapback]

There goes my 'Final Countdown' remake screenplay....

I think anyone taking extreme offense at this movie may need to sit down and consider WHY they are...perhaps it hits too close to the truth. On the other hand, if the W.Bros added very current-era specific stuff, then that's a big shame and a disappointment. While the original was done as a sort of a protest to the Thatcher-era British government, it was somewhat vague enough that it becomes more timeless and more of a story about how far a government (in the particular case, a right-wing one...although history has shown any political ideology can run amok) could go. It really should never be specific.

[Mr March]

An Alan Moore interview was aired on UK TV yesterday. Predictably, he referred to the movie as "the latest thing Hollywood has inflicted upon me". The interesting points, though, were the rarity of the event (I don't recall moore ever appearing on TV) as well as the fact that the establishment sems to be recognising the genius that is Alan Moore and the fact that 'comics' can be a serious art form. The interview was shown on the Culture Show on BBC2 (can't get more establishment than that), right next to a piece about Michelangelo.

378875[/snapback]

As much as I admire Alan Moore and his work, he would demand a panel-per-panel film adaptation of V For Vendetta akin to Sin City (even that book was abridged for film). Problem is, the Sin City graphic novel is short, the V For Vendetta graphic novel is lengthy. It would take a 5-6 hour film (or trilogy) to cover most of V For Vendetta. I love V For Vendetta, but I can tell you as a politically charged piece, it definitely doesn't enjoy universal appeal like Star Wars and Lord of The Rings, nor does it benefit from a pre-established film-fan base spawned from the first Matrix film. David Lloyd has confirmed Moore's thoughts and given his own contrary opinion about book-to-film adaptations (he claims the V For Vendetta film has a very good script).

Moore has every right to be critical of Hollywood. Several of Moore's books were made into very poor films. But IMO, I think Moore is just too upset and jaded to objectively criticize any further adaptations, unless they were filmed panel-to-shot. Ultimately, I suppose I'll have to see the film first to know for certain whether Moore is right nor not

[Guest Bromgrev]

... IMO, I think Moore is just too upset and jaded ...

379004[/snapback]

Well, he has lived in Northampton all his life ...

[Mr March]

... IMO, I think Moore is just too upset and jaded ...

379004[/snapback]

Well, he has lived in Northampton all his life ...

379245[/snapback]

Hehehe

Edited March 11, 2006 by Mr March

[Apollo Leader]

Don't loose your venom and hatred on me Apollo Leader.  I'd appreciate this topic remain open (ie. light on the banned topics like politics).

378703[/snapback]

What are you talking about? I brought up some food for thought for you to consider. I didn't launch into any personal attacks directly on yourself though I may have some ideological differences with you. Sorry that you took it that way.

And since this movie is loaded with political commentary, it's sort of hard to avoid the subject matter isn't it?

Anway, where's AgentONE been these days? He'd have a load of fun with this topic.

Edited March 12, 2006 by Apollo Leader

[Apollo Leader]

On a light hearted note, has anyone come up with any parodies of this movie? I have a few.

"V" for Vishnu - starring Apu from the Simpsons as a Hindu vigilante! (sorry if I misspelled "Vishnu")

"V" for Venison - one of Santa Claus' reindeers becomes a vigilante super hero and stands up to the "man" (in this case, Santa).

[Mr March]

Don't loose your venom and hatred on me Apollo Leader.  I'd appreciate this topic remain open (ie. light on the banned topics like politics).

378703[/snapback]

What are you talking about? I brought up some food for thought for you to consider. I didn't launch into any personal attacks directly on yourself though I may have some ideological differences with you. Sorry that you took it that way.

And since this movie is loaded with political commentary, it's sort of hard to avoid the subject matter isn't it?

Anway, where's AgentONE been these days? He'd have a load of fun with this topic.

379397[/snapback]

So telling me to move to North Korea or China was just the equivalent of flowers? Diving into an anti-Hollywood liberal rant wasn't baggage flung at me but admiration? Telling me "real censorship" doesn't exist in the U.S. was just a way of saying "I love you Mr. March?"

Wow, I gotta work on my net lingo

Agreed the film is politically charged, but we have to keep it light as per MacrossWorld rules. That was going for the jugular in my opinion.

[azrael]

If you 2 keep this up, I will end this thread. Take the talk about current politics to PM or some other medium, just not here. Got it? If you must bring up politics (which unfortunately this movie throws in...) refer it within the context of the film.

[Isamu Atreides 86]

I am really looking forward to this movie. I love Alan Moore's work (If you haven't read Top Ten: the 49's, you really should), and even if it isn't 100% faithful, it should still be moderately entertaining.

They need to do a new Swamp Thing movie based on Alan's stories.

By the way, reading V for Vendetta in a modern context is like reading Animal Farm and 1984 and saying that George Orwell was a liberal hollywood type.

[Smiley424]

Just read the book, it was very well done, I enjoyed it. Will be going to see this opening day.

[Macross73]

my brother has my copy of the book & i really wanna re-read it. going to have to wait until i can get a hold of him.

I might see this i might not.

I dont care what the main stream reviews are.

I only care if the movie stays true to the source.

V was a good book that i enjoyed and still do.

I can only hope that it works on the screen.

[Hoptimus]

I get to see this tonight. I havent read the comic for over 5 years but I am really looking forward to this.

[Mr March]

I get to see this tonight. I havent read the comic for over 5 years but I am really looking forward to this.

379900[/snapback]

Aaarrrggghhh! How the heck did you get passes?

*so jealous*

[Mislovrit]

By the way, reading V for Vendetta in a modern context is like reading Animal Farm and 1984 and saying that George Orwell was a liberal hollywood type.

Reading those books in a modern context written by George Orwell will still show how bad communism is. Edited March 14, 2006 by Mislovrit

[Mislovrit]

The original story was concieved in 1983 and and was against the thatcher parliament.  The story in the movie was changed to reflect today's political climate. This is my main beef with the film. I HATE how hollywood tries to change good stories just to make them relevant to present time. Its like adding an F-22 into the pearl harbor movie, is just something that SHOULDNT be done.

378225[/snapback]

Oddly enough people think that is perfectly fine for Macross in the "Anybody Thinks That Sk Needs To Redesign The Vf-1?" thread. Edited March 14, 2006 by Mislovrit

[Isamu Atreides 86]

By the way, reading V for Vendetta in a modern context is like reading Animal Farm and 1984 and saying that George Orwell was a liberal hollywood type.

Reading those books in a modern context written by George Orwell will still show how bad communism is.

380045[/snapback]

Absolutely.

[KingNor]

"Alan Moore, the author of the much admired graphic novel "V for Vendetta," disassociated himself from this production and had his name removed from the credits. This should make his fan base extra wary, especially since two critically panned pics ("From Hell," "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen") have already been hatched from options sold on Moore's work."

-Link

Oh dear...

[myk]

I just wanna' see the part where the secret police or whatever are beating the tar out of that girl...

[Hoptimus]

Like I said earlier it has been a good 8 years since I read the book. I enjoyed the movie. I noticed some changes and omissions but overall it was great. It kept me entirley intrigued and was shot very well. Portman and Weaving were great. Hurt was great. Overall it gets an A from me.

I think Alan Moore is being too harsh. I know he has principles but giving all the credit in the film to the artist is just strange.