Click A Poster To Purchase
Review #79 of 365
Film: V for Vendetta: The Imax® Experience [R] 132 minutes
WIP: 1st ($13.50) + 2nd (14.00) = $13.75
When 2nd Seen: 30 March 2006
Where Viewed: Cinemark Imax® Theatre at Tinseltown USA, Rochester, NY
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Review Dedicated to: Matt S. #27 of Grand Forks, ND via Minneapolis, MN
 |  |
DVD | soundtrack |
Tonight I decided to see V for Vendetta a second time, but this time on the Cinemark Imax® screen. First, let me say that if you have not seen an action movie on an Imax® screen you don’t know what you are missing. The first time I ever saw a regular movie on an Imax® screen was back when I was in grad school in NYC. The film was Contact starring Jodie Foster. This is a movie that is radially changed for the better on an amazing sound system. Well, it is pretty difficult to compete with the Imax® theatre sound system—one need only attend the pre-show demonstration to appreciate the power on hand, but it’s nearly unnecessary because even a person with less than sophisticated hearing like myself can tell a huge difference between the two. Well, V for Vendetta is playing on Imax® screens around the nation, and I thought it would be a great film to test out and see if the technology is still primo for big action movies. Score! V for Vendetta was amazing on the Imax® screen. The sounds were unreal. With this technology you can literally feel the explosions in your bones. Needless to say, I endorse the Imax® experience for traditional documentaries and the non-traditional major motion pictures as well.
As for the film itself…well, the second time around it was even better than the first. I was able to look for clues and understand the foreshadowing and the historical components so much better. I thought that Natalie Portman (Evey Hammond) and Hugo Weaving (V) did even better jobs this time around. There are so, so many layers to the character of V that it is a challenge to unpeel and absorb them the first time through. It is also easier to see how truly terrifying and Hitleresque John Hurt is as the High Chancellor of England. None of my original feelings about the film have changed. I have only concluded I liked it even better than before. Therefore, I’d like to take the rest of your time here and address some concerns that have been popping up in other critiques of the film and on some radio and tv talkshows regarding the film.
1) Some people have expressed disdain for the film citing that it attacks the current government of the USA. I find this ironic given that it is based on a graphic novel that was written on the order of 11 years ago by a writer that wanted to point out some flaws in the British government. Are there attacks directed specifically at the current USA government? If there are it must be a case of seeing what people want to see. Which is either a good or a bad thing depending on perspective. One thing this film is not is anti-war.
2) Some people have claimed that V is not a super hero, he is a t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-t. I shudder to even write that word because I hate to think people might type it into Google® and get my review which I don’t want to have happen. I’ll just use the “t-word” hence forward. Technically, he is no less a superhero than Robin Hood or Batman in that his aim it to fight a corrupt government that killed 100,000 of its own citizens and did biological DNA experiments on a bunch of its citizens in the attempt to find a virus that would kill a bunch of people quickly. Did he utilize t-word tactics to accomplish this? I would say that is in the eyes of the beholder. From a corrupt government’s point of view I am sure he did, but from a dedicated citizen’s point of view no.
3) But isn’t that waffling on the t-word a bit? Well, I just listened to an interview the other day with the brand new Israeli Foreign Affairs minister, Tzipi Livni, whom many speculate will be the prime minister of Israel within 10 years. One of the things that struck me was that she has a very clear definition of a t-word. She says that to be a t-word, you have to commit attacks that wound civilians, period. So, as we have no knowledge of any civilians being harmed in any of the major attacks committed by V, I would have to argue that V is not a t-word. I would follow this with the notion that for someone to be a t-word, he/she must cause t-e-r-r-o-r in the minds and hearts of those who could fall victim. V seems to go to great lengths to ensure that no one is ever hurt by his attacks, so innocent people could never fall victim to his plots.
4) Some people have suggested the film is anti-government and promotes anarchy. Again, I would totally disagree. The film is not anti-government it is anti-the-government that exists in the film. Anyone who says this cannot have seen the same movie I saw (twice now). The government in the movie uses fear and hatred to lull society into a false sense of security. The government in the film, I need not remind you, is responsible for committing horrible acts against its own citizens. This is a government that needs to be overthrown. It does raise some interesting questions though. Were the American colonists that fought to form the USA after years of tyranny in England t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-t-s? Or were they freedom fighters? In the film, V avenges wrongs of old and works to topple a very corrupt government, and that is it. In the end, he leaves it up to the people, the citizens, to decide if they are going to be afraid of their government or if their government is going to be afraid of them.
No matter what anyone says about the film, one thing is certain. The film will make you think, reflect, and evaluate your own principles and core beliefs. I think those are all good things.
Available for Purchase or Pre-Order on DVD
Find your movies at MoviesUnlimited.com.
V For Vendetta [DVD](2005) DVD
V For Vendetta (Widescreen Version) [DVD](2005) DVD
V For Vendetta (Special Edition) [DVD](2005) DVD
| Graphic Novel | Soundtrack | VHS |
| DVD | Related Book | Related Book |
| Related DVD | Related Book | Related DVD |
1 comment:
Oddly, your point about the film not being anti-government is one thing that I had against the movie. You see, in the graphic novel, V is an anarchist. He is clearly and directly opposed to all governments. In the movie, this doesn't appear to be the case.
They make things even safer by establishing that the government came to power through deceit. Not so in the comic.
On top of that, by the end of the comic's long run (in began in 1982 and went on hiatus for a few years as the original publication it appeared in was cancelled), Moore was saying that he felt he had been politically niave about what it would take to drive the UK towards fascism.
Also, the movie does change a lot of details to make it more specifically a comment on modern US politics than the UK politics of either Thatcher's day or now.
(After all, if the leader was meant to comment on Blair - they wouldn't have stressed that he was a "Member of the Conservative Party". As Blair, Bush lackey that he is, is not.)
Still, the dumbing down of the original source material for the film is very similar to what happened to the Robin Hood legend when they moved it to the time of Prince John "the Usurper".
Allen
Post a Comment