# Amazing buzz for V For Vendetta! **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 13, 2006, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789 "2006-01-13T05:40:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/1 "2006-01-13T05:40:42Z")
(No spoilers except basic plot) I’m surprised. For some reason I thought there was negative buzz surrounding this, but it’s starting to be shown to journalists and the first two I’ve read LOVE it! David Poland from Movie City News writes in his [Hot Button](http://www.thehotbutton.com/today/hot.button/index.html) column: > [@](#): > > V For Vendetta is a return to the style of the first Matrix film. But in many ways, it is a more powerful, more important film, even if it can never match the visual freshness of the Wachowski’s first big budget film. V for Vendetta reaches past the purely visual and may well be the best film of 2006. (It won’t have much competition for the honor when it opens on March 17.) And no, I am not exaggerating. > > The film is, like The Matrix, about a world under the control of a totalitarian regime. Here it is human… and people are not being tricked. We are conscious. And we accept. We accept out of fear. We accept out of apathy. We accept because we have forgotten to be free. > > In this world, we wander with Evey, played by Natalie Portman. She’s rebel enough to be out past curfew but still, she is part of the machinery around her. Facing deadly trouble, she is saved by V, a masked vigilante who speaks in Shakespeare and fights with speed and knives. He wants to change the world. She is not ready to do anything like that. Their journey together is the story of the film. > > I’m not going to get into a review of the film at this point. After one viewing, I am hard pressed to find a single flaw in the film… and that is probably overstating it a bit. > > But I sat in the dark and I thought to myself, the Wachowskis, director James McTeigue, graphic novelists Alan Moore & David Lloyd, and producer Joel Silver, are asking moviegoers to reach farther than any studio filmmakers have asked people to go in many years. The style is both simple and arch. Martin Walsh’s editing is full of great tricks. And the language… oh the language… it has the simple, perfect eloquence of Edmond Rostand with Shakespeare pulls to boot. And you go with it. You have to go with it. Because there is such power in these ideas… in these characters. (And don’t think for a second that Sinead Cusack’s appearance in this film was a coincidence. She played Roxane in the legendary Derek Jacobi version of The Royal Shakespeare Company’s version of Cyrano de Bergerac in the early 80s.) Jeffrey Wells from [Hollywood Elsewhere](http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/) writes: > [@](#): > > If one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter (depending on one’s political perspective), the notion of a “good terrorist” should be an exploitable subject for a Hollywood film…no? In any case it’s now the basis of a very smart big-bolt action drama, and from the makers of The Matrix yet – the brilliant, very crafty, vaguely oddball Wachowski Brothers. > > V for Vendetta (Warner Bros., 3.17), which I saw Wednesday afternoon, is a genuinely rousing and serious-minded thriller that’s fairly throbbing with political metaphor. Anyone over the age of 10 or 11 will be able to connect the dots. And it’s probably safe to assume that V will anger a few rightie jerkwads, but that’s fine – March can be a boring month and the arguments will be fun. > > … > > The boys seemed to disappear for all of '04 and early '05. Then they began work on Vendetta last summer in London and here they are again with a film that some are going to call a work of genius, or at least a piece of revolutionary cinema. There’s more, much more, to both reviews, but not too many spoilers that I caught. I hate spoilers so I kind of skimmed. If anyone’s read the graphic novels PLEASE BOX YOUR SPOILERS, if any. I only know the basic outline and I don’t want to know any more. The Wachowski, um, siblings, aren’t credited with directing, and it’s not their story, but they did write the screenplay. The director, James McTeigue, hasn’t directed anything before this but was an Assistant Director on all 3 Matrix films. I wonder where he left off and the Wachowskis began. It’d be unfair if they got credit that he deserves alone, but people will wonder. I went from thinking “This doesn’t look very interesting” to it being the first movie of 2006 that I CAN’T WAIT to see! ---
**Author:** ![Hey\_It\_s\_That\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Hey\_It\_s\_That\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hey_It_s_That_Guy)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/2 "2006-01-13T05:50:08Z")
If you’re this excited already, **Equipoise** , do yourself a favor and read the trade paperback by Moore and Lloyd before the movie comes out. You won’t spoil the movie for yourself, so much as provide yourself with a basis for comparison. Alan Moore is probably the greatest writer in the history of comics, and I’d honestly rank him alongside the finest fiction writers of the last 50 years, if not further back. V For Vendetta is one of my two favorite works of his (the other being the genre-redefining Watchmen), and it’s such a powerful read, it’ll make your hands shake uncontrollably. I think V has aged better than Watchmen due to its subject matter, eerily relevant in 21st Century America just as much so as it was in 1980s England, when Moore and Lloyd collaborated on it. And while I’m not expecting the movie to be a direct adaptation of the book (like how Sin City was lifted panel for panel, shot for shot, from Frank Miller’s comics), I think it will be the best big-screen adaptation of an Alan Moore story yet (comparing it to From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and Constantine, of course). ---
**Author:** ![Knowed\_Out](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/knowed_out/32/7380_2.png) [@Knowed\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knowed_Out)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/3 "2006-01-13T15:26:29Z")
Here’s hoping…thus far, film adaptations of Alan Moore’s work have had the Hollywood formula ground into them, making them something completely different and lacking Moore’s touch. Maybe they finally learned their lesson. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/4 "2006-01-13T21:31:31Z")
Big Bad Voodoo Lou, I do plan to pick up the trade paperback. After I see the movie. > [@Droolian](#): > > Moore positively loathes the very idea of **any** of his comic projects being mangled for either the big screen or for tv, and his hatred grew even deeper after the bullshit that was LXG (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.) Moore was so pissed off at his implied association with the Vendetta film that he actually had lawyers prepare a lawsuit. I haven’t seen League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, but if they didn’t make a good movie, I can understand him being upset. However, good movies have been made that were very different from the source material, and frankly, I’m a movie buff. If the movie’s good, I don’t **CARE** how far away it is from the source material it is. If the movie’s good, I don’t **CARE** what Alan Moore thinks of it, or his fans. Now I realize where the negative buzz came from: Alan Moore and his fans. Forgive me if I make sure your negative buzz gets relegated to the background while I anticipate this movie. I don’t listen to either David Poland or Jeffrey Wells when making a final decision as to whether or not to see a film. Both have liked movies I disliked, and disliked movies I liked, but when both of them pretty much agree that a movie is good, and they both say this one is great, that perks my ears as something I will almost certainly want to see. Besides, I’m a Natalie Portman fan. It just didn’t look interesting (I thought it was yet another superhero movie) until I read what they had to say and what it was actually about. > [@Droolian](#): > > The release date has already been bumped three times, which is never a good sign for a movie. Originally it was supposed to open at the end of September/beginning of October, then it was pushed back to November, then it was pushed to February, and now it’s been dumped off in what has traditinally been the worst time of year for movies, March. You’re right, but movies that have no chance of Awards buzz are often held back so they don’t get caught up in the 4th quarter hoopla. It’s also possible they held it back to work more on the special effects. Whatever. **The Matrix** , one of my all-time favorite films, was released March 31 (1999), so for me the release date means nothing. Just last year, **Dear Frankie, In My Country, Millions, The Upside of Anger, Melinda And Melinda** and **The Ballad of Jack and Rose** , all very good movies, were released in March. A cursory search yieled **Panic Room, Raising Victor Vargas, A Price Above Rubies, The Ladykillers, Dogville, A Walk On The Moon, The Mayor of Sunset Strip, The Ballad of Jack and Rose** , all movies I enjoyed, as being released during March. A more in-depth search would come up with more. For every craptacular dumping movie you find (and I agree they do exist), I could find a good one worth seeing, so yeah, the release date means nothing to me. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/5 "2006-01-13T21:59:50Z")
> [@Equipoise](#): > > I haven’t seen League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, but if they didn’t make a good movie, I can understand him being upset. However, good movies have been made that were very different from the source material… Definitely not the case here. Moore’s story and characters had depth. The movie took the barest trace of the concept and turned it into a shallow piece of muck. (Eg, in the graphic novel, Allan Quatermain is deeply flawed – a shell of his former self – weak, addicted, and selfish. He whines constantly when Mina requires him to stand up straight and serve his country once more, and his opium addiction leads to disaster more than once. In the movie, he’s ACTION MAN! and totally in charge, and Mina is there to display her boobies, instead of being the leadership of the team.) Also, they inserted _Tom freaking Sawyer_ into the story because they thought that American audiences needed an American hero to hold their attention and there was a troubling lack of American heros in a story featuring a collection of literary characters from Victorian England banding together to serve Her Majesty’s interests. “Ooh! A semi-literate American run-away will fit _right_ in to this ultra-secret shadow agency.” :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/6 "2006-01-13T22:28:53Z")
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I heard, that they dumbed it down. That’s why I didn’t go see it because the concept seemed interesting. It doesn’t look like they’ve dumbed down **V For Vendetta** though. I’ll find out. I’m looking forward to both the movie and the book. It’s just that, after all the whining surrounding **The Lord of the Rings** and **Harry Potter** (especially Prisoner of Azkaban), I’ve learned to take fan reactions to dicking around with the source material with a grain of salt. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2006, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/7 "2006-01-13T23:32:37Z")
> [@Equipoise](#): > > It’s just that, after all the whining surrounding **The Lord of the Rings** and **Harry Potter** (especially Prisoner of Azkaban), I’ve learned to take fan reactions to dicking around with the source material with a grain of salt. I think the difference is that with _Harry Potter_ and _The Lord of the Rings_, the nitpickers are impractically obsessed with any minor deviations in _very_ good adaptations. The unease that Alan Moore’s fans express is more like the misgivings that Tolkien fans would have if someone had shot the infamous _LoTR_ script which included changes like “Lembas bread” being changed to “food concentrate” to make it more readily comprehensible to modern viewers. I’m looking forward to _V for Vendetta_, too. So far, it looks promising. Just like I’m looking forward to _A Scanner Darkly_, even though Hollywood’s track record with regard to Dick adaptations has been absolutely dismal: Six adaptations-- five trivial and virtually worthless movies, and one great movie that works well in spite of barely resembling the original novel and entirely omitting its most interesting ideas. Come on, lucky seven! Let this be the one that substantially resembles the brilliant and provocative work it was based on. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/8 "2006-01-14T00:02:36Z")
I get what you mean. We’ll see how it all works out, and for me, that means, do I like the movie? If I do like the movie, then that ups my anticipation for the source material. If I don’t like the movie, I’ll still be interested in the source material. Either way, I’ll win. If it’s a really good movie it will bring more people to the source material. I’m looking forward to _A Scanner Darkly_ too. Since it’s a Richard Linklater film, I’m certain it will be good. The advance word from people who have seen it is outstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2006, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amazing-buzz-for-v-for-vendetta/339789/9 "2006-01-14T01:52:41Z")
Here’s another good piece. It has a few more spoilers than the other ones. > [@](#): > > [Hollywood Reporter](http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/reviews/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001701281) > In a political environment that can brew controversy out of allegorical children’s fables or a documentary about penguins, it is hard to imagine the intensity of feeling that will greet “V for Vendetta,” a movie whose heroes are terrorists. One foresees news talk shows in which red-faced pundits denounce the filmmakers and call for boycotts. Given a film as entertaining and solidly crafted as this one, such attention could turn into strong boxoffice. > > … > Although some marketing materials aim to position this as an action film, viewers expecting a thrill ride might be disappointed. V engages in a couple of satisfying crime-fighting set pieces, but the story is more occupied with mystery and intrigue. Happily, it almost is entirely free of the hollow pomposity that marred the Wachowskis’ last two “Matrix” films. Here, Alan Moore’s graphic novel and the history of real-world oppressive governments is more than enough, leaving no need for the screenwriters to invent hokey mythologies and plenty of room to fantasize about revolution