I just found out Hugo Weaving played V...i know im very slow...He did an amazing job.

Finally watched V. It's amazing how my grade went from an A- to a C+ after reading this thread.

In all seriousness, after re-examining the movie, I'm giving it a B+. Call me crazy, but I just enjoyed the movie, and didn't pay much attention to any political mumbo-jumbo (which may mean that I'm ignoring everything the writers set out to say... so sue me?). Instead, I just enjoyed the movie for what it was.

That said, there is a serious issue that happens midway through the movie, and plagues the film until the last little bit. I found myself uninterested for a while, which is why I contemplate the B grade. But, the parts that were good seriously seem to outweigh that downtime, so...

Grade: B+ for V

What issue do you mean?

I think issue was a poor choice of wording on my part. Sorry, I've been watching stuff all day, and I'm tired.

It's not any specific event. It's just that the film almost comes to a screeching halt, in terms of entertainment, and becomes slow and uninteresting. I found my mind wandering quite a bit.

Just rewatched this. Still holds up and is my #2 film of the year behind Pirates. Both Portman and Weaving are great. A really great and entertaining film.

A

Just watched it again and i agree with Chris, holds up. I think this movie and Pirates are tied for my number 1 movie of the year so far. Weaving does such an amazing job as V, he fits the role perfect and does such a phenomenal job. The tone of his voice and his diction is just interesting and his history is just great. What a great movie. A

Has anybody mentioned Hugo Weaving's mask work yet? It's the stuff of legend. Any drama instructor would be awestricken.

F

Are you guys all fucking nuts? I can't believe I'm seeing A's across the board.

I don't care about the political undertones of the movie, I don't care about the messages, I'm not going to talk about that right now. What I care about is the movie in itself, and it is an absolute a piece of shit. What struck me about this film was how it had no flow, the pacing was some of the worst that I've seen in some time, scenes were too long, too short, too choppy, it was all off. An example would be like there would be sequences between Evey and V, and then it would cut immediatley to the dictators room, where the leader is shouting orders at his 5 guards, it completley cuts any rhythm the film has. Another example would be that there would be scenes with V sending out his tape, somewhat exciting scenes with Gordon being taken away, but then the movie completley stops and has Evey read a note in a jail for 20 minutes, it's all so choppy, it completley lost my interest. The direction? Generic in every way, like a music video. The screenplay? Laughable. The dictator shouting is just hilarious, the scenes between Evey and V at the end are disgustingly corny, "The ghost from Christmas past" ... WTF is that? None of the characters acted or talked like they were in that type of futuristic society, they was no aptitude for making them act any realistically. But wait, I'm not done. The storyline had holes all over it as well, V is standing on a rooftop when everything blows up, they take pictures of him, but they can't catch him? Evey stands there confused and scared, but then the next day, she maces the cop and effectively ends her stay in the free world out of spite, for what? To save him? He's a terrorist, she wouldn't do that. The voice Evey talks to in the interrogation room isn't Weaving's, and the shadow isn't him as well, in fact there's no way that she couldn't at least see a bit of whoever was talking, see the burns. And the ending, ridiculous. So V gets shot like 100 times, and they go through the bulletproof vest, but he still has the time to kill everything with his awesome kung fu knife tricks before dieing. And then, let's blow up the building REVOLUTION WOOHOOO! Besides all that, the scenes themselves are just crap in their execution, they're just really really bad. This is clearly the directors fault, he cannot use a camera, I relate the direction in this movie to someone like Pitof in Catwoman. I've already mentioned the dictator yelling room, the way the headshots and screen are filmed, I'd rank them as one of the very worst sequences I've ever seen. Evey in the jail, are we supposed to feel anything, the whole thing flows so shitty, from when she's reading the note to being dunked, it's painful to watch because it's so bad. The city itself, the dystopia, the director doesn't know who to create any sort of setting or world, the whole place is indeed so generic and so ordinary, futuristic society for dummies. Evey and Gordon in his house, you feel no friendship between the characters, and seeing porn on his wall was so unintentially hilarious.

I could go on for hours about how crappy I think this V for Vendetta created, but I'll move on just a bit here in the subject matter itself. Aside from what shit the movie is created, it's got it's ambitions wrong as well. It's so set on making a political message, on making a movie that says something to the world today, that they forget all the basics of real storytelling. How about actually giving these characters depth, give them some chemistry, focus on the characters themselves and create a real dynamic between them? Why not develop some supporting characters in this dystopia, include a subplot or two, create some humor for gods sakes? Instead, they fail miserably trying to be thought provoking and trying to send a message, they try way too hard to make something they are completley not talented enough to, they have no base to this movie. They just have a failed attempt at ideology, a flailing generic mess that is unredeemable throughout every scene.

One of the worst movies of this decade.

This film is awsome, one of the best this year

A

[quote=Shack]F

Are you guys all fucking nuts? I can't believe I'm seeing A's across the board. [/quote]
No, we're not all fucking nuts.

I'm surprised (not having a dig - just surprised) to see such vitriol for the film.

I think you raise some good points, and you're right - the film does have a few faults. But I'm not sure they add up to the film being utterly dispicable. I thought it was quite diverting (I felt the same about the graphic novel - I think my expectations were low to begin with, so it's the good bits that stick in my memory).

My main problem was, a Nineteen Eight-Four-style vision of the future is - well - dated. The thing is, Orwell set his novel 36 years in the future. But 1984 was 22 years ago. I'm faintly surprised that the author (I've forgotten his name - The Watchmen was better and far more original, but not quite as fun) thought that the story needed telling again. After all, we've had 58 years of Nineteen Eighty-Four being a byword for CCTV, ID cards, staff surveys - any form of surveillance by any form of authority. It's not like we needed reminding. Having Guy Fawkes for the freedom fighter was a nice stroke, but really, just building on what Orwell did when he made Winston worship the paperweight, or whatever it was (fetishing the past - V basically has a house full of old "paperweights"). Nonetheless, I thought it was fun, if a little juvenile, and especially enjoyed the passage in the middle with the song (the middle of the graphic novel, that is).

I actually thought that the film improved on the graphic novel in some ways. Firstly, in the original, the Voice of Destiny (or Fate, or whatever it was) was just a sort of faceless, omnipresent PA system. I found that lazy on the author's part. We've seen it all before. On the other hand, whoever decided that the film version should turn him into a bigoted, self-rightious kind of newsreader-cum-social-commentator was a mini-genius - because those guys are not just scary but fiercely modern. The film was very noticeably post-9/11, so I guess whoever made it succeeded in tweaking (I won't go as far as "reinventing") the dystopia for a modern audience (of me).

If HMV was doing three DVDs for twenty quid, and I already had two that I really wanted, I would hover over V for Vendetta. Not the highest reccommendation, but I wouldn't call it the worst film in a decade

If only the Unabomber were still alive, we could all read his review gushing all over this film...

I've loved just about everything the Wachowski Brothers have touched, but was real hesitant to see V for Vendetta. Judging from trailers, the plot and focal character (V) didn't click with me. Thus I kept putting off watching this film, until last night.

I'm happy that it was much better than I thought it would be - it made me regret waiting so long to see it now. I like that it was thought provoking without being too preachy, and with leaving a lot for the viewer to interpret from a moral standpoint. I thought it did a good job at painting the lead character in shades of grey, as opposed to black and white. Overall the movie brought up a lot of interesting discussions.

The direction and acting were good - Weaving was great as always. The movie wasn't quite perfect. There was definitely a few times the movie dragged, and it could have been tightened up a bit. I also think it could have used a touch more action, or perhaps just a couple slightly lighter moments.

I'll give it an A-

Entertaining but too preachy at times. Natalie Portman is finally realizing the potential she's shown for years, but it's Hugo Weaving that's amazing in this. My grade: B+.

You're probably right, but have you read the Unabomber's Manifesto? The guy was clearly disturbed, but his writing about the turn to facism of our modern society is pretty darn accurate. He was a libertarian gone bad.

Just rewatched the film. Same grade.


Maybe when all of us are nuts, you're nuts. Catch-22.

B.

Somewhat important, but much more self-important. But entertaining nonetheless.

Wonderful movie. I couldn't believe I put it off for so long. The visuals and actions are great as expected, but I'm somewhat surprised how much I like the story. Thought-provoking, and it's just deep stuff lines after lines. A little too self-conscious? Probably, but I still enjoy such script and delivery. It's fun. Enters my top 5 favorite films of the year. A-.

It totally falls apart on second viewings. Once you know all the twists and plot and action scenes, you're left with a plot that doesn't seem to know that 1984 and many other dystopian works never existed. Unfortunately, most of the people that watch it don't either, so it's probably the most overrated film of last year, IMO.

**/****

I gave it a weak staright B on my original viewing, though I think it might drop if I see it again...it is really too self-confident, unsubtle and weirdly-paced.

Not to mention the dystopia itself is flat out ridiculous and silly, the movie is full of holes and unexplained events, and the ending is just completley wack... oh nevermind.

It pales in comparison to something like Children of Men (naturally), but I still can't help but love this film. It has its silly moments (Stephen Fry's Benny Hill skit is an embarrassing and bizarrely regressive view of British "humour"), but overall, great flick.

It's 2006's dystopian popcorn to Children of Men's gourmet meal.

I actually thought that CoM worked better on the popcorn level as well.

I hate to agree with you on this..

I just saw this movie again yesterday (my second time after March last year).. it's not as great as the first viewing

but it's still a great flick though..

Verdict on V for Vendetta:
Children of Men was much better.
Natalie Portman? Forget her.
Surely this film's an offence.

In "V", the below were deemed vital:
A script like a high school recital;
A Sesame Street kind of title;
An ending that doesn't make sense.

Nude Natalie would have been finer.
Would anyone here like to sign a
Petition for V for Vagina?
Folks, form an orderly queue.

Andy and Larry, I blame you.
Your scriptwriting failures shame you.
And V - why won't anyone name you?!
Alan, it's over to you.

C