V for Vendetta
2005
D: James McTeigue
**********
Pros: Characters, Acting, Dialogue, Action, Music
Cons: Some tasteless political themes, Some interesting
aspects from book cut out
Sometimes I
feel like a contrarian when it comes to movies in regard to my politics.
There are many movies that other
conservatives have fawned over that I wasn’t particularly wild about (
Juno,300, Dark Knight Rises, For Greater
Glory, 300…), and liked others that they hated.
V for
Vendetta is one of those latter movies.
I seem to interpret politics in movies and TV shows differently than my
right wing brethren (I for one cannot fathom what the hell conservative pundits
have against
My Little Pony, for
example).
V for Vendetta
takes place in Britain of the near future.
The country is run by Norsefire, a fascist dictatorship which monitors
its citizens through a complex surveillance system, imposes strict curfews and
seems to have successfully wiped out all minorities. By this time, the rest of the world has
plunged into anarchy, with the United States being explicitly described as a
collapsed Third-World nation.
 |
| And yet Dell Computers seems alive and well. |
V (Hugo Weaving), a survivor of an inhuman
experimentation in one of the death camps dons a Guy Fawkes mask, fights the
regime, exacts revenge on the individuals who directly oversaw the experiment
and befriends everywoman Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman).
While the
Wachowski Brothers’
V for Vendetta is
clearly a swipe at the policies of the Bush administration, it doesn’t really
offend any of my own personal conservative beliefs.
It takes a position against the War on Terror
(which I don’t think was a good idea), against Islamophobia (also a bad thing)
and for gay rights (which I don’t oppose).
In fact, I hold the Bush Administration indirectly responsible for all
the nonsense we’re going through right now.
His flawed policies helped ensure that no one would want to vote
Republican no matter what Obama pulls.
It doesn’t help that
one of the chief architects of the War on Terror is
pretty much running around telling conservatives to not be conservatives any
more just so we can win more elections.
In fact, this
is really more of a libertarian movie than a liberal one; it doesn’t take any
position that’s incompatible with this ideology. In fact, there’s a great line in the movie
that heavily implies that Norsefire, like any self-respecting industrialized
dictatorship, does not allow its citizens to own guns. Sometimes it gets a little too libertarian
for my tastes. I’ve noticed some libertarians
really outdoing the liberals in their anti-war rhetoric, going so far as to
equate any world leader unfortunate to preside during wartime with despotism. A small number of them even subscribe to
conspiracy theories. Likewise, this
movie paints a chemical attack on Britain as an inside job which enables the
police state to gain power. Along with
comparing the Bush Administration to a genocidal dictatorship, it is one of the
more genuinely offensive parts of the movie.
Alan Moore had a problem with the Wachowskis adapting his comic into an
American allegory. Personally, I don’t
think he had much of a right to complain about that since his own motivation
for his story was driven by his own paranoia about Thatcherism, which, as it
turned out, did not lead to gays’ and
blacks’ being put into death camps.
That’s not to
say that V for Vendetta wasn’t a
great story. Alan Moore is a master
story teller, and the original comic is an intelligent and complex mix of
dystopian fiction and swashbuckling style with great artwork. The movie takes a lot of liberties with the
story, but I don’t mind. I don’t
particularly care how faithful a film adaptation is, just so long as it’s
good. In fact, I prefer that a movie
make some changes in order to be artful in its own right. V for
Vendetta may have little in common with its source material, but it becomes
its own good work. I would rather see
that than a slavish but lackluster film like Zack Snyder’s Watchmen.
The movie’s
direction is excellent. It’s unfortunate
that James McTeigue’s following movies seem disappointing; Ninja Assassin was terrible and The
Raven looks that way. Still, the
editing, cinematography and Dario Marianelli’s excellent score help establish a
great atmosphere. The dialogue is
extremely witty and has many memorable serious and funny lines. It’s another example I cite of how I often
find the comic relief in serious movies funnier than that of comedies. The action is brilliant. There are three main action scenes, but the
final one between V and Creedy’s goons is one of my favorites in cinema. I love the stylized contrails coming from V’s
knives, the choreography, the consistent slow motion and the scoring. Even the blood splatter contrasts the dark
lighting in a perversely beautiful way.
I’m glad they didn’t go with that cheesy racking that the Wachowskis
inadvertently popularized.
Is it better
than the comic? Well, yes and no. While the movie maintains a lot of its visual
elements, it departs from it many ways. Naturally, many interesting subplots are cut out,
but that’s something to be expected in a film adaptation. Movies generally don’t react well to too many
subplots. As a result, many of the
villains are not as interesting as they are in the book. The dictator of Norsefire, Adam Susan, was a
far more intriguing character in the novel.
He believed himself and Fate (the computer system monitoring the
country) to be the only real people in the world, resulting in this perverse
attraction to the computer system, which V ends up taking advantage of. The movie version of the character (John Hurt
in an obvious homage to the film 1984)
has had his name inexplicably changed to Adam Sutler, and all he does is just
yell at his underlings through a television.
The inner circle of Norsefire is made up of multiple characters who
constantly plot against Susan and each other while either abusing or being
manipulated by their wives. These
conspiracies are simplified in the movie, and these roles are all applied to
the film’s villain Peter Creedy (Tim Pigott-Smith), who was actually a
relatively inconsequential character in the book. The villains may not be quite as compelling
in the movie, but they serve their purpose, and Hurt and Piggot-Smith fit the
roles well.
The movie’s
anti-hero, V, is depicted as more sympathetic than he is in the book. In the book he is mostly depicted as a dark
anarchist who is a product of the environment, rather than a solution. The movie attempts to make him out to be more
heroic, although this does lead to some logical fallacies, as he still engages
in terrorist activities. Despite his
status as a cultured Renaissance man, he sees no problem in blowing up
historical buildings, including Big
Freaking Ben. His torture of Evey
also makes less sense in this light, although they try to acknowledge this by
making him feel conflicted about it.
It’s definitely a problematic part of the movie which made perfect sense
in the comic, and it begs the question of whether V simply made the whole thing
up with Valerie Page. Still, on some
level this interpretation succeeds. V’s
affability and humor in the movie do make the movie more entertaining to me
than the book. There’s something
undeniably lovable about a protagonist who kicks fascist ass in one scene and then
cooks eggs-in-a-basket in a frilly pink apron in another. I will admit that V’s video address to
Britain in the book (a metaphorical chewing out of the people for allowing
Norsefire to oppress them) is better than the friendlier version in the
movie. One thing that helps V’s
character is Hugo Weaving’s acting.
Although his face is never seen, he gives one of the best body language
performances I’ve ever seen in a movie, if not best performances, period. He manages to convey a myriad of emotions
flawlessly even though his mask has a constant maudlin smile. He’s lighthearted when it’s appropriate and
intimidating when he has to be. I
particularly like one scene in which Evey walks in on him pretending to fight
Mondego from The Count of Monte Cristo. V’s nervous reaction when she sees him is
priceless. Natalie Portman and Stephen
Rea are also very good as Evey Hammond, the heroine, and Eric Finch, a virtuous
police inspector trying to hunt for V.
Both characters try to survive within the system while suppressing their
own misgivings about it. Portman does
particularly well in a demanding role, acting alongside British actors without
sticking out like a sore thumb.
Another
noticeable difference is the methods by which V assassinates his victims.
In addition to fighting the regime, he also
wants to personally kill three people who ran the experiments in the fictional
concentration camp at Larkhill (a real life military settlement) that made him
what he was.
These people are Lewis
Prothero (Roger Allam), Bishop Lilliman (John Standing) and Dr. Delia Surridge
(Sinead Cusack).
In the book, V uses
symbolic gimmicks to kill Prothero and Lilliman, a la Dr. Phibes.
The assassination of Prothero, a propagandist
who ran the camp is far more interesting in the book than it is in the movie,
in which he simply stabs him offscreen in a shower.
In the book, he kidnaps him and drives him
insane by burning his valuable doll collection in a simulated death camp
furnace, illustrating the twisted ideology of a man who cares more about dolls
than human life.
As I said before, I
love Roger Allam’s acting, and seeing this scenario come to life on film would
have given him more screentime in addition to being more interesting that what
happened in the movie.
Still, the
loss of Prothero’s scene is more than worth it, because it wouldn’t have made
much sense for V to use a symbolic death to kill him and then forego this
method for Bishop Lilliman.
This
character’s death is not only my least favorite scene in the book, but it’s
certainly the most demonstrable and objective improvement in the movie.
In the book, V seems makes a very pretentious
and highly offensive statement about religion by forcefeeding a cyanide-laced
communion to Lilliman after using Evey to lure him into a pedophilic
tryst.
In addition to perpetrating the
pedophile priest cliché, Moore displayed an absurd lack of knowledge and
research in regards to the sacrament.
Most ridiculously, V asks Lilliman if the wafer will become the Body of
Christ the instant
it enters his mouth,
and Lilliman confirms this in the dialogue.
Obviously, the wafer becomes the Blessed Sacrament when the priest
consecrates it at the altar.
The comic
also claims suggests that if this were true, Lilliman wouldn’t die of cyanide
poisoning, and thus his death supposedly disproves this doctrine.
Again, not true: the physical
accidents of
the cyanide wafer will still remain nonetheless, and that’s even assuming that
God will let a dirty pedophile truly perform the sacrament.
I also assume that Norsefire’s state religion
is Anglicanism, and I’m not even sure if Anglicans even believe in transubstantiation.
The internet keeps giving me ambiguous
answers, so if any Anglican wants to correct my bottomless ignorance, then that
person is more than welcome to.
Instead,
the movie not only just has V kill him offscreen, it adds a hilarious moment of
comic relief in which Evey gets cold feet and decides to warn Lilliman that V is
lying in wait, and Lilliman thinks she’s playing a sex game.
Overall, it’s a pretty damn good reason to
prefer the movie.
Delia
Surridge’s death is actually one of my favorites. Knowing of her remorse, V shows her what
passes for mercy for him: painlessly killing her with a syringe and allowing
her to be forgiven by him before dying in peace. It’s about as heartwarming as murder can
get.
Some scenes
really do embellish the story well. One
example is the story of Valerie Page (Natasha Wightman), a homosexual actress
sent to the same camp as V. It’s an
effectively poignant story regardless of one’s opinion on homosexuality. It’s relatively faithful to the book’s
version, although I think the narration about her coming out to her parents is
improved. Some political statements in
the movie are less well executed. When
Evey asks about his possession of an illegal Koran, Gordon Deitrich (Stephen
Fry, of all people) straightfacedly utters, “Do you have to be Muslim to
appreciate its beautiful writing?” Not that the book is without such dreadful
corniness. In one of its scenes, Finch
visits Larkhill, drops acid and says something which I somehow doubt will be
included among history’s more eloquent defenses of racial equality.
So, yeah. Black
people are coffee. It sounds worse to me
when I consider that I can’t stand coffee unless it contains at least 40%
cream. The movie thankfully omits the
part about the acid and replaces it with an excellent montage consisting of V’s
falling dominoes, as well as flashbacks and current events leading up to the
third act.
I must point
out that one line which sounds inspiring really doesn’t make much sense to me:
“People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their
people.” Well, fear does not imply
powerlessness. A bear will tear you to
pieces because it’s afraid of you. The
line should be “People should not trust
their governments. Governments should trust their people.” The government should always trust its people
with their own lives, and the people must be vigilant lest the government
overstep its bounds.
The final
scene consists of V’s bombing of Big Ben while citizens dressed up as him
watch. While the logical storyteller in
me objects to the act of bombing an architectural landmark that could have had
people in it, my inner poet loves this scene.
The inspirational use of the 1812 Overture gives the movie’s ending an
inspiring tone, and I love the touch of having some people remove their masks
revealing people who were murdered by Norsefire, whom V as a symbol
represents.
Although many
comic fans dislike this movie for the changes it made, I actually have to say
that I like it more than the comic. I
admit that I did watch the movie first, and that the comic has more complexity
and logical sense than the movie, but I generally just find the movie more
entertaining overall. Even though there
are definite objective improvements in some areas.
 |
| Especially this fucking scene. |
FAVORITE QUOTES
EVEY: Who are you?
V: Who? Who is but
the form following the function of what, and what I am is a man in a mask.
EVEY: Well, I can see that.
V: Of course you can.
I’m not questioning your powers of observation. I am merely remarking upon the paradox of
asking a masked man who he is.
EVEY: Oh. Right.
V: But on this most auspicious of nights, permit me then,
in lieu of the more commonplace sobriquet, to suggest the character of this
dramatis persona….. Voilà ! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously
as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere
veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished.
However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and
has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and
vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. [carves a V into a Norsefire poster] The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta,
held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day
vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.
[giggles] Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers
most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and
you may call me V.
EVEY: Are you like a crazy person?
EVEY: I don’t see any instruments.
V: Your powers of observation continue to serve you well.
SURRIDGE: You’ve come to kill me, haven’t you?
V: Yes.
SURRIDGE: Thank God.
SURRIDGE: Are you going to kill me now?
V: I killed you 10 minutes ago. [shows her a syringe]
SURRIDGE: Is there any pain?
V: No.
SURRIDGE: Thank you.
Is it too late to apologize?
V: Never.
SURRIDGE: I’m so sorry.
V: Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for
this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day
routine- the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy
them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those
important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end
of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we
could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by
taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat.
There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now,
orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on
their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of
conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to
meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth
is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty
and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom
to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems
of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How
did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more
responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be
told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I
know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror,
disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason
and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic
you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he
promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient
consent. Last night I sought to end that silence. Last night I destroyed the
Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four
hundred years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever
in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and
freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing,
if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest you
allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you
feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside
me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we
shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot.
FAKE SUTLER: Ah, warm milk, there’s nothing better.
GORDON: I understand you enjoy a glass every night,
chancellor.
FAKE SUTLER: Since I was a boy. [Real Sutler is watching with a glass of milk in hand]
SUTLER: We are being buried beneath the avalanche of your
inadequacies, Mr. Creedy!
EVEY: [finding out about Prothero’s death] V, yesterday I
couldn’t find my ID. You didn’t take it,
did you?
V: Would you prefer a lie or the truth?
VALERIE: That year I came out to my parents. I couldn’t have done it without Chris holding
my hand.
VALERIE: Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all
we really have. It is the very last inch of us.
DOMINIC: What do you think will happen?
FINCH: What usually happens when people without guns
stand up to people with guns.
CREEDY: Why won’t you die?
V: Beneath this mask is more than flesh. Beneath this mask is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and
ideas are bulletproof.
V: The only thing you and I have in common, Mr. Creedy,
is that we’re both about to die.
CREEDY: How do you imagine that’s gonna happen?
V: With my hands around your neck.
CREEDY: Whatchya
gonna do, huh? We've swept this place. You've got nothing. Nothing but your
bloody knives and your fancy karate gimmicks. We have guns.
V: No, what you have are bullets, and the hope that when
your guns are empty, I'll no longer be standing, because if I am you'll all be
dead before you've had time to reload.
BTN Anchor: Now this is only an initial report, but at
this time it’s believed that during this heroic raid, the terrorist was shot
and killed. [shows footage of hostage
forcibly dressed up as V getting wounded]
V: Would you dance with me?
EVEY: Now, on the eve of your revolution?
V: A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth
having.
FINCH: Who was he?
EVEY: He was Edmond Dantes….and he was my father….and my
mother…..my brother, my friend….and me.
He was all of us.
EVEY: Where did you get all this stuff?
V: Oh, here and there.
Mostly from the Ministry of Objectionable Materials.
EVEY: You stole them?
V: No, stealing implies ownership. You can’t steal from the censor. I merely reclaimed them.
