V For Vendetta is easily the most important film in a decade

[MrScorpio]

Important, not because it addresses our current situation, but instead how it addresses the plight of citizens everywhere when and if their governments take on a fascist identity. Important, in how hypocrisy, power, violence, wealth and propaganda is used to cull certain "undesirable" sectors of a populace to restrain the rest, but most importantly, how these things are done with our consent. Silence implies consent. Whether for victim or for citizen.

Important, in that it highlights that these undemocratic and inhumane actions of governments that have gone out of control, are not without consequence. The word "circumstance" was a key point throughout the movie, the word "consequence", though not frequently used, lay beneath the movie's substrata, and was waiting to strike at the conclusion. Consequence for all parties involved.

Important, that it shows that no society, regardless of its democratic and egalitarian traditions is immune to such an onslaught of raw and naked ruthlessness. The facade of civility can be torn away in an instant if we succumb to fear and creepy hegemony.

Important, in that it highlights that a "norm" is nothing but an insidious tool of the elite to control those they otherwise cannot control.

This movie with spark the better ideas of the people for years to go. You should see it.

V: "People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

Indeed.

[Beausoir]

1. What I liked best about it were all the young people (17, 18, 19) in the

audience to watch it.

They got an absolute education on what happens if we continue down the path we are on.

They were definitely buzzing about it afterward.

[no name no slogan]

2. I'll have to check that out

the reviews have all been positive.

but I'm still betting on "Snakes on a Plane".

[Orsino]

3. Damned good flick.

Perhaps a little too lightweight to be the most important, but you may be right in that it's cool enough to be the most influential.

[Lisa]

4. it could almost be analyzed as if it were 2 different movies ...

The "police procedural" storyline (where the investigator gradually pieces together the history of what happened during the Chancellor's rise to power) reminded me very much of the excellent "Prime Suspect" TV series -- where the characters are deliberately understated in order to emphasize the horror of the discoveries (with Stephen Rea in Helen Mirren's role). It could almost function as a stand-alone film. (I recall a book by Ronald Wright called "A Scientific Romance", where an archaeologist in the distant future is attempting to reconstruct the history of the 21st century, and deduces from the scraps and artifacts he finds that Britain fell into fascism ...)

The flashier action/adventure part of the movie (which I gather is what provoked the strongest disagreement at DU, e.g. on the "boring" thread) is tied to this through Evey herself, and the flashbacks provided by the actress's letter.

Personally, I enjoyed the film (and if anything would have liked to have seen some more detail -- and more development for Rea's character). The types of issues which it brought up -- conformity, the ways in which the people themselves were complicit (hinted at in V's message), the dilemma of confronting a violent regime using violence, and the consequences of all these things, as MrScorpio pointed out -- it would be interesting to see how they unfolded over the course of, say, a 4-day miniseries. There would be more time for subtlety (some of the issues people had with "being hit over the head" may have been due to the time constraints). With so many characters to follow, no wonder they had to leave some things out (which might otherwise have clarified the story and filled in gaps in the plot).

[SeattleGirl]

5. "Silence implies consent."

Yes it does. Thus, my sig line.

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. I just saw it today and I have a question

How did V get evie out of police custody? Was that ever explained?

[DS1]

8. My guess is that it was him who grabbed her in the first place

all done up like a cop

[Lisa]

10. someone on another thread implied that the cop who grabbed her ...

... as she attempted to escape from the TV host's house was V himself (and that the jailers who shaved her head, fed her, tortured her, etc. were either accomplices of V, or even V himself in various disguises -- something that forced me to try to remember how many people there were in the room at any given time, during the incarceration scenes).

[NMMNG]

18. I read the novelization based on the screenplay (spoilers ahead)

The cop who grabbed Evey, the interrogator, the prison guard and everyone else were all played by V in different costumes. The entire time she was in his underground complex.

[Hieronymus]

29. She was never arrested...V was testing her.

I just saw the film today, and it exceeded my expectations.:bounce:

[leftofthedial]

7. well said

plus the knife shit was kickass!

[tjdee]

9. I have serious problems with what is done to Evey by V...

without getting into spoilers (which I love, and I've not seen the film yet, LOL).... how do they explain what is done to her, so that she doesn't hate his guts?

Is it seriously as sickeningly idealistic as "so now you know what it's like"? Because I have to tell you, that would suck as an answer if all that happened to me.

Unless I've not got the correct spoilers?

[DS1]

11. She does hate his guts

but sucks it up

[MrScorpio]

12. This how I see that

In order from Evey to have her Epiphany, she had to go through an ordeal. The same ordeal that V went through, in an reduced fashion

It was very Nietzschean, in that an ordeal that didn't kill her, made her stronger.

Plus, Evey understood Valerie's plight quite well although she had little in common with her up to the point of incarceration.

[Lisa]

13. it is pretty disturbing ...

(if you don't want any spoilers, here is the short version -- scroll down to see the longer one)


In the film, there's the problem of how Evey can escape being caught by the authorities. She could either stay hidden (an option if she wants to hide with V), or she could somehow alter her appearance and character and abandon her old identity. But that would require some pretty drastic measures (more than just fake ID), and what would happen if she did get caught? She could break under torture and endanger V as well.



































What I got from the film is that the experience of being tortured not only changed her appearance, but altered her personality as well -- she made a remark about not being recognized by former associates. Not being afraid of being caught (because she already knew what torture was like) factored into this. (Personally I feel this is a complex issue -- I've been reading a lot about the Maher Arar case, and he definitely had a personality shift due to his torture -- and I'm not convinced that it would make a person stronger and less vulnerable, at least not what the Syrian authorities were doing.) I don't know whether this was V's main intention (to help her hide by altering her identity), or whether he wanted to make her into a protege and this was his way of shaping her. The implication is that he regrets what he did to her, afterwards.

For some reason, I keep thinking of the parody skit, where the Chancellor and V appear to trade identities (perhaps a hidden comment that they are the same kind of person, underneath -- not just that the Chancellor is using V as an excuse to crack down?).

p.s. regarding what MrScorpio said -- I agree, Evey seems to be sympathetic and understanding enough to realize what had happened to the actress, without having to be immersed in a prison environment. If she had been an airhead, or staunchly apolitical (or supportive of the regime), just reading the letter might not have affected her. (One imagines George W. or someone like him, gradually coming to an understanding after a Twilight-Zone type switch ...)

[hippiechick]

15. What he did to her, IMO is a 'intensive microcosm' of

... what the gov't was doing to them ALL: dictating every aspect of her life.
Making them live in fear and isolation.

Not to mention, he put her in exactly the same sort of situation he himself had been in, possibly knowing and hoping that she would emerge just as pissed off and fearless as he did.

[Duer 157099]

17. I think that he wanted her to lose everything except her will

I don't think she hated him; I think by that time, she wasn't capable of that or any emotion anymore.

I think he duplicated the environment not because he wanted her to walk a mile in his shoes, but that perhaps he knew for certain that those conditions were completely sufficient to accomplish his goal.

Or, maybe not.

edited to add: the reason for making her lose everything was to show her that she didn't have anything left to lose. I guess that's sort of obvious though.

[RandomKoolzip]

21. Yup. Manson did that same thing to his "girls."

[CanuckAmok]

14. "in a decade"?! What about "Cheerleader Sodomaniac Vixens in Heat XXVI"?!

You've changed, man.

[hippiechick]

16. I think the importance of it was the rise of the solitary ego-theocrat

ie, il Bushie. It was a very little stretch in my mind. Hopefully many more viewers made the same comparison.

Also, the prick that died in the shower reminded me of Cheney - even though he was more likely supposed to be a 'Rush Limbaugh' type character.

[enigmatic]

19. I have to go see this

A friend at the hotel has been raving about it ever since he saw it; I might just break down and go to the movie theater for the first time in a couple of years for this..

[Radio_Lady]

20. Here's my earlier review. I agree -- go and see it for yourself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=4945709

In peace,

Radio_Lady in Oregon

[Radio_Lady]

22. I like your thoughts on "Vendetta," MrScorpio.

"V For Vendetta is easily the most important film in a decade."

Impressive and inciteful.

Thanks for this interesting thread.

In peace,

Radio_Lady

[alarcojon]

23. Hey, I'll throw in my comments from an earlier thread

I found the movie very interesting on various levels. One of which was the understanding that it was agitprop. The premise of a lone hero saving a people from a corrupt government appeals to a wide demographic - of course there are DUer's like us, but self-professed rebels of all sorts, including most young people must have also identified with V for at least some of the time.

Since we are to understand that the buildings were unpopulated when they were destroyed, their destruction is a call for the death of a symbol, not intended to cause loss of life.

Still, we all know the film will ultimately be dismissed by the right wing as a film asking its viewers to identify with terrorists. It is important that the plural "terrorists" is used rather than the singular "terrorist," this encourages multiple images in our minds, predominantly Saddam Hussein and Usama Bin Laden - rather than a lone actor, Hugo Weaving as V.

It is amusing watching Bush's propaganda people screw up their response to this movie. It is set in and is about England at the time the graphic novel was written. But they can't help seeing it as a direct attack on Bush. It betrays a certain insecurity, does it not? In a night at the local multiplex, one isn't often confronted with the portrayals of secretive administrations which use fear to control their people, which have significant control of the media, and whose methods involve an intentional framed calamity for which the government then provided the cure. If Bush has been such a great president, why worry if some left-wing loonies are going to - gulp - see connections between the Bush administration and the far more reactionary government of this film? Remember that in the film the leaders of the government are demonstrated to be incredibly corrupt and to have committed heinous crimes against humanity; again, if Bush has been such a great president, why assume anyone is pointing any fingers at Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, Wolfie, O'Splotchy, etc. etc.?

When you are saying stuff like "this movie is a blatant political attack on the Bush administration," you are yielding to your political opponent's frames - our government rules by fear, the media is bought and paid for, loyalty to country is flagrantly conflated with support for terrorists, and our sons and daughters should never have been sent to fight Bush's ill-advised (even, of course, at the time) war in Iraq. And that is all to the good.

I urge all Duer's to continue to see the film and make up your own mind. And take someone with you, maybe someone you think is ripe for a shot of revolutionary zeal.

BTW I also saw lots of young people at my screening. They have the most to lose if Bush gets his sorry way. In fact, one of my students, who looks like and probably is a football player, was telling two female students that the film was great and they should see it.

edited to add cool image!

[Book Lover]

24. Glad you liked it, but

I'd bet anything you'll enjoy the novel more. If you can, check it out.

[enigmatic]

25. We're seeing it this weekend

I can't wait!

[JackORoses]

26. did anyone notice

the dead people in the crowd at the end?

The little girl who was shot, the lesbian couple, etc.

This all ties in to the Christlike characteristics of V.

In the past, Fawkes tried to destroy the Empire by himself and was crucified for it.

In the present, reborn as V, he accomplishes this mission and destroys the Empire precisely because he is not alone.
He has inspired the People to all discover the V living within themselves. To find the common thread that binds them all together.

Destroying the old world where everyone was isolated in there own mental prison cells, wearing invisible masks over their true selves.
Giving birth to a New World where the People truly live as one. There is no death when we live within each other.
So the Dead may rise.

[Lilith Velkor]

27. Gnostic symbolism

Just like the Matrix.

[yellowdogintexas]

28. What you said. Awesome

Just saw this movie yesterday, with my daughter. We really did like it. And it says so very much about how easily a manipulative person can cause the populace to literally imprison themselves out of fear.

That is how Hitler did it.

A former minister alluded to this in a sermon once..he was talking about Germany in the 1930's and the
Final Solution, etc. ...the whole Fascist/totalitarian mindset... and he said "Don't ever think it can't happen here, just because this is America"...this was proably 10 or 11 years ago ...

Fear drives prejudice of all kinds. Fear ..in the hands of a master manipulator allowed the evils of McCarthyism to flourish for a time in this nation...

If any group can be singled out and oppressed...then all groups can ..

In the beginning, when the dictator is doing his telecommunicating the first time, you don't realize that one of them is the head of the BTV network. Having this media mogul under his thumb is so essential to the story. Of course you don't quite know who all of these folks are at first...adds to the impact later on.