"V" is for very boring

[msatty99]

Am I the only one who thought this was more or less a bad, make that
'very bad' movie? Yeah yeah...I got the 'give it to the man'
subversive theme..but, I couldn't help feel silly every time
Zorro came on screen with that carnival mask. Evey and apparently
everyone else is so dumb that they don't get it until V leads the
way? Fighting with spinning knives..oh that's so cool.

And was it just me or did the entertainer who is 'dissappeared' after
spoofing der Fuehrer ala Benny Hill seem just a wee bit...I don't know...
the diletante?

And, forgive me,but tell me again why V imprisons and tortures Evey for
months? To free her mind. Where was it when a ghastly furor leader was
running around with nazi crosses creating a dictatorship?

I actually nodded off...and finally had to leave. Let me guess,
V won in the end and was a hero for the masses.

[derby378]

1. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd give it a 6.5 or a 7, myself

I had some problems with V's decisions regarding Evey, myself. But I think he came to realize that he had become as much of a monster as the regime that imprisoned and tortured him.

As for the end of the movie, if you want to know, PM me and I'll share.

[JackRiddler]

200. I'd give it a 9.11

The movie was a faithful adaptation (except for elements of the ending) of the 1980s comic book, except for the addition of various elements that deliver an obvious message with constant, sledgehammer force:

9/11 was an inside job. More is likely coming, in the form of flu.

Other than that, like the comic, it's Batman but he's an anarchist, his nemesis is not a mugger but a fascist state.

[Cobalt Violet]

2. What movie do you find to be a good movie?

[msatty99]

5. Crash

[Erika]

6. What's your point? n/t

[msatty99]

12. My point is to answer Cobalt's question.

I just gave the first really good movie that came to mind.

[mondo joe]

20. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Liking Crash would explain a lot to me. :-)

[Malikshah]

23. Just reading that -- I thought of Stewie from Family Guy

when he did his own laugh track... I know, it's not for everyone...

BTW-- good response.. Crash. Ummmm....OK...

[BrutalEntropy]

163. oh yeah... giggity..

that was a GREAT episode... what a way to give a great big FUCK YOU to the FCC...

[mattclearing]

80. I enjoyed Crash, but your response was most like my own.

Mostly because of the Brokeback Mountain flamewar. :)

[Warpy]

60. Thanks for the review. I've been resisting the thought of seeing it

even when it comes out on DVD unless I'm really, really, really bored and desperate for a couple of hours of violent diversion.

Of course, I'm an old broad and not part of the target audience, so chances are I'd find watching it sort of like watching the last 3 Star Wars movies, a mixture of curiosity, habit and penance.

Your review just confirmed the impression I've gotten from watching trailers and adverts.

[RebelOne]

66. Crash was not a good movie.

In fact, I couldn't even watch it until the end because it depressed me so.

[mattclearing]

81. It was a good movie.

But not a great movie.

I enjoyed V more.

[file83]

132. Crash="The Stupidist People in L.A." --- V="ReVolution!!!"

I'll take V any day of the week.

[mondo joe]

146. Hehehe. Also the only 24 people in all of LA too. n/t

[Uzybone]

198. 100% in agreement

Crach was way too contrived. it was like watching a long WB network drama. I will also give "V" about a 7, it was good but not near great. It was still way better than Crash.

[mondo joe]

214. I thought it was more like a big budget diversity training video.

But I like your analysis too.

[400Years]

67. I walked out of Crash

talk about contrived

[msatty99]

10. Great war movie was "Bridge on the River Kwai"

The insanity of war. The extremes which result from 'principle'.

[Erika]

32. You mean when we were attacked vs. w's war on Iraq?

When we attacked a country who never harmed us?

[msatty99]

36. Erika

I mean just what I said. WW2 was insane. But it looks like pure lucid
thought compared to Iraq. (IMO)

[MikeDuffy]

35. Did you know that in the book the film is based on

the Alec Guinness character prevents the blowing up of the bridge (I believe he cannot bear to destroy what he labored on so much to create)? The book is pretty short, as I recall. It has been quite a while since I've seen the movie (and even longer since reading the book), but I've always remembered what seemed to me one important point of the book, i.e. that it can be very difficult to destroy one's own creation...

(BTW this comment is no doubt irrelevant to this thread).

[msatty99]

38. No, I didn't know that

But every time I watch the movie, I try to figure out if the Colonel
falls on the detonator on purpose or not. I still am not sure and
I think they portrayed it that way for the ambiguity.

Is the book good?

[MikeDuffy]

58. I guess if the movie is trying to be somewhat true to the book

then you would have to think Guinness falls and blows up the bridge accidentally, because in the book the bridge doesn't even get blown up because of him. The movie has a lot more content than the book and therefore probably explores more ideas than the book, but you probably won't regret reading the book. (I read it as a teenager, so if I read it again I probably would understand things that passed over my head then and I would appreciate it even more).

[hedgehog]

I remember reading the book years ago.

I think the book had a lot more about the downfall of Europe before the "lesser" races. Pierre Boulle also wrote the book that inspired the Planet of the Apes. We're seeing a return of some of that thinking emerging in the fear that "Christian" Europe is being taken over by Moslem immigrants who don't have Western democratic values.

[rppper]

116. better war movie/s.......

the sand pebbles......murphys war....

Steve McQueen and Peter O'Toole....both pictures also about wars insanity....

[msatty99]

118. I haven't seen either of these

But I think both McQueen and O'Toole are great. SO I will definitely
check them out. It's hard to believe they are better than "Kwai"

[msatty99]

59. Fearless, the Big Lebowski, Eyes Wide Shut

[Balbus]

98. The Big Lebowski!!!

There ya go :thumbsup:

[cascadiance]

3. You missed the point...

The whole point of her going through what she did was that she was going through what many of us haven't gone through but others in other countries have gone through in terms of difficult times of strife where one has had to know when one needs to take risk to fight for freedom, potentially fighting one's neighbor down the street. One needs to be prepared to lose everything in order to take the risks needed to win the difficult challenges presented by a dictatorship. We've had two to three generations where people take their freedom for granted, and it's now starting to get threatened. Unlike places like the Ukraine, where they have memories of the need to fight for their freedom by they or their parents and knew they had to surround the palace when something was wrong, we're too afraid to take that extra step now, no matter how much anger might be brewing inside of us now. We may need to shake that, if our Democratic Processes can't weed this criminal cabal out of power!

[Theduckno2]

53. Yep, they missed the point.

".....we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.". Delaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776.

One has to get past the fear in order to triumph. Bushco has exploited fears to advance their criminal cabal; color coded alerts, plastic sheeting/duct tape and "...mushroom clouds..." come to mind. We as a nation needed to get past the fear instilled on September 11th, 2001, but Bushco with the help the help of the MSM nurtured and harnessed the fear for their own purposes.

NO FEAR!

I saw the movie Monday and hope to see it again later today.

[okieinpain]

228. yeah, but don't let our favorite sports team lose.

[Erika]

4. Your review runs against every other review I've read

about the movie. In fact, masks are now popular.

I'll see the movie this weekend. A friend says the religious GOP right are portrayed accurately as the monsters they now are. They've let go of Christ and embraced a greed based evil theocracy.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vinnie From Indy]

LOL! Good call !

It is pretty obvious to me!

[muriel_volestrangler]

62. Not so popular in British reviews

The Independent on Sunday: How to lose the gunpowder plot

The Independent: F for funny Guy (2 out of 5 stars)

The cleverest aspect of the film is the way it turns a terrorist into a crusading hero while remaining politically correct. What it doesn't manage is to create a credible future or avoid pomposity.

The Observer

The Guardian: It's also for Valueless gibberish (1 out of 5 stars)

BBC: while it may provoke thought, it rarely thrills or engages as a story (reviewer 2 out of 5; 'users' 4 out of 5)

BBC film prog presenter: If it had been called V for Vasectomy I could scarcely have found it a less enjoyable experience

[mattclearing]

82. A lot of Britons seemed to find it insulting or contrived.

Americans seem to be a more receptive audience to it. Dunno why, but that is what I've heard.

[Dorian Gray]

174. I think that if the film were attacking NYC

rather than London, it would have felt a bit more threatening to many Americans.

I can see why people didn't like the film. I liked it myself, but I don't think it's the best film that I've ever seen. I've enjoyed other films more, as well. I've had friends (very liberal friends) who slept through much of the movie. Comic book films are not everyone's cup of tea.

[upi402]

7. Did you like the * press conference better?

:shrug:

[msatty99]

18. Well, I thought Helen Thomas jabbing the Chimp in Chief was a lot more

exciting and real than V...so, I liked that.

[Erika]

25. Helen did a great job but reiterated W was too chicken to

honestly answer her questions. She did this on various daytime shows.

Exactly why are we in Iraq?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

90. Umm...

Here ya go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=730648&mesg_id=736815

[IChing]

9. Colin Quinn is that you?

Sounds like you are gonna be up against a "tough crowd"
Everyone is entitled to their own tastes and opinions.
But your post reminded me of a skit Colin did...I don't know ... a little retro.

Thanks for your viewpoint.
I plan on seeing it tomorrow

[burythehatchet]

13. My second trip tomorow

can't wait!

[htuttle]

11. I'm sorry there wasn't enough exploding shit to keep you interested

If the Wachowski Brothers didn't do it for you, perhaps you should check out a Bruckheimer production -- he's usually got twice as much exploding shit in his movies.

[msatty99]

29. I like the Coen brothers, espec Big Lebowski... the Wachowski's first

Matrix was very good. Bruckheimer...you like that? (just kidding)

[DefenseLawyer]

40. Nihilists!

Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

[msatty99]

42. Hey...there's a beverage here!!!

[Neil Lisst]

97. You called me?!

Then the least I can do is add my 4 part parody of the film this week, with appropriate Bush bashing with selective art and quotes.

[msatty99]

128. N your cartoon

much better than the movie.

[rinsd]

102. Sorry that comment just made me laugh...

...considering how dumbed down and simplistic the movie is vs. the book.

Now as a propaganda vehicle it will serve its purpose with its glaringly obvious metaphors and real life standins but as a movie? It was okay, not as good as the Matrix but not as bad as its sequels.

[Astrad]

14. The movie is pseudo-subversive (warning spoilers)

I don't want to be too hard on it because it is based on a comic book after all. But I can't take it as a serious polemic. It domesticates resistance. Makes it neat and tidy. Look at the V's apartment, who cleans it? Does he? And does he really have time to set up all those dominos? And when he orders all those masks and the fertilizer for the bomb how does he sign for it? And how come the populace all looks so complacent and middle class? People in old folks homes, people in very nice houses. Where's the tyranny other than that if you go out after dark you might get raped? Well that could happen now, in liberal democracies. Again it makes tyranny look Hitlerian. As though that's the only referent for it. The best point the film made was in blowing up the Houses of Parliament. Not that I support this. They are architectural masterpieces after all. But the idea that democracy is a living thing, not an edifice, not an established structure is well made. It's an important reminder to us all that institutions are not signs of liberty. In fact they can be the opposite. One needs to be in a constant state of overthrowing the establishment in order to have a modicum of freedom.

[Erika]

19. It's a fricking movie

I can see by some of the posts it might be on the banned list by rabid right wingers. You know, the thought control police.

[mondo joe]

22. What, you think you can't have a middle class home in a tyranny?

Bread and circuses, bread and circuses.

[libertad]

68. you didn't think locking people up for being homosexual was tyrannical?

What about killing the entertainer for making fun of the head of state? What about the state sponsored terrorism of planting viruses in the orphanage and hospital? What about locking up dissenters?
I found numerous incidents of tyranny.

[Teaser]

117. Who cleans his apartment?

Why did that even occur to you?

[Leopolds Ghost]

157. Why, in a civilized society, we must depend on others to clean our

apartments.

That's why upper middle class people are so tolerant on immigration.

We must stop deluding ourselves with fantasy worlds promoted by Levellers and Leftists, and start addressing the concerns of soccer moms who are overworked and can't afford to have their house cleaned, or their kids raised, in this changing global economy.

:sarcasm:

[Red Knight]

130. The movie is a fantasy

It has nothing to do with HOW he got fertilizer, or any other mundane details. It's a film that colors the real world---at least the one we seem to be headed---with images and symbols to tell a story. It doesn't matter WHO V is or what he looks like. What's important is what he represents. The film is far from subtle in its targets and points but it's very well done, IMO.

If you went to this looking for a mainstream superhero flick you'd be disappointed but that may be the fault of the trailers which seem to want to sell it like that. It's a very good film and I found it far from boring--the images and the symbols inject it with emotion and power.

And Natalie Portman was terriffic---even Oscar worthy.

Good flick---and the ideas it presents are extremely important.

I also loved the humor--especially the attack on the Bill O' Riely character. Hilarious.

This film can be looked at as a block or as a three dimensional image with many interesting sides and angles. If it's just action you're looking for though--well, it ain't The Matrix. And that isn't a bad thing.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

15. At least you caught up on your sleep.

[genie_weenie]

16. The V in the movie is changed from the graphic novel

He's much more a respectable freedom fighter (albeit with a flare for dramatics) than the true anarchist and killer in the novel.

V in the novel is telling humanity make a choice, think for yourselves or allow others to think for you. Choose anarchy or fascism...

I think the question arises of the movie arises, in whom do you trust with force and aggression?

[WildEyedLiberal]

17. He wears a mask because he's badly disfigured

Also, the entertainer who disappeared WAS gay, which he had to hide from the fascist government, or did you miss the entire conversation they had in his basement? What's your point? Gays are bad?

I'm sorry, but it appears you didn't like the movie because you don't have the capacity to understand it, which is different from disliking it on its merits. From your "review," it is apparent that you ignored/misread the entire film.

[genie_weenie]

21. My take on the mask

is the whole idea of some masks hide your true self and others reveal it.

Ala the artist, politiican lines in the film...

I think this was illustrated by Gordon, Eveys' boss with his opening up about himself in his inner sanctuary.

[msatty99]

26. Hey wildeyed, no, my point is not that gays are 'bad'.

and just because I disagree with you...you think that means I 'don't
have the capacity to understand"....wow.

I thought it was boring, predictable, not 'cool' when it comes to
torturing Evey and made the good guy subversives look like
they were a bit affected. Another poster notes...who cleans V's
lair? V speaks like an aristocrat or upperclass person.
That sort of grates on me...in the same tradition as Zorro (the
aristocrat who fights for the people...the people can't save themselves)

but.. go ahead..just think I'm dumb.

[Erika]

27. I've heard it portrays the Christian right

as evil and unChristian as they now are.

[CoffeeCat]

55. Yes, that's for sure....**spoilers**

I'm not criticizing Christians, because there are a lot of good Christians and a lot of decent religious people in the world.

However, there are many evil people who wear the banner of Christianity (leaders and followers). They are some of the most sadistic, pathological people--because they use religion to hide their crimes and corruption.

There is a character in the movie--a priest who is promoted to Bishop. This Bishop was once a leader in a secret torture prison, in which human medical experiments were conducted. We also see that this Bishop is a pedophile who often has sex with children. V kills this Bishop, and everyone understands the Bishop's glaring hypocrisy. His story is so common these days.

John Hurt's character throws around religious references too--and he's a corrupt, powermongering sicko.

I would say, as you said, that this movie gives unjust Christians their just desserts.

For those who actually STILL believe that Pat Robertson, Falwell, Ralph Reed and James Dobson are really Christians--maybe this movie will jolt them into reality. We can only hope.

[Imagevision]

96. "V" portrays what Bushco is doing to this country...!

[mondo joe]

33. It's very funny that you are so taken by such superficial issues

such as speaking like an aristocratic.

I think it makes sense of your opinion of Crash.

[ContraBass Black]

172. You don't have to be an aristocrat

To play with words and use proper grammar.

[msatty99]

173. Of course not Mr. Black, but that has always been Hollywoods

'shorthand' for an aristocrat. That's why in Die Hard, Bruce Willis
has to say Yippie Yi Kie A

Here it seems intended...its 'linked' up with our man in a mask with
a black cape and super fighting skills (with blades)..a la Zorro.
If you recall, was an aristocrat who 'fought for freedom' and against
oppression.

Or am I stretching it too far...Even in the commercial flick with
antonio banderas he is groomed by the original and THAT movie makes
the point of showing that Antonio, with the proper education can pass
as nobility. IE., 'aristocracy' is just a sham.

In "V" , the language signifies aristocracy (IMO) and
I saw nothing in the behaviour of the oppressors that they were
from aristocracy. They are evil people but they are 'of the people'and
their spokesman is 'populist' (like Rush baby)

In my opinion, true 'nobility' comes from character and is not a product
of breeding or wealth. The finest users (not to say artists) of language
have mostly been from 'common' backgrounds. (Shakespeare, Whitman)

But in "movieworld" using elaborate language with a lifting sharp
enunciation signifies a duke, earl or prince...doesn't it?

[ContraBass Black]

175. I don't think so.

I think that his speaking ability points to intelligence, education, and thorough thought behind his ideas. Nothing more.

His previous identity is lost. He came from nothing.

[mondo joe]

179. More hogwash.

If language signifies aristocracy in V it's only in your projection.

Alan Moore himself is as articulate and literate a person as you'll ever find and he is far from an aristocrat.

It's a shame when people can't see past their own issues.

[msatty99]

180. Ok, I will try to break it down in simpler terms for youse

1. I do not think that in the 'real world' adept use of language
is aristocratic or the only the province of aristocrats.

2 I do think that in "Hollywood" and "cinema", generally aristocratic
background is usually signified by 'high falootin' talk.

See the difference? Reality vs. Movie

When a filmaker wants to present someone as an aristocrat or upper
class person, the cheap quick and easy way to do it is make them talk
like a snob.

Now, in V, the filmakers decided to give V aristocratic diction.
Now if this were 'reality' then we could just say, Hey V, where you
from? Did you go to Cambridge or Eton or did you drop out to work on
your Pop's beer truck? But, since this is a film...we have to make
a decision...Either V is a person from the upper class or he is a phony
trying to talk like he is from the upper class.

Cause..see, its a movie.

[msatty99]

181. By the way....wan't our hero enamored of "The Count" of Monte Cristo?

not 'Grapes of Wrath"??

[mondo joe]

188. What a strange assumption, that all cinema shares a common

symbolism.

And what a strange prejudice to admit - "talk like a snob" indeed.

What's yet more sad is your conclusion that only someone of the upper class would authentically speak like V.

Stereotypes are ugly things.

[msatty99]

190. Mr. Mondo Joe, you are like having a wife...except sometimes

when I say the sky is blue...she agrees with me, plus
I bet she is smarter and better looking than you are.

[msatty99]

191. Joe, actually cinema does have a 'common' symbolism

of course not necessarily universal. I will give you an example:
good guys wear white hats and bad guys wear black hats. (to cite the
crudest example)

Of course, you apparently refuse to acknowledge the point of my post.

You are so correct that stereotypes are ugly things. They are BORING
too! That's part of why V was boring. OF COURSE V talks 'like' an
aristocrat. SO did the Count of Monte Cristo, Zorro, the scarlet
pimpernel and all these aristocratic heros who had to save 'us.'

You aren't really this dense are you? Also, try to have a sense of
humor.

[mondo joe]

196. It's become increasingly clear that your objection to the movie has

more to do with your hostility to the idea that anyone born to the upper class might actually contribute something, and not to the actual movie.

It's furthermore a real shame that you've somehow bought into the idea that only aristocrats can be literate or artistic.

[msatty99]

201. Mondo, again, I have come to the end of my willingness to debate with you.

You are going out of your way just to avoid understand what I have said.
I have to think you are just playing around. The alternative is
that you are simply not rational. OK the jokes on me...good one!

[mondo joe]

203. I don't know how many times you can come to the end of the same thing.

Normaly arriving at the end just once suffices.

[Minnesota_Lib]

124. You are not dumb...but I disagree....

"I thought it was boring..." - to each their own. I found it fascinating.

"...predictable." - few movies are unpredictable.

"...not 'cool' when it comes to torturing Evey and made the good guy subversives look like they were a bit affected." – This is one if the aspects I found so fascinating and thought-provoking. It was not clear-cut, black-and-white. Yes, he was a bit nuts and what he did was wrong, but he admitted as much later and paid his pentance by going to “meet his maker.”

"Another poster notes...who cleans V's lair?" – Err, who cleans your place? This is plain silly. He was shown cooking his own food, so I would suppose he is capable cleaning up after himself.

"V speaks like an aristocrat or upperclass person." – Since when is being literate the exclusive domain of the wealthy? If fact, I would think most wealthly, aristocratic types are probably fairly shallow. He sounded like someone who was definitely well-read (possibly from living in isolation) and maybe even an actor (he spoke of art quite a bit) in his previous life. I do wish they had revealed a bit more about his past, though.

Anyway, to each their own. I found "V" to be thought-provoking, fascinating and extremely well-acted by all the featured players, especially Hugo Weaving (AKA Elrond in LOTR trilogy and Agent Smith in the Matrix trilogy).

[mondo joe]

127. Thank you! I'll never understand how being literate became stigmsatized

by the right AND the left, or when Americans decided it was aristocratic.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

28. In the graphic novel (SPOILER).....

I never got the impression V was disfigured. I think he had to hide his identity because he was known to the folks he was going after. In fact, in one scene where he confronts one of his previous captors, he is asked to show his face again before his kills her. When he removes his mask, we see the back of his head and the victim saying "Its beautiful".

That said, I've not seen the movie as I'm waiting for the crowds to thin out. There's nothing that pisses me off more than not being able to hear the dialog due to rude, chatty audiences.

[WildEyedLiberal]

46. I haven't read the novel - that's interesting

In the movie, there is a brief glimpse of his hands, which are severely disfigured by burns - we also see footage of him in the middle of a roaring fire. It seems as though he was badly, severely disfigured in the fire, which is why he chose to disguise his entire body. That's how I took it, anyway. Obviously, the need to be anonymous played a factor as well.

[Malikshah]

24. Wouldn't want to spoil it for you any more than it already did for you...

Wow.

So, how *does* your garden grow?

[qanda]

30. You should at least put a spoiler tag on this thread

I just saw the movie tonight and I LOVED it! I loved the symbolism, the strength of ideas, the power of words and message that desperately needs to be told before it's too late.

[Erika]

34. Thanks. We'll definitely see it this weekend

Any flick who has the right wing extremists bristling needs to be seen.

[mondo joe]

37. Oh you and your high falooting aristrocratic ways!

Just kidding - it was brilliant!

[BEZERKO]

31. I enjoyed it, actually.

Blowing up Parliament's building though, I had to think about it. Then, just decided it's just a damn movie, sometimes symbols need to symbolically be blown up.

[Jade Fox]

39. Not surprised to hear that....

I thought The Matrix was a world class snoozer, and it was made by the same folks. I couldn't sit through it, and I tried. Twice.

[truebrit71]

41. They're out in force tonight...

:eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

88. Oh Loosen Up. Seriously. You're Hinting Someone's A Freeper Cause They

didn't think as highly of a movie as you wanted them too? I mean god, seriously, loosen up... ...it's a friggin movie.

[truebrit71]

131. There's a difference between thinking of a movie differently..

...and completely missing the point which the original poster did...plus there are certain key words that lend one to think something's amiss.....

BTW, I thought the movie was good, but not great...To be honest I found the mask very hard to get around, and when coupled with Agent Smith's voice annunciating very consonant it was initially very annoying...

I had a BIG problem with the V line stating that Guy Fawkes was a good guy and he was emulating his heroism. Guy Fawkes was NOT a good guy. At all.

It is something I will see again, if only to catch some parts again, but I wish there had been more back story into just how much of a totalitarianist regime the Brits were living under, especially about what a bunch of bastards the Fingermen were and who empowered them and why...There were an awful lot of blanks to fill in, and that's why I enjoyed it, anytime a movie can challenge you to participate in it to fully understand it, is a winner in my book, but it is quite obvious that some of it was simply too difficult for some to comprehend...

Overall I'd give it a 'B'.

[msatty99]

143. How arrogant!!!

you pose that I (the OP) completely missed the point of the movie. "some of it was simply too
difficult for some to comprehend..."

Although its insulting, I have learned to appreciate when someone undersestimates my
skill, intellect etc.,

That's' right...I thought the movie was boring and a crude cartoon because I was too
slow mentally to understand the sublime message of politcial extremism (and expression)
that all the V lovers 'got'.

What a hoot.

[truebrit71]

149. Ah yes. The premise of the movie was "give it to the man"...Um, no...

..not really. In fact not at all...

It is searingly obvious that you missed the point of the movie.

No you probably thought it was boring because there was no nudity and not enough shit got blown up...

[msatty99]

144. And to prove you are wrong...you are still clinging

to the idea that I am a 'freeper'...Boy are you wrong!

[truebrit71]

150. So me holding on to my ideas "proves" I'm wrong?

On what planet does that logic work???

[msatty99]

151. Mr Truebrit

all due respect,

If you think I am a freeper, then you are wrong.

If you persist in believing something that is wrong
then you are irrational. I would even say illogical.
Even here on Earth, this crazy illogical place.

Not everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, or bad, or a freeper,
or ignorant, or a boor.

I am glad you enjoyed the movie. It spoke to you. Good.

I saw the movie because of the many, like you, who sang its
praises.

I generally like the DU attitude and 'worldview' (if you can
say there is such a thing). So it meant something to me
to see such enthusiasm for the movie.

But in the event, I found the movie juvenile and obvious
and, in the end boring. But that's just me.

I'm just an old, stupid, former pot head lawyer with
a degree in English Lit.

[truebrit71]

152. In that case...

"I'm just an old, stupid, former pot head lawyer with
a degree in English Lit."

..I forgive you.... :evilgrin:

[Lizz612]

43. Knives capes and masks (spoilers)

I think you might have enjoyed it more if you had suspend your disbelief a little more.

Yeah the entertainer was gay. That means he had even more to loose if his house was searched, and he did the spoof anyways. Why? He thought it was worth it. Would you in his position?

The torture was supposed to be hard to swallow, it made V more dimensional than just "the good guy". He imprisoned her, tortured her, and it made sense in his mind as a way to free her; it supposed to be creepy. Odder yet, she loved him anyway. Why? I dunno, but I'm thinking and thats what I want from movies.

Where was her mind before? It was focused on living in the day to day. Surviving the dictatorship that killed her family. Her parents spoke out and were taken, don't you think that might be a wee bit traumatizing?

In the end he dies, Evey blows up parliament, roll credits. No heroes, no promises for the future, no one hint of anyone waiting in the wings to reestablish the status quo. Just the birth of turmoil/chaos/"anarchy in the UK!"

[mondo joe]

44. Not to mention the fact that SHE could have ended the torture any time

she chose to. That doesn't mean it was a nice thing to do - but y'know...

[Lizz612]

45. True true

One more reason why torture is no good; its moraly repugnant and the information is probably false since the tortured wants it to end.

[msatty99]

51. Maybe you're right Lizz,

Sometimes one's mood can strongly effect how you take in a movie.
I had read so much enthusiastic reports that my expectations were up.
Then the movie turned out to be so heavy handed and 'comic book'
that I got bored and irritated by it. Maybe in a different mood
I would feel differently about it.

Blue Velvet was adored by lots of people I respect when it came out.
When I saw it, I hated it. I thought it was phony and creepy.
I get enough creepy stuff in my regular life so the whole "Mommy"
thing was just repulsive. Years later, I saw it and thought it
was 'ok'. Still not wild about it but I didn't actually dislike it
as when I first saw it.

[Lizz612]

56. I can see that

The introductory "Vandetta villify visage viscocity vegan vagina" speak nearly put me off, but whatever. I went in expecting something rather heavily comicbookishness(and that Natlie Portman would be hot). I was actually braced for it to be way too comic book.

I also went with a friend, on a whim, while on vacation in DC. My mood was way up going in.

[radio4progressives]

47. Don't get to see the Anarchists defeating the Fascist State very often

Give us a better film that depicts that scenario.

as entertainment film goes even with all the bells and whistles and a couple of bad editing jobs, suspending belief and all that, i pretty much dug it and yes, especially the ending.

[Joe Fields]

48. Naturally, you are entitled to your opinion. I don't share it.

Given the comic book contextual background, I thought it was rather good. Not great cinema, but highly entertaining, not to mention chillingly timely. I am surprised this administration hasn't banned it.

[radio4progressives]

49. So, what did you think of Why We Make War?

that was a documentary film not intended to entertain...

but maybe you could give us your critique on that one without spoiling the ending, cuz i haven't seen it...

[msatty99]

52. haven't seen it yet.

[CoffeeCat]

50. I loved the movie and I found many important messages in it...

I thought "V" was very moving, and I definitely didn't have the same experience that you did.

There were so many parallels to our current political situation--that I was very consumed by the movie for that reason.

Yes, there were imperfections. However, the overall themes were more powerful than the film's faults.

Yes, I had mixed emotions about what V did to Evey--staging a prison and torturing her. However, V was re-creating the scenarios under which his strength was catalyzed and--ultimately, his suffering was how he gained the strength to fight for freedom. He "passed the torch" to Evey--and she took his vision to the next step.

When Evey was in prison, there was dialog about the "one inch of you that they can never touch"...and how we should all hold onto that once inch. V stripped Evey of her fears, which had buried that "one inch" of Evey for most of her life. By stripping her down to that "one inch"--the fears that controlled her and crippled her--were melted. She was reborn. She became that "one inch."

I was inspired by that. In the end--he helped Evey to reclaim her strength. Yes, it was an ugly trip getting there, but V helped her to reclaim her soul and become that "one inch."

Sometimes you have to go to some very dark, scary places--to get to who you really are.

There were hundreds of messages and beautiful, poetic moments in this movie---if you want to see them.

[phusion]

84. well said...

:toast:

[mattclearing]

139. Thanks for this.

That was exactly what I got from it, and I was similarly moved.

I think the Wachowskis and McTiegue hit the mark there, for people who were willing to hold up the target.

[Generic Other]

54. I enjoyed it for what it was. Personally would have liked to see as anime

I never think comic books translate to film very well. I always miss the art frames and the thought bubbles.

[Lizz612]

57. Not that I don't like anime but......

I don't think it would get such a large audience if it were animated in any style. Transfer from one media to another is always hard.

[Generic Other]

61. You're probably right

I just find comic book heroes a bit campy no matter what.

I liked "V" anyway. It's message was subversive. And interesting.

[baby_mouse]

63. Haven't seen it yet. I don't have particularly high hopes.

Moore's stuff is terminally unfilmable. His stuff's intricate and takes several readings, you can't strip out all that stuff without stripping out the most valuable part of his work.

[alcibiades_mystery]

64. I agree: the film was stupid and boring

The people praising its "political statement" on nthese boards vastly overestimate the value of its politics.

[cantstandbush]

65. Yes, and for people who feel as you (and you are entitled) there never

would have been an American revolution or Bastille Day.

[alcibiades_mystery]

78. Um...

Huh? I mean, huh?

Nice non sequitor, but otherwise...:shrug:

[rinsd]

105. Yes, not liking a movie means that person hates freedom

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem, wit us or agin us and all that jazz...

:eyes:

This shit cracks me. All these DUers following the siren's call of hollywood marketing, it reminds me of the Lenin(?) quote about the capitalists selling the communists the rope to hang them with?

[file83]

133. You've got that quote twisted, because in this case...

...it's not hollywood "marketing" the rope to the citizens for their hanging. To the contrary, this movie is giving the citizens the rope to hang the capitalists with. In case you haven't noticed it, V for Vendetta has had many people from the right try and paint it as a terrorist sympathizer's movie. Now, if you've seen the movie, then the REAL establishment is playing right into the hands of the plot of the movie. Ironic, isn't it?

[rinsd]

134. C'mon now.....

Shall I give you a list of the movies that were going to open people's eyes and start the revolt?

Shall I list the songs that were suppossed to do the same?

Now I got the quote right and its tale or irony and I guess in Lenin's mind poetic justice. Hollywood has learned to tap into and make a great deal of money off a market that normally avoids it even denounces the way its business is conducted.

On edit: I wanted to add the movie's propaganda value is a positive, but not nearly at the lengths people describe it here which makes my point about irony all the more delicious. People here are saying "you have to see this movie, we have to go again and again", attaching a near requisite of having seen this movie to prove your liberal bonafides. Nothing wrong with that persay but I do find the irony amusing.

[file83]

137. I suppose that Orwell, Huxley and Bradbury's message was a "rope"

to hang the citizens with? :shrug: Are we supposed to cast their messages to the wayside just because they were "capitalists" trying to sell their books to make "money"?

Don't be ridiculous. The fact is that EVERY movie made is supposed to make money. Does that mean that we are to AUTOMATICALLY cast the messages they contain to the wayside because they are tainted by the "desire" for cash?

Of course not, so dig deeper for your irony.

[rinsd]

147. You've completely missed my point....

...whether that was willful or not remains to be seen.

I didn't claim taint, just irony. Being ironic is not a moral judgement and at no point did I say this was hypocritical because it isn't. If wannabe revolutionaries flocking to a big budget Hollywood blockbuster about revolution doesn't make one giggle a little in its irony well, all I can say is to each his own.

[sarcasmo]

69. Your idea of a good movie is?

[mondo joe]

70. For as FEW mainstream movies as we get in which the Bushco

fascists are the bad guys, in which standing up to oppressive governments is heroic, in which gays are even sympathetic much less human, a number of posts strike me as bizarrely dissatisfied with this movie.

[alcibiades_mystery]

77. That's the point

The "Bushco" fascists only appear to be the bad guys to people who already think as we do. The "bad guys" are, in essence, too caricatured, to easily assimilable to bad guys past, and too easily distanced from bad guys present. The problem with Bushco is not that Bush is an easily disliked evil Chancellor, but that he is a too easily liked "regular guy." That was the problem with Thatcherism as well. To the extent that the "bad" government in Vendetta is soooooooo bad, it is easily dismissed. That's why the film is useless, and only DUers who imagine Bush as a totalitarian chancellor see any "subversive" value in it. It's easy for all Americans to dislike the totalitarian regime depicted in the film. It is much more difficult to think through the conditions of the variety of fascism that we currently live under, which has no resemblance to that one. Apart from that, the film also struck me as too easy and therefore boring.

[mondo joe]

86. I'd disagree.

There's people who think as we do, there's people who will always disagree, and there's a nice big middle. I think it was just right for much of the middle.

The film's not useless -it's entertaining and a little inspiring.

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. You know I would have to watch the same movie in

different theaters.

F 9.11 was like that, I watched it first in a theater where people from lower middle class \ military backgrounds came, and people where hooting and hollering. I then watched it in a very well heeled area of town and we only had silence... you could hear a needle drop. When I watched V it was in a more or less well heeled theater... and people were silent... yet when the movie ended people were talking among-st themselves. It would be an interesting study.... assuming I had the money to do that

This said I think you are under estimating the changes under the surface in the country. The line where the government should fear the people and not the people fear the government is starting to resonate... but that is just me, from talking to folks who ARE NOT DU'ers or for that matter, freepers.

[rinsd]

106. I can see not liking the movie because of the above....

especially in light of the book being much more complicated.

But I think you're wrong on a propaganda level. Simple works.

[msatty99]

112. Thanks for articulating further what I did not like in the movie

It isn't hard to see John Hurt as the Chancellor is a bad guy.
Is it supposed to be a big shock for the populace in the movie?

[mondo joe]

119. Is it? What has the general populace seen of him?

A protector? Do they even have a choice in who holds office?

For goodness sakes.

[msatty99]

120. Mr. Mondo Joe,

I have just about decided that you just don't like me. I guess because
I didn't like a MOVIE that you liked.

OK. If I say You are so right will that make it better for you?

I guess you missed my point. The John Hurt-Adolf Hitler character was
SO OBVIOUSLY a 'bad' guy. In my opinion, it is not very interesting
since as has often been demonstrated in movies and fiction (and life)
the bad guys who also contain good or appear good are much more
interesting. (Think Richard III).

Bush (IMO) is much scarier than the boogie man chancellor of V.
The big 'meme' that helped get him elected was the idea that
"he's a guy I could have a beer with" as opposed to Gore who
was spun as a technocrat pol.

But Mondo, buddy, I think you just don't like me.

[mondo joe]

121. I don't know you, so I can't dislike you. I'm just pointing out your

errors.

1. "The John Hurt-Adolf Hitler character was SO OBVIOUSLY a 'bad' guy."

Obviously to whom? When did the general populace see him being "bad"?

Would it even matter if anyone DID think he was a rabid tyrant? Could they do anything about it?

And don't you think that by calling him Hitler you point out that REAL people have lived with an ACTUAL Hitler?

[msatty99]

122. Mr. Mondo, Here's my last post on this with you tonight

First, thanks for 'getting my back' on my errors.

As for your questions and comments:

Obvious to whom? Hmmm ...to ME. Maybe you didn't notice Hurt was a bsd
guy...I'm just sayin'...

When did the populace see him being bad? I don't know. Maybe when he
was taking their parents, friends and family to deep dark holes?

Could they do anything about it? Hmmmm....that would take a lot more
than putting on a funny mask and wearing a cape, in my opinion...but.
hey what do I know.

I didn't call him Hitler...the real Hitler was scarier than this
cartoon for exactly the reasons I stated earlier...a nation actually
thought he was good...cared about them...wanted the best for them..
But, I probably don't understand these things.

See ya Joe, maybe we can find a topic we agree on.

[mondo joe]

125. Did you notice that you, in the audience, are privvy to scenes

the general population isn't?

The guy has been chancellor for a long time - you have no idea what his public image was or is. You only see him behind the scenes.

Did the US see Bush being bad when US citizens were taken away? Spied on? No - not enough.

You call him Hitler ("The John Hurt-Adolf Hitler character")but then say you didn't "I didn't call him Hitler".

You say the Chancellor isn't as scary as because people believed in Bush and in Hitler - but obviously the people believed in the Chancellor at one point - a point you're not privvy to.

In most cases I wouldn't expect people to think they know what they couldn't even be aware of - but since you think you judge V as an "aristocrat", since you slept through the movie and left it but still think you know what happened... well, it's not surprising.

[Dorian Gray]

235. "Did you notice that you, in the audience, are privvy to scenes...."

Mondo, I had to jump in here. I liked the movie, so I'm just playing a sort of "devil's advocate" here. But, isn't that what the viewer is saying? That the Chancellor is silly because he is so obviously the bad guy (TO THE VIEWER!). It doesn't matter what the population in Britain think of him (in the film). What matters is that he was so obviously a charicature of a bad guy to the viewers, and that was one of the factors in making the film boring for that one viewer.

I've known a few people who didn't love this film. (I liked it, but would rate it a 7 or 8 out of 10. I thought Portman did a fantastic job. I liked a lot of the film, and I thought that it was thought provoking. But, I've heard similar complaints from people about the Chancellor and other characters, so I understand where the OP is coming from.)

[file83]

159. Maybe we can find a happy middle here? I think what

would have added a "scarier" element to the Chancellor's character would have been to contrast what we saw of him "behind the scenes" to some images of him being a downright "nice guy" in the public's (in the story) perception of him on TV (hugging babies, hanging out at some "ranch" doing ranch stuff).

I think maybe that's what you are getting at? That way, it would allow the audience to reach the conclusion that maybe Bush isn't such a "nice guy" after all? Although, I think a lot of us know that already (he's a fucking lunatic war monger), but it would have added some depth to the Chancellor's character.

Despite that "could have been better" flaw, I still think the movie was great and much needed.

[file83]

135. Now I see why you "missed the point". The movie isn't SUPPOSED to

be about Bush NOW. This movie is a general warning about where the PATH with Bush (or any other Executive hard right winger) in a seeming "democracy" will inevitably go: Fascism.

The movie shows the "evil Chancellor" at his fascist apex - the point at which violent reVolution is both necessary and justified.

If you miss that point, then of course, this movie would seem ridiculous. Never forget to appreciate the futuristic allegory of the movie, don't make the mistake of trying to interpret it as a literal representation of the current situation.

Not to mention the obvious fact that Bush is the President of the U.S. He doesn't live in Britain. How could you make that mistake? :shrug:

[rinsd]

136. Reading comprehension is good

"Not to mention the obvious fact that Bush is the President of the U.S. He doesn't live in Britain. How could you make that mistake? "

AM seems well aware of that. His/her complaints are that the evil was too superficial and unrealistic(therefore people dimiss it as never happening here) and the metaphors for the Bush admin were too hamhanded. Now I imagine what further biases him is that he read the book/graphic novel/whatever as did I. That story is more complicated and shows how the fascist state came to be, how "natural" it was.

I would agree with him that simplification made for a less interesting movie. I thought it was okay and could have been better.

I disagree with him on its value as propaganda because as I said before I believe that simple works. But as I also said I think people are overblowing its value as propaganda.

[file83]

138. Actually, I can read quite clearly, can you?

"AM" said:
"The problem with Bushco is not that Bush is an easily disliked evil Chancellor, but that he is a too easily liked "regular guy."

AM is attempting to downgrade the movie because the "Evil Chancellor" guy doesn't closely resemble Bush's character enough. My point (which you conveniently didn't address) is that the evil Chancellor was at his fascist apex, the height of his power, and his grip was at it's tightest. That's when we enter the story - and that is when V is already blowing up buildings and killing people in power.

The reason the movie makers did this was because if they had V killing a guy like Bush the movie would probably get banned.

[rinsd]

145. "which you conveniently didn't address"

Ohhhhhhhh now ya got me? That was all part of my plan.

Part of AM's point was the jump to the APEX with very superficial laying of the groundwork that brought them to that apex. It doesn't sufficiently explain the populace's apathy in the face of monstrosity.

But I am sure you knew that already.

"The reason the movie makers did this was because if they had V killing a guy like Bush the movie would probably get banned"

He didn't have to look like Bush. The Chancellor could have been more nuanced though. Shit Lucas's Empereor was more complicated.

[alcibiades_mystery]

168. I didn't make any mistake, nor did I miss any point

My point is that these so-called "fascist" apexes are a joke. They are too reminiscent of an older version of fascism and say little about the current version. Your MISTAKE is that you consider fascism to naturally evolve into that "apex" version (if it gets bad enough, you know). That's nonsense. That supposed apex was characteristic of one kind of fascism, that can be easily shunted off into a bad ole past or dystopic future - it doesn't really matter which, as long as it says little or nothing about the kind of power that circulates NOW. And that's precisely what the film does. It presents a picture of a dystopic fascism reminiscent of an earlier fascism but avoids at all points presenting OUR KIND of fascism. As for it being a film, fine, whatever. I agree it is just a film. The point is that DUers are crowing about its political effects, and I think it would have little, precisely because its vision of fascism is so alien to our own.

As for the time for revolution being ripe, I would say that time is ...er...right fucking now. And that it is a production of our own kind of fascism to say that things are peachy if we ain't living in Nazi Germany (or V for Vendetta England). We don't need a revolution, our kind of fascism says, because things aren't THAT bad. And that is how our kind of fascism reproduces itself and consolidates power. And meanwhile the system of capitalist production murder millions around the globe and sucks the blood of generation after generation, and now is engaged in a depraved and self-destructive assault on the very ecosystems that sustain us. Yes, but revolution isn't necessary now, because squads of thugs aren't knowkcing down the doors of talk-show hosts and killing them in their homes for owning a Koran? Please. That's like saying that we're not really ready to oppose the guy who is ass-raping us because he hasn't yet seen the need to knock our teeth out. Your very understanding of fascism is what allows OUR version of fascism to exist.

[msatty99]

177. Here here.... my hunch is that some of those who are so

enthusiastic about this movie don't appreciate how truly
screwed up the era we are living in now is.

I think when people in the year 2206 look back at us they
are going to be as shocked as we are when we read about the
French Revolution today.

[Texasgal]

71. Funny isn't it...

When you don't agree with the mindset of DU, all of the sudden you have no "point" or you are "stupid" or "useless". :)

Incredibly progressive group we have here, huh. :eyes:

[The Stranger]

72. Worst. Post. Ever.

And my faith in DU was recently being restored . . .

[mattclearing]

83. But the Crash post redeemed the thread.

Priceless. :D

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

89. I'm Just Curious Why.

You seem to feel strongly about how bad this thread is. What are the things that make it so bad as to be the worst post ever?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

73. I haven't seen it yet, but I'm not overoptimistic.

I liked the book (although I didn't think it was as clever as some of Alan Moore's other stuff), but from what I've heard he himself is very contemptuous of the film, which doesn't fill me with hope, and the track record of Hollywood adapting his work (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I think Hellraiser although I may be wrong about that, something else which is on the tip of my tongue but which I can't quite remember) is not stellar.

I shall probably go and see it, but I'm not holding my breath. The book is well worth reading, though.

Oh, and in answer to questions about films people think are good, I can't help mentioning Cabaret, which blatantly inspired at least one scene in the book, and thus can legitimately claim to be the film's Grandfather. That's some fairly big boots to live up to.

[EOTE]

94. Hellraiser became Constantine....

Both Constantine and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen were awful movies. I thought From Hell was pretty good, but I thought V for Vendetta was the best Moore movie by far. They're working on a movie version of The Watchmen and I can't wait to see it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

107. I thought the book of V was quite good,

but I felt that the imagery was slightly unoriginal and less clever as a concept than Top 10 (although there was far more depth to it than that, obviously) and much of Watchmen or to a slightly lesser extent Promethea did.

[DrGonzoLives]

74. Dear God, people, it's just a damn movie

The amount of ad hominem attacks in this thread is just amazing.

I guess we can add another litmus test movie to the list at DU, like the "If you don't like Brokeback Mountain you're a homophobe" chestnut.

[msatty99]

99. Thanks, I feel like a traitor for thinking the movie was juvenile

as some here question my intelligence, claim I'm a freeper( or insinuate)
suggest I'm a homophobe etc.,

I just didn't think the movie lived up to the hype I was seeing on the
boards.

Some poster raised a question mark about Eyes Wide Shut, which I think
is a very great movie, much more subversive and as a bonus for some
here, it has masks!

There is a doctor who is drifting along in his perfect world with a
perfect wife, perfect job, perfect apt etc., and because of his natural
fleshly desires, curiuosity and privileged arrogance stumbles into
a world of perversity and personal/political power ... He discovers that
despite his modest success he is really little more than a clean up boy
for his wealthy and powerful friend...he is owned, body and soul.

He has been asleep...dreaming only to wake up...and realize he has no
choice to continue on Eyes Wide Shut.

[Bridget Burke]

75. OK! I'll be sure to catch V in the theaters.

Thanks for your opinion.

By the way, it's not a Zorro mask. It's a Guy Fawkes mask. "Gunpowder, treason & plot!"

Also: There are several fora for discussing entertainment, etc. Does your distaste have anything to do with a political message you detected?

[Cyrano]

76. I've read most of the posts here, and while I wish I could make an

intelligent contribution to this conversation, I'm still trying to figure out the hidden messages in "Bambi."

[Lisa]

79. the entertainer was a "diletante" in what sense?

As in, not really taking things seriously (not a genuine revolutionary)?

I thought that was actually one of the more realistic situations in the piece. It's interesting how many people get swept up in political events, who weren't seemingly cut out for a leadership role, but thought it looked like the fun or "in" thing to do -- or who were being opportunistic or vengeful -- or were just plain contrary.

I had the impression that he had "misunderestimated" (as Bush might say) how dangerous the situation could get. Either he was overconfident in how his fame/visibility would protect him to some extent -- or he was a bit clueless about what had happened to other people (the disappearances of other homosexuals, shown in the movie flashbacks, surely would have been noticed and speculated upon).

Sure, the film is a gothic fantasy -- as is "Batman" -- and is bound to oversimplify a lot of things and go heavy on the symbolism, because that's what the genre does. I thought the satirical sequence with the Benny Hill chasing around and impersonation was actually rather revealing (if not strikingly original, since the "play within a play" has been used for centuries).

[tocqueville]

85. Read the plot on Wikipedia = BORING

same old old lone ranger myth, the sick anarchist wet dream.

wars over dictatorships are won by DEMOCRATIC ENLIGHTED masses not by twisted Guy Fawkes/Zorro figures...

[Lizz612]

108. True, but the fiction is more entertaining

We all know, because we've all seen in our time, that what you said is true. But that doesn't mean that we don't find the Lone Ranger enticing. A face, a leader, even if just in a movie, is easier to attatch to than an englightened mass. Which in real life leads to all sorts of problems, but in a movie (especially since V dies) we can walk out feeling okay about it.

As for the "sick anarchist wet dream"; it gives the character more depth, he's not a purely good guy, he's twisted.

I think that before you pass judgement on a work (either the film or the book) you should do more than read the plot synopsis. A plot synopsis takes all the thrill out of a work, and with out thrill of course its going to sound boring.

[mondo joe]

114. A lone ranger, like Gandhi or MLK.

Enlightened masses have to start somewhere.

[ContraBass Black]

123. No, not like MLK or Ghandi. Fully opposite.

Remember, V blows things up and kills people. If you saw that movie and just said, "Yeah! Ideas are bulletproof!" you didn't think.

[mondo joe]

126. But like them both in being a focal point. You missed the analogy. n/t

[Minnesota_Lib]

161. But V wasn’t a lone ranger, a single person…

The movie goes to pains to hint that V represents us all. It was a bit deeper than Zorro.

I am probably guilty of over-analyzing a bit, but upon further thought (helped by reading the plot of the graphic novel) it seems that V’s past and identity was left ambiguious because he represented many people. He was Gordon (I’m sure there is a V-word somehow associated with Gordon), he was Valerie (the lesbian in the cell next to his), he was a Victim and a Villain, he was eVeryone (the people rose up as one, all dressed as V)...and in the end, EVey became him, sending the explosive-laden train on its journey (in the novel, she does indeed become V and continues his work after he dies).

V was a symbol. He was all of us.

[Dob Bole]

87. I loved it...but I think the book is probably better

I'm a huge Alan Moore fan, and he wouldn't attach his name to the film because he didn't write the script.

[mondo joe]

93. Alan Moore is just a cranky pants.

He's brilliant, without doubt, but he's also a crab. He's now vowed to not work with essentially any existing publisher because of one slight or another he's suffered at their hands.

Now given what's come of some of his material, I don't blame him for generally opting to not attach his name, just on principle.

But I think this movie did good service to his series - much, much better than I ever expected, in fact. And in some ways the tidying up and the more modern references were an improvement. IMO.

[MissMarple]

91. My son liked it, and he is really into movies.

But then, he REALLY likes "Running on Empty". He has practically memorized the entire movie, not to mention most of Quentin Tarantino's film efforts.

I asked him for a particular line from a movie to post on a DU thread. He immediately offered up "Say hello to my little friend".

He really is a very nice kid, though. :)

[donco6]

92. You liked Eyes Wide Shut and think V is boring?

Hmmm. Okay. :shrug:

[msatty99]

100. See my post # 99 above, yes I liked Eyes Wide Shut

it is certainly far superior to V in many ways. But, that's my opinion.

But what can I say..I'm just an ignorant, freeper, homophobe:sarcasm:

[donco6]

104. Wow, all that and they let you post here?

Snicker. It must be a slow news day or somethin'.

In all honestly, though, E.W.S. just annoyed me. Movies with ridiculously rich people who are always whining about how horrid their lives are - it just makes me want to throw something! Give me something with explosions and a good martini and I'm set. :)

[walldude]

101. Boring? I see a thread here with nearly 100 responses..(SPOILER)

maybe the movie wasn't to your taste, but regardless of your personal opinion of the movie you can't say it wasn't well done. If it were as bad as you say nobody would be talking about it. The movie has a philosophy, and you don't find that in a comic book movie too often. As far as your "happy Hollywood" ending you couldn't be more wrong. V dies at the end. Before he finishes what he set out to do. He leaves the fate of the people in the hands of the people.

I think Alan Moore might have actually liked this. It holds the spirit of the original piece and actually left in some suprising things unlike what they did to his other books...

[iconoclastNYC]

103. I loved it.

Anyone can find something to complain about.

I didn't think it was boring at all. It had some holes in the plot but it certainly wasn't boring.

[InfoMinister]

109. SPOILERS - What Alan Moore Had To Say About The Movie - SPOILERS

Alan Moore was the guy who wrote the comic book and he read the script and absolutely hated it.

"Moore: Those words, "fascism" and "anarchy," occur nowhere in the film. It's been turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country. In my original story there had been a limited nuclear war, which had isolated Britain, caused a lot of chaos and a collapse of government, and a fascist totalitarian dictatorship had sprung up. Now, in the film, you've got a sinister group of right-wing figures — not fascists, but you know that they're bad guys — and what they have done is manufactured a bio-terror weapon in secret, so that they can fake a massive terrorist incident to get everybody on their side, so that they can pursue their right-wing agenda. It's a thwarted and frustrated and perhaps largely impotent American liberal fantasy of someone with American liberal values against a state run by neo-conservatives — which is not what "V for Vendetta" was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about . The intent of the film is nothing like the intent of the book as I wrote it. And if the Wachowski brothers had felt moved to protest the way things were going in America, then wouldn't it have been more direct to do what I'd done and set a risky political narrative sometime in the near future that was obviously talking about the things going on today?

George Clooney's being attacked for making <"Good Night, and Good Luck">, but he still had the nerve to make it. Presumably it's not illegal — not yet anyway — to express dissenting opinions in the land of free? So perhaps it would have been better for everybody if the Wachowski brothers had done something set in America, and instead of a hero who dresses up as Guy Fawkes, they could have had him dressed as Paul Revere. It could have worked."

- http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224142

[msatty99]

111. V is for "vindicated"

:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: Ha!!!

[Beaverhausen]

148. How many writers don't like films made of their work?

Plenty. And Alan Moore is a big old curmudgeon who doesn't like much of anything.

I loved the film and plan to see it again. I'm sorry you didn't like it.

But to call it boring just blows my mind. :crazy:

[msatty99]

155. What else do you call a movie that literally puts you to sleep?

I found myself nodding off when V was telling Evey all his reasons
for having locked her up, torturing her etc.,

I am not sure that locking up a person and torturing them leads
to a epiphany on the value of freedom.

I have dealt with a lot of people who are locked up
and it is almost universally degrading, corrupting and
soul crushing.

Please remind me, how did that help Evey?

[Beaverhausen]

156. I compare it to what is happening to us...now...here...in the US

Do we have to get to the point where each of us is imprisoned and tortured before we rise up and do something? Just what will it take?

We have to get to the point where we don't have any fear and we have to rise up against the evil powers that are threatening to take over our country and our very freedoms.



That's what I got out of it. I was moved to tears by that entire portion of the film.

[mondo joe]

162. Sounds like an attention span problem, frankly. n/t

[msatty99]

164. I'm sorry......you were saying?

[mondo joe]

165. It "put you to sleep".

I've seen a number of boring movies.

I've sat in many times that number boring meetings.

Never been put to sleep by one.

If a movie "put you to sleep" it might have more to do with you than the movie.

[msatty99]

166. Say again....I nodded off before I could finish reading your post....eom

[mondo joe]

167. Here's a link to the Narcolepsy Information Page for you.

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/narcolepsy/narcolepsy.htm

:-)

[Misunderestimator]

219. ...

:spray:

[mondo joe]

113. That it's a Bush-era parable set in a different country is what I LIKE

about it.

I revere Alan Moore as a writer, but his panties are permanenntly in a knot. V in the original is great, but somewhat dated, and less relevant than the movie we got.

He knows how it is - if he wanted to see his vision in a movie he should have made it himself OR not sold the rights.

[Leopolds Ghost]

158. Moore = another moron who equates Anarchy with blowing up buildings

Which, as we have seen in the case of the persons behind 9-11
(not to mention the Seattle demonstrations), is utterly false.

(Anti-globalization activists never blew up anybody - unlike Bush.)

Moore is just upset because "the other side" (a group of fascists) took his idea and ran with it on 9-11. And yes, plenty of so-called "anarchists" and other leftists proceeded to wring their hands. Then turned around and expect us to be outraged if, indeed, Americans (or whoever) had any involvement in 9-11. As if it were somehow OK to blow up buildings otherwise...

Violent hypocrites who associate blowing stuff up with social change. That's the real problem and it sounds like listening to Moore -- yet another comic-book anarchist who believes in the unlimited power of the individual -- can't fix it. Fascism and antinomianism are two sides of the same coin. One leads to the other, as we have seen in the case of Soviet Russia. Genuine anarchism (or left libertarianism, or direct democracy) would not embrace or have use for "code name V".

[tlsmith1963]

170. Huh?

I have *never* heard Michael Moore say that he wants to blow things up! Where did you get this information?

Tammy

[msatty99]

171. Tammy, Michael Moore is ON RECORD

as being in favor of many many blow ups!

The information is gleaned from a close reading, 'between the lines'
of his "Hate america' polemics. (such as F-911)

I have even seen, somewhere, Michael Moore's face photoshopped
onto the V mask.

I assume that is sufficient proof for you.:smoke: :smoke: :freak:

[msatty99]

178. ping

[Beaverhausen]

194. Uh...we "kick" posts here - FR is where you "ping"

[kiki]

183. Hmmm... 'between the lines'

Kinda sounds like another way of saying "He's never actually said anything like this."

And "'Hate America' polemics"? Please. Consider the source from which you most likely picked up that little gem.

And I think they were talking about Alan Moore.

[ContraBass Black]

185. Have a look at his reply right above yours.

[kiki]

186. ?

Don't get you.

[msatty99]

187. I am joking!!!!!!!!!! Michael Moore had nothing to do with this

Tammy apparently thought so. Alan Moore is the author of the origianl V.

It called "humor", as in "having a sense of"

[devilgrrl]

221. BULLSHIT!

Uh huh... whose ass did you pull that one out of?

[KevinJH87]

110. anybody know how moderates or conservatives liked it?

Has anybody heard how people who are not very politically involved liked it? Did they see the ideas or just explosions and knife fights?

How about moderates or conservatives? (I can only imagine...)

Whether you liked it or not, its ideas seem to have caused a lot of discussion and thinking. That makes it better than most movies in the theaters.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

115. I thought it was pretty rubbish

although I'd say the torture sequence was on of its strongest parts (if not the strongest outside of the finale).

Bnd Benny fucking Hill?? Why do the Wachowski's hate the UK? :)

[Starbucks Anarchist]

129. I wasn't going to see it, anyway.

The Wachowski Brothers are partly responsible for the state of moviemaking today.

Specifically, the overdone CGI effects, hyper-editing and uninspired, bloodless violence. Of course, the Wachowskis aren't the only perpetrators, but they definitely made this style popular.

It's all the more sad since their first film, "Bound," was actually a well-done film noir. Even the first Matrix movie was decent enough, but their legacy has hurt filmmaking for the foreseeable future.

[mattclearing]

140. You can't blame the Wachowskis for that.

That's like blaming Nirvana for Silverchair, or Alice in Chains for Creed.

Bound was a great movie, as was the Matrix.

Having seen V, it redeems them for the Matrix sequels in many ways, and it is likely not as special effects laden as you may be tempted to assume.

It is more shot/character driven...more Bound than Matrix, I'd say.

[walldude]

153. Gimme a break....

First of all this movie contained non of the things you mention, overdone CGI, hyper editing, uninspired bloodless violence. Second if you are going to blame the state of movies on someone it should be Lucas and Spielberg. However I am grateful for all they have done for filmmaking. Sure Hollywood is in a slump. Has nothing to do with writers, directors, actors or crew. You wanna blame someone blame Sony, Time Warner, Universal, the studios. They throw up on the screen whatever they think the teenagers will see this week. There are plenty of people out there who know what the tools are and know how to use them, they just can't get a movie greenlit. There are good movies out there and there are good movies which use all the things you rail about. To blame your lack of interest on a couple of filmmakers is bizarre to say the least. Oh and BTW the Wachowski's are the writers on this film not the directors...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

160. I didn't say they were the only perpetrators.

They did start the revival of the type of filmmaking I talked about, though, but were not the original ones to blame.

And I didn't imply all new films are Wachowski-like. There are many good films released today, but many mainstream movies do go through the Wachowski treatment, sadly.

And I'm well aware of the stupefying actions of the studios. I'm actually an aspiring screenwriter myself.

But my mistake on crediting the directing to the Wachowskis.

[Spinoza]

141. 'Boring' doesn't begin to describe

the torture I felt. I went because my (21 year old) son told me it was great. I really tried to find something--anything-- of value, but slept thru the last 45 minutes. Yes, it was pretentious and patronizing, but above all it was DULL.

[cantstandbush]

154. Six more months of the Bushbot administration and I bet you will want

to the film again.

[tlsmith1963]

169. Wasn't Dull to Me

But then, it was mostly about *ideas*, not the usual car-crashes & things that we usually see in American films. It really spoke the truth about what we are facing. I was mesmerized.

Tammy

[TexasLawyer]

142. I had the same reaction

I thought it was a very flawed story.

[Protagoras]

176. Shocking Discovery!

Not everyone likes the same things in Movies and Not everyone sees the same message in movies (or art or music or literature).

I'm amazed. Glad this thread and all the others on BBM/Crash were able to open my eyes otherwise I'd have continued to think that there was some obvious and objective criterion by which I should be judging (or having people inform me of their judgements) which things were worth while or meaningful and which things were not :D

Anyone seen "This Divided State" yet?

:popcorn:

[go west young man]

182. Not boring at all! Actually very exciting and thought provoking!

And what passes for excitement for you these days. Sitting at ones computer critisizing? My wife who is Russian loved it. I'm English and I loved it. True there are some holes in the story but it's a comic book adaptation so one must give it some leeway. I think it will reach a larger audience because of the way it's being marketed. America is as surreal as the movie if you ask me. I went to vote in the local election back in November. My wife accompanied me. The polling place was the local Methodist church. When we got there a secret service car was out front with an agent in it. In the church they told me my name wasn't on the list. I was sent to another church up the street. There was a secret service Ford LTD right out front there too. We went into the church to vote and inside up by the preachers podium was a full scale "Support the Troops" display with mannequins dressed in fatigues, mesh nets and ammo boxes. My wife looked at me and goes "It's like Soviet Union." Then the next week we head down to Disney World. Just after we cross the Florida state line a police cruiser gets behind me. We are on I-95 doing 65 in the right hand lane. Other cars are going past at 80 in the left hand lane. He pulls us over. When he gets up to the car he tells me my tag has expired. I play dumb and say "has it?" Knowing full well I just got it 2 months before and that all my paparwork was in order. He goes and re-runs it and then says it checks out ok now and lets us drive on. The only reason I know of that he pulled us over for would be my bumper stickers which are 1) A DU sticker,2)an Air America sticker, 3)a Buy Blue sticker and 4) an impeach Bush sticker. Why else did he run my tags in the first place? I drive a 1996 Ford Explorer. Not a suspicious looking vehicle. My wife once again said "It's like Soviet Union." Even when we went to Sea World before the killer whale sho they did a 5 minute tribute to the troops. I'm antiwar aginst the Iraq war. I didn't pay $130 bucks for the day so I can stand at attention while Joe G.I. gets his ass kissed for an immoral war. Once again my wife wonders "what the f...?" This nation is changing these days and its not for the better. V for Vendetta will hopefully make us all think.

[msatty99]

184. Well, I agree with everything you say, past the

heading. I am glad you liked it. I started the thread as a frustrated
response to all of the praise being heaped on it which I saw here on
these threads. I don't think its a great movie. I do think its boring,
juvenile and obvious. I don't think its going to trigger a national
rousing of awareness. It certainly will not cause a revolution. (which
is what it appears some think).

Your story about the killer whale struck a chord with me. I was in
a country show bar with some friends (including an army lieutenant a
few days after the first Iraq war began. At one point in the evening,
they stopped the line dancing (I guess that's what it was) and had
a big 'event' where some yahoo held an American flag (or waved it) and
paraded around the nightclub to the tune of that insufferable song
by Lee Greenwood. The crowd stood (like it was the natn'l anthem).
The only people seated were me and the lt. It was surreal and sick
and hilarious...a bunch of drunk rednecks...hurrahing the war.

[mondo joe]

189. It's not supposed to trigger a national movement. It's supposed to be

a movie.

[msatty99]

192. Mr. Mondo Joe, glad you finally realize it's just a flick. eom.

[msatty99]

193. I mean, god, earlier you were comparing V to Martin Luther King and Gandhi

[mondo joe]

195. No, I was comparing the notion of a focal point. Now that I see

the sort of reading comprehension problem you face, I better understand your problem with the movie.

[msatty99]

197. Mondo, now you are just being dishonest. too bad

[mondo joe]

204. Dishonest? Not in the least, as I can demonstrate.

I responded to a post making this point: "same old old lone ranger myth, the sick anarchist wet dream. wars over dictatorships are won by DEMOCRATIC ENLIGHTED masses not by twisted Guy Fawkes/Zorro figures..."

My reply was to observe that in fact we have had significant individuals who are focal points for mass movements, people like Ghandi and MLK.

Was I saying that a fictional character has the real world impact or stature of those figures? Obviously not, (though in the fictional context of a fictional world he does).

It's interesting how the critics of V complain that it doesn't have real political impact, but then complain that its fans don't understand that it's just a movie.

Then again, though I can easily see not liking the movie, I don't see how anyone could think 2 hours of tyranny, torture, shooting, knife fights and political uprising is "boring".

[Orsino]

199. The ordeal is a common trope in heroic tales.

In the book, Evey's torture is presented a tad more graphically, and Finch goes on a sort of vision quest at Larkhill, seeking the revelation of V's origin, which is itself an ordeal of torture. The movie cuts Finch and shortchanges V a bit, but the parallel themes add power to the story.

Torture is always wrong, but the point lurking behind the movie is the wisdom that can come from facing and denouncing the people who perpetrate it.

[imlost]

202. I loved it! n/t

[Misunderestimator]

205. Saw it this weekend... it was a GREAT movie.

And may I ask what you meant by the entertainer being "diletant" (sic)? Is that some slam at him being gay? Did you not know that that was a very major POINT of the movie, the oppression of gays?

[msatty99]

206. NO, its a slam at him for being a numbskull

[Misunderestimator]

207. Oh? How so?

[msatty99]

208. Uhhhh maybe thinking that in a brutal tyrannical totalitarion

nightmare that regularly disappears critics you fill your home with 'rebellious memorabilia'
but no f'ing shotguns, security systems or other means to defend yourself, then broadcast
a program to make der fuehrer look like an idiot then imagine that you are safe and secure
in your home.....I say that's being a numbskull....did I mention harboring a fugitive but
making no effort to protect her or yourself from discovery?

[Misunderestimator]

209. Actually, I would say that in a totalitarian government such as that...

purchasing and arming your home with security equipment might be a red flag. As for filling your home (behind a secret wall) with memorabilia, that again is one of the points of the movie... it was his way of having some personal freedom, even if it was dangerous. Harboring a fugitive? How about welcoming a friend with whom you sympathize politically? And broadcasting a program that ridicules the chancellor... it seems to me that he wanted to take that risk and he decided to take a stand. Perhaps he was tired of living his life the way he had to live it. Perhaps that was his way to make a statement, knowing that he was risking his life... What sort of life did he have anyway, since he could not admit to being gay?

That's what I got from that. Not that he was numbskull. Every revolutionary in the world is a numbskull by that logic.

[msatty99]

210. I'm sorry, was that character gay? I don't recall that being

stated or shown. Perhaps it was when I nodded off from boredom. Actually, I remembered that
actor from the great series based on the PG Wodehouse stories "Wooster and Jeeves". He played
Bertie Wooster's (Hugh Laurie) butler Jeeves. I was glad to see him in a movie.
Was he gay? Whatever.

[Misunderestimator]

211. Really? You noticed his clandestine collection, but you didn't

take in the homosexual artwork and the admission that he had to date women to keep up appearances? Maybe you need to see the movie again and pay attention next time. Did you notice that the woman who wrote her bio in the cell (who actually was in the same prison as "V") was gay too and that a huge underlying theme of the entire movie was that she was imprisoned and died because of being gay, inspiring "V" to revenge her death?

[mondo joe]

213. The things people fail to noitice!

Not that it stops them from complaining. Elsewhere in this thread someone observes that the government wasn't sufficiently tyrannical. I really wonder what theater they were in!

One tidbit worth sharing is that some readers of the original series believe V to actually be Valerie (the actress who wrote her bio on TP in the cell).

[msatty99]

241. Mondo, did you notice my threat "the news from HELL"

Why don't you critique it for me?

bye. :evilgrin:

[msatty99]

242. "thread" sorry freudian fingerslip

[msatty99]

220. Thanks for reminding me, You're right

I missed the homosexual artwork...what was it? I do recall the passing comment about
keeping up appearances. I was used to seeing the actor in the asexual (or hetero) role of
Jeeves so it didn't click to me. (duh...my bad)

Of course I got the lesbian story line. I guess my overall problem had nothing to
do with who was gay or not...but the storyline that these people were so dumb.

[Misunderestimator]

224. But you haven't answered anything else... why do you think he was dumb?

I and others have already responded to your initial premise that he should have guns and shouldn't have taped a critical comedy piece about the chancellor... and why do you use the word "dilettante?" What would being a dilettante have to do with anything? You use of it in the OP certainly seemed to me to be a back-handed comment about his homosexuality. Nothing else you've said makes sense as to why you would have used that particular word.

"And was it just me or did the entertainer who is 'dissappeared' after
spoofing der Fuehrer ala Benny Hill seem just a wee bit...I don't know...
the diletante? "

"A wee bit... I don't know... the diletante..." hmmm... I just can't get past how that comes across.

In any case, it's clear that you didn't really pay attention to the movie. I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to post your critique about a movie you didn't pay attention to.

[msatty99]

230. Thanks for clueing me in...in your book a "delittante" is gay. OK.

If you check out some of my earlier posts you can see why I posted. But to save you the time,
the basic reason is that I got excited based on the enthusiasm of people posting on
these boards about the movie. I love movies and I wanted to see it. Some talked about it
in such glowing endorsing terms that I thought it might have real power.

Clearly, for some it did. That's good. But for me, after the hype, I was dissappointed
and found the thing fuzzy headed and cartoonish. I actually felt embarassed at being
in a movie theater watching movie about a guy with a mask and a cape. (I am no longer
a child).

Some of the responses I got ranged from insults (see Mondo Joe) to accusing me of being
a Freeper, questioning my taste, intelligence etc., Then I get this 'Are you gay bashing'
thing. (actually I got one of those earlier.)

Pleasantly, I also got feedback agreeing that others, like me found it a cartoonish drag.

I do not consider being a dilettante (however you spell it) being indicative of sexuality.
I was actually not thinking of the character as hetero or homo for as I have stated, my
main reaction was pleasure in seeing that particular actor in a feature film. I just wish
he had a better role as he is so good.

(I recommend you check his work out in the series I mentioned.)

[mondo joe]

231. Since you keep using the word, what is YOUR definition of

dilettante?

[msatty99]

236. I think of a dilettante as a person who is self indulgent

in a hobby, interest, drugs, lifestyle, pursuit, field of knowledge or other area
to such a degree of self indulgence as to disregard the value of others or the
realities of life.

I'm sure, Mondo, that is unlikely to satisfy you.

[mondo joe]

238. "The realities of life"? What an odd definition. n/t

[msatty99]

239. Wow...Mondo...you WEREN'T Satisfied....

what a shock.

[Misunderestimator]

232. Nice way t o twist my words...

which were actually your words. :eyes:

[mondo joe]

237. Indeed. It's hard to know what is meant by "dilettante" in this

context.

But it does seem to fit a theme that people being literate or interested in the arts is somehow bad.

[truebrit71]

217. Um, yes and stuff....

:eyes:

[mondo joe]

212. Indeed. The TV host had a cushy situation, relative to most others,

and he was willing to take a big risk using the one weapon he had.

Worth noting is that the outcome went much worse than he believed it would.

I don't know what we've come to when taking a stand means you're a "numbskull".

[msatty99]

222. Here we go for Monday , Mondo....

when we get to the point that you start deliberately misunderstanding me I will
stop responding to you.

I am not saying the character is a numbskull for 'taking a stand'.

I am saying that the character was a numbskull for doing it in a way
that was portrayed... ie nothing achieved, and his own demise.

He was apparently, (like many people) going along somehow imagining
that 'it can't happen to me'. Its seems a bit like a ...hmmm ...naive diletante (sp?)

[mondo joe]

225. LOL - you keep saying you won't respond to me and then responding

again. And I'm not even addressing you!

The character took a stand using the best weapon he had - humor and his show. If it acheived "nothing" it wouldn't have mattered - but it did acheive something. It was part of the destruction of the repressive regime.

I can only say it's a pleasure to see your continued criticism reveal how completly clueless you are about what took place in the movie.

[truebrit71]

215. As it is now it is VERY difficult to get guns...even for hunting...

..so why is it a stretch of the imagination for it to be even more difficult to get them under a totalitarian government?

Talk about "numbskull"... :eyes:

[mondo joe]

216. Kind of hard to see what he'd do with a shotgun ANYWAY considering

the firepower of the entire totalitarian government against him.

What the heck would he do against that even with a machine gun?

[Misunderestimator]

218. Yeah, not much logic in that. He would certainly die if he had guns in...

his possession. At least without them, he had a chance at living, even if it was in prison. Protect himself against the government with GUNS... :rofl:

[msatty99]

226. Yes......

Since the overarching theme of the V cheerleaders is that the movie is
an allegory for the current 'tyranny' I can certainly see that all of you
will be 'going to prison' to protect your 'chance at living'.

Wow. This crowd is a tough bunch of revolutionaries! Che Che Che!

If the whip ever does really come down... you better have something more
than your Che poster and a book of poetry to protect yourself.

But...that's just me.

[Misunderestimator]

227. LOL! Now that's funny. I describe how HE might have felt...

about his own life, and somehow you think I'm describing MYSELF? How insulting you are... go watch the movie again... might do you some good. Drink some coffee first.

[mondo joe]

229. History is rife with those who took a stand without the benefit

of being armed or having home security. If you wait until you're totally secure you'll never be able to take a stand.

Again, take a look at real life: MLK, Rosa Parks, the Stonewall riots, Ghandi, the protesters at Tienanmen Square. Were they "naive dilettantes"?

[msatty99]

233. You are right Mondo,

MLK Rosa Parks Ghandi all were courageous people willing to stand for their beliefs.
The protesters at Tienanmen Square were a little different...they were mostly college
kids (a rarity in China). But your point is good. I would offer that these people
knew what they were doing and are justifiably celebrated for their courage. They also
achieved something.

They are all more courageous than I will ever be I expect though I hope I try or would try.

This character chose to spoof the emperor and take no precautions. He also jeopardized
his friend Evie by his naivete. If he were in harm's way he should have tried to
get Evie out and safe elsewhere. And if he didn't realize he was in harm's way then
he was just 'a numbskull'.

[mondo joe]

234. He realized he was at risk but not the degree of risk. If you'd

paid attention you'd know that too.

Do you think Ghandi was naive? He didn't take precautions either, you know. Or how about MLK who put not only himself but also his wife and children in haerm's way? Or were they "numbskulls"?

[msatty99]

244. Well, I believe that those persons you have

cited all chose non violent resistance to oppression. In this they purposefully chose a
a morally correct as well as more effective way to fight oppression.

Of course they were not fighting totalitarian tyrants either. The TV character you
are so busy to defend chose a non-violent protest of a tyrant. It wasn't too effective.

Your hero, V, despite his silliness with the Zorro act, fights with violence.

What's the 'right' way to fight?

[mondo joe]

245. Not effective?

What do you believe the intended effect was, exactly?

[msatty99]

246. Mondo, did you notice my thread"the good news from HELL"

Why don't you critique that for me.

[mondo joe]

247. No, I didn't. What do you think the TV host's intended effect

was in V?

[msatty99]

248. Very similar to the intended effect of msatty99 in his thread

the good news from HELL is not being told by the MSM

:smoke:

[msatty99]

223. You too are right trubrit...

I should have postulated that in the V world guns were impossible to get..after all
V uses knives and explosives NOT GUNS. DUH my bad. I am being such a numbskull.

I will have to remember that when "the whip comes down"....when I get my cape and
mask...make sure to secure another shotgun and some ammo. That will be good thinkin'.

[hedgehog]

240. Read the book, haven't seen the movie yet, but ya gotta admit,

it's got people talking, and that ain't bad.

[msatty99]

243. Agreed Hedgehog... and thanks by the way for not

calling me a homophobe, freeper, moronic, ignoramus!