V for Vendetta -- C/D?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

One of the best British novels of the eighties, or kids stuff?

― Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Sunday, 15 February 2004 22:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Kids' stuff???

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 16 February 2004 09:33 (twenty-two years ago)

I saw 'V for Vendetta' bathroom graffiti in a hipster club the other night, for whatever that's worth.

― Jordan (Jordan), Monday, 16 February 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

There's a band with the name...anyway: stone-cold classic, no debate neccesary!

― billislord, Monday, 16 February 2004 16:34 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's completely classic, but I only saw it in the collected form, so I don't get the sense of their being a big gap that DV mentioned on the other thread.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 17 February 2004 13:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's good up to the gap, but it trails off badly after that. The whole Leader being in love with the computer stuff is arse, as is how easy it is for the Fascist regime to fall apart. Anyway, I find it very hard to believe that a society that had been through the war of the early 80s would be computerised enough to be sufficiently dependent on a computer.

It's a lot better than Marvelman though (which in retrospect is incredibly tiresome, po-faced, whingey drivel). What makes V for Vendetta appealing is the mood the art creates, and that whole Ealing-Comedy-From-Hell air that it has.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 18:40 (twenty-two years ago)

i like both the comic and the band. the comic more.

― Ian Johnson (orion), Saturday, 28 February 2004 06:36 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...

Um...yeah. Ri¢h J0hn$ton, wtf, dude?

http://newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28792

― Huk-L, Friday, 4 March 2005 15:13 (twenty-one years ago)

I saw that link to that thing on another blog, and I don't know if it was the blogger or RJ himself, but there was a line in the post about "making Spider-Man's origin look like trumped-up fish eggs" (oh, I'm sorry - "infant parable") or some ridiculously off-the-wall potshot that just makes me wanna back up m'man Huk's WTF?

― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 4 March 2005 15:25 (twenty-one years ago)

I think he's just to cheap to buy a proper birth announcement.

― Huk-L, Friday, 4 March 2005 15:48 (twenty-one years ago)

two months pass...

First sign movie might be in trouble...
http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33374

― Huk-L, Monday, 9 May 2005 15:41 (twenty years ago)

Actually, that's okay, I'm glad it's not Purefoy (too young, too rubbish, really.)

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:20 (twenty years ago)

Earlier though, there were promises we'd never see V's face. Now that they have a "name" actor (maybe Purefoy is a name to someone), will there be more pressure to unmask V?

― Huk-L, Monday, 9 May 2005 18:23 (twenty years ago)

Kingdom of Heaven had a similar situation where they don't reveal the actual face of a name actorb.

― Lee (Leee), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:24 (twenty years ago)

I can imagine his voice being very fitting for V, but I'm sure I will also lose my shit in the theater when he inevitably slips into Agent Smith or Elrond mode.

― Jordan (Jordan), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:36 (twenty years ago)

I think he has a better voice than Purefoy too, but yeah, what Jordan said. Leeee, did you like Kingdom of Heaven? I had major problems with the way Scott presented history in Gladiator, so I don't know if he could treat the Crusades like the volatile issue that they are.

― jocelyn (Jocelyn), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:42 (twenty years ago)

I think the problem won't be who plays V, or if they unmask him or not -- it's not really integral* -- but that the Wachowskis (who're scripting) have yet to prove they don't horribly suck.

*i.e. it might be okay to unmask him, at a pinch, if they still keep his backstory suitably shady.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:54 (twenty years ago)

I didn't like KoH for ideological reasons, which I ought to retract because I wasn't paying attention to the film, apparently.

― Lee (Leee), Monday, 9 May 2005 18:59 (twenty years ago)

Chuck OTM.
In the comics, V's backstory is effectively described to the point where, really, to reveal his face would be irrelevant. If they did show it, it wouldn't mean anything to the reader anyway.

As for the WachBros, the two Matrix sequels proved the suffer from Lucasosis Prequelitis, in believing that their audiences actually preferred the stupid and boring politico-religious subtext to the whiz-bang sci-fi action.

― Huk-L, Monday, 9 May 2005 19:09 (twenty years ago)

Which is funny, 'cause the (non) boring-politico-subtext is part of what makes V for Vendetta so GR8.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Monday, 9 May 2005 19:53 (twenty years ago)

Ha, you're right. So it might be good, since they actually have decent source material!
Although, subtext is one of the things comics does waaaaaaaay better than movies.

― Huk-L, Monday, 9 May 2005 20:04 (twenty years ago)

Hey, are they still the Wachowski Brothers?

― Lee (Leee), Monday, 9 May 2005 21:51 (twenty years ago)

I'm not sure how they're going to manage showing the opera/fawkes mask thing without it seeming campy. (Cue: Every film reviewer in the unvierse making a joke about Phantom OTO.)

For some reason, I think Altman direting V would be a laugh. Not necessarily good, but a laugh.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Tuesday, 10 May 2005 18:18 (twenty years ago)

In the comics, V's backstory is effectively described to the point where, really, to reveal his face would be irrelevant. If they did show it, it wouldn't mean anything to the reader anyway.

I think there's more to that, actually. V is not a real person, s/he's a myth, or more likely a symbol for anarchy/anarchism. To unmask him/her would make him one person, and the whole idea of the comic would be ruined; it would then be just another story of superhero vigilantism, instead of anarchism vs. fascism.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 10 May 2005 19:33 (twenty years ago)

Great point, Tuomas. Good to have you back on ILComics.

― Huk-L, Tuesday, 10 May 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

Tuomas speaks for me.

The really big question for me is can they possibly keep the really sadistic chapter where V tortures and kidnaps Evie to show her that she has the strength to resist fascist brainwashing. That's easily the most brutal part of the book, but probably also the weakest, and simultaneously the most important.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 10 May 2005 20:00 (twenty years ago)

Newsarama has a picture of Portman as Evey with her head shaved, so it will at least be alluded to!

― Huk-L, Tuesday, 10 May 2005 20:05 (twenty years ago)

But will V do it, or will the bad guys get her and then he rescues her?

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 10 May 2005 20:11 (twenty years ago)

http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/

nothing much up yet...

― zappi (joni), Wednesday, 11 May 2005 09:00 (twenty years ago)

but i like the opening on Nov 5th touch

― zappi (joni), Wednesday, 11 May 2005 09:03 (twenty years ago)

I dunno, Tuomas. As the 'faceless' V gives way to the Natalie Portman V at the end of the story -- the new one, true V -- the myth already has a face for us.

― bucky wunderlick (bucky), Wednesday, 11 May 2005 13:22 (twenty years ago)

But, Bucky, that's no different than the notion of the Dread Pirate Roberts in The Princess Bride - the DPR is a construct (fabricated by some fellow) that's achieved mythic proportions, wherein the persona (the mask) is more important than who's behind it. It doesn't matter than Mandy Patinkin (sic?) is going to take over for Wesley at the end (of the movie) - what matters is that the DPR will still exist.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 11 May 2005 13:26 (twenty years ago)

Isn't the whole head-shaving/concentration camp (I don't want to give those who haven't read it the notion that V shaves Evey's head and her transformation is complete) business about the process of washing Evey away that she may become V?
See also, Lee Falk's The Phantom, which always gets really boring and often obnoxious whenever the story turns to Kit Walker and his love for Diana Whatsername and his brief life in America, even though, I guess, propagating the Phantom line is of almost as much importance as smashing poachers.

― Huk-L, Wednesday, 11 May 2005 14:12 (twenty years ago)

anyone have a link to the photo of portman w/ head shaved?

― kenchen, Saturday, 14 May 2005 23:30 (twenty years ago)

― Rock Hardy (Rock Hardy), Sunday, 15 May 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

Luke...I am your mother!

― Huk-L, Sunday, 15 May 2005 04:15 (twenty years ago)

david-- yeah, the same outcome for the character, sure. but the story perspective is 180 degrees... in the princess bride, we don't so much know the DPR as we know wesley. in V, we know the construct only. i can live with associating a face with the 'original' V, just so long as we don't also have to associate a character (other than portman's) with the construct.

― bucky wunderlick (bucky), Sunday, 15 May 2005 16:04 (twenty years ago)

That's easily the most brutal part of the book, but probably also the weakest, and simultaneously the most important.

It's kind of the best bit, up until you realise that it's V who kidnapped her, which happens right where the original five year break in the story being published happenned.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Sunday, 15 May 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

this is going to be horrible, I don't trust the Wachowski's or the studio AT ALL. But maybe it'll put some money in David Lloy's pocket.... I guess that's a good thing...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 16 May 2005 16:42 (twenty years ago)

I thought you were talking about the kid from Phantom Menace for a minute.

― Huk-L, Monday, 16 May 2005 17:08 (twenty years ago)

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~kuppem/jakelloydauto.jpg

You'll learn, Evey.

― Le (Leee), Monday, 16 May 2005 20:08 (twenty years ago)

Aw shit, a 9-year robot has better handwriting than I do.

― Huk-L, Monday, 16 May 2005 20:09 (twenty years ago)

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~kuppem/jakelloydauto.jpg

Are you an angel, Evey?

― Le (Leee), Monday, 16 May 2005 20:10 (twenty years ago)

Alan Moore inevitably disassociates himself from W is for Wachowski:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/index.cgi?column=litg&article=2153

― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 27 May 2005 20:51 (twenty years ago)

haha that uri gellar thing at the end is priceless

― strng hlkngtn, Friday, 27 May 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

He's sort of in love with Alan Moore, isn't he?

― Huk-L, Saturday, 28 May 2005 07:50 (twenty years ago)

Those who have read the book know how V first meets Evey, in the dark alley after rescuing her. Here is, word for word, the speech written for V by the Wachowski brothers.

He indicates his mask

V: "This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vangquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.

"The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."

Evey: "Are you like, a crazy-person?"

― kit brash (kit brash), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 02:49 (twenty years ago)

Voly Vucking Vell!

― Huk-L, Wednesday, 1 June 2005 04:01 (twenty years ago)

There is zero chance it will be a good movie.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 06:00 (twenty years ago)

That is perhaps the most exceptionally awful dialog I have ever heard or read.

Vapid, vile and very vaguely vomitous.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 13:20 (twenty years ago)

Haha, that has to be a joke, come on now.

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 13:27 (twenty years ago)

Didn't you see any of the Matrix films then?

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 13:47 (twenty years ago)

Ah.

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 14:05 (twenty years ago)

For vintage and voluminous examples of the Matrixers valiant yet vain attempts to proffer vivacious dialogue, please view any or all of their very pricey Burlyman books. For vuck's sake.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 15:27 (twenty years ago)

Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction

(Stan) Lee for Vendetta!

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 1 June 2005 15:36 (twenty years ago)

Well, they got the mask right, at least.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=20377

― Huk-L, Monday, 6 June 2005 15:24 (twenty years ago)

Vexcellent.

― Jordan (Jordan), Monday, 6 June 2005 15:30 (twenty years ago)

I feel that people should stop reading about the film. It is nigh inevitable that we will go and see it, and it would be nice to form an impression from the film itself rather than a million pieces of pre-publicity about it.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Monday, 6 June 2005 18:11 (twenty years ago)

Ha ha, good one, DV.

― Huk-L, Monday, 6 June 2005 18:12 (twenty years ago)

Round these parts, we call it "doing a Scoffer".

― DV (dirtyvicar), Monday, 6 June 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

It is nigh inevitable that we will go and see it,

I've not seen any Alan Moore adaptation and I'm not about to start now!

― kit brash (kit brash), Monday, 6 June 2005 22:49 (twenty years ago)

three weeks pass...

Okay, finally read the series. ANybody know where i can find an annotated version of it? Not being British, i figure i'm only getting about 1/2 the refs...

― kingfish (Kingfish), Sunday, 3 July 2005 17:42 (twenty years ago)

This blog post (not written by me) has a lot of links http://www.livejournal.com/users/rfmcdpei/784578.html
that I'm too lazy to copy over

― Ray (Ray), Sunday, 3 July 2005 20:14 (twenty years ago)

So, uh, do today's events spell bad news for the future of this movie?

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 7 July 2005 18:19 (twenty years ago)

maybe it'll be delayed 6 months at the most, but if Collateral Damage came out, this one will too.

― kingfish (Kingfish), Friday, 8 July 2005 05:21 (twenty years ago)

I don't know how similar the script is to the book, but there are events near the end of the book - the Viking funeral - that people might be wary of. In the same way that there's unlikely to be a remake of The Running Man that sticks more closely to the book's plot, because of that big ending.

― Ray (Ray), Friday, 8 July 2005 07:22 (twenty years ago)

seven months pass...

If I'm to make but one post today,
it shall be to say
that Natalie Portman with short hair
is beyond exceedingly fair.

― c(''c) (Leee), Wednesday, 22 February 2006 21:44 (twenty years ago)

three weeks pass...

BEST MOVIE OF 2006 SO FAR! IT'S INSANELY GOOD!

― meatloaf, Tuesday, 21 March 2006 04:46 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.