Few films have given me such a feeling of boring inevitability as this one did but if anything good can be said about this sad work of art, then it is that it is a perfect representation of the current left wing zeitgeist. All the fear and hysteria that is currently being displayed by the left is bared here. The anti American sentiments, the notion that the west is doomed, fear of 'right wing oppression', all are given time and dwelt upon with the sort of attention one might otherwise associatiate with mental illness. Terrorism, in the form of resistance is justified and even glorified and the movie ends with Britains Houses of Parliament, sometimes known as the 'Mother of Democracy', being blown up as a symbol of oppression and rebirth.
If this were just a fantasy, the telling of a morality tale for example, then it would be of mediocre nature, but it is not such a fantasy. This film is so obviously a comment on the current political climate that it cannot be regarded as anything but a prediction, by its makers, of what is to come as a result of what is.
As such, it is a farce. The notion that western democracy is at fault, or flawed, that we are all heading into a state of religious and sexual persecution is so paranoid as to be ridiculous, and highly annoying. The use of nazi iconography, coupled togther with Christianity was especially crude and so blatent as to be ridiculous. Naturally, the only representative of the Christian faith actually shown in the film was a foul mouthed pervert who had once sanctioned an Auschwitz-style chemical weapons laboratory. All the victims were artists, homosexuals, Muslims or other 'non conformists', as they were termed. All the people who do not 'fit in'.
I was reminded of George Galloway's recent speech to his faithful followers, when he nicked the famous, 'They came for the homosexuals and I stood by and did nothing' quote. Its a great sound byte and it certainly creates an ambience with a willing audience, but alas, it has nothing to do with reality when you don't actually live in an oppressive society. Galloway, like the Wachowski brothers, ought to try living in such a state and experience what its really like instead of trying to peddle the notion that western democratic society is becoming an oppressive conservative society simply because they don't like certain aspects of it.
8 comments:
I think it's important to note that the comic book that this film was based on came out between 1982-1988, and while the setting was in the near future, it was after a nuclear war had already destroyed much of the world. In the aftermath, a fascist political faction came to power, and that's what set the stage for the story. It's very classically dystopian, and from what I understand, it's very different from the film.
I haven't yet read the comic (although I intend to), but this information was shared by friends who read the comic and saw the movie. They were very disappointed in the film, because there were so many changes that were made to the original story. The filmmakers certainly did capitalize on the current political climate, and they even changed Evey's status from a prostitute to a girl with an nice, cushy kind of job.
Now...having said that, I did like the film, but I can guarantee that I'll like the comic better. I prefer things when they're gritty, and I did see through the attempts to take the current political climate and wrap it around the story in order to give it more relevance to the movie going public.
I must admit that I'm a sucker for anything that features Stephen Fry and Stephen Rea. I even endured that piece of crap Fear.com since the main baddy was played by Mr. Rea. ;)
I am ambiguous with regards to Fry... mostly I think because he is so typecast, he is often excellent in comedy (especially Black Adder 4) and when left to his own devices, can be very good indeed.... but I've seen him play 'the Englishman' too many times. He's like an English version of Hugh Grant (who is an American icon, no matter what country he was born in).
As for Rea. He is always good, even when he is bad. =)
With regards to the original. I understand the artist (I've forgotten his name already) has distanced himself from this film for not having the drugs n low life look to it that he had envisioned.
I've read some unusual things of late regarding the Wachowski brothers, and no doubt a lot of what is happening to them in private has translated itself to their work on screen. Unlike most people I converse with, I was not disapointed with the second and third 'Matrix' films (they were pretty much as I'd expected them to be) and I love 'Bound'.
But with 'V for Vendetta' I'm afraid the chain has hopped off the cog and I am not impressed at all.
They'd have been far better served if they'd stayed true to the original instead of trying to copy & paste '1984' onto the contemporary world.
For this type of film, Terry Gilliam set the bar far higher than these two brothers have yet to reach.
Oddly enough, the role that turned me on to Stephen Fry wasn't a comedy role. I saw him in Wilde, and I found him to be an extremely expressive actor.
Not so with Hugh Grant. I can't stand that guy. To me, he's sort of the British equivalent of Tom Cruise...a little too plastic for me.
The original artist's name is Alan Moore, and he's done a lot of interesting comic book work, but he always tends to distance himself from the film adaptations. I think that's reasonable, because no one can ever truly recreate your vision the way that you intend it.
As far as the Wachowski Brothers go, I really didn't care for the second and third matrix movies. The second was okay as far as a tool for plot development goes, but I just hated the ending of the trilogy. It was really anti-climatic.
And yes, Terry Gilliam rocks.
The best thing about 'Brazil', I think, is how Gilliam highlights the sheer absurdity of a dictatorial society by focusing upon that which grants it strength.
Brazil was brilliant!
I have this movie, as in own it well my husband bought it and I have yet to see it. I really liked the comics as a teenager and just don't want to ruin my memories of the storyline. Besides from what I have read the storyline was totally altered.
Moif the comic never took a side, it was hard to find good and evil because V was a brutal murderer and the comics made that graphically obvious.
Here is Moore's review of the movie
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 [standing up] 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 [England]. 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?
whoops missed the last bit of the quote...
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.
Indeed!
Post a Comment