V for Vendetta

[jura86]

I brought this up on the imdb Tremblay board, so sorry in advance for bringing it up again (also - hope there isn't already a thread on this, I haven't been on Bettermost for a while) - just wondering if people had similar reactions to this film as they did to BBM?

I'm watching it again for the second time, and I have to say the Valerie subplot has me blubbering almost as much as BBM does! So heartbreaking!... I know a lot of people who don't like this film at all though.

[Flashframe777]

I just got around to seeing this movie last week, and it really got to me emotionally.  The inspiration was different in that it made me want to stand my ground as a human being.

Brokeback Mountain broke my heart, and made me want to be in love again.

[dmmb_Mandy]

I remember rtprod's thread about V for Vendetta's Valerie over at IMdB, and yes indeed, the subplot - along with the rest of the film - is spectacular. I've seen it twice too and I can't wait for it to come out on DVD. My sig is such a heartbreakingly beautiful phrase from the film. I recommend that everyone see the movie, now!! 

[JCinNYC2006]

There might be a thread in the Safe Haven section about V for Vendetta already, but I was so surprised by the character of Valerie and overall how queer-friendly the story is.  That it includes gay people so specifically as affected by governmental oppression, and that Valerie, and the producer character (I forget his name right now).

I haven't read the graphic novel it's based on, so I don't know how much was adapted or how much was added.  One of the Wachowski brothers is transgender, but since he doesn't talk about it in print, I don't know how much that influenced the inclusion.  Definitely looking forward to the DVD as well....

Juan

[starboardlight]

One of the Wachowski brothers is transgender, but since he doesn't talk about it in print, I don't know how much that influenced the inclusion. 

i never knew this. is he mtf or ftm?

about V, there were some things I liked and some things I didn't like. The Valerie sequence was the highlight of the film. I did like that it was the what gave Evie the strength to find self-actualization. It was beautifully shot, and the juxtaposition between the golden glow of Valerie's story and Evie's dark tortures was gorgeously done. The thing I didn't like was that I couldn't reconcile V's tactic. His "I tortured you because I knew it'd be good for you" is just too close to GW taking away our civil rights because "he knows what good for us".

[JCinNYC2006]

MTF from what I've read.  I'll try to find a good article on it, I've come across a couple.

Juan

[starboardlight]

MTF from what I've read.  I'll try to find a good article on it, I've come across a couple.

Juan

ah, so they wouldn't be brothers anymore.

[JCinNYC2006]

Yeah, that could be at some point.  I'm not sure where he's at with it, or if he's even switched to a feminine gender.  J

[jura86]

SPOILERS

about V, there were some things I liked and some things I didn't like. The thing I didn't like was that I couldn't reconcile V's tactic. His "I tortured you because I knew it'd be good for you" is just too close to GW taking away our civil rights because "he knows what good for us".

That's a good point, but I don't think V was supposed to be a conventionally sympathetic protagonist that the audience rooted for - he's a complex character, and what I liked about the film is that it is never clear whether he is really a hero or a villain. V even says at one point in the film "What they did to me was monstrous" and Evey replies "Then they created a monster". I think that's kinda true. The fact that he tortured Evey is definitely evidence of his monstrous side.

[rtprod]

I remember rtprod's thread about V for Vendetta's Valerie over at IMdB, and yes indeed, the subplot - along with the rest of the film - is spectacular. I've seen it twice too and I can't wait for it to come out on DVD. My sig is such a heartbreakingly beautiful phrase from the film. I recommend that everyone see the movie, now!! 

I saw this film three times -- the final in IMAX -- and it knocked me out.  It succeeds on all levels and is far too intelligent to be shrink-wrapped into a Hollywood blockbuster package. 

Mandy's sig is the film's best line and scene, closely followed by:

"Behind this mask is an idea, and ideas are bulletproof." 

When Valerie appears in the crowd at the end of the film I got choked up.  A very memorable film, from Valerie's story to the "domino effect" sequence to the destruction of Parliament.  I also particularly liked Sinead Cusack's death, how calm and rational she was and the elegant chill of V's response to her question:

"You're going to kill me now, aren't you?"

"I already did--ten minutes ago, while you were sleeping." 

rt

[rtprod]

i never knew this. is he mtf or ftm?

about V, there were some things I liked and some things I didn't like. The Valerie sequence was the highlight of the film. I did like that it was the what gave Evie the strength to find self-actualization. It was beautifully shot, and the juxtaposition between the golden glow of Valerie's story and Evie's dark tortures was gorgeously done. The thing I didn't like was that I couldn't reconcile V's tactic. His "I tortured you because I knew it'd be good for you" is just too close to GW taking away our civil rights because "he knows what good for us".

Hi Starboard,

Except the critical difference is that V is mobilizing Evie and the populus against George Bush, isn't he? 

Oh, and Larry Wachowski is male to female trans, or in the process. 

rt

[starboardlight]

Hi Starboard,

Except the critical difference is that V is mobilizing Evie and the populus against George Bush, isn't he? 

Oh, and Larry Wachowski is male to female trans, or in the process. 

rt

the thing is, does the end justifies the means? if GW's cause is justified, does it make it okay for him to take away our rights? He's certainly trying to mobilize us against another fascist evil. What would be the difference? I just have trouble with someone else trying to tell me that they know what's good for me.

We certainly see that Evie, herself, felt betrayed by it. It never became clear to me how she reconciled it. She was crying and angry one moment and then she was simply okay with it. That part didn't resonate with me.

SPOILERS
That's a good point, but I don't think V was supposed to be a conventionally sympathetic protagonist that the audience rooted for - he's a complex character, and what I liked about the film is that it is never clear whether he is really a hero or a villain. V even says at one point in the film "What they did to me was monstrous" and Evey replies "Then they created a monster". I think that's kinda true. The fact that he tortured Evey is definitely evidence of his monstrous side.

That might be the case. I'm not sure. I did get the feeling that we're suppose to root for V. The film set up the government as being completely evil and that he represents the rage of those people without voices. And in the end, everyone shows up wearing the mask, as if to say that V is all of us. Imo, we're suppose to identify with him.

[rtprod]

the thing is, does the end justifies the means? if GW's cause is justified, does it make it okay for him to take away our rights? He's certainly trying to mobilize us against another fascist evil. What would be the difference? I just have trouble with someone else trying to tell me that they know what's good for me.

We certainly see that Evie, herself, felt betrayed by it. It never became clear to me how she reconciled it. She was crying and angry one moment and then she was simply okay with it. That part didn't resonate with me.
That might be the case. I'm not sure. I did get the feeling that we're suppose to root for V. The film set up the government as being completely evil and that he represents the rage of those people without voices. And in the end, everyone shows up wearing the mask, as if to say that V is all of us. Imo, we're suppose to identify with him.

I think in the context of this film it justifies the means, at least as a narrative device to move Evie on to where she needs to get psychologically--free.  She comes into her own consciousness and full power during this exercise.  I think she felt betrayed by it in the moment only, but understood its significance in her life later which is why she made good to return on her commitment come November.

Yes, that's exactly what I  took from the end -- and I had no problem identifying with him, worshipping him even.   

[starboardlight]

I think in the context of this film it justifies the means, at least as a narrative device to move Evie on to where she needs to get psychologically--free.  She comes into her own consciousness and full power during this exercise.  I think she felt betrayed by it in the moment only, but understood its significance in her life later which is why she made good to return on her commitment come November.

Yes, that's exactly what I  took from the end -- and I had no problem identifying with him, worshipping him even.   

you're right as a narrative device it works. if i take the film as just a story, it's great fun. but i also see it as wanting to be a commentary on GW's "War on Terror". On that level, that part of the film fell apart for me. I can't justify torture under any circumstance, especially if it's meant to fight against someone who uses torture.

[rtprod]

you're right as a narrative device it works. if i take the film as just a story, it's great fun. but i also see it as wanting to be a commentary on GW's "War on Terror". On that level, that part of the film fell apart for me. I can't justify torture under any circumstance, especially if it's meant to fight against someone who uses torture.

Okay Starboard, let's have it out with our loving mano-a-mano here lol.

Can you really call what V did to Evie torture? I thought it was just simple deprivation really, and not too extreme...  Just basic interrogation and prisoner will breaking....

rt

[starboardlight]

Okay Starboard, let's have it out with our loving mano-a-mano here lol.

Can you really call what V did to Evie torture? I thought it was just simple deprivation really, and not too extreme really...  Just basic interrogation and prisoner will breaking....

rt

i do. it's not physical pain, but emotional torture is just as cruel and inhumane to me.

as a matter of fact, GW also say that what they're doing in Guantanamo and even Abu Graib is "not torture" because they're not out right physical torture.

[rtprod]

i do. it's not physical pain, but emotional torture is just as cruel and inhumane to me.

as a matter of fact, GW also say that what they're doing in Guantanamo and even Abu Graib is "not torture" because they're not out right physical torture.

My point is that I don't think what he did to her was actually torture or terribly inhumane either.  She was simply interrogated and kept in a cell for a few days.  She was certaintly fed and the extreme was her believing she might die by firing squad.  This was not to make merry from the thought of that event as a torturer would do, rather to get her over a wall she could not scale prior.   

It was a form of deprivation, a test, an exercise if you will, and he did NOT succeed at breaking her spirit.  In truth he was protecting her from the regime during that incarceration period while forcing her into self-examination and analysis to gain strength for the revolution he knew was coming.  What he did was a service to her.  He just helped shed what was left of the old Evie--afraid, hiding, running--and then rebuilt her into a creature without fear and possessing a center of gravity.  He did not succeed at taking away her identity and will during this episode, rather he forced her to find it herself and it became more powerful. And then she was set free, not only psycholgically but free into the world.  She was no longer dependent on him, oppressed by the government or her own limiting beliefs and fears. 

What happened at Guantanamo and Abu Graib is something opposite, which is making sport out of something dehumanizing and sordid strictly to wield gross abuses of "authority."  It's not the same thing as what V did in any way, or at least in my book.  V would never have let Evie be truly harmed in that he loved her chastely and she became indispensible to him.  He desired to empower her, to make her flower fully, to wake her up and then set her free. 

Much like Jeff Bridges in the great Peter Weir film Fearless, about plane crash survivors trying to integreate back into daily life, she learned through this episode that she had experienced something that transcended fear itself, and was now impervious, and could not go back.

[starboardlight]

My point is that I don't think what he did to her was actually torture or terribly inhumane either.  She was simply interrogated and kept in a cell for a few days.  She was certaintly fed and the extreme was her believing she might die by firing squad.  This was not to make merry from the thought of that event as a torturer would do, rather to get her over a wall she could not scale prior.   

It was a form of deprivation, a test, an exercise if you will, and he did NOT succeed at breaking her spirit.  In truth he was protecting her from the regime during that incarceration period while forcing her into self-examination and analysis to gain strength for the revolution he knew was coming.  What he did was a service to her.  He just helped shed what was left of the old Evie--afraid, hiding, running--and then rebuilt her into a creature without fear and possessing a center of gravity.  He did not succeed at taking away her identity and will during this episode, rather he forced her to find it herself and it became more powerful. And then she was set free, not only psycholgically but free into the world.  She was no longer dependent on him, oppressed by the government or her own limiting beliefs and fears. 

I understand what you're saying. I guess that where we all come to a piece of art with our own baggage and take from it what we put in. while i understand that it was necessary for Evie to go through that to find her transformation, I just couldn't justify it. It still felt like a totalitarian tactic, what ever his motives were, whether he would actually hurt her or not, he still took away her freedom and choice for that period of time. Were I in Evie's place, I'm not sure I'd forgive him so quickly. The film does stimulate thoughts and discussion and that's great when art does that. I give the film credit for that.

[Flashframe777]

Rtprod and Starboard,

I am going to chime in with something I was taught: 

"Evil wears the mask of Good, and in its path leaves fear.  Good wears the mask of evil and in its path leaves peace."

[Kd5000]

I liked V for Vendetta just the way the news was handled. Usually in these dystopic futures, it's obvious what your watching is alien to our own news.  Say 1984 or Farhenheit 451, it's someone reading out statistics in a monotone and dull manner.  Our news is so glammed up with beautiful ppl who annuciate every word with nuance and dramatization.  In this film, their news is still like our news service, but they are so obviouslyl just stating what the govt told them say. Pure propaganda. PRAVDA with a facelift.

On another take, why do you this rather dystopic vision of the future didn't catch the public attn like THE MATRIX???. It's too intellectual, poor marketing. I think it's been somewhat of b.o. disappointment.   Then again, it's sad to see something like Scary Movie #4 doing so well and more adult oriented films not taking the cake.  I mean you don't have to agree with all movies viewpoints to actually go see it and enjoy it...

[jura86]

On another take, why do you this rather dystopic vision of the future didn't catch the public attn like THE MATRIX???. Is it too intellectual, poor marketing? I think it's been somewhat of b.o. disappointment.   Then again, it's sad to see something like Scary Movie #4 doing so well and more adult oriented films not taking the cake.  I mean you don't have to agree with all movies viewpoints to actually go see it and enjoy it...

I think that's a really interesting point -- as someone who is v.interested in box office results, it is definitely worrying how poorly, thought-provoking, intelligent films are doing lately, while mindless, critically panned duds of films are consistently doing good business. I even read an interview recently with Sarah Jessica Parker (of all people), and she was saying how bad it is that critically acclaimed dramas are finding it so difficult to make money these days - look at all of the Oscar nominees - none of them were huge hits, even though GNGL, Capote and BBM had fantastic reviews. Perhaps more mature, grown-up audiences are staying at home these days, watching films on dvd in the comfort of their own homes away from teenagers in cinemas, or perhaps television drama is much better in the US now (I couldn't say) so that's why certain audiences are staying away from the cinema. One scary thought -- it could be a change in western society and culture, enjoying something thought-provoking and intellectual may be seen as a bad thing now - no offence to anyone who likes the guy, but its obvious that Bush appeals to a lot of people because he seems down-to-earth, not-too-intelligent, average joe kinda guy. Maybe America doesn't want these sort of films -- just like they don't want their cowboys to be gay, lol!

Looking at V for Vendetta specifically, it probably didn't do as well as expected because: a) the protagonist wears a mask throughout the film, and audiences (apparently - I'm sure I read this somewhere) like to see the eyes of their heroes/anti-heroes - apparently, this was one possible reason why "Daredevil" didn't do as well as expected (however, that was probably just because Daredevil was a bad film. b) Hugo Weaving and Natalie Portman aren't massively bankable stars. c) Its UK setting perhaps? I know the Harry Potter films are too, but they had a huge in-built audience -- what's certainly weird is how badly V did in the UK (much worse than in the US) - but I blame all of that on marketing - in the UK, there was not much advertising, no big premieres or tv interviews/specials with the stars/makers of the film, so it was bound to fail.

[JCinNYC2006]

Okay Starboard, let's have it out with our loving mano-a-mano here lol.

Can you really call what V did to Evie torture? I thought it was just simple deprivation really, and not too extreme...  Just basic interrogation and prisoner will breaking....

rt

In the same respectful spirit, it's definitely torture.  Is it concentration camp level torture?  No, the level of pain inflicted on Evie was probably not primarily physical, but it was mental.  It was meant to test her to see if she would give in to her fear, as much of her life had be ruled by it.  But she was clearly suffering, believing that she was in prison and might die as a result. 

The fact that she comes out of it stronger, in large part due to finding Valerie's writing (which again, whether he created or whether they were real, were used by V very manipulatively), doesn't make it any less a type of torture tactic.  I agree with Starboard in terms of the questions about the means that it raises, but to me, V seems to be saying hell yes, the end justifies the means - I don't think he even makes that distinction between himself and his enemies. 

Juan

[rtprod]

I think we are over-rotating a bit on the "torture" sequence of this film, which minus the embedded Valerie sequence might comprise 5 minutes or so of 131 in a movie that offers so many other pleasures. 

I guess I just disagree with the assessment that this is technically torture.  It's an exercise in manipulation and V has nothing personal to gain from what he does.  To lump this in as being truly torturous reminds me of how elastic the definitions are today of what constitutes sexual harassment on a scale from ridiculous to legitimate.  As interrogation standards go, Cillian Murphy was tortured far worse after the IRA explosion in Breakfast on Pluto, and that was a comedy after all. 

Imprisoned?  Yes.  Manipulated?  Yes.  Deprived?  Maybe.  Tortured?  Ummm....

Happily politically incorrect here so hurl the tomatoes or pies at least. 

rt

[JCinNYC2006]

I think we are over-rotating a bit on the "torture" sequence of this film, which minus the embedded Valerie sequence might comprise 5 minutes or so of 131 in a movie that offers so many other pleasures.

Not really.  The point is not that the movie is about torture.  I was agreeing with Starboard's take on V and that he was as willing to do whatever it took to get his point across.  I think a bigger part of the reason why the movie 

I guess I just disagree with the assessment that this is technically torture.  It's an exercise in manipulation and V has nothing personal to gain from what he does.  To lump this in as being truly torturous reminds me of how elastic the definitions are today of what constitutes sexual harassment on a scale from ridiculous to legitimate.  As interrogation standards go, Cillian Murphy was tortured far worse after the IRA explosion in Breakfast on Pluto, and that was a comedy after all. 

What does 'technically torture' mean?  According to Wordnet, torture is defined as:

     n 1: extreme mental distress [syn: anguish, torment]
     2: unbearable physical pain [syn: torment]
     3: intense feelings of suffering; acute mental or physical
        pain; "an agony of doubt"; "the torments of the damned"
        [syn: agony, torment]
     4: the act of distorting something so it seems to mean
        something it was not intended to mean 

From her performance, Evie goes through all of this except for the physical part.  The character of Kitten was physically abused much more, but again, what constitutes torture is not necessarily degree.

Imprisoned?  Yes.  Manipulated?  Yes.  Deprived?  Maybe.  Tortured?  Ummm....

Happily politically incorrect here so hurl the tomatoes or pies at least. 

rt

LOL, not politically correct here either, but no cyber tomatoes needed.  It's just a fun discussion.

Juan

[rtprod]

Okay, you guys can win on this one.  I'm all torture-talked out.  How can I argue with Wordnet?

rt

[starboardlight]

even if we don't use the word "torture", he still took away her rights and freedom, for that time. sure she comes out strong for it, but I'm not sure I can justify it. The government wants to wiretap our phone calls by justifying that it'll make us better and safer, and yet we know that that's not a good thing.

As a film it's a fun film. And if I turn off my contemporary political/social mind, I can totally understand and accept V as a character. It's just that I want it to be more than a film. I think that we're meant to see it as a commentary on what's going on now. With that in mind, V's tactic just doesn't seem so different from what we're suppose to question about our own governments. And maybe that's the the point. We're suppose to question everything and everyone that tells us they know what's good for us, even our own heroes.

rt, this discussion has been helpful to me though, so don't feel like you're bashing your head against the wall. I kept asking myself why I can't get over V's tactics. Why is it I can accept Ennis and Jack as flawed men, but not V? The difference for me is that BBM world is a complex one that is as ambiguous and contradictory as the one we live in, while V's world is an extreme one that is shown to us with black and white, good and evil, distopia and utopia. As such I seem to want V to be more "ideal" than "real".

[JennyC]

rt, this discussion has been helpful to me though, so don't feel like you're bashing your head against the wall. I kept asking myself why I can't get over V's tactics. Why is it I can accept Ennis and Jack as flawed men, but not V? The difference for me is that BBM world is a complex one that is as ambiguous and contradictory as the one we live in, while V's world is an extreme one that is shown to us with black and white, good and evil, distopia and utopia. As such I seem to want V to be more "ideal" than "real".

Starboard, well said.

This discussion is very interesting.  I have been lurking here from time to time when there is new post.  I have not seen the film, therefore can not comment on it, but the whole discussion of how the film is aimed to reflect what's going on now, and the torture discussion is quite intriguing. I will watch it when it's on DVD.  Thanks for you posts and I will be able to watch the movie with some new perspectives.