Movie Review: V for Vendetta

I thought after attending the stinkfest Date Movie and the painful Ultraviolet in consecutive weeks I would finally enjoy a movie in V for Vendetta. How cruel the gods of entertainment truly are. If I were to watch this film again, I would sneak a sleeping pill about a half an hour beforehand, enjoy the first explosion in the opening scene, sleep through the middle then have someone wake me up for the final explosion. Explosion, nap, explosion; maybe then I wouldn’t have objected so much to having put forth money to see this film. That wasn’t a spoiler either, as we know from the trailers what the ending of the film shall be.

Natalie Portman plays Evey Hammond, a Londoner who works for the state sanctioned television network. It’s a London with obvious Orwellian rules regarding behavior, and Evey is caught after curfew by some non-uniformed enforcement officers who are preparing to rape her. V, played by Hugo Weaving, intervenes and incapacitates the men before they can harm Evey. He’s wearing the mask of Guy Fawkes, an anti-Protestant terrorist from the seventeenth century who tried to kill off the Protestant government of England by blowing up the Parliamentary building in London.

Soon enough, Evey Hammond is knee deep with V and is forced into hiding after helping V take over a television network. I guess there’s some plot in the movie, since we need to understand how we get from the beginning explosion to the ending explosion. Fascists are involved, evil pharmaceutical corporations are involved, as well as hypocritical priests, and I think they even kill off a Rush Limbaugh-type character in the mix. The message the film sends about the evils of conservatism (of which I personally am one) is heavy throughout the film. It’s an unfair caricature for sure.

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • V for Vendetta V for Vendetta

    Imagine a Britain stripped of democracy: a world of the not-too-distant future, in which freedom was not lost, but surrendered willingly to a totalitarian regime that rose to power by exploiting people's ...

Article comments

  • 1 - Tan The Man

    Mar 22, 2006 at 1:33 am

    It gets pretty hard to emphathize with a character with a mask on. As eloquent as Huge Weaving's voice can be, even it doesn't make up for the lack of facial expression.

  • 2 - Triniman

    Mar 22, 2006 at 11:44 am

    This movie seems to divide people. You are either really impressed or not impressed much at all. I'm with the latter camp for some of the same reasons you are. I think the whole dystopian society with fascist / totalitarian gov't and a rebel, has pretty much worn out its welcome with me. Those who haven't had thier fill, however, really like this film.

  • 3 - Marty Andrade

    Mar 22, 2006 at 3:39 pm

    I was trying to think of some good dystopian films. The recent movie "The Island" would be one, the classic "Fahrienhiet 451", the conservative "Red Dawn." I know there are plenty in the Sci-Fi realm, but there aren't many good ones. In fact, I can't think of one good dystopia produced by Hollywood.

  • 4 - Paul

    Mar 22, 2006 at 8:32 pm

    I don't mind the entire totalitarian theme. I just felt it was another movie aimed at Christian Conservatives. I wouldn't have liked it to bash the liberals either. They could have taken a different route and not alienated one side or the other. Beyond that, the movie just did not have me glued to the screen.

  • 5 - Isaiah

    Mar 24, 2006 at 7:35 pm

    "The message the film sends about the evils of conservatism (of which I personally am one) is heavy throughout the film."

    He considers himself an evil of conservatism? How interesting.

    I thought the film was great, but I do agree it was unnecessarily politically biased.

  • 6 - Dave Nalle

    Mar 24, 2006 at 8:27 pm

    V for Vendetta says nothing at all about the 'evils of conservatism' and everything about the evils of an all-controlling and oppressive state, something which is far more likely to develop out of a left-wing pro-government tradition than the individualistic tradition of American conservatism.

    As for 'unnecessarily politically biased', I think it's always necessary to be biased against totalitarianism.

    dave

  • 7 - Ruglobster

    Mar 27, 2006 at 1:52 pm

    I agree with David about the film being about the totalitarian state, but disagree that this comes from the left rather than the right. Go too far in either direction and you end up in the same place.
    The problem I had with V for Vendetta was that the coup at the end was absolute and had nothing to do with a popular uprising or revolution. By the time the people gathered at the end, V had already assasinated the chancellor and the chief of police. So ostensibly there was still just one guy making the decisions for the nation. I just have problems with that, know what I mean?
    I also thought Natalie Portman gave a bad performance and her character was pointless.
    And regardless of motive or sentiment, V locked her up, tortured her and brainwashed her!
    I was left with the feeling of having been preached at and wondering what kind of point the Wachowskis were trying to make!

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 27, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs