Jump to content
hagren

New V for Vendetta Posters

Recommended Posts

Homosexual or otherwise, it's not fair to spoil V for anyone.

 

The party is keeping anarchy at bay, but anarchy is represented as a positive force, which makes the party the bad guys. And two-dimensional bad guys, too. Susan might attempt to justify himself, but he's little more than a lunatic - one whose perfect system involves a recreation of the Nazi holocaust and allowing the police carte blanche to rape and murder prostitutes. It's a stark, monochrome morality for the most part.

 

And it's quite obvious that V's plan is for what he percieves to be a positive cause, not just revenge. Otherwise he'd have stopped when all of the Larkhill employees were dead. Why bother raising up Evey to continue his work and allow himself to die otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homosexual or otherwise, it's not fair to spoil V for anyone.

Of course, just kidding about. You'll note that I did actually use spoiler tags :)

It's a stark, monochrome morality for the most part.

 

Indeed, and where the party are pure black, V is pure white. Each is trying to force the metaphorical scales completely to their side. And all that results in is broken scales.

 

And it's quite obvious that V's plan is for what he percieves to be a positive cause, not just revenge. Otherwise he'd have stopped when all of the Larkhill employees were dead.

 

Equally, it's quite obvious that both Susan (mad though he is) and the party as a whole, believe that they are working for a positive cause. Otherwise, they wouldn't be doing it. Furthermore, I think it's slightly dangerous to credit V himself with any great deal of sanity, in which case: would he really have stopped at the Larkhill employees?

 

Why bother raising up Evey to continue his work and allow himself to die otherwise?

 

In order to perpetuate his vengeance after he's gone, maybe?

As you say, anarchy is represented as a positive force - but it's only a representation, propaganda if you will. The story could equally well be told in such a way that the government are painted as the good guys - the movie Starship Troopers springs readily to mind as an example of that sort of thing. It's readily evident that neither total anarchy nor absolute governmental control (even down to the weather!) is desirable - but there is no middle-ground option, at least not one that's offered by either of the factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that there's a lot of moral and political questions raised by V, but that's the beauty of the book, innit? Any book that gives you very clear-cut answers would have to be insanely well written not to be oversimplifying. That said, my view is that V's struggle against the oppressive regime is totally justified, and something anyone could support, WITHOUT necessarily supporting his goal ("anarchy"). This is something we see al the time in real-life politics after all. It's pretty easy to support, for instance, Fidel Castro's struggle against the Batista dictatorship. That doesn't mean you have to agree with what Castro did later. Same goes for V.

The problem with the book IMHO is that it perpetuates the myth of the single genius who can by his own actions save society. That just isn't the way it works. If Moore wanted to be more "realistic", V could have been part of some sort of movement. It is organizations of people that can overthrow tyrannies, not lone heroes.

I still love the book though, not the least because the fascist system described in the book isn't just a fairytale, but something that is instituted by degrees these days. Just look at the new terror laws in Britain, the Patriot Acts in the US (Just the NAME Patriot Act gives me chills down my spine) etc. As a wake-up call against the dangers of resurgent fascism, V for Vendetta is brilliant. Plus, you know, it's a really well-written comic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I also want a big white square in my posts!

 

 

There is it, everyone look at me big white square!

 

Now, the V posters look really good, man! I don't know, the film maybe sucks, but at least she's Natalie Portman, not Whoopi Goldberg (for example)! I mean, after the Kneaustine we can always expect the worst, and from that point, everything which approaches to the comic source should be celebrated with champagne and soft sex!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Otherwise, they wouldn't be doing it.

 

Yes they would - they're all power-mad lunatics who love oppressing people, whether it's ethnic minorities or their own wives.

 

Except for the detective, of course; he's a good guy who just happened to fall in with a bad lot.

 

The story could equally well be told in such a way that the government are painted as the good guys

 

But it wasn't, and that's what I'm complaining about. Moore had everything in V's favour right from the start, with the sole exception of Rose. Susan thought he was doing the right thing for Britain, but he was also a complete nutcase. How much more interesting it would have been if he'd been a complex and, in his own small way, good man as well as a monster. After all, Hitler liked playing with his kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story could equally well be told in such a way that the government are painted as the good guys

 

But it wasn't, and that's what I'm complaining about. Moore had everything in V's favour right from the start, with the sole exception of Rose. Susan thought he was doing the right thing for Britain, but he was also a complete nutcase. How much more interesting it would have been if he'd been a complex and, in his own small way, good man as well as a monster. Hitler liked playing with his kids.

Aren't we getting a wee bit too postmodern here? What is the most relevant story about Adolf Hitler - that he was a nice guy to his kids or that he led a fascist dictatorship which killed millions? (Yes, I'm being rhetorical here...) I'd agree with your gripes if...

a) ...this was a story about an actual historical occurence, like Germany in the 30s and 40s, or the like. Then we have a lot of backhistory which can be taken for granted, thus opening the door for more in-depth character study of the main protagonists/antagonists. But here Moore is constructing a political history very different from reality, which isn't even explained that well, we have to put the pieces together ourselves (this is something i like, btw). Using lots of storytelling time to expound on Susan's complex personality would detract from the story being told, and the message Moore wanted to convey.

b) ...the point of the story was to show how in extreme circumstances even fascism can be unerstandable, or at least that authoritarianism can be "defended". It isn't. Moore's point is to show us the danger of totalitarianism, even in relatively peaceful, stable countries like Britain. To do this, he has to show how this alternate reality is something we should be afraid of, not indifferent towards. This requires broad brush storttelling, to some degree. Feel free not to agree with Moore, but criticism basically saying he should have written a different story falls flat, IMHO. Would you criticize "Animal farm" for painting Napoleon (i.e. Stalin) in too harsh a light?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm hesitating here, but could this movie actually be...er...be halfway decent?

Not a cat in hell's chance, I'm afraid.

If you don't believe me, google for "eggy in a basket". No, really.

 

But it wasn't, and that's what I'm complaining about. Moore had everything in V's favour right from the start, with the sole exception of Rose. Susan thought he was doing the right thing for Britain, but he was also a complete nutcase. How much more interesting it would have been if he'd been a complex and, in his own small way, good man as well as a monster. After all, Hitler liked playing with his kids.

Right, point taken.

However, I'd propose that, irrespective of how Moore told the story, a great part of its drive is couched in the need to take the narrative at much much more than face-value. David Lloyd says in his introduction to the trade that the book is "for people who don't switch off the News" - and even when V himself tells Evey that "all the blindfolds are gone", he's just finished a totally fictitious prison set-up for the poor girl! What's to prove, beyond his word alone, that he hasn't just changed the party's blindfolds for his own?

Oh, and as a final note on the V's personal revenge debate - VENDETTA, for god's sake! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't read V For Vendetta? Good grief. This must be rectified immediately - please report as soon as you are able to a place of mutual convenience for extensive re-education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You haven't read V For Vendetta? Good grief. This must be rectified immediately - please report as soon as you are able to a place of mutual convenience for extensive re-education.

What he said. But with some swearing. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I'd propose that, irrespective of how Moore told the story, a great part of its drive is couched in the need to take the narrative at much much more than face-value. David Lloyd says in his introduction to the trade that the book is "for people who don't switch off the News" - and even when V himself tells Evey that "all the blindfolds are gone", he's just finished a totally fictitious prison set-up for the poor girl! What's to prove, beyond his word alone, that he hasn't just changed the party's blindfolds for his own?

 

That scene doesn't call V's mission into question, only his method, which is vindicated by Evey anyway. You can add your own layers of meaning, but the basic text does not invite any kind of criticism of V's actions, since Moore wraps everything up in cotton by revealing that in the end, it was The Right Thing To Do. The morality of a character's actions is irrelevant if the universe in which they exist conspires to keep them in the right 99% of the time.

 

Evey is undoubtedly changed for the better after her imprisonment. V is still right and Norsefire is still wrong, because V is still (mostly) the good guy and Norsefire is (definitely) the bad team.

 

Aren't we getting a wee bit too postmodern here? What is the most relevant story about Adolf Hitler - that he was a nice guy to his kids or that he led a fascist dictatorship which killed millions?

 

I don't see what postmodernism has to do with this. I only brought it up as an example of even the most horrendous of human monsters having a tender side.

 

Using lots of storytelling time to expound on Susan's complex personality would detract from the story being told, and the message Moore wanted to convey.

 

It wouldn't require "lots of storytelling time". Just take those one or two issues dedicated to Susan blithering on about his wonderful computer and replace them with family scenes or something.

 

Moore's point is to show us the danger of totalitarianism, even in relatively peaceful, stable countries like Britain. To do this, he has to show how this alternate reality is something we should be afraid of, not indifferent towards. This requires broad brush storttelling, to some degree. Feel free not to agree with Moore, but criticism basically saying he should have written a different story falls flat, IMHO. Would you criticize "Animal farm" for painting Napoleon (i.e. Stalin) in too harsh a light?

 

If you read the criticism in context, you'll see that I have no problem with what Moore wanted to do, or the methods he used to implement it. Rather, I have a problem with people going on about V for Vendetta being a morally complex work when, for the most part, it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the criticism in context, you'll see that I have no problem with what Moore wanted to do, or the methods he used to implement it. Rather, I have a problem with people going on about V for Vendetta being a morally complex work when, for the most part, it is not.

Ah, I see. I agree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a different between "morally complex" and "morally ambiguous," and VFV definitely falls into the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mistery of the Blank Big White Spoilers Squares has been discovered.

(Man I miss Mr. E. D. Meaner, anyone knows what happened to him??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

Are we supporting this film or giving it the Keanusteen treatment?

 

It's my opinion that V is the single greatest comic ever. Most of you know that I only just read it over the summer but that I was truly inspired by it. If the film is going to be as bad as it looks then I will be even angrier than I was last February!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

OK, the first preview I saw looked OK. I even posted that I thought it looked a little like V meets Desperado which was so absurd, I loved it.

 

But everything I've seen since has made me cringe. Why must they change Alan Moore's version? Why must it be updated? It fits into its capsule of time fine. It didn't need to be changed.

 

On a different note, I found a HELLBLAZER written by Grant Morrison and illustrated by V's own David Lloyd. I had to pay all the rest of my wallet's cash ($7) to get it, but it's in flawless shape. To me, that is comic gold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, the first preview I saw looked OK. I even posted that I thought it looked a little like V meets Desperado which was so absurd, I loved it.

 

But everything I've seen since has made me cringe. Why must they change Alan Moore's version? Why must it be updated? It fits into its capsule of time fine. It didn't need to be changed.

 

details details! (what first preview? what was changed and from where do you now etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...