“V” for “Vamoose” April 8, 2006
Posted by Administrator in Cultural Pessimism, Drama.trackback
I confess it right now. I have been very interested in "V" for Vendetta. Not least of my reasons are the stars: Natalie Portman (outside of Star Wars) is generally a very intriguing actress who is also easy on the eyes, and Hugo Weaving has been sublime in every role I have ever seen him in; especially in The Matrix, an otherwise useless film that has Weaving cracking me up as Agent Smith.
But I had already had some serious threads of doubt. Reports that the film glorified vigilante justice, almost to the point of endorsing terrorism.
Then through my ever-vigilant son I came upon this review from decentfilms.com. In addition to endorsing the concern about terrorism, I also find now that the Wachowski brothers engage in a more than a little bit of gratuitous Catholic bashing. So much so, in fact, that it apprantly (in addition to other sins) forced "V"'s comic book father Alan Moore to disscociate himself from the project.
Yet, even with those caveats, I was ready to give it a try, until I saw this. Not that big a deal, you say? Well, consider that the link comes from the reprehensible Michaemoore.com, and the actual link looks like this:
'V for Vendetta' "Go see this movie!" — Michael Moore
AIIIGGGHHHH!!!! Michael Moore says this is a good film???
MOON BAT ALERT!!!!! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!!
I'll just have to wait for another chance to see Portman and Weaving in action.
A Whole Lot About Mostly Nothing 
Hey Hoody, awesome blog! Definitely easier on the eyes than the last on, and the sidebar is nice and clean.
Anyway, I’ll link to you as soon as I’m done being awesome.
I’d say I rather prefer blogs that have dark backgrounds. They’re easier to read than things with lots of glaring white.
A friend of mine got me to read the comic book last year, and it was kind of thought provoking. And at first I was interested to see it in movie form. However, I think I’ll pass. Thanks for the warning.
Well, I too prefer the dark background, and we may be going back to it when I can drum up the motivation to play with it.
Actually, I have to put in a good word for “VfV”. It does have a lot of good points to make, and a fair amount of bad ones as well, I’ll admit. However, I think the attacks that the Left are so delighted with are fine, because the things they are supposedly attacking (particularly the Church), are depicted in the movie so that they only vaguely resemble reality, essentially just making and then tearing apart the straw man.
If things were as they are in the film, then of course they would be evil.
The problem comes when people think that since the Church and State are both evil in the movie, and there are some vague semblances to their real-world counterparts, so the real things must be evil and disgusting as well.
I reccomend it despite its shortcomings. I actually think it was a pretty good movie, not for the very obvious agenda (Homosexuality the pinacle of all humanity, and anybody who disagrees is a filthy hypocritcal Nazi!), but just because it does give one something to think about, and provides characters through whom tyrrany can be studied, and events of ambiguous morality.
We Christians seem to have the weird habit of automatically rejecting anything that depicts evil or sin without taking the time to see how the story of that sin is shown. I think V for Vendetta is one occasion where there is still something to be mulled over and perhaps something even to be learned through story of sin.
OK, Avenger. I’ll keep this in mind.