
V for Vendetta
Controversy around this picture should not deter one from watching.
Forging the notion that a film can inspire or glorify terrorism or that a film in particular, is a condemnation of current governmental processes, the media finds itself in the ironic situation of expositing an untruth, which is paramount to the ideals set forth from the film in question. Anyone who has opened a magazine or watched any sort of entertainment rag knows that V for Vendetta follows the heroic/evil exploits of a Guy Fawkes masked terrorist/vigilante V, in the totalitarian British future.
The key element to this movie is the freedom lent to it by the genre in which it exists. Pulling from sci-fi and a unique script (adapted by the Wachowski, who produced as well, from an Alan Moore graphic novel) the filmmakers, James McTeigue in particular, can borrow from previous tales told of a future where people are condemned to allowing other s to do their thinking for them. The vision is distinctly Orwellian.. V, played by Hugo Weaving, a freedom fighter of sorts who befriends Evey (Natalie Portman), a misbegotten waif caught between what is easy and what is (debatably) right. As the film continues, one begins to wonder which side V truly is on. His web of gray and unclear distinction and moral ambiguity forces Evey to navigate her way through a very complex web that she cannot fully understand. Also notable among the cast is John Hurt, whose casting as Adam Sutler should also bring no end of glee to the adept viewer.
The ideas are complex, although presented to an audience in a way that makes them more palatable and perhaps understandable. What is still in question is whether or not the audience will take home the answer: That there is no true answer, which is the genius of the film. The gray area extends itself fully into the area beyond the end of the credits.
Written by: Kevin Yeoman
Reviewers Rating: 9.5
Reader's Rating: 7.25
Reader's Votes: 4
Added: 22-Mar-2006
Talk to other readers about this story.
|