   V for VendettaMPAA Rating:
 for strong violence and some languageReviewed by: Michael Karounos Offensive
Moviemaking Quality:
Primary Audience:
Adults
Genre:
Sci-Fi, Thriller, Action/Adventure, Drama
Length:
2 hr. 12 min.
Year of Release:
2006
USA Release:
March 17, 2006 (wide)
          Relevant Issues
What is Islam? Answer Persecuted church—Why and how should we pray for suffering Christians? Answer Every time you buy a movie ticket or rent a video you are casting a vote telling Hollywood “That’s what I want.” Why does Hollywood continue to promote immoral programming? Are YOU part of the problem?
“Remember, remember the 5th of November”
All of these elements are present in the movie as well, with the exception of the nuclear winter. V (Hugo Weaving) is a vigilante-like hero who seeks to overthrow a government described as “religious and conservative” like those portrayed in Burton’s “Planet of the Apes” and in Wimmer’s “Equilibrium” and “Ultraviolet”. The movie also repeats the cross motif that each of the other movies uses to denigrate Christianity. The particular cross in “V” is what is called a papal or archiepiscopal cross, with two transoms of uneven length. It serves as an ever-present red symbol of oppression and decorates the backdrop of a viewing platform before which goose-stepping troops march in American-style desert camouflage. This association of Christianity with an oppressive military has become a common motif in Hollywood productions, more recently in “Ultraviolet”. V himself is the product of a viral experiment which, though it does not kill him, does in fact make him stronger and very angry. Consequently, he seeks to overthrow the government by 1) exposing the lies that sustain it, and 2) by awakening the masses from the dulled TV sleep into which they have been lulled. V accomplishes this by blowing up governmental structures representing the judicial and legislative branches, and by assassinating the figurehead for the executive branch. In short, V’s project is an anarchist one, as the ending makes clear when the populace of London turns out, dressed in V masks, and their TVs are shown in empty rooms and empty pubs as a symbol that they have been awakened from their ideological slumber. The movie is preachy to say the least, and harps on three major themes and one minor one: 1) the evil of America; 2) the government control of media; 3) the evil of Christianity; and 4) the innocence of Islam. These themes are portrayed so frequently in American films that it’s become necessary to rebut them as a counter to V’s assertion that “Art is fiction that tells the truth.” This is the movie’s transparent attempt to claim authenticity for its own fictions. The first fiction portrays the United States as an evil society, racked by civl war; suffering from riots over medicine shortages; and as the source of the deadly virus that conservatives in England used to kill 80,000 of their own people. What is remarkable about such Leftist fantasies about the presumed guilt of the United States is that all of those evils are in existence today and employed by regimes which were enemies of the United States, such as Sadaam Hussein’s Iraq. Just this past week, a Russian Communist accused the U.S. of inventing the avian flu (Center for Disease Information). Yet, reality is found in the disturbing revelation of the viral weapon the Communists in the Soviet Union developed (Technology Review). The second fiction of the movie is that of a government-controlled (or supported) media which brainwashes its populace. In reality, this is true only of oppressive regimes and socialist societies like England where the media is, in fact, already Leftist. In the United States, we have a freedom of speech that is so wide-ranging in its liberties that it permits our media to print blatant forgeries libeling our President. Although Dan Rather was fired for publishing propaganda just before a national election, he can take comfort in the fact that he got a nice severance package and was tortured only by his attempts at explanation. Thirdly, it is difficult for Christians to take seriously the hysterical fictions of Christian totalitarianism by those on the Left who make movies like this and contribute to organizations like Moveon.org or the Democratic Underground. The only totalitarianisms we have known in the modern era are either secular or Islamic, precisely the ones that the United States is trying to protect the world from. It is not Christians who blow up buildings, chop people’s heads off, or issue rewards for the death of Danish cartoonists. This is another case of wishful and perverted projection on the part of the Left. The movie further portrays the Anglican bishop as a pervert who preys on young girls and who has made a fortune from drug company graft. Lastly, the fiction of Islam as a religion of peace is directly or indirectly referenced twice in the movie. The first is with the suggestion: “What if the worst attack was not the work of religious extremists?” This echoes the fever-swamp accusations by those Americans who think our own government was responsible for 9/11 and not Islamic terrorists. The second reference to Islam is when a TV entertainer is arrested and executed for having a Koran in his possession. In no Christian land across the world is it a crime to have a Koran or even to preach death to Christians from it, as the imams regularly do in England, Italy, Germany, and the prisons of New York ( Newsday article). In fact, in Muslim Saudi Arabia the persecution of Christians is well-documented, as when two Philippino Christians were arrested, tortured, and deported in 2002 for privately practicing their faith. There are many such instances documented at The Voice of the Martyrs Web site or at Christian Persecution. The movie further shows the pseudo-Christian regime arresting, torturing, and killing lesbian and gay couples. But in the real world, it is Muslims like the Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani of Iraq who say that “gays should be killed in the worst possible way” (Web reference). By no means are such Muslim comments limited to him, nor are they necessarily meant maliciously. It is simply what Islam teaches. I saw “V for Vendetta” with nine Christian college students and was struck by their immunity to issues which I found offensive. I believe the reason for their neutral response is because our media have done a thorough job of tainting Christianity and exonerating Islam. While Hollywood is busy making movies about the fictional evils of Christianity, it is just as busy ignoring the real evils of Islam to gays, women, and Christians. What is important for Christian viewers to remember is that movies are not just entertainment; they are ideological statements. And when movies persistently portray our country and our faith as evil, even skeptical believers who think that Hollywood is too shallow or too objective (!) to make anti-Christian movies should sit up and take notice. What distinguishes Christianity from all other belief systems is the overwhelming message of grace, forgiveness, and redemption that we have through Jesus Christ. It is a mystery that this is so; it seems fantastic and a stumbling-block to non-belevers that it is so; but we live in a remarkable time when even the co-founder of string theory, Michio Kaku, can say in his new book, Parallel Worlds, that the universe is ordered according to a still-unknown theorem and that where there’s a theorem there must also be a Creator of that theorem. We live in a world of true and false statements, of good and evil deeds, and we must learn how to distinguish one from the other by the fruits of their practitioners. “V for Vendetta” is a political speech disguised as a movie, but it affirms nothing positive, spending its time engaging in juvenile fantasies about the thrills of anarchism and the evils of Christianized regimes. Natalie Portman, as Evey, does what she can with the role of a prostitute* turned savior, but it is a morbid role with little range of expression. Even Hugo Weaving, trapped behind the Guy Fawkes mask, has more humorous statements and more range of inflections in his speeches than does Portman. Finally, the movie has female nudity, including showing naked dead bodies, as in WWII by the Nazis, being scooped into mass graves. The viewer can catch glimpses of naked women but it’s not prolonged. There is nothing good to say about it except that there are a number of quotations from Shakespeare and that I like the happy features of the Guy Fawkes mask very much. While it is good to have a historical knowledge of the Catholic Fawkes’s attempt 400 years ago to blow up Protestants in the Parliament Building, it is even better to understand that 400 years later it is neither Catholics nor Protestants who are a threat to our country. Rather, it is a union of leftist secularists and Islamic jihadists who have joined together to attack the values of our faith and the security of our nation through precisely the kind of propaganda and violence that V advocates. “V for Vendetta” producer Joel Silver clings to the old canard that “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” in defending the anarchy in this movie. For these people, there is no difference between real Muslim terrorists and fictional Christian ones; between real totalitarianisms of the left and Christian ones. For them, it’s all one, and it’s all true so long as the truth is in the eye of the individual beholder. While the English remember the 5th of November, let us in the U.S. never forget the 11th of September. “V for Vendetta” is not recommended for viewing by a Christian audience. Instead, go see “End of the Spear” or “The Second Chance” and enable Christian filmmakers to make more and better films in the future. Violence: Heavy / Profanity: Heavy / Sex/Nudity: Moderate * The movie doesn’t state that Evey was a prostitute (a call girl), but it infers this through her portrayal. The film begins with Evey in her underwear dressing sexily, looking at an address written on a scrap of paper, and going into the dangerous streets after curfew. Why would she need a scrap of paper and dress sexily for a GAY friend and go into the streets knowing she could be picked up and tortured? Furthermore, I am told that in the graphic novel (which I have never read) the character Evey “was indeed a prostitute and was out turning tricks after curfew when she was attacked by some of the Fingermen (the secret police of the movie’s totalitarian government) and rescued by V.” Note from reviewer, Michael Karounos
I want to thank the viewers who have written their comments on my review. There are too many differences of opinion for me to address them all, but perhaps it would help if I address the central thesis of my review which is that the movie is a disguised film that is anti-American and pro-Islamic. The following is from an interview at MTV with Alan Moore, author of the graphic novel, “V for Vendetta”. Moore, who is an anarchist, is more honest than some Christian critics I have read on the movie. He outs the movie for what I called it and for what it is: “a thwarted and frustrated and perhaps largely impotent American liberal fantasy.”
Also, would it help if Hugo Weaving, the star of “V,” indicated that it really is an anti-American film? If it would, then read this quotation:
Lastly, does it matter what the director, James McTeigue, thinks? Is there really a moral equivalence between, say, George Washington and Che Guevara? Or between George Bush and Osama bin Laden? If viewers think so, that is their opinion. However, that doesn’t detract from the fact that the director thinks so and that his viewpoint informs the viewpoint of the movie that Islam is a positive religion and that Christianity is negative:
These are just a few of the quotations that reveal what Alan Moore, Hugo Weaving, and James McTeigue describe as the film’s intent. Moore correctly identifies the Wachovski’s leftist and anti-American agenda. I encourage Christian viewers to learn to recognize when their faith is being attacked. Believers without a clear sense of their own identity will be unable to recognize attacks on their faith. See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.  Comments below:
Negative
Negative - I saw this movie with friends and before going thought it would be an anti-government, anti-totalitarian (anti-big brother) film. It was, in a very small way, just that. Its real purpose is to portray homosexuals as the poster children of oppression—the most significant victims of persecution and totalaritarianism. Aside from the main characters (“V”—well-portrayed by Mr. Weaving, and “Evey”—decently done by Portman) the only characters that are fleshed out in the first 90 minutes are a homosexual male and a lesbian female. They’re portrayed as victims forced to supress their desire for fear of reprisals from the state. They don’t dwell on the man so much as the woman, and from a profit-perspective that makes sense since lesbianism is less offensive to the masses. Synopsis: Negative - I thought that the first half of this movie was interesting and entertaining. However, there were early themes that were clearly trying to make a case against a conservative or Christian world view. By the middle of the movie it was clear that Muslims and Islam were being portrayed as victims of the conservatives; gays were also portrayed as being victimized by a repressive tyrannical Nazi like conservative government. The jabs at the US and the current Bush administration were also obvious. Finally the institutional “Church” was portrayed as part of this tyrannical government. Negative - The best part about this film is the conversation with my 17 year old son after. The villain of the film is described as conservative, strongly religious man. He locks up homosexuals and kills thousands with a virus in an effort to gain power. His symbol is a cross. Others are a priest who molests little girls and a conservative talk show host who has a drug problem, and they all schemed with a drug company to make money. One of the films sympathetic characters is a gay man who has to hide his sexuality while he protects a copy of the koran. One of the messages is that it is ok to blow up a building in an effort to affect change… do you see a connection with 9/11 here. Some good acting, good effects, and it is artistic. Too bad in the movie industry finds it acceptable to bash Christians. Nothing in the previews would have lead me to expect this. As I said it provided great conversation with my son how our beliefs are protrayed in the media and how some horrible things have been done by people who called themselves Christians. Not for kids or young teens. I would not advise seeing. Next time I’ll wait for the Christian reviews before spending my money. Negative - Overall, the film quality, action, and sound effects are great. but that’s where it ends. I’m surprised by these so called Christians giving this movie a positive or even neutral review. I suspect wolves in sheeps clothing. If you watched this movie, you’ll realize how anti-Christian it is from the very start. As you go further into the movie, it begins to push the hidden message of pro-terrorism, pro-gay, and anti-Americanism. Negative - …I had been waiting to see this movie, the anticipation was high, and after about five minutes I was waiting for the movie to be over, I was bored out of my mind. “V for Vendetta” first of all basically steals all ideas from the movie “Equilibrium” starring Christian Bale, and really there isn’t an original thought throughout the whole movie. I was extremely disappointed because I really think Natalie Portman is fun to watch on screen; she did okay, but this movie just plain was a waste of her time and mine. All the great scenes are in the trailers; I should of just stuck to the trailers and ignored the movie and saved my 8 bucks. I really thought this would be a great film; after all, she shaved her head for it, so it must be good if she would do that. Maybe she was shaving her head in mourning that she made this movie, who knows, but I think what a waste. …The movie is just a mess, and it’s also your basic hit piece on Christians, and in all honesty, it’s a really bad and poorly designed movie, and the words “This is really stupid,” kept replaying in my mind. It makes no sense, it’s just a bunch of scenes thrown together that don’t flow. The movie makers go out of their way to portray Christians as these murderous thugs and full of hate, and I was really surprised that Natalie Portman would have anything to do with such a malicious movie as “V for Vendetta”. Negative - I went to see this film …and expected one of Hollywood’s traditional modern action movies. Instead, I ended up witnessing one of the most groutesque, biased, and incorrect films that I have ever seen. Anyone who believes that this film is not full of anti-Christian messages needs to re-watch it because it occurs right from the beginning of the film when we witness the villain of the film (although most in Hollywood would look on him as a hero), V, slashes through a Christian banner hanging on a alleyway. Negative - My daughters were dying to see this movie. All their friends said it was awesome! My wife and I went to check it out. We should have read the Christian critique first. Sorry we went. I was telling my wife the same things you brought out in your critique. How a christian could miss the subterfuge I will never know. God bless you all, and keep up the good fight. Negative - The cinematic quality of this film as well as the screenplay are both very good. I found the film clever and thought provoking; much better than the usual drivel produced by Hollywood. I could recommend the film except that I am greatly concerned over the diminishing critical thinking skills found in the film going crowd. This seems to be true regardless of one’s profession of faith. Negative - I screened “V For Vendetta” only because numerous teens in our church youth group had been raving over this film. I already knew the movie had anti-Christian elements, but I thought I needed to sit through it in order to better point out to them the radical worldview behind the film. For the sake of entertainment, many teens and sadly adults, turn a blind eye to the underlying messages of most movies, unaware that over time habitual exposure to harmful influences can alter one’s perception. Negative - Let me just say that I remember why I don’t go out to movies anymore. Trying to prove its reason for being, “V for Vendetta” had a vendetta against modern conservative politics. It was a blatant insult and criticism to anything religious, conservative or Godly. In the middle of the film, the plot turned out to be more about the oppression of homosexuals (a blindingly obvious dig at the recent gay marriage issues that have gone down in flames) than about politics. Of course, they showed that there was nothing wrong with homosexuality, with the hint that anyone who said otherwise was a prejudiced, narrow-minded, cruel person who needed to be removed from society. The ever-changing theme made me think that the Wachowski brothers couldn’t make up their minds about what they wanted the film to say; so they just threw everything into the film. Negative - Why don’t these guys come out and say they are going to charge you 20 bucks to proselytize you for two hours on every cliché, idiotic conspiracy theory, and gripe the left has produced in the last few years in their advertising? …I wasted an entire Friday night watching this stink fest and I want my time back. And it was boring. Hugo’s character was hard to understand due to the everpresent mask, maybe that was the only redeaming quality to this stink fest. I have lost respect for everyone involved. From the sex-crazed priest to the homosexuals being rounded up in death camps, it was a political statement made poorly, and it was uninspired. Save yourself some time and money and go to a Micheal Moore Web site. You will see everything there you can find in this film. Negative - First off, I came into this movie expecting a huge action movie. Was I wrong about that; second the movie I thought I was going to see was about a government that oppressed its people and was more of a pre-war Iraq when it was under the rule of Saddam. It was not that at all, what I found after seeing this was that it was a total push for homosexuality, and for us as humans to start thinking for ourselves and accept the homosexuals’ immorality in this world and embrace [it] for our own. But the one thing that got me flaming was the comment the one homosexual said in the movie, while they were dragging all these gay people out of bed and arresting them she said, why do “they” hate us so much. Think about this, the government was run by Christians, the symbol for the country was two crosses on top of each other. This movie is pointed at us as Christians. Please do not support this… Negative - I have had some minor problems with the reviewer before, but in this case he is right on target. The movie is not only anti-Christian and liberal, but I am very curious why no one seems to comment on a hero who TORTURES Evey into submission? She even THANKS him for what he did! How can liberals seriously take V as a hero simply because he opposes a “religious and conservative” regime, however evil it may be. V says at one point “ideas are bullet proof” but I was asking myself, “what ideas”? He doesn’t have any ideas—just “I hate the bad guys.” This seems to be the message of the far left —'I hate Bush'— but they have no agenda of their own and no solutions. V, if he were a real character, would not have made England more free or just. In fact, he would merely be creating more of the chaos which the film portrays the manner in which the “conservative” party took power. Indeed, the villain at one point says 'We want to show them why they need us,' by which he means that he wants to create chaos so that the government can “save” them, but V’s goal is to create choas, so isn’t V really just helping the government he opposes? Negative - “V for Vendetta” is an extremely silly film: although some of the ideas it presents resonate with current events in in Blair's Britain, it has neither the guts to attack the current Government (much nearer to the nightmare Government it was meant to warn against, during Margaret Thatcher's tenure), nor the moral authority with which to launch such an attack. The scene in which Natalie Portman appears dressed as a little girl for the bishop's lascivious attentions was played not for the shock value that such a person would indulge such lusts (we know some churchmen do), but to actually titillate the “dirty old man” brigade (hardly surprising when one considers the predilections of one of the Wachowski brothers). In all, a grave disappointment that merely confirms in my mind that the original “Matrix” movie was a flash in the pan. Neutral
Neutral - I personally felt the movie was portraying that when governmnet and religion become one, that the people lose because freedom of choice is lost. Hitler mixed religion with government and religion lost to the will of government. I felt the movie was saying that the government should never be controlled by religion or vice versa because they will distort the people, forcing them to believe a certain way, which God does not want, that’s why we have free will. They happened to pick Christainity to be the bad guys but it could have been muslims or hindus. People will always be oppressed if the government is run by cliche that is why we vote for several different people for lots of offices. So I believe one should watch the movie in view that religion and government do not mix because, as what happened with Hitler’s reign, the government will distort the religion. People need to be able to choose their faith. So when viewed in this manner the film is positive, but I know that was not the intent of the film. Neutral - First of all let me say that I grew up in a very strict religious home. As a child, I was raised with the belief that the bible is inerrant, and that it alone should be the source of all our decisions in life. As I grow in the Lord, I continue to have an interest in expanding my knowledge of the bible and how people think in general. Especially liberal minds! Having said that, I can now say that “V for Vendetta” is an awesome movie! With terrific moviemaking quality, it now hails on my list as one of the few “standards” of how a good movie should make you feel when you leave the theater. Neutral - V for Vendetta is an amazing film, no doubt about it. You can’t expect anything less from the Wachowski brothers. Hugo Weaving and Natalie Portman gave great performances (as did the rest of the cast). Weaving was absolutely spellbinding in his portrayal of “V.” He really must have put a lot of work into portraying the character. Portman also was great. Her character was very believable, especially during the whole imprisionment sequence. The special effects were great, and it didn’t feel too out there in regards to the future in regards to technology and such. It looked and felt almost like today in many aspects. Neutral - Given the quality of the film making I enjoyed this movie. It grabs your attention right from the start and never lets go. For the most part the plot twists and turns flow quite well. The dialog is superb. V’s alliteration is especially well written. The fact that the bad guys are a right wing party doesn’t really offend me. One could easily substitute a left wing government for the one portrayed in the movie. And, although I count myself as part of the Christian right wing, this movie serves as a good reminder that not everyone in the right wing necessarily has the best intentions at heart. Neutral - First of all, let me say that I loved the film because of the movie making quality, acting, directing, etc. etc. However, I had problems with the profanity and the fact that there is a disgusting man acting as a bishop who tries to take advantage of a young woman (and he also uses profane language). Neutral - As I exited the theater, I began to think back over the movie I had just watched. I knew most Christians and conservatives in general would take offense to it. And most liberals would adore the message, if not the film as a whole. But I seriously had no opinion on it. Its message seemed weaker after being hammered into my skull through the two and half hours of the film than it had been in the trailers that proclaimed “People should not fear their governments…” and after the credits began to role, I seriously didn’t feel anything. Was I entertained? Yes. Was my mind engaged and my emotions triggered? To an extent. Did I continue to contemplate the deeper meaning and underlying messages as I drove home? Not at all. Positive
Positive
Positive - “Remember, remember the fifth of November” Opening words of a movie I thought was going to be a disappointing addition to the action genre. I was wrong. This movie is a poignant look into a dark future that could happen if the people, so frightened and blind by the world around them, put on the mask of a democratic socialist regime and allow that regime to control their entire existence. It is a story of a people who are so desperate for an answer to why the world has gone wrong that they will elect anyone who has a loud enough voice and a solution that promises change and then delivers it, no mention of the means. And when the deed is done, when the safety and security the people are so in need of has finally come, they wake up one day and realize that they live in a world controlled by monopolistic companies, a “Hitler” like chancelor who “preaches” control, safety, and morality in the name of the greater good. A greater good that everyone knows they need, everyone wants to believe they have found, but one that is farther away than they could believe. The British population of the movie has accepted the prison, the mask, of their choosing and making, and now lives their dull, routine-laden lives without a worry or a second thought allowed to surface. Positive - M for Magnificent. My friend and I, both of us Christians, went to see this movie… The one thing that stands out to me is how well the movie was made. The movie depicts a futuristic Britain which is under a facist government. It is set in a time when “faith” is the only thing keeping the country together, the government uses Godlyness to keep the country under control. There mottoe is “Strength through unity / unity through faith.” They justify the exterminisation of undesireables such as homosexuals, Muslims and anything “un-Godly” as being essential to keeping the country from destruction. We also get a very good look into the mind of someone who is willing to commit terrible acts of violence to get his or her way, and we must decide if this is right or wrong. V, the protagonist, was a victim of a concentration camp that was established during a time of uncertainty during the war that precedes the film. The line in the film that puts is so well is, Positive - …I have to say it is one of the best films I have seen in a while. Well done with terrific acting. I absolutely loved the dialogue. One thing I must disagree with in some of the reviews I have seen is how Christianity is depicted in the film. I did not see it as depicting Christianity as evil and oppressive, but as an evil and oppressive government doing evil in the NAME of Christianity. A government that justified its actions by manipulating the teaching of Christ. I believe that my religion is a good thing, but there are many people that would use it as a means of control and a way to further their own goals. Positive - …one of the best movies made so far this year. I saw yes, Christian bashing, but it did bring up something that I think Christians fail to see 99% of the time: even christians are not perfect and can make mistakes. If we look at our world history we see that the Catholic church was very similar to this in the middle ages. Hunting down and killing people who didn’t agree with them, etc. They did terrible things to people just for disagreeing. Positive - I disagree with reviewer Michael Karounos in just about everything he said regarding this movie. There were things in this film that I did not care for, but I did not regard it as an attack on Christianity rather it served more as an attack on those who profess to be Christians who use a veneer of faith to justify the evils and sins they themselves commit. Yes, the villains are members of a evil dictatorship that claim to be conservative Christians in order to justify the things they do, but no one with any sense could watch them commit the lies, atrocities against their own citizens, the murders and the torture and believe that they actually were Christians. Is it fair that the filmmakers made a film in which evil men commit evil acts using Christianity as a thin excuse for their actions? It would only be unfair if it were impossible for such a thing to happen; which it is not, and we have people in history as far back as the Crusades and as recently as David Koresh to prove it. This movie is certainly not a Christian film, but it does present a truth that is found in 2 Peter 2:1-3. Positive - First off, this is just a movie, and as all forms of limited media they cannot change the entirety of a culture by simply exsisting. Rather this movie plays on the thoughts and ideas already captive in our psyche. Now, as a Christian, I cannot agree with everything that was put forth in this movie, such as the justification of homosexual relations through the appeasment of government interference, but the ideal of limited government still resonates through and through. As you may have heard our goverment wasn’t always the way it was, much of the power belonged to the people, and over time we have given much of this power away *coughFDRcough*. And now we are seeing the consequences of such an pandemic of action. “V for Vendetta” has just brought to the surface many ideas that are already common place in many societies. And as a Christian it presents the opportunity to share how God sees government and its role in our lives. Positive - WOW. What a movie, the best so far this year. This film has action, story, great acting, and a message to it. This is a masterpiece pure and true, a must see for all film lovers. I was just blown away by it, it’s amazing to see how great films have become now a days, when I was young, they never had the power of some of the films today. I will definitely see this great film again. Positive - I have to say that I disagree with the main reviewer on the morality of this film. The reviewer makes references to present horrible regimes that exist, and claims that this movie is only an attack against America. I think it’s more of an attack against any regime that uses violence to further its goals. This movie could just as easily apply to present day Iraq or Saudia Arabia as it would a future fascist America or Britain. I left the movie with ambivalent feelings about V’s actions. Obviously he did a good thing in helping to bring down a fascist government. But his own violence could be seen as excessive. Positive - What I found amazing about this show is how accurately it actually shows what can happen under the guise of “false” faith. The movie was not anti-Christian. It showed what can happen when anybody takes total control of the liberties that we are blessed with. It reminds me of a quote “People who will trade in their liberties for security deserve neither.”—Benjamin Franklin Positive - Let me say in response to the negative reviews above, primarily those who objected to the government being labeled “conservative” and saw the government’s use of religion as “Christian-bashing,” I think you’re mistaken. Why? Because you’re failing to take into account the film’s target audience. The audience is not a bunch of Afghan Muslims living in the mountains north of Kabul or working class Saudis living in Medina. Its audience is the (extremely nominal) Christian west whose form of government is representative democracy. Would any one of us have believed (and been moved to fear by) the future painted by this movie if the Chancellor had not been a white man spouting religious platitudes, but instead a bearded, olive-skinned ayatollah in a turban railing against women exposing their ankles, the evilness of infidels or the need for conformity to sharia law? I doubt it. Also, because the “swipes” at America and conservatives are never really as excessive as they could have been. They are used to establish the film’s political motif, nothing more. Positive - I for one, really liked this movie. Yes, it does contain violence and some hot button issues. If you do not want to see violence or blood, do not see it. However, I felt this movie was emotionally moving, and it really made you think. I think some Christians are so influenced (myself included) by the few of us who have mainstream access to the public, that we take their opinions as our own and don’t always think for ourselves. This movie represented opinions that our different than our own, but it was done in a very artistic and entertaining way. Have they changed my mind about anything? Not really. But they have made me take down some walls that I had built up towards others who are different. I do not believe homosexuality is right, but I also think we need to love them into the kingdom rather than shout hate speeches at them. I also agree with the viewer above that said this was not a representation of Christianity, but what evil people will do in the name of it. No one who loves God would torture people and kill them because they are different. Positive - I would just like to point out a thought. Yes, the movie portrays the United States as a morally bankrupt country responsible for the worlds suffering and in great turmoil. Perhaps, that is not the reality. The only view of the U.S. we as viewers receive is from the government controlled media and from the character’s limited (and flawed) understanding of history. We know for a fact who was responsible for releasing the virus by the end of the movie. Maybe it was nothing more than propaganda to further scare the people into submission. Just my though, maybe the movie wasn’t digging at the U.S. directly. Rather, it was simply using it as a vehicle to further the plot. Positive - A pretty good movie—not spectacular, but solid. My complaints would be its flat visual style, and lack of subtlety with its characters and themes. I gave my “Average” rating because as Christians freedom should be important to us—even if people choose lifestyles we don’t agree with. Nobody deserves to be rounded up and treated as those shown here. Yes, there is some graphic content (holocaust imagery and some violence) but I felt it was necessary to the story and nowhere near levels of other films that are well regarded by believers. Positive - I went to this movie with a few of my Christian friends, and wasn’t really knowing what to expect. I’m glad that I did see this movie, because it shows that the government can be corrupt and rule through dictatorship or fear. V (played by a masterful Hugo Weaving) is rebelling against the government through terrorist measures, especially on the 5th of November, where he attacks “fingermen” and blows up buildings. He stumbles upon a girl named Evey in his terrorist action (played by an excellent Natalie Portman) and tries to drive out all of her fear. Positive - Although I am not specifically Christian, I ask that my comments on this movie be as they are and not as an attack against any group of people. There are many—including the commentators here—who viewed this film as an exclusive attack on Christianity; such a viewpoint is simply shallow and short-sighted at best, and a complete reversal of the actual point at worst. Positive - As a Christian of nineteen years and a film studies teacher, I found myself overjoyed after watching “V for Vendetta”. At no point does it demonize our faith. All it does is examine how it can be misused, nor does it hold Islam as the perfect faith it just highlights the demonisation of all those of a different skin colour in the mass media. Positive - What many people seem to be missing with this movie is that “V for Vendetta” IS all about faith and where the common man should place it: in the hands of those promoting faith for their own causes, or those promoting faith in mankind as a whole. Obviously, V promotes the unification of this post-nuclear society under a common faith. Christ as a symbol was forced to go against society to restore a true, uncorrupted faith to mankind; V leads the people of England away from the corrupted regime (based on a false faith) and towards a true faith in mankind. The movie preaches the idea of redemption and the ability of the common man to overcome oppression through faith alone. V may be a “terrorist” of sorts as a human, but Jesus was a pauper, a poor man, as a human. It is the unhuman or symbolic power of both V and Jesus that made them powerful; it requires faith to trust in these inhuman identities. The people of England unite under the idea of the Fifth of November and the mask of V, but not under the terrorist human that he embodies. The focus in this faith is on the spirit and not the man; V's undying lust for revenge as a human is shown quite negatively, especially towards the end of the film. Comments from young people
Positive - The Wachowski Bros. have done it again, and I'm not refering to the 2nd and 3rd “Matrix” installments, but the original. In this perfectly crafted tale of a not so distant Orwellian society where fear and censorship is the ultimate form of control, one man's journey of revenge becomes a catalyst to the awakening of the conditioned masses. I don't care what the corporate controlled, main-stream media has to say about this film, I knew as I left the theater that critics would find a way to bash this truly relevant film. Not since Darth Vadar has there been such a powerful performance by an actor who's facial expressions are concealed by a mask. Kudos Hugo Weaving. As the title of this review suggests, A MUST SEE!! Movie Critics
Positive - …Obviously, “Vendetta”’s makers are targeting the Bush administration, including the Patriot Act and how it deals with dissent.… Negative - …clearly meant to have more than a passing resemblance to our current political environment …this film sags when it should zip, weighted down with self-importance and some dubious thinking… Negative - …a dunderheaded pop fantasia that celebrates terrorism and destruction… The Wachowskis clearly wanted to weigh in on current politics, so they threw in references to the Bush Administrations political use of Christianity. There’s also talk of “rendition,” and the secret police repeatedly throw black hoods over people’s heads, Abu Ghraib style.… Neutral - …Coming out of V for Vendetta, a friend of mine called it “radical” and “subversive.” He was awestruck with disbelief that a film with a harlequin terrorist as its hero could actually be released by a major American studio. I was awestruck at his naivety in a world where fight-the-power anarchy is now marketed as a fashionable identity statement by the corporations that helped raise a generation on bands like Rage Against the Machine, by the armchair-leftist bloggers who flog the same righteousness day after day. V for Vendetta has a playful-demon vitality, but it’s designed to let political adolescents of every age congratulate themselves. It’s rage against the machine by the machine.… Negative - …vapid …mind-numbing pretentiousness… Negative - …Any connections made between world leaders past or present are strictly intentional. …With a terrorist hero spouting lines such as “violence can be used for good” while blowing up buildings (which apparently have no custodial staff or other hapless collateral victims to fret over), V for Vendetta engages in lots of speechifying about the importance of ideas and the freedom to question them. Ironically, though, the movie doesn’t really seem to have any ideas of its own.… Negative - …V makes blowing up buildings look very cool and very justifiable. It’s hard to measure or predict the impact such images and ideas might have in today’s culture, where blasting buildings to make political statements has become a raw reality. The film also contains a veiled condemnation of the political and evangelical “right” in America today. Vendetta not-so-subtly implies that our current government is on course to end up like the one in the film. To make its point, it ropes in issues such as homosexuality, terrorism, electronic eavesdropping and the mistreatment of political prisoners.… Negative - …the talk that emanates from behind the grinning mask, courtesy of unseen actor Hugo Weaving, is sophomoric bong-hit blarney about “freedom” that would get him booed by a coffeehouse full of vegan anarchists. In its final moments, “V for Vendetta” devolves from stupid to insulting.… Negative - …“V for Vendetta” says that terrorism’s OK as long as no one really gets hurt, and to believe that, you need the wishful thinking of a child. Unfortunately, the world has grown up since Alan Moore set pen to paper. One wonders if the fan-boys ever will.… Negative - …a big snooze. Think of it as great photography with a dark, neo-noir atmosphere encapsulated in a sleeping pill… It’s simply not involving.… Negative - …P for Propaganda. …Very strong humanist, anti-religious, politically correct worldview that is pro-terrorist and includes many anti-Christian elements… a very scary and dangerous movie because it is liable to incite more political terrorism by Muslim fanatics and left-wing ideologues… |
E-mail this page to a friend