This is a very unique film. Watching it again 15 years later, it's amazing how much closer we are to this totalitarian future. A must see.
2,447 Reviews
Terrifying and inspirational
benxrichardson17 November 2020
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
Bored_Dragon3 March 2018
Placed in futuristic Britain, this movie tells a story about dictatorship and the man who became symbol of it's downfall. People from many, not to say majority, countries in today's world can easily identify with the characters. Great adaptation of DC comic and always gladly seen Natalie Portman.
8/10
8/10
V for Vigilance at all Times...
Xstal15 November 2022
A masked messiah seeks to topple fascist rule, despotic government's so brutal and so cruel, all diversity has gone, being different is now wrong, poor Britannia is no longer calm and cool. The police have spies and cameras everywhere, their eyes and ears observe the wires, seize and snare, but disguises cause surprises, hero V knifes, Fawkes and prises, to derail those, that sit in the top chairs. Removing dread, concern and fear is the key, which V does tormentingly to friend Evey, enables her to have the power, as the clock counts down the hour, to raze a tomb that sets the shackled people free.
A fantastic piece of storytelling with outstanding performances all round.
A fantastic piece of storytelling with outstanding performances all round.
My Personal Favourite Movie of All Time
seige-hound31 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
It's been quite a few years since I first saw V for Vendetta. I didn't see it at release, because I was far under the age demographic at that time, but I managed to catch up to the film at around 2011-2012. Not sure the exact year, but I was a teenager at the time, and I loved the Matrix (still do), and heard that V for Vendetta was written by the Wachowskis, so I thought I'd give it a shot.
It blew me away in many ways, and I credit the film as being part of the reason I became less homophobic and bigoted in many ways. It was the first time I saw homosexuality in a direct and positive light in the media, and it helped me immensely in establishing my more left-leaning views in the Christian world I was raised in.
It's for this reason I have a very deep and personal relationship with this film, but I love the film at a more enjoyable level as well. This film oozes with style. Everything from the cinematography and sound design, to the ways characters speak and act. The rather sparse use of fight scenes (in comparison to other action films of its ilk), opting rather to use political thriller tropes and character development, surprised me the first time I watched it, but even though the film wasn't as action packed as films like The Matrix or Equilibrium (both of which have massive third act spectacles) the action I feel is much more effective and emotional than either of those films (ironic, since Equilibrium is about emotion). While short, the final fight scene between V and Creedy's men is an incredible burst of ecstatic visceral action that makes the entire film worth it.
You can say there are three main characters in this film. There's V, the titular anarchist vigilante, Evey, the young woman who is kidnapped, and slowly falls for V in a more violent twist of Beauty and the Beast, and there's Detective Finch, a government employee tasked to finding and unmasking V, and during this task discovering that his beloved government isn't as noble as it may seem. Each of these characters is given a fair and due amount of screen time, and they each have a full and satisfactory character arc. I find how well written and edited this film is to be incredibly impressive, and writing this I want to watch the film all over again just to appreciate it more.
There is something to be said, however, about the differences between the film and the original graphic novel written by Alan Moore. I haven't read the original comic, but judging by Alan Moore's distaste of films inspired by his work, and the fact that he refused to watch the film after reading the script, maybe this film isn't for fans of the original work. There's a great comparison video by CineFix on Youtube comparing the film to the novel, and they are very very different from each other. One notable difference is that the portrayal of V vs the dictator Sutler is much more nuanced and less Black and white in the novel than in the film, and that is a very well deserved critique of the film.
I do not claim that V for Vendetta is the best film ever made. I haven't even scraped the surface of world cinema and cinema history to ever make that claim. However I can definitely say that V for Vendetta is, at least for the time being, the most personally meaningful movie, and the most enjoyable movie, I have ever seen. Mad Max Fury Road did get close though.
It blew me away in many ways, and I credit the film as being part of the reason I became less homophobic and bigoted in many ways. It was the first time I saw homosexuality in a direct and positive light in the media, and it helped me immensely in establishing my more left-leaning views in the Christian world I was raised in.
It's for this reason I have a very deep and personal relationship with this film, but I love the film at a more enjoyable level as well. This film oozes with style. Everything from the cinematography and sound design, to the ways characters speak and act. The rather sparse use of fight scenes (in comparison to other action films of its ilk), opting rather to use political thriller tropes and character development, surprised me the first time I watched it, but even though the film wasn't as action packed as films like The Matrix or Equilibrium (both of which have massive third act spectacles) the action I feel is much more effective and emotional than either of those films (ironic, since Equilibrium is about emotion). While short, the final fight scene between V and Creedy's men is an incredible burst of ecstatic visceral action that makes the entire film worth it.
You can say there are three main characters in this film. There's V, the titular anarchist vigilante, Evey, the young woman who is kidnapped, and slowly falls for V in a more violent twist of Beauty and the Beast, and there's Detective Finch, a government employee tasked to finding and unmasking V, and during this task discovering that his beloved government isn't as noble as it may seem. Each of these characters is given a fair and due amount of screen time, and they each have a full and satisfactory character arc. I find how well written and edited this film is to be incredibly impressive, and writing this I want to watch the film all over again just to appreciate it more.
There is something to be said, however, about the differences between the film and the original graphic novel written by Alan Moore. I haven't read the original comic, but judging by Alan Moore's distaste of films inspired by his work, and the fact that he refused to watch the film after reading the script, maybe this film isn't for fans of the original work. There's a great comparison video by CineFix on Youtube comparing the film to the novel, and they are very very different from each other. One notable difference is that the portrayal of V vs the dictator Sutler is much more nuanced and less Black and white in the novel than in the film, and that is a very well deserved critique of the film.
I do not claim that V for Vendetta is the best film ever made. I haven't even scraped the surface of world cinema and cinema history to ever make that claim. However I can definitely say that V for Vendetta is, at least for the time being, the most personally meaningful movie, and the most enjoyable movie, I have ever seen. Mad Max Fury Road did get close though.
More relevant than ever
beschuitfluiter14 November 2021
Here we are, 2021, almost 2022
Do I even need to explain why this movie is of the most importance?
Watch it
Understand it
Know how a fascist state is born, nurtured, and rises
And now look around
Yes, you may thank me later, if it is still allowed by then.
Do I even need to explain why this movie is of the most importance?
Watch it
Understand it
Know how a fascist state is born, nurtured, and rises
And now look around
Yes, you may thank me later, if it is still allowed by then.
Utterly Spectacular!
paxatron8 March 2006
I was a fan of the "V for Vendetta" graphic novel, and Alan Moore disinheriting the film was a bit discouraging. But he's always been a little crazy. The film version is everything I could have possibly hoped for - gripping, chilling, intense, exciting, heartbreaking. It gets Moore's music if not his exact words; elements are slightly different, subplots removed. But the idea - as V himself would be so proud to say - remains the same.
The plot is surprisingly complex and nuanced, and I don't want to give anything more away than the previews already have. Suffice it to say that a masked anarchist (voiced by Hugo Weaving) must save a young woman (Natalie Portman) during his attempt to expose corruption in the government. Weaving is perfectly cast, using his formidable physicality and imposing voice to give gravitas to the insanity of the character. Portman has gone from child to teen star and is finally emerging as a talented, adult actress following her Oscar-nominated turn in "Closer". Here, she gives her best performance to date as the orphan Evey. John Hurt is characteristically impressive as the enigmatic government leader, and Stephen Rea gives a wonderful supporting turn as the police inspector charged with finding V - before it's too late.
The Wachowski Brothers' former protégé, James McTiegue, takes on the directing duties here and helms an enormously impressive first feature, using every trick in the book in a manner reminiscent of his mentors' breakout hit "The Matrix". Unlike "The Matrix", McTiegue allows the story to be more of a focus than the action, and as a result the film is a tense and emotional thriller, with outbursts of spectacularly filmed and choreographed action. Showing more maturity and restraint than the Wachowskis, McTiegue doesn't show off, and his trickery isn't self conscious. When slow-motion overtakes a late action sequence, it seems as natural as breathing. The late cinematographer Adrian Biddle (the film is dedicated to his memory) does an outstanding job, Oscar-nominated Dario Marianelli's score is a fantastic accompaniment to the piece, and the visual effects are astonishing, terrifying, and deeply moving, especially in the climatic moments in Trafalgar Square.
With solid acting, great action, and fantastic technical wizardry, it sounds just like another "Matrix"-style ripoff. But the biggest difference in "V" is that it is a story of real ideas - not a fantastic, science fiction creation, but a genuine examination of the human condition. The power of fear takes center stage here - the fear of war, of disease, of famine. Fear is a basic human nature, and has been exploited as a weapon - a method of control - for centuries. And for those who would use it, a masked man waits in the shadows to carry out your sentence. The verdict? Vengeance. "V for Vendetta" is a must-see.
10/10
The plot is surprisingly complex and nuanced, and I don't want to give anything more away than the previews already have. Suffice it to say that a masked anarchist (voiced by Hugo Weaving) must save a young woman (Natalie Portman) during his attempt to expose corruption in the government. Weaving is perfectly cast, using his formidable physicality and imposing voice to give gravitas to the insanity of the character. Portman has gone from child to teen star and is finally emerging as a talented, adult actress following her Oscar-nominated turn in "Closer". Here, she gives her best performance to date as the orphan Evey. John Hurt is characteristically impressive as the enigmatic government leader, and Stephen Rea gives a wonderful supporting turn as the police inspector charged with finding V - before it's too late.
The Wachowski Brothers' former protégé, James McTiegue, takes on the directing duties here and helms an enormously impressive first feature, using every trick in the book in a manner reminiscent of his mentors' breakout hit "The Matrix". Unlike "The Matrix", McTiegue allows the story to be more of a focus than the action, and as a result the film is a tense and emotional thriller, with outbursts of spectacularly filmed and choreographed action. Showing more maturity and restraint than the Wachowskis, McTiegue doesn't show off, and his trickery isn't self conscious. When slow-motion overtakes a late action sequence, it seems as natural as breathing. The late cinematographer Adrian Biddle (the film is dedicated to his memory) does an outstanding job, Oscar-nominated Dario Marianelli's score is a fantastic accompaniment to the piece, and the visual effects are astonishing, terrifying, and deeply moving, especially in the climatic moments in Trafalgar Square.
With solid acting, great action, and fantastic technical wizardry, it sounds just like another "Matrix"-style ripoff. But the biggest difference in "V" is that it is a story of real ideas - not a fantastic, science fiction creation, but a genuine examination of the human condition. The power of fear takes center stage here - the fear of war, of disease, of famine. Fear is a basic human nature, and has been exploited as a weapon - a method of control - for centuries. And for those who would use it, a masked man waits in the shadows to carry out your sentence. The verdict? Vengeance. "V for Vendetta" is a must-see.
10/10
Remember, remember, V for Vendetta, the writing, character and plot, i know of no reason why this movie should ever be forgot!
Sicaa3698 December 2020
First, I have to give credit and praise the team behind this film, for releasing a movie so politicly powerful and sharing a strong message how "we", as "we" the people living in our country shouldn't be afraid of our governments 4/5 years after 9/11 and during the massive political protests in many countries around the world.
It is sad to think that 15 years later in this rough, chaotic 2020, when I saw this movie for the first time, I realized that my countries government isn't far away of being like the government presented as a villain in a fictional, sci-fi, DC made film based on a graphic novel. Hope that in the future things will change for the better, but we should not stand low and keep on fighting.
The movies writing and characters have so much emotion, care and love put into them. The plot and the story are powerful, heartwarming yet entertaining. Action is well filmed and exciting. And the acting is just, WoW! Hugo Weaving kills it as V, and Natalie Portman's character Evie's growth through the story from beginning to end was so well done that id had me tearing up!
In my opinion, a MUST WATCH! Honestly my favorite DC movie ( yes, love it more than the Dark Knight ) and one of my top 5 favorite movies.
A perfect 10/10 from me.
It is sad to think that 15 years later in this rough, chaotic 2020, when I saw this movie for the first time, I realized that my countries government isn't far away of being like the government presented as a villain in a fictional, sci-fi, DC made film based on a graphic novel. Hope that in the future things will change for the better, but we should not stand low and keep on fighting.
The movies writing and characters have so much emotion, care and love put into them. The plot and the story are powerful, heartwarming yet entertaining. Action is well filmed and exciting. And the acting is just, WoW! Hugo Weaving kills it as V, and Natalie Portman's character Evie's growth through the story from beginning to end was so well done that id had me tearing up!
In my opinion, a MUST WATCH! Honestly my favorite DC movie ( yes, love it more than the Dark Knight ) and one of my top 5 favorite movies.
A perfect 10/10 from me.
A Bloody Masterpiece!
atzimo19 March 2006
I am speechless. I just came back from the theatre, where I watched 'V for Vendetta'. There are three main elements in the movie and it excels on all three of them.
First off the dialogues and script. Intense, witty, honest but not patronising, intelligent but not pretentious. That's the first level at which the movie surprises you. You don't except such high level of script from an action movie. But it is slowly revealed to the audience that V for Vendetta is not just an action movie. The story is filled with current events and has a definite strong political sense.
Secondly Hugo Weaving's performance. It is definitely what grabs you from the start. He delivers some of the hardest lines with incredible charisma. His performance shines throughout the movie and honestly he sounds as good as any of the best actors out there. He should be nominated for an academy award.
Finally the visual part. Incredible, yet no "Matrix" effects used. Everything looks beautiful, dark yet vibrant. The cinematography is top notch. The final battle scene brought tears to my eyes.
Do not miss 'V for Vendetta'. It's one of the best movies of all time, an eternal classic.
10/10
First off the dialogues and script. Intense, witty, honest but not patronising, intelligent but not pretentious. That's the first level at which the movie surprises you. You don't except such high level of script from an action movie. But it is slowly revealed to the audience that V for Vendetta is not just an action movie. The story is filled with current events and has a definite strong political sense.
Secondly Hugo Weaving's performance. It is definitely what grabs you from the start. He delivers some of the hardest lines with incredible charisma. His performance shines throughout the movie and honestly he sounds as good as any of the best actors out there. He should be nominated for an academy award.
Finally the visual part. Incredible, yet no "Matrix" effects used. Everything looks beautiful, dark yet vibrant. The cinematography is top notch. The final battle scene brought tears to my eyes.
Do not miss 'V for Vendetta'. It's one of the best movies of all time, an eternal classic.
10/10
Very pertinent for our times.
alexkzapf8 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I feel every person on the world should watch this movie. It's very time important. And is a real reflection of what's going on as of right now. On top of that. It's a fun ride with great acting and a fantastic cast. If you watch this movie. You should realize the goal of all politicians. Absolute control and rule thru whatever means necessary. All governments should be de-centralized And this movie shows what happens when people let the government run rough shot.
More relevant now than when it was made
barcmeister495814 December 2020
We haven't watched this movie before and it has been out for 15 years. It seemed a tad too cartoonish in the first few minutes so we gave up on it when we first tried to watch many years ago. I am glad we gave it another view tonight-it could be a movie about the events happening today and so very realistic it is frightening.
It has a good storyline and the acting is well done. More importantly is the message it carries and we should all take that message seriously if we don't want to end up living in a country governed by martial law, fear and loss of freedom.
"remember the Fifth of November, gunpowder, treason and plot"
BrunoRatesTheMovies27 March 2022
While the Visuals look dated, the Vibe is Very current. The parallels in this Version of reality is ominously similar to our own 2020. Viral disease, politicising Vaccines, at least this pulls the Veil on what a true fascist totalitarian regime is like along with government control media.
An amazing feat of Cinema
divinethomas14 February 2006
"Remember, remember, the fifth of November, gunpowder treason and plot. I see no reason why the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot."
I've never read the graphic novel, but I don't think you need to read it to appreciate the movie. I saw the film last night at it's World Premiere at the Berlin International Film festival. Though it became a little weighty in the middle (one part seemed to drag a little) other than that it was a great experience. The story was so topical that I got seriously emotional during a lot of parts. Weaving did an excellent job with the mysterious title character "V", creating a poetic, intelligent, and compassionate yet ruthless character. Portman always seems to surprise me, except with her Star Wars character. She portrays tremendous emotional range and transforms completely throughout the movie. This is one of those movies that really sticks in your head long after you watch it though... and it continues to stir and grow.
I've never read the graphic novel, but I don't think you need to read it to appreciate the movie. I saw the film last night at it's World Premiere at the Berlin International Film festival. Though it became a little weighty in the middle (one part seemed to drag a little) other than that it was a great experience. The story was so topical that I got seriously emotional during a lot of parts. Weaving did an excellent job with the mysterious title character "V", creating a poetic, intelligent, and compassionate yet ruthless character. Portman always seems to surprise me, except with her Star Wars character. She portrays tremendous emotional range and transforms completely throughout the movie. This is one of those movies that really sticks in your head long after you watch it though... and it continues to stir and grow.
Reasonably entertaining film, juvenile political screed
Hancock_the_Superb22 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
In the not-too-distant future, Britain is (surprise!) a dystopian, totalitarian state ruled by Fascist Chancellor Sutler (John Hurt), which exercises complete control over its citizens, ruling through fear and intimidation. Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman) is a naive young Londoner who is saved from a gang of lascivious policemen by V (Hugo Weaving), a mysterious man wearing a Guy Fawkes mask. V soon initiates a campaign of terrorism against Sutler's government, hoping to spark a popular insurrection. He uses his charm and coercion to convert Evey to his cause, and soon the public begins to tire of being oppressed. Police Inspector Finch (Stephen Rea), who is assigned to track down V, begins to uncover evidence of government atrocities during the course of his investigation. It all builds up to a massive popular revolution, and Sutler's government stands on the verge of collapse.
"V For Vendetta" is a film that, while reasonably entertaining on one level as an action film, is laughable in terms of its political views. It awkwardly positions itself between being a liberal position paper for standing up for freedom and civil liberties, and an endorsement of Anarchism for anarchy's sake. On a technical level, the film can't be faulted; on a thematic level, the film is laughably immature.
While the original graphic novel explored the complexities and ambiguities of the dichotomous political views, Anarchism and Fascism, the film takes a simplistic pro-anarchy stand. For all its posturing as a screed against totalitarian excess (with an occasionally insightful line, like V's "People shouldn't be afraid of their government; the government should be afraid of their people"), the movie plays as an endorsement of anarchy (or perhaps Nihilism) and Revolution, with Government as something inherently evil. The film treats us to yet another dystopian future Britain, which we've seen in everything from Brave New World to 1984 to Fahrenheit 451 to Brazil to Children of Men. It's nothing we haven't seen many times before, nothing that hasn't been done much better in other films, TV series, and books. As a result, the film's political views have the grace, sophistication, and subtlety of a campus protester, or a teen-aged punk poseur. It might be valid to argue that violent revolution is the only cure for an oppressive regime; but V for Vendetta seems to think that Revolution is a good thing in and of itself. The people launch a massive uprising against the government at the end, and we're expected to cheer; but the film is curiously silent on what exactly the Revolution stands for.
In spite of an occasional verbose speech about lost freedoms and civil liberties, in the end, V doesn't seem to stand for much more than personal revenge (as he was victimized in a government concentration camp) and nihilism. It's hard to care much for Sutler's Big Brother state, but it's equally hard to support V when he seems to lack a goal beyond destruction of authority. The movie seems to think that Revolution for Revolution's sake is the answer, failing to pose, let alone address, the question of "What's next?" This is in fact the key question; 20th Century revolutions in Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain, China, Cuba, Algeria and elsewhere went sour as soon as the Revolution was won, leading to the creation of some of the most repressive regimes in the history of Mankind. Is the fact OF Revolution at the end more important than the outcome? Only a hard-core Anarchist - or, more pointedly, a teenager who thinks it's cool to pose as anti-authoritarian - would think so. Even those Revolutions who succeeded had a leader (or leaders) to guide them - with V dead, should we really expect that his uprising will have inherently positive affects? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, but even such a cliché insight is far beyond the childish Revolution-chic mindset of this film.
V's morality is made more dubious by the methods he employs. His murder of government officials is one thing; his treatment of Evey is something else entirely. He kidnaps Evey, and when his attempts at subtle and charming persuasion fail, he kidnaps her, and sends her to a faux-prison, where she's interrogated, tortured, and broken down until she becomes committed to V's cause. Just when we think we're seeing a verifiable example of Sutler's brutality, we actually see our alleged protagonist in the role of Torturer, sinking down to the level of the enemy. It would be one thing this were presented as an example of V's moral ambiguity, but since the film makes no claims that V is doing anything but good elsewhere, it serves as a rather disquieting sequence.
As a simple film, V for Vendetta is pretty good. The cinematography and visuals are often stunning, really capturing the feel of a bleak dystopian future state. Hugo Weaving deserves much credit for making V an intriguing character, considering we never see his face. And the movie has some interesting ideas, including the use of Stephen Rea's Police Inspector as a plot device which uncovers past government atrocities. The action scenes are entertaining and well-done, if straining credulity at times. The cast is mostly good: while Natalie Portman is merely adequate, Stephen Rey, Stephen Fry, John Hurt, Tim Piggot-Smith, Sinead Cusack and Roger Allam give solid supporting turns.
So, am I being churlish for focusing on V for Vendetta's political views? Well, considering that they're positioned as the centerpiece of the film, I think it's more than fair to focus my review on them. V for Vendetta has nothing more insightful to say about politics and terrorism than a college freshman who's read a Michael Moore book. And for a film that, while somewhat entertaining, positions itself as a political statement, this is a serious flaw.
"V For Vendetta" is a film that, while reasonably entertaining on one level as an action film, is laughable in terms of its political views. It awkwardly positions itself between being a liberal position paper for standing up for freedom and civil liberties, and an endorsement of Anarchism for anarchy's sake. On a technical level, the film can't be faulted; on a thematic level, the film is laughably immature.
While the original graphic novel explored the complexities and ambiguities of the dichotomous political views, Anarchism and Fascism, the film takes a simplistic pro-anarchy stand. For all its posturing as a screed against totalitarian excess (with an occasionally insightful line, like V's "People shouldn't be afraid of their government; the government should be afraid of their people"), the movie plays as an endorsement of anarchy (or perhaps Nihilism) and Revolution, with Government as something inherently evil. The film treats us to yet another dystopian future Britain, which we've seen in everything from Brave New World to 1984 to Fahrenheit 451 to Brazil to Children of Men. It's nothing we haven't seen many times before, nothing that hasn't been done much better in other films, TV series, and books. As a result, the film's political views have the grace, sophistication, and subtlety of a campus protester, or a teen-aged punk poseur. It might be valid to argue that violent revolution is the only cure for an oppressive regime; but V for Vendetta seems to think that Revolution is a good thing in and of itself. The people launch a massive uprising against the government at the end, and we're expected to cheer; but the film is curiously silent on what exactly the Revolution stands for.
In spite of an occasional verbose speech about lost freedoms and civil liberties, in the end, V doesn't seem to stand for much more than personal revenge (as he was victimized in a government concentration camp) and nihilism. It's hard to care much for Sutler's Big Brother state, but it's equally hard to support V when he seems to lack a goal beyond destruction of authority. The movie seems to think that Revolution for Revolution's sake is the answer, failing to pose, let alone address, the question of "What's next?" This is in fact the key question; 20th Century revolutions in Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain, China, Cuba, Algeria and elsewhere went sour as soon as the Revolution was won, leading to the creation of some of the most repressive regimes in the history of Mankind. Is the fact OF Revolution at the end more important than the outcome? Only a hard-core Anarchist - or, more pointedly, a teenager who thinks it's cool to pose as anti-authoritarian - would think so. Even those Revolutions who succeeded had a leader (or leaders) to guide them - with V dead, should we really expect that his uprising will have inherently positive affects? Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, but even such a cliché insight is far beyond the childish Revolution-chic mindset of this film.
V's morality is made more dubious by the methods he employs. His murder of government officials is one thing; his treatment of Evey is something else entirely. He kidnaps Evey, and when his attempts at subtle and charming persuasion fail, he kidnaps her, and sends her to a faux-prison, where she's interrogated, tortured, and broken down until she becomes committed to V's cause. Just when we think we're seeing a verifiable example of Sutler's brutality, we actually see our alleged protagonist in the role of Torturer, sinking down to the level of the enemy. It would be one thing this were presented as an example of V's moral ambiguity, but since the film makes no claims that V is doing anything but good elsewhere, it serves as a rather disquieting sequence.
As a simple film, V for Vendetta is pretty good. The cinematography and visuals are often stunning, really capturing the feel of a bleak dystopian future state. Hugo Weaving deserves much credit for making V an intriguing character, considering we never see his face. And the movie has some interesting ideas, including the use of Stephen Rea's Police Inspector as a plot device which uncovers past government atrocities. The action scenes are entertaining and well-done, if straining credulity at times. The cast is mostly good: while Natalie Portman is merely adequate, Stephen Rey, Stephen Fry, John Hurt, Tim Piggot-Smith, Sinead Cusack and Roger Allam give solid supporting turns.
So, am I being churlish for focusing on V for Vendetta's political views? Well, considering that they're positioned as the centerpiece of the film, I think it's more than fair to focus my review on them. V for Vendetta has nothing more insightful to say about politics and terrorism than a college freshman who's read a Michael Moore book. And for a film that, while somewhat entertaining, positions itself as a political statement, this is a serious flaw.
V for Vacuous
saint_barbie27 March 2006
*** CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS ***
Alan Moore's graphic novel V for Vendetta is an elegant, thought-provoking and complex exploration of the meaning of freedom and the politics of protest. The Wachowski Brothers and James McTeigue have somehow reduced this to a film that pretty much says 'Whoa, dude! Terrorists ROCK!!!111!'
It's hard to imagine how anyone who is a fan of the book could have produced this film. The novel is clever where the film is dumb, engaging where the film is boring, and subtle where the film simply blows stuff up. Where Moore's V is erudite and sophisticated, the best McTeigue's V can manage is a big speech of words mostly beginning with the letter 'V'.
Principally to blame for this must be the screenplay, which is full of unwieldy clunking additions which are supposed to make you think REAL HARD YOU GUYS about how this is LIKE RELLEVUNT to NOW. The screenplay takes a piece which is about Thatcherite Britain and tries to use it to bang home a message about George Bush's USA. So, instead of Moore's extreme conservative regime, we are presented with a 'British' government of the religious right, which seeks to ban homosexuality and Islam in the name of Christianity. Anyone who is actually British will find this confusing and nonsensical, as there is no popular religious right in Britain. And Americanisms like 'lever' (pronounced 'levver' rather than 'leever') and 'elevator' don't help.
Still, no one could really have expected the Wachowskis to produce a subtle or clever screenplay. But you might reasonably expect that this would be a super-stylish, high-action thriller. It isn't. The production design is sloppy - we're expected to believe that, thirty or forty years into the future, people are wearing exactly the same clothes and using exactly the same technology as they are now, with the sole exception of a little red bleepy machine which doesn't seem to have a function but might perhaps be a dictaphone. And, as for your high-octane thrills, well... don't get your hopes up. The action moves at around a quarter of the pace of the Matrix, and fight scenes are few and far between. In the climactic fight at the end, wherein V slays a whole troop of men, the film's signature visual effect finally kicks in: and it's... *drumroll*... knives leaving vapour trails. Wooooo. No need to bring a spare pair of pants to the cinema. Bullet time, it ain't.
There are many problems with this film: poor editing, appalling performances, the pointless addition of a love story. But the main crime is undoubtedly the sheer stupidity that the Wachowskis have brought to the table. Moore's novel deliberately does not end with firm conclusions, but asks you to consider relative evils: the government is obviously oppressive and fascist, but V is no less totalitarian in his own convictions. When he blows up symbols of democracy and justice like the OId Bailey, murders those who don't agree with him, or tortures Evie to 're-educate her', he becomes more and more like the government he despises.
In the film, this duality is forgotten, and V is presented as a straightforward hero. The conclusion, therefore, is that terrorism works, terrorism is good, and the ends always justify the means. The film of V for Vendetta misses the principal point of the novel, and ends up being offensive as well as boring and rubbish. Read the book, please, but don't waste your time watching this. And let's pray they never make Watchmen.
Alan Moore's graphic novel V for Vendetta is an elegant, thought-provoking and complex exploration of the meaning of freedom and the politics of protest. The Wachowski Brothers and James McTeigue have somehow reduced this to a film that pretty much says 'Whoa, dude! Terrorists ROCK!!!111!'
It's hard to imagine how anyone who is a fan of the book could have produced this film. The novel is clever where the film is dumb, engaging where the film is boring, and subtle where the film simply blows stuff up. Where Moore's V is erudite and sophisticated, the best McTeigue's V can manage is a big speech of words mostly beginning with the letter 'V'.
Principally to blame for this must be the screenplay, which is full of unwieldy clunking additions which are supposed to make you think REAL HARD YOU GUYS about how this is LIKE RELLEVUNT to NOW. The screenplay takes a piece which is about Thatcherite Britain and tries to use it to bang home a message about George Bush's USA. So, instead of Moore's extreme conservative regime, we are presented with a 'British' government of the religious right, which seeks to ban homosexuality and Islam in the name of Christianity. Anyone who is actually British will find this confusing and nonsensical, as there is no popular religious right in Britain. And Americanisms like 'lever' (pronounced 'levver' rather than 'leever') and 'elevator' don't help.
Still, no one could really have expected the Wachowskis to produce a subtle or clever screenplay. But you might reasonably expect that this would be a super-stylish, high-action thriller. It isn't. The production design is sloppy - we're expected to believe that, thirty or forty years into the future, people are wearing exactly the same clothes and using exactly the same technology as they are now, with the sole exception of a little red bleepy machine which doesn't seem to have a function but might perhaps be a dictaphone. And, as for your high-octane thrills, well... don't get your hopes up. The action moves at around a quarter of the pace of the Matrix, and fight scenes are few and far between. In the climactic fight at the end, wherein V slays a whole troop of men, the film's signature visual effect finally kicks in: and it's... *drumroll*... knives leaving vapour trails. Wooooo. No need to bring a spare pair of pants to the cinema. Bullet time, it ain't.
There are many problems with this film: poor editing, appalling performances, the pointless addition of a love story. But the main crime is undoubtedly the sheer stupidity that the Wachowskis have brought to the table. Moore's novel deliberately does not end with firm conclusions, but asks you to consider relative evils: the government is obviously oppressive and fascist, but V is no less totalitarian in his own convictions. When he blows up symbols of democracy and justice like the OId Bailey, murders those who don't agree with him, or tortures Evie to 're-educate her', he becomes more and more like the government he despises.
In the film, this duality is forgotten, and V is presented as a straightforward hero. The conclusion, therefore, is that terrorism works, terrorism is good, and the ends always justify the means. The film of V for Vendetta misses the principal point of the novel, and ends up being offensive as well as boring and rubbish. Read the book, please, but don't waste your time watching this. And let's pray they never make Watchmen.
For freedom
zpsfgnqn29 March 2022
Want to see where the anonymous mask came from?
nicholasjcourville2 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
V for Vendetta is still after all these years one of my favorite movies to watch, and I find it as relevant today as it was whenever it was released in 2005. It is a story about a freedom fighter whose goal is to take down a totalitarian government that uses fear and deceit to control its people. To do this, he knows that one man is not enough to accomplish such a monumental feat and that he will need to use something that cant be silenced, hurt, or killed. he sets out with the goal of planting the idea of revolution in the people because, as he says in the movie "Ideas are bulletproof."
One of my favorite things about this movie is that the main character is wearing a solid mask. It is a fantastic display of acting, both voices acting as well as physical. I guess you could say that I found myself not liking the character as much as I loved the idea of the character. The writers and director did an amazing job of drawing me into the storyline by mirroring enough of the world we live in today that I felt that the world I was watching on the screen could very easily enough being the world I live in one day. I saw myself in many of the characters and identified with their blind devotion to their country, their developing distrust of their government, and their inner conflict of trying to rationalize the two.
Hugo Weaving plays the leading role of V and delivers and an unbelievable performance from behind a mask. Natalie Portman plays the role of V's sidekick, love, and accomplice. Stephen Rea plays the detective that is hell-bent on finding out the truth even if that means he must accept that all his life he has been on the wrong side. Many other great actors help director James McTeigue bring The Wachowski Brothers V for Vendetta to life. It is definitely worth your time. Please watch and enjoy this movie,
Among the best stuff you'll see from DC Comics.
planktonrules16 November 2019
DC Comics has a rather poor reputation lately. Despite having some great superheroes, the films based on their characters often have sucked. However, one of the best and most worthwhile films based on their comics is WELL worth seeing..."V for Vendetta".
The story is placed in a dystopian future. According to this future, the United States has been torn apart by civil war and disasters. And, the United Kingdom has gone from a constitutional monarchy to a repressive fascist dictatorship. But the government is far more evil than just repressing free speech. It seems that much of the chaos that led to this government was actually created by the man who now is in charge. To create a climate of fear and chaos, the government has created fake terrorists...and used the deaths of 10s of thousands of Brits as an excuse to control the country with an iron fist.
The only hope Britain has is a weird nehilistic superhero, V. V (Hugo Weaving) is determined to bring down the government and give the country back to the people. But how? And what part does Evey (Natalie Portman) play in all this? See the film.
This is a very exciting and intelligent film. It definitely kept my interest...much of it because the whole thing (aside from the near indestructable anti-hero) seemed possible! Well worth seeing and exceptionally well made.
By the way, if you like this film, try the 1960s Italian film "Danger: Diabolik". Both have very, very similar themes and both are wonderful movies.
The story is placed in a dystopian future. According to this future, the United States has been torn apart by civil war and disasters. And, the United Kingdom has gone from a constitutional monarchy to a repressive fascist dictatorship. But the government is far more evil than just repressing free speech. It seems that much of the chaos that led to this government was actually created by the man who now is in charge. To create a climate of fear and chaos, the government has created fake terrorists...and used the deaths of 10s of thousands of Brits as an excuse to control the country with an iron fist.
The only hope Britain has is a weird nehilistic superhero, V. V (Hugo Weaving) is determined to bring down the government and give the country back to the people. But how? And what part does Evey (Natalie Portman) play in all this? See the film.
This is a very exciting and intelligent film. It definitely kept my interest...much of it because the whole thing (aside from the near indestructable anti-hero) seemed possible! Well worth seeing and exceptionally well made.
By the way, if you like this film, try the 1960s Italian film "Danger: Diabolik". Both have very, very similar themes and both are wonderful movies.
Truly Unique
GreenPlastikMan26 February 2006
There are some that will, upon seeing this film, say that it was akin to Andrew Lloyd Weber attempting to make a political statement: overly dramatic. These people would be well served to remember that the symbol of drama is a mask, which certainly begs one important question- Why, if you are so put off by an overtly dramatic motion picture, would you choose to see a movie that stars as the (anti)hero a man in a mask? I just saw this film at an advanced screening and I must say it is nothing short of uniquely brilliant. Entertaining from the start, V manages to combine a strong socio-political message in a compact and highly intense experience. Infused with issues and concepts that pervade in the global political climate of our times, this movie is endowed with a tremendous timely relevance that belies its trappings as a mere action adventure.
The acting, the cinematography, the effects, and the general vision of this film all lead me to believe that it will likely receive a cult following. It is only my hope that the message of this film will come to summarize the history of our future ascendancy to true liberty.
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. In the meantime, go see this movie.
The acting, the cinematography, the effects, and the general vision of this film all lead me to believe that it will likely receive a cult following. It is only my hope that the message of this film will come to summarize the history of our future ascendancy to true liberty.
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. In the meantime, go see this movie.
More relevant now
CashelWicklow21 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This great film is more relevant now than when it was made in 2006!
Flawless acting by everyone but stand outs are Hugo Weaving,Natalie Portman and John Hurt.
The film is poetic in its dialogue,the action scenes are exceptional. This film will make you think. With the rise of social media,the print and T,V media being more partisan than its ever been and our every move being monitored . We are living in V For Vendetta A movie way before its time. Frightening and eerily realistic!
Flawless acting by everyone but stand outs are Hugo Weaving,Natalie Portman and John Hurt.
The film is poetic in its dialogue,the action scenes are exceptional. This film will make you think. With the rise of social media,the print and T,V media being more partisan than its ever been and our every move being monitored . We are living in V For Vendetta A movie way before its time. Frightening and eerily realistic!
A Blueprint or Warning a for 2020?
paddy-360-46093210 November 2020
V
0U11 February 2020
Some of the action might be a bit choppy, but V for Vendetta is extremely entertaining. Its great visual effects and Hugo Weaving's iconic portrayal of "V" is more than enough to satisfy even the strictest of viewers. There is also a great message about rising up against political propaganda within its great style and environment. Another great film from the Wachowski's is now on your hands.
Accuse those of which you do
granfunk20016 October 2023
Good movie. Natalie did well. Movie was well cast.
However, there was a statement that the government was started as a Conservative Party. But as I watched it, all I could think of is this is the works of leftist and or fascist.
It's well known that fascism will appear cloaked in liberalism.
I can see this happening in the US.
Remember the 5th of November not the cake and tea party of January the 6th.
The story was solid and I'd say truthful. Governments get too big and powerful as this movie has depicted. It gives us a guide on how to behave, without the killing I hope. Again, governments should be afraid of their people.
However, there was a statement that the government was started as a Conservative Party. But as I watched it, all I could think of is this is the works of leftist and or fascist.
It's well known that fascism will appear cloaked in liberalism.
I can see this happening in the US.
Remember the 5th of November not the cake and tea party of January the 6th.
The story was solid and I'd say truthful. Governments get too big and powerful as this movie has depicted. It gives us a guide on how to behave, without the killing I hope. Again, governments should be afraid of their people.
The Real or Dystopian UK?
markchriswillis2 December 2021
F For Subtlety
Ricardo_Aparicio7 October 2006
This film looks wonderful and yet gracelessly misses its mark - think of a springboard diver executing a two-and-a-half reverse tuck only to clip his head on the board while falling. (Did I really just make a DIVING reference?) Yes, I understand that this movie used a graphic novel as a source material; this is why most comic book movies have less entertainment value than Laffy Taffy wrapper jokes.
The visuals and performances were top-notch, but the message delivered inside of the story was pure rubbish. It was the "slippery slope" rhetorical device typically used so nauseatingly by social conservatives (The whole world's gone to hell since (pick one) long hair on boys/the slam dunk/the birth control pill/rock and roll) - only this time, the slippery slope falls to the far right: If you're against gay marriage, it leads to the internment of gays. Opposition to radical Islam leads to the criminalization of the practice of Islam. Opposition to illegal immigrants leads to the deportation of all immigrants. There was also fodder for conspiracy buffs: the government knows and sees every last thing. And the government is waaaaaaaaay bad. I mean seriously - like, EVIL. There was even a Rush Limbaugh sighting, complete with prescription drug addiction!
It's obvious that this movie is anti-conservative, which I don't mind at all. We need honest disagreement (which we do have in this country) as long as we are willing to work together (which we have not had in this country since the 1810's). However, I really hate to see sophomoric distortions like these presented as some sort of provocative satire. It's not. It's got all the thoughtful gravitas of "Rock Against Bush".
The visuals and performances were top-notch, but the message delivered inside of the story was pure rubbish. It was the "slippery slope" rhetorical device typically used so nauseatingly by social conservatives (The whole world's gone to hell since (pick one) long hair on boys/the slam dunk/the birth control pill/rock and roll) - only this time, the slippery slope falls to the far right: If you're against gay marriage, it leads to the internment of gays. Opposition to radical Islam leads to the criminalization of the practice of Islam. Opposition to illegal immigrants leads to the deportation of all immigrants. There was also fodder for conspiracy buffs: the government knows and sees every last thing. And the government is waaaaaaaaay bad. I mean seriously - like, EVIL. There was even a Rush Limbaugh sighting, complete with prescription drug addiction!
It's obvious that this movie is anti-conservative, which I don't mind at all. We need honest disagreement (which we do have in this country) as long as we are willing to work together (which we have not had in this country since the 1810's). However, I really hate to see sophomoric distortions like these presented as some sort of provocative satire. It's not. It's got all the thoughtful gravitas of "Rock Against Bush".
An image of Britain in the near future - as envisaged by student activists
pwfinch2 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I had no idea the Wachowski Brothers were still students. No really, I honestly didn't. I thought they were accomplished film-makers, but judging by the pretentious bombast that is here presented as something profound, I'll approach any further work of theirs with the same wariness I would work by any other bunch of opinionated undergrads.
We're in Britain, 20 or 30 years in the future, and the Conservative Party has returned to power, now with sufficient mandate to do what it has clearly always wanted to do, transform the country into a brutal Nazi state even though it was a Conservative government who stood up so bravely to the real Nazis (I'm not a Conservative by any means, but you immediately understand the sort of targets this movie is taking pot-shots at, and if you prefer your cinematic entertainment not to be filled with unsubtle student politics, then you're already irritated). Anyway, a superhero thankfully arises, one of those guys of many inexplicable talents: he can breeze his way through the most advanced security systems (without ever feeling the need to show us how); he can perform all kinds of acrobatic hi-jinks and is also a master of weapons and technology (again, without telling or showing us how or why); he is hugely well financed and is always three or four steps ahead of his blundering foe. He even manages to break into the government's own television channel and broadcast a message of hope (as they so often seem able to do in these dystopian sci-fi thrillers).
Anyway, all this is a good thing because Britain is now an Orwellian police state full of dark alleys, creeping spotlights and crashing jackboots, where anyone and everyone is likely to get it in the neck, but the staunchly right-wing, Christian authorities mainly pick on intellectuals, homosexuals, Moslems and all the other minorities that student activists like to imagine are persecuted in the present-day West. As a result, our hero 'V' is a guy proud to wear the moniker of 'terrorist'. He openly admits that his war against the state is born of a personal vendetta, and he'll go to any lengths to force his views on people even imprisoning and torturing innocents in order to show them how terrible the enemy are (yet another half-baked student philosophy, where any means are justified by a righteous end). Of course V has a softer side too. Naturally he's a lover of the arts (students can never conceive of a hero who isn't at least as well-educated as they are). He fills his house with paintings and sculptures, and (completely irrelevantly to the plot) quotes the great works of literature at tedious length. He also appears to idolise 17th century 'freedom fighter' Guy Fawkes, a mask of whose face he wears 24-7.
And yes, you've got it. This is basically a hollow, ostentatious, politically outdated lump of pseudo-anarchist propaganda.
We could blame Alan Moore's original graphic novel, but hardly anyone read the graphic novel, whereas lots of people have seen and commented on the film, so it's the film we need to concentrate on. In any case, Alan Moore had the good grace to disinherit the film, so he's divested of all blame.
Even at a purely technical level, it's flawed. The narrative is weak and full of holes: why is a simple chief-inspector of police investigating a case that has the potential to bring down the whole of society?; why does the state bother with a police force at all when it has it's 'finger men' all-licensed thugs whose job is simply to terrorise people and who are above the law themselves; despite there being spies and surveillance cameras everywhere, how is that free-thinkers are still allowed to provide rays of hope? in this case it's Stephen Fry's character, a closet gay and Koran reader (!), who regularly mocks the government in his television show, yet only now seems to attract their attention. Why do the British public, who are constantly shown scoffing at government broadcasts and disbelieving everything the politicians say (got to remind the working-class that we're not having a go at them, I guess) do nothing about the terrible conditions in which they live, when the authorities' hold on power is patently so tenuous?
And if that isn't enough, the whole thing is massively overwritten, and overly talkie, and it uses lots of big words and Shakespearean quotes to show how clever the movie's authors are, and as you'd expect from a bunch of students, it preaches, boy how it preaches. But just in case the preaching isn't enough, there are lots of other bits and pieces thrown in to ram the message home: every symbol of evil seems to have a crucifix attached to it; Britain's clergy are shown to be child-molesting phoneys; her war-heroes are cruel sadists who would rather be concentration camp commandants.
The acting is risible. John Hurt does his usual shouting madman thing; Tim Piggot-Smith is his usual sneering bureaucrat; Natalie Portman presumably because she thinks she's at last made it into a 'real' movie screams and cries a lot; while Stephen Rea plays a cop so stricken with conscience that it's a miracle he even lasted one day in his job let alone rose to the rank of chief-inspector.
It certainly looks good, as befits the budget. But at the end of the day, it's all pretty empty and silly. The stuff and nonsense about November 5th, and the lauding of Guy Fawkes who in reality was a religious zealot of the sort this film seems determined to loathe shows how shallow and poorly researched it really is.
In short, and in keeping with the World War Two feel, this is a pile of corny old tripe
We're in Britain, 20 or 30 years in the future, and the Conservative Party has returned to power, now with sufficient mandate to do what it has clearly always wanted to do, transform the country into a brutal Nazi state even though it was a Conservative government who stood up so bravely to the real Nazis (I'm not a Conservative by any means, but you immediately understand the sort of targets this movie is taking pot-shots at, and if you prefer your cinematic entertainment not to be filled with unsubtle student politics, then you're already irritated). Anyway, a superhero thankfully arises, one of those guys of many inexplicable talents: he can breeze his way through the most advanced security systems (without ever feeling the need to show us how); he can perform all kinds of acrobatic hi-jinks and is also a master of weapons and technology (again, without telling or showing us how or why); he is hugely well financed and is always three or four steps ahead of his blundering foe. He even manages to break into the government's own television channel and broadcast a message of hope (as they so often seem able to do in these dystopian sci-fi thrillers).
Anyway, all this is a good thing because Britain is now an Orwellian police state full of dark alleys, creeping spotlights and crashing jackboots, where anyone and everyone is likely to get it in the neck, but the staunchly right-wing, Christian authorities mainly pick on intellectuals, homosexuals, Moslems and all the other minorities that student activists like to imagine are persecuted in the present-day West. As a result, our hero 'V' is a guy proud to wear the moniker of 'terrorist'. He openly admits that his war against the state is born of a personal vendetta, and he'll go to any lengths to force his views on people even imprisoning and torturing innocents in order to show them how terrible the enemy are (yet another half-baked student philosophy, where any means are justified by a righteous end). Of course V has a softer side too. Naturally he's a lover of the arts (students can never conceive of a hero who isn't at least as well-educated as they are). He fills his house with paintings and sculptures, and (completely irrelevantly to the plot) quotes the great works of literature at tedious length. He also appears to idolise 17th century 'freedom fighter' Guy Fawkes, a mask of whose face he wears 24-7.
And yes, you've got it. This is basically a hollow, ostentatious, politically outdated lump of pseudo-anarchist propaganda.
We could blame Alan Moore's original graphic novel, but hardly anyone read the graphic novel, whereas lots of people have seen and commented on the film, so it's the film we need to concentrate on. In any case, Alan Moore had the good grace to disinherit the film, so he's divested of all blame.
Even at a purely technical level, it's flawed. The narrative is weak and full of holes: why is a simple chief-inspector of police investigating a case that has the potential to bring down the whole of society?; why does the state bother with a police force at all when it has it's 'finger men' all-licensed thugs whose job is simply to terrorise people and who are above the law themselves; despite there being spies and surveillance cameras everywhere, how is that free-thinkers are still allowed to provide rays of hope? in this case it's Stephen Fry's character, a closet gay and Koran reader (!), who regularly mocks the government in his television show, yet only now seems to attract their attention. Why do the British public, who are constantly shown scoffing at government broadcasts and disbelieving everything the politicians say (got to remind the working-class that we're not having a go at them, I guess) do nothing about the terrible conditions in which they live, when the authorities' hold on power is patently so tenuous?
And if that isn't enough, the whole thing is massively overwritten, and overly talkie, and it uses lots of big words and Shakespearean quotes to show how clever the movie's authors are, and as you'd expect from a bunch of students, it preaches, boy how it preaches. But just in case the preaching isn't enough, there are lots of other bits and pieces thrown in to ram the message home: every symbol of evil seems to have a crucifix attached to it; Britain's clergy are shown to be child-molesting phoneys; her war-heroes are cruel sadists who would rather be concentration camp commandants.
The acting is risible. John Hurt does his usual shouting madman thing; Tim Piggot-Smith is his usual sneering bureaucrat; Natalie Portman presumably because she thinks she's at last made it into a 'real' movie screams and cries a lot; while Stephen Rea plays a cop so stricken with conscience that it's a miracle he even lasted one day in his job let alone rose to the rank of chief-inspector.
It certainly looks good, as befits the budget. But at the end of the day, it's all pretty empty and silly. The stuff and nonsense about November 5th, and the lauding of Guy Fawkes who in reality was a religious zealot of the sort this film seems determined to loathe shows how shallow and poorly researched it really is.
In short, and in keeping with the World War Two feel, this is a pile of corny old tripe
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
