V for Vendetta

One of the most fundamental comics that Alan Moore wrote and David Lloyd illustrated has been transformed into a form that certainly won't disappoint. The ideas that Alan Moore had here, although not in their full extent, are captured here and the film clearly delivers the message that the government of the people can take different forms. A political film that is action-packed and yet retains an important idea. The combination of the Wachowski siblings (then brothers) with James McTeigue worked brilliantly. After "Watchmen", the second-best adaptation of Moore's work. (26/05/2014)

A utopian story about a romantic avenger. An appeal for revolt against the order. A provocative caricature of today's world. V for Vendetta wants to be all of these things. It is the first of these thanks to the great Weaving and the decent Portman. It wants to be the second thing too much. It could be better at the third thing if the realities were more elaborate. Overall, V for Vendetta is a great movie with many cons. The main downside is the Wachowski brothers syndrome - a simple and impressive parable to please as much as possible, go in all possible directions and lose sight of the path that leads to the goal. Such is the middle passage of the film, where the great onset of the introduction literally bursts in all directions and the film only manages to glue things together in the nice finale. I don't mind the activist touch, the shallow provocations. It's a sort of cute anarchy, supported by the protagonist, which combines black and white adventure movies with postmodern comic book superheroes. V for Vendetta does not lack great inner strength and persuasiveness. But it needs more sophistication and better screenwriters, unfortunately. Even so, this is confirmation of the rule that comic book remakes have sent commercial cinema in an interesting direction. (23/04/2006)

Although the visual attacks the highest goals and the idea appeals to me, Vendeta works only as a comic store for effect. Just after it ends, all the stronger moments evaporate from my mind, and with a few years of distance, I only recall the totalitarian-British atmosphere and the always amazing Natalie. A wasted opportunity, which is especially regrettable. There were incredibly many potentially strong stimuli. (07/05/2006)

This commercial variation of Brazil is rather pleasantly surprising in the end. And although this is a very simplified insight, it isn’t at all dumb. Almost no action, very TV standard in visual terms, the actors have thankless roles (especially poor John Hurt, but who else could have given such a great performance?). And it is even more surprising in that it works rather well overall. The greatest positives are the main vocal performance by Hugo Weaving, the soundtrack and the pretty daring act of grafting of the story onto the contemporary political situation with thoughts that are currently not in fashion. At least in commercial America. What brings this picture down is that it doesn’t manage to create a convincing atmosphere of a nation under a dictatorship which would make the term “big brother" a reality. In the end, V stays in the realm of an entertaining Hollywood spectacle. (23/04/2006)

The film is at its weakest in the action-packed beginning and ending, everything in between is a surprisingly thought-provoking narrative, full of reflections on the individual's struggle against dictatorship, their right to be different and non-conforming (an interesting take on the fate of a lesbian woman, probably the most emotional part of the film) and their willingness to submit to the fight against evil and totalitarianism, even at the cost of losing their own lives. Yes, thought-provoking, but ultimately somewhat contradictory, because I really don't think blowing up historic buildings in the manner of terrorists is the right and effective way to fight the establishment. The action scenes weren't anything great, and their lack was more of a plus in my eyes. The film's main problem is its unconvincing depiction of totalitarianism. The allusion to the omnipotence of the media and its ability to manipulate the crowd is obvious, but I missed the Orwellian despair, the heaviness of life in a totalitarian system. That's also why the overall emotional impact of the film on me was somewhat negligible. On this subject, next time I'd rather reach for Radford's 1984, Truffaut's Fahrenheit 451, or Kachyna's The Ear. (24/09/2006)