Mar 232006
V for Vendetta is the kind of movie that would normally spark angry letter-writing campaigns led by Focus on the Family and Concerned Women for America, those defenders of delicate conservative sensibilities. However, I think the film’s comic book roots and somewhat obscure title have kept it under the radar of those who would find it most objectionable. I read the book before seeing the film and, to be honest, I’m not sure why Alan Moore insisted on having his name removed from the credits. The film is generally faithful to the book, but with some changes to account for the the technological/political shifts that have occurred since the book was first written. I especially enjoyed the film’s depiction of the “Valerie” sequence (those who have read the book or seen the movie will know what I’m talking about). Hugo Weaving is appropriately charismatic and sinister as Codename V. Natalie Portman demonstrates that she’s much more comfortable acting on a real set rather than in front of a green screen. And she looks great with or without hair.
My take is roughly the same.
Poor Natalie Portman was just fine in the opening scenes…but needed some private coaching from Sigourney Weaver for the final ones.
(For the record and in her defence, I’ve done blue screen acting, and it is *really* hard.)
I would have also liked to have seen more chemistry between V and Evie and more obvious external on-screen development of their relationship — to justify the final scenes.
But all in all, a very good flick. I went in with modest expectations and was very pleasantly surprised.
I wish the whole “I love you Evie” would have been left out entirely because there are just too many movies with random bits of romantic affection in them for no apparent reason.
As for the Valerie seen – huh? Is it where he uses just about every V word in the dictionary? ‘Cause that got old after a while….