V for Vendetta (2005)

“V for Vendetta” is more than just a masked terrorist running amuck in a futuristic Britain; it is more than just the quick wits of an anti-hero challenging the government; and it is far more than just the follow-up film from the Wachowski brothers. This is a philosophical cinematic entry disguised as a blockbuster. While most will argue that it is a poor excuse for the graphic novel (and slightly I agree) because it doesn’t follow the story frame by frame, the themes are still pulled through. Looking back into the graphic novel, the changes made from page to screen were dramatic, yet bold. The “happy” ending in the film gives way to the more dismal, slightly uplifting ending in the graphic novel. The main difference between the two is the lack of grittiness, one could call it realism, found within the story and missing in the film. “V for Vendetta” the film is beautiful, watched in full HD, the sound, visuals, and colors are exactly the opposite from the graphic novel, and while comparing the two is not the extent of this review, it is an element that needs to be considered. Alan Moore took his name off this film, reading the graphic novel will explain why.

With that said, what worked and was miscalculated in the film? To begin, the Wachowskis coupled with the direction of director James McTeigue captured the visual of “V” perfectly. The mask was chilling, and the darkened question of his origins remained open-ended. Their depiction of this masked vigilante was brilliant. The way the shadows fell, the camera angles on his face instilled both fear and excitement for this character. “V”, with this film, became iconic. Alas, the visual alone couldn’t counter what preceded “V”. The use of Hugo Weaving’s voice was, like Natalie Portman’s accent, weak. “V” was a bold character, but when he spoke, he seemed weaker and in less control. Weaving’s voice-work didn’t capture the intensity that surrounds this character – and then there was Portman. While she brought some innocence to the character of Eve (a name symbolic as well as poignant), the fading British accent continued the idea that she was merely Natalie Portman playing a character, not just Eve incarnate. Stephen Rae was superb in his role, as always, as the tamed cop hunting for a belief he struggles with, and John Hurt was completely over the top, applauding his role as evil as outstanding. These secondary characters, proving their might stronger than the primary ones, added much needed relief to this film, but it didn’t make it perfect.

“V for Vendetta” is a great film to sit down and enjoy two hours of crisp visuals, amazing music (look for a beautiful cover by “Cat Power”), and intense ideals. It is a thinking film. It camouflages itself as a big-budget action/adventure film, but all the while it is asking to you see the modern news and question our governments. It will keep your mind occupied for hours. McTeigue did a great job of bringing modern relevance (still tragic today) into this film to create a timeless sensation, but it still doesn’t counter the disappointing acting. As mentioned before, what makes “V for Vendetta” the graphic novel work is our characters, and as they lacked in the film – it moved it in a different direction. Without the graphic novel, this film still works as entertainment, and slight thought – but it isn’t a complete masterpiece. I enjoyed this film when it was first released on the big screen, but watching it today – the small nuances with the characters just don’t hold up well over time. Its message is in tact, but lacks the body.

Found in my "Videohound 2008" book, this film is getting a pink mark. I wanted to love it, but after re-reading the graphic novel, it just missed too many crucial elements. Also, I should mention, that I watched this film on bluray. Alas, I will not watch it again, but would perhaps consider suggesting it to friends. Maybe....