Movie Review: V For Vendetta

6/10

Ever feel you got your double bill round the wrong way?

The central message of V For Vendetta (the film) is one that doesn't really come as a surprise to most British folk - that standing up to authority is not just inportant, it is absolutely crucial to a happy society. In the original book, I believe the V character is an Anarchist rather than a revolutionary.

I'm not sure this message will be heard particularly loudly in America where it is clearly meant to hit home hardest against what at the time at least was a rise of Neo-Conservative hyper national feeling.

The reasons for this are twofold. Firstly, if you're trying to get the USA on your side best not to do it by playing up the heroism of mad, serial killing bombers however appropriate the parallels with Guy Fawkes (assuming, of course, you sympathise with Fawkes in the first place). Secondly, because they have set it in the UK.

I appreciate the desire to set it overseas comes from the original graphic novel, but their messages suffer the same.

The British are one of the least trusting countries when it comes to their governments - this comes partly from our laughable pseudo-monarchy in which our nominal head of state has less power than a string of limp spaghetti and partly from a long history of secularism in government that means we do not imbue our leaders with anything like the automatic respect that any American President gets.

The Prime Minister (whoever it is) is just a gloified bank manager to most and it isn't viewed as "UnBritish" to refer to him as anything you like, within the confines of legality that apply to all British citizens.

For this reason I find it a big leap of belief to see anyone as mental as John Hurt's chancellor taking over the UK and turning it into a police state. What is interesting about this particular governement to me is that, unlike the Nazism it is clearly meant to resemble, it is heavily faith-based. This is of course central to their intense hatred of homosexuals, immigrants and deviants displayed in the film.

Taking the film at face value though, it is a perfectly servicable romp with bangs and flashes and the occasional good performance (despite a slightly wandering accent, Stephen Rea impresses as the doubting Thomas).

It suffers from the old problem of pretention though - never better depicted than in the final moments, when all the dead characters return for one last look at the world. That's just a cheesy and dumb decision.

Natlie Portman... sigh. She has been good on occasion (Leon, bits of Closer) but here she is two dimensional and dull until a good three quarters of the movie have passed by, at which point she seems to wake up and perform to her best. Hugo Weaving as the central character is daft as a brush, and fairly good physically - though some of the shots are actually of his predecessor in the part, James Purefoy (with redubbing, obviously).

An enjoyable movie, then. But it not half as profound as it thinks it is, and the less than enthusiastic response I remember it receiving may well be justified given its strange message and odd morals.

A