Governments should be afraid of their people.

July 24, 2005 7:44 PM

"...I don't know who you are. Or whether you're a man or a woman. I may never see you or cry with you or get drunk with you. But I love you. I hope that you escape this place. I hope that the world turns and that things get better, and that one day people have roses again. I wish I could kiss you."

--Valerie
posted by John Kenneth Fisher (38 comments total)

Uhm, okay. You too?
posted by jmccorm at 7:48 PM on July 24, 2005

That's a long way to walk for a nickel.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 8:00 PM on July 24, 2005

Just watched the trailer today with my roommate who got me into V, and who works at a comic shop. We were pretty pumped at the trailer, they made it look pretty good.

But trailers have a way of doing that. With Alan Moore publicly distancing himself from the movie we're both wondering how it turns out.














Alan Moore also supposedly said all four possible endings of the movie contained V's identity being revealed, even one where V was Evey's father. Any movie which can miss the central point of it's source material can't be that great. It might have some nice effects, but if they identify V, I don't think it can even be related to the comic.
posted by Be'lal at 8:02 PM on July 24, 2005

Crap, wrong use of brakets between that space lead to my big "Spoiler Warning" disapearing.
posted by Be'lal at 8:02 PM on July 24, 2005

Man, I hope they do this one right. The movies made of Moore's films haven't been anywhere near the quality of the books. It's hard to tell from the preview whether or not the Wachowski brothers have finally managed to make something that'll do justice to Moore... the trailer was heavy on the action, but then trailers often are.

On preview, Be'lal's comments are making me worried. Damn. If they unmask V, I can't imagine they've really understood what Moore was getting at at all.
posted by ubersturm at 8:04 PM on July 24, 2005

Is there a single Alan Moore book that managed to be made into a movie that didn't suck and totally distort his actual comics following Moore distancing himself from? The key problem seems to be the obsession to take all of his works, each of which usually encompass several hundred pages, and cram them into less than two hours. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen sucked so hard they even managed to make the logo fuck Moore's work up. I swear to god, they'll make Watchmen and have them walking hand and hand into the sunset.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:10 PM on July 24, 2005

I highly suspect they'll screw this one up, and the post is intentionally about the book more than it is about the movie.

For the record though? Moore tends to through hissy-fits often. Oh, he's entitled to, it's likely part of whatever gives him his genius, but that alone isn't enough to get me to give up hope.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 8:17 PM on July 24, 2005

I'll definitely check out the comic, but there's no way in hell you could get me to read those reviews.
Jeez, two paragraphs into the first link and I realized what I was doing: reading a beginning to end plot summary. I hate shit like that. What purpose could that possibly serve? I'm not cramming for some 'V for Vendetta' test as far as I know.
posted by Edible Energy at 8:43 PM on July 24, 2005

I think the movie would be better, certainly, without showing us the individual behind the mask. But I can also see that however much that might upset Moore, it would be almost impossible to get that sort of ending into a big-budget movie. The people making the decisions just don't have that kind of faith in the audience. I expect that the John-Galt-esque TV speech will be eliminated or much distorted as well. And, of course, more action scenes, even more improbable than those in the comic will be added.

If that's the extent of it, and the rest of the movie isn't similarly mangled, though, they'll have done better than I expected.

Still, I'm sort of waiting for the other MeFi shoe to drop in this thread. Do I get the obligatory job of raising the point that it's interesting to put out a movie in the current climate whose protagonist is basically a terrorist?
posted by tyllwin at 8:57 PM on July 24, 2005

...what Moore was getting at...

I read through most of the links but does someone want to clue me into to what the central point was?
posted by 517 at 9:22 PM on July 24, 2005

tyllwin, or even the parts from the trailer that have the government leader demanding that the public should be more fearful, to put their faith back in the government.
posted by Iax at 9:38 PM on July 24, 2005

Edible Energy, I hear you.
I hope you do check out the comic, preferably before the movie comes out (they'll reprint it with a cover still from the movie, no doubt).

But this post served to remind me (not in the main links, but their URLs and people's posts beneath) that THIS is the movie that the Wachowski bros are going to mangle next. I saw a shot one of the later Matrices and swore that they were doing something really scary to me, but for the life of me, I couldn't remember. And fear of it being something near and dear to my heart kept me from IMDB'ing it.

I enjoyed the book, and will continue to do so, long after WB releases it on DVD to try and recoup their losses. Movies based on Moore's comics are cursed for the same reason many books don't translate well to celluloid: too complex, too many sublties.
posted by Busithoth at 9:53 PM on July 24, 2005

Do I get the obligatory job of raising the point that it's interesting to put out a movie in the current climate whose protagonist is basically a terrorist?

Same climate the comic came out in. If anything it's way less interesting now that the IRA isn't the one blowing people up in London. To be interesting they'd have to switch to having V wear a mask of a famous historical Islamic terrorist who's also been used as a symbolic focal point for the persecution of Muslims.
posted by queen zixi at 9:57 PM on July 24, 2005

Hmm, I did a fine job of being America-centric, didn't I? Nasty, that. Creeps up on you when aren't looking.

The climate in the US is a bit more unpleasant than it was when V came out as a comic, I think. Searches in public places here were a bit less common then. Criticism of individual politicians was less equated to hated for your nation. Terrorists were less of a fear. My memory fails me when I try to recall US citizens designated as "enemy combatants" and held without charges. So things, I think, have changed a bit here.

But I'm sure our leaders know what they're doing. I'm not worried about rights being eroded. Freedom prevails.
posted by tyllwin at 10:10 PM on July 24, 2005

I continue to hope that an Alan Moore work will get the treatment it deserves on screen, but I'm not holding my breath. Especially with the Wachowskis, those idiots could fuck-up a bowl of cereal. Rich Johnston over on comicbookresources posted a script review that I think is pretty even-handed, pointing out both the potential and the problems with this project as it is. I don't mind making changes to the source material; after all, a movie is a different beast than a comic book, and certain things don't play out well in one or the other. But changes that make it suck, well those I have a problem with. If this movie bites the way I fear it will, I will be a lot more upset than I was over the crappy film translations of From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. V is one of Moore's finest and most important works; fucking it up is a real tragedy.
posted by papakwanz at 10:34 PM on July 24, 2005

V for Vendetta is awesome and people should read it. I write fiction and I'll eagerly agree that some books are worth making movies of. But I don't feel the same way about comics, honestly. Even notwithstanding the formulaic shit that invariably gets laid on top of them, I just don't see the point. It's like making a sculpture of a fine painting. Uhhh... okay... Didn't really need that!
posted by scarabic at 10:46 PM on July 24, 2005

It's an odd thing, but comics make really bad movies. The similarities between the two forms seem compelling, but they just don't mix at all.
posted by thatwhichfalls at 11:03 PM on July 24, 2005

I swear to god, they'll make Watchmen and have them walking hand and hand into the sunset.

Shit. Now I have to rework the whole treatment!
posted by mwhybark at 11:36 PM on July 24, 2005

Edible Energy: The first link is from Scott Tipton's column Comics 101, which I read all the time. The thing is that he does start out with a plot summary, but rarely gives away any more than 50% of the book he's discussing. Then he goes on to demonstrate the sophistication in art and storytelling through examples of pages and dialogue. His intention is to get people who are otherwise estranged from comics to read them, and point them in the right directions. I don't find that I have the time or money to follow comic books particularly closely, and his recommendations have yet to steer me wrong. Anyway, just wanted to point out that his review isn't necessarily what you thought it was.
posted by ScottMorris at 11:38 PM on July 24, 2005

thatwhichfalls, I'm not convinced yet that comics are incapable of being translated well onto the big screen. I think that recent comic-to-movie translations have suffered from marketers who think that Alan Moore comics have the same audience as, I don't know, Spiderman or the Fantastic Four. Big dumb comics become big dumb movies. [I know I'm doing them a disservice here - some vintage superhero comics are really good - but they're stories that can survive on action and special effects.] Depending somewhat on the subject matter and need for special effects, I'd like to see indie directors taking on well-respected indie comics. Freed from the need to make a movie that everyone can 'get', I think a lot of the complexity and subtlety could be translated. At least, there are certainly films that manage to achieve those qualities, and I don't see why a comic-based story couldn't, with the help of a creative director.

Unfortunately, I suppose that Marvel and DC [who've no doubt been very happy about the recent spurt of comic-based movies] would be loathe to hand over production rights to someone who's going to make a small indie movie that'll appeal to fans and indie movie-goers, but not gross all that much. Doing a comic-based movie is pretty hard, too, since fans nitpick not just the story adaptation but the translation of the art style to the screen as well. Ah well. I can still hope that someday someone will manage it.
posted by ubersturm at 12:13 AM on July 25, 2005

Unmasking V would be a travesty. From the book:

"...because you were so big, V, and what if you're just nobody? ...or even if you're someone, you'll be smaller, 'cause of all the people that you could have been, but weren't."

"If I take off that mask, something will go away forever, be diminished because whoever you are isn't as big as the idea of you"

I'll definitely check out the comic, but there's no way in hell you could get me to read those reviews.

Basic summary: V for Vendetta takes place in Britain after a small-exchange nuclear war. The government has clear fascist overtones (video cameras everywhere, corrupt police everywhere, etc.) but the beauty of it is that it's not so far removed from what we live with today. In this dystopia, a masked anarchist runs around wreaking havoc. He recruits a young girl to aid him in his endeavors of toppling the corrupt regime. They try and stop him. End of summary.

(Small side-note: One thing I really don't like about the trailer is that the Brothers W. have decided to go the Orwellian/Citizen Cane/Apple Commercial "big screen talking dictator" route: not only is it revoltingly cliché, but it creates an enormous gulf between story and our own reality, which runs contrary to Moore's vision).
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:51 AM on July 25, 2005

I can't believe Moore only got $8k as option money. Ouch.
posted by mecran01 at 3:12 AM on July 25, 2005

"big screen talking dictator"

Agreed. Admittedly, it is the easiest way to trigger the kind of Orwellian fear we've all developed within ... but the book makes a point of letting Fate -- the all-knowing machine at the heart of this fictional government -- remain anonymous through the use of radio, not video. The Voice of Fate is an ordinary actor, but the public don't hear a man ... they hear Fate.

I really hope this film works. If nothing else, it will bring several thousand eyes to a book that should be required reading.
posted by grabbingsand at 5:50 AM on July 25, 2005

I guess I'll have to scare up a copy of Moore's original and see if I can connect. I read the first link, and I just can't relate. The movie Brazil already said a lot of this much more engagingly a long time ago.
posted by alumshubby at 6:36 AM on July 25, 2005

I dread a Fahrenheit 451-style dystopian future in which all of Alan Moore's comics have been banned or disappeared into obscurity, leaving only the movie adaptations as "conclusive proof" that Moore was one of the most atrocious hacks of the 20th and 21st centuries.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:59 AM on July 25, 2005

Well, actually alumshubby, V came out in 1982. Brazil came out in 1985.
posted by zerolives at 7:03 AM on July 25, 2005

Basically this movie is going to be a total piece of garbage. Compare these opening lines from V:

Comic:
"The multiplying villainies of nature do swarm upon him...and fortune, on his damned quarrel, smiling, showed like a rebel's whore. But all's too weak, for brave Macbeth.. well he deserves that name...Didsaining fortune, with his brandished steel, which smoked with bloody execution. Like valour's minion, carved out his passage till he faved the slave. Which ne'er shook hands, nor bade farewell to him." (from Macbeth, I'm assuming)

"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vangquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition."

Movie (possibly revised now)
"The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."

Evey: "Are you like, a crazy-person?"

So basically, yeah. Garbage made from a brilliant comic. And the trailer supports me on this..
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 9:02 AM on July 25, 2005

er, the comic's stuff ends after the macbeth line. whoops.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 9:07 AM on July 25, 2005

Self-important hacks ruin perfectly excellent comic book. Film at 11.

The Wachowskis have already shown, through the self-important bloatware known as the second and third Matrix flicks, that they're not up to the task of holding Alan Moore's jock. Let 'em go back to lesbian gangster thrillers for a while before they can play with big toys again.
posted by RakDaddy at 1:08 PM on July 25, 2005

Civil_Disobedient writes "The government has clear fascist overtones"

To use another quote from the book:

"My name is Adam Susan. I am the leader. Leader of the lost, ruler of the ruins. I am a man, like any other man. ... I believe in survival. In the destiny of the Nordic race. I believe in Fascism. Oh yes, I am a fascist. What of it?"

As much as I'd like this to be good, I see the names Joel Silver and The Wachowski Brothers and shudder. I have to wonder just how 'uncompromising' their vision will really be (although a suicide bomb was clearly shown). I do hope like grabbingsand that this might bring Moore's work to a wider audience. I've tried lending some of his stuff (like Watchmen) to friends, who have politely accepted, but returned later unread.

On preview: What RakDaddy said, the second and third Matrix films certainly made me wonder if the Wachowskis are better at ripping off other people's material than creating their own. Then again, maybe that's a plus with regards to V.
posted by Edame at 1:33 PM on July 25, 2005

Well, honestly, you can't even compare the sheer awesomeness of alan moore to some guys like the brothers wachowski. It's apples and oranges.
posted by zerolives at 1:44 PM on July 25, 2005

Well, one man's pile of junk is another's work of art.
posted by Edame at 1:55 PM on July 25, 2005

For all you who think that comics cannot be turned into movies, I submit Road To Perdition, which I felt was a huge improvement on the graphic novel.
posted by cyphill at 2:45 PM on July 25, 2005

Well, I havn't read the comics, but the trailer did look a little stupid.
posted by delmoi at 4:12 PM on July 25, 2005

For all you who think that comics cannot be turned into movies... Did no one see Sin City?

It can be done. It probably isn't going to be done here. And isn't usually done. But it can be done.
posted by davros42 at 5:06 PM on July 25, 2005

For the record, I don't think it was done with Sin City.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 7:08 PM on July 25, 2005

My guess would be Ghost World, but I'm not sure if that fully counts.
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 7:51 PM on July 25, 2005

Sin City is a blatant Dick Tracy rip-off
posted by cyphill at 8:30 PM on July 25, 2005