whats Alan Moore saying about this movie?

[Swordmaster]

Here's how I view it: As an adaptation, V fails, but as a standalone movie (as the general public, and not people familiar with the GN see it), it succeeds.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

 

[Motown Marvel]

Here's how I view it: As an adaptation, V fails, but as a standalone movie (as the general public, and not people familiar with the GN see it), it succeeds.

i can mostly agree with this.

but yeah, moore hit the nail on the head when he said V is a story about anarchy, yet the word anarchy isnt even in the film. i mean, thats simplifying whats wrong with the film, but the film makers really did miss the point. it seems they were clearly more focused on constructing the film to criticise and impliciate american policy and the bush administration, rather than doing a proper adaptation of the story given to them.

 

[Figs]

i can mostly agree with this.

but yeah, moore hit the nail on the head when he said V is a story about anarchy, yet the word anarchy isnt even in the film. i mean, thats simplifying whats wrong with the film, but the film makers really did miss the point. it seems they were clearly more focused on constructing the film to criticise and impliciate american policy and the bush administration, rather than doing a proper adaptation of the story given to them.

The word Anarchy didn't need to be in the film. Although it was clear to me, some people didn't see it because people see what they want to see. I got the left wing/right wing agenda in the very beginning of the film with "The Voice" on tv talking about godlessnes and all that but that wasn't what the whole movie was about. Some people just took that and ran with it, missing the rest. Overall, yes the movie may have not been as long and in depth as the book but it still was about totalitarianism and Anarchy. V in the movie didn't stand for any right wing or leftist beliefs, he stood for Anarchy. To bring the system down. The system which was a Totalitarian rule. One of the causes of Anarchy, unlike middle schoolers and high schoolers who believe in the whole trendy "anarchy is cool" thing, the outcome when a government system or certain type of ruling fails and falls leaving no real order. It is in a lot of cases when the people overthrow or fight back. I have read some of Moores excerpts about V and he says a lot of it was based on the fact when he left England because of certain elements and laws being established that he felt was against being free, open minded and being an individual.

 

[Figs]

I do think the book was waaaay better, but just didn't think the movie was as bad as some make it out to be. Especially not nearly as bad as The League.

 

[Motown Marvel]

The word Anarchy didn't need to be in the film. Although it was clear to me, some people didn't see it because people see what they want to see. I got the left wing/right wing agenda in the very beginning of the film with "The Voice" on tv talking about godlessnes and all that but that wasn't what the whole movie was about. Some people just took that and ran with it, missing the rest. Overall, yes the movie may have not been as long and in depth as the book but it still was about totalitarianism and Anarchy. V in the movie didn't stand for any right wing or leftist beliefs, he stood for Anarchy. To bring the system down. The system which was a Totalitarian rule. One of the causes of Anarchy, unlike middle schoolers and high schoolers who believe in the whole trendy "anarchy is cool" thing, the outcome when a government system or certain type of ruling fails and falls leaving no real order. It is in a lot of cases when the people overthrow or fight back. I have read some of Moores excerpts about V and he says a lot of it was based on the fact when he left England because of certain elements and laws being established that he felt was against being free, open minded and being an individual.

the idea of anarchy was hardly even there. there was the fight against a fascist government, sure....but it was never a fight for anarchy, in the film. they just watered and dumbed it down and tried to use it as a vehicle for their own agenda.

 

[Captain Carnage]

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

The V of the comic simply would NEVER have come out with that statement... because he truly is an anarchist in the purest political sense of the word.

Anarchism just does not recognise systems of organized government of ANY persuasion, but rather the belief in harmonious self-determination for and by the population to the mutual benefit of all.

And when did Alan Moore leave England?
For many, many years now, he hardly ever even leaves his hometown of Northampton, let alone the country. It's true that V was largely a reaction to the rightist politics of Thatcherism back in the day of the early Eighties... but he never jumped ship, so to speak!

 

[UltimateJustin]

V as a movie based on a letter is good. As an adaptation of the GN, it fails.

 

[Figs]

the idea of anarchy was hardly even there. there was the fight against a fascist government, sure....but it was never a fight for anarchy, in the film. they just watered and dumbed it down and tried to use it as a vehicle for their own agenda.

....and what exactly was that agenda?? Aside from what some are saying is right wing/left wing prapoganda. I just don't see a huge liberal-hippy/conservative-republican agenda as much as everyone else. Honestly, im asking you to try and educate me because I guess im blind.

 

[Motown Marvel]

....and what exactly was that agenda?? Aside from what some are saying is right wing/left wing prapoganda. I just don't see a huge liberal-hippy/conservative-republican agenda as much as everyone else. Honestly, im asking you to try and educate me because I guess im blind.

there were a lot of subtle implications of american politics and the bush agenda. there's a reference to "americas war", theres some abu grahib(sp?) inspired imagery, and in the TV dudes bunker theres a merged american/british flag with a swastika in the middle with the words "coalition of the willing" (bush's term for the countries aiding america in the war on terror). i believe theres some others too, but its been a while since i watched the movie. it was just obvious they were drawing parallells between the fascist government in the movie with the bush administration, and they did it at the expense of alan moore's story.

 

[cryptic name]

I will assume then that you didn't like the graphic novels either since the film 300 was extremely close to the novel as well as Sin City was basically spot on. I understand when a writer gets pissed because his work translated to another medium gets changed and or altered but when it comes to V for Vendetta I don't see what the huge deal was. Aside from the fact that Moore seems to be anal like a fanboy and wants it translated 100% exactly like the novel. I love his written works, but as movies I still enjoyed From Hell and loved V for Vendetta. League was crap all around though lol. I just don't get aside from being anal, what the big deal about V was. It kept the main message of his book, the strength to rise against a totalitarian government. Which for those about to jump on me with the Anarchy thing, anarchy is definetly always apart of overthrowing a government/dictator. It's a cycle, when a country/government gets so corrupt you need the system to completely crash to start anew and fresh.

actually, if Moore had his way they wouldn't be adapting any of his work at all.

 

[UltimateJustin]

actually, if Moore had his way they wouldn't be adapting any of his work at all.

Which would be a better scenario than what we're getting.

 

[blind_fury]

If V for Vendetta is a dumb movie then 99% of movies are borderline ******ed.

 

[blind_fury]

"Oh noes, the movie implicated Bush and made it relevant to the world we live in. They ruined it!!!"

 

[Figs]

"Oh noes, the movie implicated Bush and made it relevant to the world we live in. They ruined it!!!"

Thank you! It may have been changed from the graphic novel but I still think it was a damn good movie compared to a lot of garbage that comes out. I think if the graphic novel never existed, people would be singing a different tune about it if it were entirely original.

 

[Captain Carnage]

But it isn't.

So there.

 

[sad lieutenant]

If V for Vendetta is a dumb movie then 99% of movies are borderline ******ed.

No truer statement has been made on these boards.


Because the movie adaptation of V is dumb as cock.

And 99% of movie are, verily, borderline-******ed.

 

[Motown Marvel]

by the way, for the record, i never said V was a dumb or bad movie, its a fine movie that i can enjoy. but its nowhere near as good as it could of, or should of, been. there are many many flaws in its adaptation.

 

[Figs]

No truer statement has been made on these boards.


Because the movie adaptation of V is dumb as cock.

And 99% of movie are, verily, borderline-******ed.

The graphic novel was damn good but it wasn't like it was a damn masterpiece or anything like that.

 

[Motown Marvel]

The graphic novel was damn good but it wasn't like it was a damn masterpiece or anything like that.

what?

but seriously, even if in your (flawed) opinion you dont consider the book a masterpiece, that surely doesnt make the movie any better.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I personally loved both the movie and the GN of V. I appreciated both for what they were. In my opinion, V is one of the best comic book movies today. Was it as wonderfully complex or deep as the graphic novel? Of course not, but who actually expected the movie to come within the greatness of the original work? That's almost as far fetched as wanting the Harry Potter movies to be 100% faithful to the books and recreate each and every scene perfectly. It's just not going to happen. And I don't think it ever will, I don't think any movie based off Moore's work will be able to match the book it's based off of.

 

[Slipping_Halo]

The movie version of V was a terrible adaptation, but a fantastic movie. It really was. I didn't read the novel before seeing the film, so I guess that may be why it didn't piss me off what they did to change it, but I still dug the X-Men, Batman, and Spider-Man movies even though there were serious departures from the source material (ie organic webshooters, Gwen Stacy, The Bat-suit, the origins of villains, the ages of and relationships between almost every mutant). I personally wouldn't have done what they did if I were to adapt something because you have to respect the source material like Rodriguez did for Sin City and Snyder did for 300, but I don't hate the movies because of that. I only hate movies that completely did away with what the whole thing is about-which I don't think V did. It updated it and made it relevant to American politics, but I still think the idea is there.

So far I'm not digging some of the things I'm hearing about Snyder's adaptation. I have already read Watchmen and I think unnecessary changes to the story will definitely piss me off this time around. I hope not, but it's not looking good. Some things sound great and others...I dunno. We'll see.

 

[Kahoot]

On removing his name from the "Watchmen" movie: Alan Moore - "If they go for some other novelty option like they did with V For Vendetta then I'm in for another year of excoriating them in every interview I do until they remove my name from it."

V For Vendetta novelty?

The Man just does NOT like Hollywood... especially when it's his work that's being "adapted".

He has this weird idea that his comics can't be made into movies...

 

[Totenkopf]

V for Vendetta was a horrible adaptation and at times, horribly cheesy (V's alliteration speech? Come ON...). It prostituted the anarchist ideals of the graphic novel in exchange for 'interesting' twists and action and drastically changed most of the supporting characters. Not to mention changing the entire ending. It went from a timeless drama to an above-average thriller. I can see why Alan was PO'd.

 

[Figs]

what?

but seriously, even if in your (flawed) opinion you dont consider the book a masterpiece, that surely doesnt make the movie any better.

Very mature acting like your opinion is fact and saying my opinion is flawed when with common sense(which most people are lacking now days) no ones opinion is wrong. You didn't like the movie because it didn't follow the books ideals and points, fine, I get it. I guess if im flawed for not finding it a masterpeice it's because I've read older more mature fiction and non-fiction alike. Remember this is a graphic novel. That definetly doesn't mean it's kids stuff, it's far far from it. Just to call me wrong for knowing it wasn't as mind boggling deep as some make it out to be is BS.