Posted on 03/20/2006 2:27:38 AM PST by goldstategop
"V for Vendetta," which opened on Friday, combines all of the celluloid left’s paranoid fantasies – Christian conservatives in charge of a brutal regime, the war-on-terrorism as an excuse for the suppression of civil liberties, homosexuals harassed and killed by conservative Christians, a pedophile priest (who works miter-in-had with the regime) and an attack blamed on terrorists that’s really a right-wing conspiracy.
All that’s missing is a Halliburton connection. For that, we’ll have to wait for "V – The Return."
"V" opens in Britain circa 2020. America has succumbed to plague, civil war, and chaos. (Bush’s fault, no doubt.) The UK is ruled by a fascist regime with strong Christian overtones – the party’s slogan is "Strength through Unity; Unity through Faith." Its symbol is a stylized cross, and its enforcers are a quasi-religious police.
As the film opens, Britain’s most popular commentator is explaining how America’s fall was ordained by its embrace of "degeneracy," as flecks of saliva fly from his mouth.
The Brit Reich is headed by Chancellor Sutler – played by a cadaverous John Hurt (who looks like a cross between Hitler and Kate Moss). Hurt is incapable of delivering his lines unless he’s: A) Screaming B) Sneering or C) on the verge of a cerebral hemorrhage.
In the England of "V," free speech has been crushed. Conformity is ruthlessly enforced. Dissidents and non-conformists are hunted down and eliminated. Torture is a routine. Medical experiments are performed on undesirables. And "1984" indoctrination is ubiquitous.
Enter the mysterious "V" – a knife-throwing martial-arts master in a Guy Fawkes mask.
The movie projects the 17th century Englishman as a prototypical freedom fighter. In reality, Fawkes was a Catholic conspirator who tried to murder James I and most of Britain’s nobility by attempting to blow up Parliament in the famous Gunpowder Plot of 1605. His objective wasn’t constitutional democracy but a return to Catholic rule. But, then, Hollywood never did have much of a sense of history.
That’s only the beginning of "V’’s confusion. One of the characters is a closet homosexual talk-show host (portrayed by British actor Stephen Fry), who shelters Natalie Portman on the run from the authorities.
In his Crypt of the Banned, Fry shows Portman a Koran. "Are you a Muslim?" Portman innocently asks. No, Fry replies, but I appreciate the beautiful illustrations and poetry therein. Does he also appreciate the perspective of the religion-of-peace on the love-that-dare-not speak-its-name? Were there German Jews in the ‘30, who really dug those snappy SS uniforms?
The only reference to Islam has to do with beauty and poetry. "V" has other targets on its radar screen. In terms of bashing the Right and demonizing Christians – with "V," Hollywood is completely in character.
Need a clichéd bad guy? Call central casting for a stock lecherous priest, hypocritical evangelical, repressive preacher or sadistic nun. Whether now or in the past, committed Christians are regularly portrayed as characters who should be committed – fanatical, hypocritical, cowardly, avaricious and lustful. Think "Kingdom of Heaven," "King Arthur," "Saved," "The Magdalene Sisters," "Priest," The Order," "Dogma," "Stigmata," and the movie version of "The DaVinci Code," coming out in May.
As much a staple as the evil Christian is the unprincipled, power-mad conservative politician, general, or businessman.
Starting with "Dr. Strangelove" and "Seven Days In May," proceeding to "The Manchurian Candidate" (both the ‘60s original and the recent remake), "Dreamscape," "The American President," "The Contender" (with Gary Oldman doing his Bob Dole impression), "Bulworth," "The Day After Tomorrow" (where the destruction of America in a global climate catastrophe is blamed on a conservative vice president opposed to the Kyoto Treaty) – well, you get the picture.
"V for Vendetta" is distinguished by envelope-pushing, combined with an unapologetic glorification of terrorism.
The title character (who begins the movie by blowing up the Old Bailey and ends with the demolition of Parliament) is a noble soul – a courageous, long-suffering, philosophical bloke, who appreciates jazz, Renaissance paintings, weepy old movies, and high-cholesterol cooking.
This is Hollywood’s romanticized take on terrorists – far removed from the reality of Koran-happy sadists who plant nail-packed bombs in restaurants frequented by families with young children.
The slogan of "V for Vendetta" is: "People shouldn’t fear their government. Governments should fear their people."
In the real world, beyond the pages of comic books (where "V" originated), there’s no shortage of governments that prey on their people, and people who live in gut-wrenching fear of their rulers – places like Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and the Peoples’ Detention Center of China.
Here are governments with gulags, medical experiments performed on dissidents, tanks rolling over demonstrators, torture cells and thought-control.
Beijing sells the organs of executed prisoners. Kim Jong Il deliberately starves his subjects while pursuing nuclear weapons. Iran puts out contracts on novelists. When he was in power, Saddam Hussein’s idea of a night on the town was watching a live man being fed into a plastic shredding machine.
When was the last time Hollywood made a big-budget film about the agony of existence in one of these nightmare states? I know; it’s a real brain-teaser.
The few include "Red Corner" (where China’s "justice system" is not portrayed sympathetically) and "Die Another Day" (even here, the bad guys aren’t the rulers of North Korea, but rogue elements therein – scary thought).
While they carry on about Bush being behind the 9/11 attacks and using the war on terrorism to advance his totalitarian plans, much of Hollywood has the warm and fuzzies for the most corrupt and brutal tyrannies on earth.
Sean Penn flew to Baghdad prior to the U.S. liberation and posed next to a picture of Saddam. Steven Spielberg (whose "Munich" posits moral equivalence between Palestinian assassins and Israeli agents out to get them) once remarked, "The best seven hours I ever spent was actually with Fidel Castro." (Given the quality his recent films, he might be right.)
And, lest we forget, Jane Fonda (star of "Monster-In-Law," now playing on cable), who traveled to Hanoi during the Vietnam War to make propaganda broadcasts, told an audience at the University of Michigan (1970): "I would think that if you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees, that we would someday become communists."
After the war, Fonda called Joan Baez a liar for charging the Khmer Rouge with genocide. (In reality, the Killing Fields were a reclamation project.) The U.S. POWs who said they were tortured at the Hanoi Hilton – also liars, according to Fonda.
Her ex-husband, Ted Turner – who’s gone duck hunting with Castro – has remarked that "communism is part of life on this planet. And that’s okay with me."
In the 1980s, Ed Asner bought "medical supplies" for the FMLN, the Marxist guerrillas who wanted to turn El Salvador into another Cuba.
The aptly named Vanessa Redgrave is a member of the British Workers Revolutionary Party. In her younger days, the mummified Marxist may have shared a bed with the red gravedigger of Cuba. And, in 1978, she teamed up with Fonda to make "Julia," glorifying yet another Red lover: Lillian Hellman. Warren Beatty got off playing John Reed (who thought Lenin was the messiah) in "Reds."
Need I continue? Hollywood has a lot of credibility when it comes to lecturing us on tyranny – about as much as Ted Kennedy does on drunk driving, Bill Clinton on marital fidelity, and Robert Downey Jr. on a drug-free America.
This sort of crap is never going to stop unless one of two things happen:
1 - Conservatives begin to financially take-over the
Producers and the Distributors of this garbage (via
corporate buy-out, thus gaining the control of
Hollywood's ability to finance such crap.
- or -
2 - Finance competition: Start building and financing the
few conservative/non-liberal elements in the Industry
so they can produce movies that reflect the point of
view of the real majority here in the US, to say
nothing of promoting the real truth behind any of
these issues.
Boycotting these films isn't going to work largely because Hollywood has always depended upon the foreign market to make its money. The US Market has always "just paid the Bills" as one Movie company exec told me years ago. Now with this "Hate America" nonsense running rampant around the world these junk movies are even more profitable.
i agree with Feder. i'm sick of the film apparatchik's bashing/portrayal of Christians. thus i will not be seeing this film & will discourage any who wish to do so. this board's positive gleanings are almost word for word with
a Jefferson quote: "when the gov.t fears the people there is liberty. when the people fear the gov.t there is tyranny." against which gun grabber Rep. henry waxman is contrasted: "If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all."
the libs need to learn about the consequences of reciprocity. what they sow they'll reap. they need to be careful what they wish for. they just might get it.
so i'll add the next thesis/antithesis from the book of Romans, New Testament: " For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil." Romans 13. NKJV
Are you sure? I thought V for Vendetta was about his fears of what Margaret Thatcher would do to the UK.
I disagree. If you can look past the superficial attacks of the film (which is difficult at first), the underlying truth of the movie is something that all party members, be they Democrat or Republican, need to be reminded of. Government is not always our friend and a healthy distrust of the government needs to be reborn no matter who is in charge.
Unfortunately for many posters here (and people in general) their distrust of the government depends on which party is in control
Think again.
The movie sucked.
Dont even waste a DVD rental on it.
There were only 3 action sequences...and they sucked too.
1 right in the beginning another shortly thereafter by the mask dude and one late in the movie by the mask dude.
THE MOVIE SUCKED.
By the way, "idiot" (comes from ancient Greek and Latin and is spelled the same way in many languages) means "common man" or "private man" or "ignorant man of strong opinions".
I pay enough in the coin of cultural collapse to pay more to see crude propaganda. Well crafted and skillful propaganda, maybe. Especially if there is some mocking metaphor of self and audience. In "V" mockery of the audience is extreme and obvious. The lesson of "V" is that humanity is a herd of pigs.
Looks like you went for it hook, line, and sinker.
Most people can tell you that Fawkes was a Catholic, but few know that he was exposed by a fellow Catholic who had received word of and who was horrified by his plans.
We never hear about "Lord Monteagle, the brave Catholic who saved King and Parliament."
Well, there goes Feder's credibility down the toilet. The most obviously insane character in "Dr. Strangelove" was obsessed about the pollution of his "precious bodily fluids" (greenie-weenieism is hardly conservative), and the rest were simply feckless and inept as the wheels spun out of control.
WTF? The original graphic novel was clearly aimed at Thatcher & the Tories. Moore's tiff with DC Comics and Hollywood isn't particularly political -- basically, he's externalizing his irritation at himself for signing a lousy contract.
Strangelove is certainly a satirical take on SAC, but it is also one of the greatest movies ever made. If you're going to have an opinion, express it well.
*** DING DING DING *** No more calls; we have a winner!
So, who do you stand with: Jefferson or Waxman?
Yes you got me. Not being able to think for myself or having the intelligence to see multiple levels within a movie and having never read the graphic novel, I didn't see quite a few lessons 'conservatives' could learn. No, none of that. Went into the theater and the director of the movie had me believing everything I saw. I really should be more gullible and believe everything from the 'right' party. Sort of like reading a review of a movie from someone else and making me an expert on the movie without seeing it....
I know. People daring to stand up against the state, against tyranny. And making rash statements like "People shouldn’t fear their government. Governments should fear their people" is just absolutely 'stupid'. Oh wait...
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty--Thomas Jefferson
Nope you're right. As long as the 'right' party is in charge, it's absolutely 'stupid' to question motives, rights, or freedoms. They should've have waited until a Democrat was President to dare question the government...
You know I would suggest you wait until the movie is out on cable or for rent. Look past the blatant attacks on what you hold to be true. Look at the deeper meaning of the movie. I remember a time conservatives used to be concerned about government control and tyranny, no matter who was in charge.
All of what you say may be true, but Hollywood would never make a movie like this unless the intent was to undermine a conservative. All of the paranoid ranting about exaggerating the threat of terrorism in order to gain power is enough to keep me away. The intent is clearly to undermine faith in the administration and the war and reflects the adolescent paranoia that holds Hollywood in its grip.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.