Posted on 03/07/2006 7:21:33 PM PST by goldstategop
If you liked the politics of last weekend's Oscar nominees, you'll love "V for Vendetta."
But if you're like the rest of America--you support our troops and believe in firmly responding to terrorists on our own shores--then, don't waste your time at this piece of garbage masquerading as a superhero movie. It is anything but.
If the other political films subtly whisper of an agenda, "V" clocks you over the head with it with a still sizzling, iron frying pan.
Based on the graphic novel series of the same name, "V" comes complete with all the bogeymen the far left loves to hate: NSA spying and wiretaps; government torture complete with Abu Ghraib hood fashions; lecherous, elderly Christian clerics in collars raping young girls; Islam, gay rights, and free speech under attack; and even a Bill O'Reilly-esque evil cable talk show host/wicked pharmaceutical billionaire/heinous military officer combo rolled into one character.
Oh, and by the way, the hero of the movie: He's a terrorist in a Guy Fawkes mask, who blows up important government buildings. Sound familiar? His mask might as well be a kefiyeh wrapped around his head in a Nick Berg video.
The movie takes place in futuristic England, and there is only one American star (Natalie Portman). But it's quite clear to whom the "commentary" is directed: Joe and Jane American. Lest I forget, when this movie takes place "the United States of America" doesn't exist anymore. America is in the midst of a civil war.
I love this type of movie usually, but already having seen the commercial for this movie, this movie is a no go for me, reason... cross used as the symbol for the evil people not to mention they dress to resemble Catholic priest....no thanks Hollywood!
I only wish I had know this before wasting my money seeing 'Ultraviolet', all buildings of the evil people are in the shape of a cross.
As a Christian who see 25 to 30 movies a year Hollywood can take a flying leap before I will support this crap no matter how well done it is!
Personally, I don't think it's that funny (No Offense meant, at all).
And I'm not here to lecture you -- I respect you a lot. You wanna be a "16", that's okay by me -- some of my best friends are Socialists (grin). You can be a "Liberation Theologian" if you wanna; I like you, I'll still enjoy your company.
BUT, I'll tell you what -- study the Torah, and then apply the LIBERTARIAN PURITY TEST against the Law of Israel as you understand it.
Every Theologian I have challenged to apply the Test found that Old-Covenant Israel rates at least a 115 or above. Now, I am willing to admit that the New Covenant adopts some Theonomic Changes; but going from a 115-119 rating to a 16 represents a Radical change, indeed.
Tell you what -- go through the Test, and tell me how you think that Apostle Paul would have scored (remembering that Paul was a Righteous Pharisee, and did NOT impugn the basic morality and regulations of the Old Covenant). If you think that I, at a 98-107, am far off of his mark -- then tell me so, and tell me why. I will listen to your instruction. ON THE OTHER HAND -- if you find that you, at a 16, are far off of Apostle Paul's mark... then tell me, why would you be happy with that?
Maranatha
Hopefully, V FOR VENDETTA will follow the first (and brilliant) MATRIX movie and not the two idiotic sequels.
Reviews can be helpful, but they are often as much propaganda as the movies themselves.
A good example is MUNICH which was criticized for being too conciliatory when it was anything but. MUNICH is a terrific film and was robbed of an Academy Award by misleading press.
IMO MUNICH wasn't signified as worthwhile because we're supposed to "all just get along." MUNICH was too on-point, and we don't want to rile the islamofascists with memories of their inhumanity.
You just never know till you see the film. And in the case of MUNICH, IF you see the film.
I thought Diana was hot. OK, even if she was a murderous reptilian alien man-eater.
Aren't they all?
I happen to like the tagline, people shouldn't be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people.
Well, the reason I was a 16 was largely because the questions were false dichotomies where I had to pick yes or no - and I'm more progressive (in the old-style sense) than libertarian.
This is supposed to be a conservative forum, where the members are supposed to have a higher sense of "self".
It appears the membership has grown too large; many on this thread, at least, really don't know what they believe in, who their enemies are, or when to stand up for their beliefs.
Yes, this extends to withholding their 10 bucks, or whatever it costs these days for a movie that spits in their faces and trashes their beliefs.
All one has to do is read Schlussel's column to determine that: 1) With all the current themes shamefully forced into this piece of agitprop crap, this is clearly NOT a faithful adaptation of Moores' book about Thatcher/reaganism in the early 80s, and 2)that Hollywood still has not learned its lesson, and will continue to wage its war on America.
War of what, one might ask? I'm not sure they even know. Or even understand what victory will even mean for them if and when "victory" is delcared.
I read Schlussel's column and no disrespect, but I'm not convinced. I'll have to go see it for myself and let FReepers know if it is liberal crap or not. I'll see it opening night and post after seeing it.
Have one quibble with your critique. The graphic series, according to Moore, came about as a response to the election of Margaret Thatcher as PM. There were great fears of her being a fascist among the British moonbat left and her sending off the troops to the Falklands in 82 intensified their fears. V for Vendetta took the Thatcher reign to the extreme most lefties fear in anyone whose politics falls to the right of Trotsky.
Too bad, I liked Alan Moore's graphic novel and I was hoping for a decent adaptation.
Batman Begins was bad, as in, not good. It screamed "written by the director."
Moore routinely disavows every film project that tries to make use of his graphic novels, though when you look at the crap that has been put out (From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen) it's not hard to see why.
I catch myself typing "Michael Moore" when I'm talking about Alan Moore too. But seriously, if you like the graphic novel format at all, you're missing a treat by skipping classics like The Watchmen and V for Vendetta.
Just went right over poor Debbie's head did it? This is a screenplay from a comic book that is almost 25 years old. As I stated elsewhere conservatives will have no problem with this movie. Republicans, well that's a different story isn't it?
Actually, every good Nazi had to own it, but it was rarely read (except in schools). It was just displayed in the home so as to feign readership or provide a badge of loyalty for any visiting Gestapo types.
Indeed it is. I've been waiting for this movie's release for months
Any pundit who likens their opposition to Nazis is more likely to want the opposition to be facists, just so they can justify their rage.
On a similar note, anyone who fears that the opposition is portraying their favored leader as facist in stories like "V for Vendetta" or "1984" may be wise to independently contemplate whether said leader is heading too far in that direction (recall: facist leaders are usually elected with popular support).
A libertarian in a facist nation is hard to distinguish from an anarchist - especially when acting out of frustration.
2)Alan Moore has renounced this film and now may sue them for implying that he endorsed when he in fact condemed it.
Alan Moore refuses to have his name attached to ANY film based on his novels - nothing particularly personal, just his policy. Any who attempt to make the connection may get sued.
3)The serial was inspired by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
Could just as easily been inspired by a conservative writing about Hillary Clinton. The inspiration is really any political persuasion viewing their opposition as Nazis, and desperately attempting to portray them that way.
Nothing in the story can be particularly linked to Conservatism. (Have you read it? I have.)
4)The wasnowski brothers, both big fans of serial are not hiding the fact that this is a political movie and both are quite liberal if not leftists.
Everyone has a philosophy. The movie is political. If the W brothers are really good, they can tell the story without tying it to unrelated modern issues. It's very much like making the book "1984" into a movie: the story is solid unto itself, and a good director will refrain from injecting modern specifics & personal vendettas into the movie.
Soon we will see the movie, and see if it does contain any Bush/Regan/Thatcher-bashing in it ... or whether it is true to the generic concept of facism (which, BTW, has socialist roots).
The novel is more of a Rorshac (sp?) Test: you see the villan therein which you choose to see.
Jesus Christ! Did you read the frickin' article? Did you read that the message of the movie has been changed, perverted, and even replaced to reflect AND UNDERMINE the current war on terror? Did you read the Abu-Ghirab references? The Koran garbage? Can you put 2 and 2 togehter? Or do you need to watch the movie 23 times and give hundreds of dollars to hellywood before you say to yourself "Hey! I done think this movie is liberal propaganda!"
I hope you enjoy this garbage. Please tell us how it goes on opening night. We know you and the other stuck-in-the-media-matrix-sheeple who are so desperate for entertainment and so cock-sure of the movie's "libertarian" message will be more than happy to tell us we were completely off base, which I am sure we are...
Not.
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.