Review V for Vendetta

Review: V for Vendetta

I find myself in disagreement with Jonathan Ross more and more often these days. I used t find that our tastes pretty much coincided on films. Much more so that I did with his predecessor, Barry Norman. So when he was so viciously scathing about this film I very nearly decided not to bother going to the press screening.

How glad I was that I decided to make up my own mind.

I found this to be a thoroughly enjoyable couple of hours. It has more depth than the average comic-book story and its ambiguous politics and morals appeal to me much more than the usual squeaky-clean superhero flick. The action scenes are generally well-paced and appropriate to the piece and have not succumbed to the temptation of going overboard just because it can be done. Since I’d heard that Alan Moore had his name removed from the credits I even went off and read his graphic novel before I wrote the review. I don’t really see what his problem is with it.

Unless it’s that, in some ways, the film’s better…?

Not wildly or completely better, you understand, but there are distinct improvements in plotting, tension and just being able to follow who’s who. Because of the way a large part of the film-going audience are presumed to be by studios (i.e. stupid) it has a clearer villain and a more satisfying dénouement. The bad guys are badder and the good not quite so grey. I don’t think anything was gained in the GN by having the police inspector take drugs and end up a tramp. I thought Evey taking on the mask was good in the GN, but probably better not done in the film as it would probably have seemed more clichéd there. I was offended by the awful attempt at representing a Scots accent and more-so by having all the tramps in the GN being given one.

The acting is excellent, especially from the estimable Mr Weaving who not only carries off being masked throughout the entire film, but shows a surprising subtlety and breadth of emotion whilst being deprived of all the tools actors mostly rely upon. Like C-3PO and Darth Vader’s masks before it, V’s mask with its fixed expression is a masterpiece of the sculptor’s art. The mind wants to see more, so the bland expression can be interpreted in many ways by the viewer’s imagination, but this in no way detracts from what the actor has added to it.

There are, however, some problems.

I’m afraid that Natalie Portman’s accent is a little weird for someone who has supposedly never left London. Seems to veer into Australian rather frequently, and Stephen Rea lets his Irish brogue drift in from time-to-time as well. Now, they do make a comment about his mother being Irish, but the point is that it’s his mother who was. Not him, and he wasn’t brought up there. Of course, due to the American influence on the film there is no comprehension of the difference between British and the nationalities which make up the discrete groups who comprise it. Hence all the references, apart from that one about Rea’s mother, to the relationship between England and the other nations of the United Kingdom have been excised. This leads to that awful use of ‘England’ when ‘Britain’ is meant and vice-versa.

Whilst the fights are good and V is shown to be thoroughly skilled, but not super-powered, there are a few problems. Especially in the seeming ability of bladed weapons to penetrate anti-stab vests. I don’t know why the police bother to wear them in this film as it seems even a thrown knife will cut through them as easily as a cotton t-shirt.

Steven Fry’s character is an excellent invention, drawing comparisons to those who helped the targets of the Nazis to hide during WWII and showing that even in such an oppressive police state with deeply intrusive powers (just like Tony & his cronies seem to want in real life) people will still try to do good things. One does rather wonder, though, how he got his seditious programme made and transmitted. John Hurt is, as always masterful and it I extremely weird for anyone who enjoyed his performance in 1984 to see him playing a very Big Brother-ish character.

Neither this film with its pat ending or the Graphic Novel with its ambiguous finale are perfect. Both serve the tale well for their particular medium, though and V for Vendetta is a more than acceptable way to pass a little time. If either can provoke some debate or even a doubt in some minds about the current use of the politics of fear and our government’s erosion of civil liberties even better, for both do so without the liberal partisanship of the likes of The Road to Guantanamo.

PS Why is it that trailer-editors are so keen to give away the end of a film? If you watch any trailer for this film you will realise very quickly that you have seen V’s objective reached before you got into the cinema. Moving this objective gave the film a more concrete objective than that of the GN and leaving it to Miss Portman’s character to decide what to do is a better story choice than in the original but any tension about whether or not she’ll do it is ruined by the trailer which delights in showing the target explode. Alright, it’s not really in too much doubt because we all want the satisfying bang and the whole film builds up to it, but there are other explosions in the film, other equally dramatic shots, so why not use them instead of giving the game away?