Skip to main content

Empire List: #418 - V for Vendetta


“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” I don’t know who came up with that quote, but whoever it was, they most likely did not have the hero of “V for Vendetta” in mind. Although when I use the word “hero” I do so only because the villains are much worse than him. To a fictional fascist government “V” is a terrorist who destroys government buildings and kills government officials. To the people, he is a freedom fighter who opens their eyes to the lies they have been sold. One thing is certain: he believes violence is part of the solution. I hope that is a prospect a lot of people find divisive.

I first saw this hundredth graphic novel adaption at a movie theatre in Quebec City in 2006, but I had a much more interesting second viewing in 2010. One of my courses at the University of Sherbrooke was Cultural Studies, and wouldn’t you know it, the graphic novel “V for Vendetta” by Alan Moore was required reading. Once we were done with that exhausting homework assignment (sarcasm) we watched the movie in class. We now live in a world where we have to read comic books and watch movies as part of our class assignments. This may anger some uptight literary scholars, but it’s fine by me. We had some great conversations in class discussing the similarities and differences between the novel and the movie, its political implications, and its place in modern culture. I even wrote a 2000 word essay about it. It always helps if you are writing about something you actually enjoy.

To be sure, a lot can be said about both the graphic novel and the movie. Alan Moore and illustrator David Lloyd published their work in the 1980s. It was heavily influenced by the right-wing government of the United Kingdom and was set in a future where fascists rule with an iron-fist in the aftermath of nuclear war. In James McTeigue adaptation, the story is set even further into the future and still features a fascist government, but no nuclear war since there is no surviving that kind of war. Instead, Britain has suffered a biological attack, leading to the political takeover of the Norsefire party led by High Chancellor Adam Sutler (John Hurt). Sutler controls the police, the army, and most importantly, the media.

As the film opens, two people are preparing to leave their homes and head into the streets of London. One is Evey Hammond (Nathalie Portman), a young woman who works at the state television station. The second person is a man whose face remains hidden until he puts on a mask of Guy Fawkes, the man who is known for the failed Gunpowder Plot of 1605. The mystery man and Evey meet in the streets as he rescues her from police officers who try to rape her for violating curfew. The police have guns, but the man is lightning fast with knives. Following his victory, he delivers a speech where just about every word begins with the letter V. “Are you mad?” says Evey. “That’s probably what they will say” is his answer.

He may be mad, but “V” has a plan. It begins with the destruction of the Old Bailey, a court building of central London. The following day he hijacks the state television station to broadcast a message to the nation. He delivers a promise: one year from now, he will destroy the Houses of Parliament, and urges the people to join him in the overthrow of the government.

Sutler will not stand for this. He barks at Chief Inspector Finch (Stephen Rea) to find this terrorist by whatever means necessary. Finch belongs to the grand tradition of smart British detective who know how to follow the clues. Remember, this is the country that gave us Sherlock Holmes. The evidence shows him that “V” was the victim of human experiences done in camps reminiscent of Nazi Germany. After his escape from the room number 5 (“V” in Roman numerals) the man vowed to kill all those who experimented on him. But once they are dead, the government must fall too.

That the government did monstrous things, of that there is no question. But as Evey points out, “they created a monster.” It seems a lot of responsibility for one man to decide how a government should fall. Are his methods perfect? Does the rubble not hurt people when he destroys these buildings? His relationship with Evey is also questionable. “V” wishes her to live without fear as he does. Therefore she must suffer as he has suffered and find freedom from within. This is definitely not the same relationship as the one between Superman and Lois Lane.

As a movie, McTeigue’s adaption of the story has fewer subplots than the graphic novel and focuses more on action. Well, the point of a big budget is to make money, and action usually fills the theatres. Still, nowadays it’s rare for an action movie to make you think about ideas such as anarchy, freedom, and the definition of terrorism. On the one hand you have a government who rules all aspect of your life. Then a man comes along and says the solution is chaos. Where would you stand?       

Both the graphic novel and the film have influenced protesters all over the world. I have seen people wear those Guy Fawkes masks at anti-Scientology rallies, but most recently at the Occupy protests. I once heard George Carlin say on “Real Time with Bill Maher” that fascism will not come to the United-States wearing brown and black shirts, but Nike sneakers and smiley shirts. Perhaps that is what all of these Occupiers believe: we are not being ruled by an omnipotent Big Brother figure that resides in a government building, but by the people who control all of the money. I doubt a bunch of people wearing Guy Fawkes costumes will make much of a difference in the way Wall Street is run, but at least it shows people care. I am all for protesting inequality, but just as long as nobody decides to fill a train with explosives to blow up a building. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #70: Stand by Me

Another clear influence on Stranger Things, Rob Reiner’s Stand by Me (1986) portrays American kids from a lost era in which they could go on an adventure away from home. Nowadays if children go missing for more than an hour parents try to locate them using cell phone apps, but in the story written by Stephen King four boys in 1959 Oregon go walking in the woods during a long weekend to look for, of all things, a dead body. Their lives are sometimes at risk, they have no way of communicating with their parents, but they will definitely have a story to remember for the rest of their lives.
For many North Americans adults this movie fondly reminded them of a time in their childhood despite the inherent danger. Not so for me since, first of all, there was no time in my childhood when I could possibly go out of the house for more than three hours without my mom getting in her car to go look for me. The there is the fact that I spent a good chunk of my childhood living in Chile and Peru, an…

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #77: Spartacus

Spartacus (1960) is an interesting movie in Stanley Kubrick's filmography because it doesn’t really feel like a Stanley Kubrick movie. I don’t exactly know why, but his signature style doesn’t seem to be present unlike in classics such as The Shining, A Clockwork Orange, or Dr. Strangelove. It does however feel like one of those big sword-and-sandals epics in which you have British thespians acting as Roman politicians with the occasional big battle sequence. In that respect it is spectacular and features Kirk Douglas at his best as the titular hero.
The story of the rebel slave Spartacus has inspired a bloody and sexy TV series (so far unseen by me, but I hear it’s great) and the story behind how it was made is one of those cases of life imitating art. The Bryan Cranston film Trumbo tells how screenwriter Dalton Trumbo was blacklisted in Hollywood during the 1950s for his communist beliefs and had to rebel against the system by writing screenplays for cheap movies under a fake nam…

Empire Magazine (2008) Greatest Movies List - #79: The Thin Red Line

I once saw an interview in which Christopher Plummer said that what Terrence Malick needs is a writer. He was referring to his experience shooting The New World, which saw his role considerably reduced. The same happened to a much greater extent with Malick’s war movie The Thin Red Line (1998), which saw the screen time of many movie stars reduced to mere minutes amid a 170-minute running time. However you have to hand it to the guy: he knows how to make anything look beautiful, including the carnage of war.
Malick’s movie came out the same year as Saving Private Ryan, so I think that year I had my fill of ultra violent war films and was no too interested in seeing it. Sixteen years later I finally caught up to it on Netflix, but in hindsight the big screen might have been a better option since this is a very visual story. The plot is pretty loose, following one American soldier and sometimes some of his brothers in arms as they make their way through World War II in the Pacific theat…