"V" A Nearly Perfect Adaptation

My thoughts on "V For Vendetta:"

The graphic novel was one of the most powerful and
illuminating efforts of the eighties - in any form.
Though the GN dealt with Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons'
projected future from a Margaret Thatcher government
that was then in power, it dealt with the subject of
oppressive governments and the need for them to not
be tolerated.

The essence [and the vast majority of the key scenes]
of the GN have been translated extremely faithfully
onto the big screen. The changes are minimal, really,
and are mostly in form of updating the story to
reflect the various governments in the democratic
world [not identify, or identify with - just to
reflect].

Most reviewers have commented on the title character's
use of terrorism - but the movie's ideas are a good deal
less straightforward than merely that.

The basic idea being put forward [behind the facade of
a cracking good superhero movie] is that good people
are *required* to not stand by and let oppression take
place. As a sort of derived, splinter idea, the film
makes the point that there is a difference between a
terrorist and a revolutionary - a difference that is
not always apparent at the time.

If all the news you get tells you something, then you
will be more inclined to believe it - or at least
tolerate it. In the England of "V," that tolerance
has, at long last, reached its final moments. Thus,
when "V" begins his course of action, Britons find
that they do not believe that he's a terrorist.

In the case of Evey, who has been a direct victim of
the evil of the government [and has tried to go on
with her life in as low-profile a manner as possible],
we have the case of a good person who has stood by -
despite knowing, first hand, of the government's
evil.

While "V" revolts against the government, however,
he is also pursuing a person vendetta against those
who were responsible for terrible wrongs done to him
in a government research facility - a facility that
turns out to have created a plague that decimated
the population and was blamed on enemies of the state.
This makes him at once a murderer and a revolutionary.

When he frees Evey from her fear, he resorts to the
same tactics that the government would have used to
gain information from her. Now he *has* become a
terrorist - if only in regard to his actions with Evey.

At the same time as Evey is devastated by "V's" actions,
she is also prodded to look again at the corrupt, evil
government - and decide why she made the decisions she
made when she thought she was going to die.

It takes time, but Evey reaches a point where she does,
finally, realize that she can no longer stand by.

All this analytical prose tackles the ideas behind the
film; it shows how the film made me think about the
issues it debated. Which is kind of dry...

What I felt, as "V" played out before me, was a rush!
The action sequences were quite amazing; the effects
definitely precisely what they needed to do [without
ever seeming forced, or gratuitous].

The characters were involving. Stephen Rea played the
detective, Finch, so well that we actually see how
his thoughts and feelings were leading to the changes
his character undergoes as the film progresses.

Natalie Portman's accent may have varied, slightly,
at times, but her emotional portrayal of Evey rang
true at every point. Her terror, as she was being
interrogated; her sympathy for her boss, when she
learned why he feared the government; her moment
of confusion when she realized what "V" was planning
- from fine nuances, to full-blown emotional havoc,
Portman made Evey real.

Hugo Weaving was a surprise - he made a completely
motionless mask a character. The way he used his voice;
the odd little motions he made with his head; the way
he made incredible use of his light - these made "V"
a person, rather than a cypher. And Weaving has a
gift for knowing how to play the camera. In the end,
we understand why he followed his vendetta as much as
we understand why he was revolting against the government.

Even minor characters, like Delia [Sinead Cusack], came
across well. Cusack, in particular, stood out as the
scientist who had seen her work perverted and done
nothing.

As for the representatives of the government, John Hurt's
Sutler was a great villain. His rantings gave "V's" work
more credibility than any other single aspect of the
production.

Tim Piggot-Smith's Cready was the perfect "party member
with a Plan B." His increasingly slow burns, as Sutler
moved further and further into insanity, were a delight
- matching Rea's Finch as his work took him places he
really didn't want to go, but had to.

Protheroe [Roger Allam] was also perfect as the party's
propaganda mouth.

The film's design looked as though it was a series of
tracings from the graphic novel. The tones, the lighting,
the uniforms, "V's" costume, everything was taken, and
faithfully, from the GN. It looked incredible.

The soundtrack was also extremely good - not like some of
John Williams' increasingly paint-by-numbers scores. There
was a lot of subtlety in the use of music - but that didn't
preclude bombast when required.

James McTeigue did a remarkable job for a first-time
director. He elicited fine performances from his cast; kept
the film moving - even when there wasn't an action sequence
in progress, and he understood and embraced the source
material.

If the third act hadn't gotten a wee bit muddled, this
might have been as near a perfect film as I've ever seen.
As it is, I give it a 9.5/10.