V for Vendetta: Will its politics hurt its box office?
Filed under: Action, Berlin, Box Office, Politics, Comic/Superhero/Geek
V for Vendetta - produced by Joel Silver and the
Wachowskis; based on a graphic novel by Alan Moore (who has since disowned the film), and starring a bald Natalie
Portman – won't officially premiere until the Berlin Film Festival in February, but ever since its first public
screenings in Austin a couple of weeks ago, the film's been trapped in a bit of a tug of war between the left and right
corners of the web. The fan boy circles are, predictably, all about it, and even the Hollywood Reporter has
come out with a positive review. In contrast, Jason Apuzzo's leading one of the strongest marches against the picture
on Libertas. From what I can tell, neither Apuzzo, nor his commenters, have actually seen the film, but that's not
stopping them from proclaiming it a national tragedy. Partially in response to the Reporter review, Apuzzo
writes: "Those of you who’ve been claiming that this film is just an innocent little adaptation of an
80’s graphic novel series are, um, in for a surprise." His commenters take this opening and run with it. Calling V "a big slap in the face to “Jesusland”", Jim Rockford claims that "What makes this film junk as a film and as storytelling is that it’s explicit pro-Terrorist and anti-American, anti-Bush politics fly in the face of the reality: terrorists really DO want to kill us all; they’ve tried very hard." It will fail commercially, he continues, because "being explicitly opposed to what most of your paying customers hold dear is a good way to lose their business." Michael Hutchinson continues the ideological doomcasting: "Now, the Wachowski Brothers were REALLY lucky that they were able to sell The Matrix with its anti-social message because of its flash and style, but its messages were rather hidden and a huge part of the audience just went for the SFX. Here you have a movie that’s all about its message, even in the trailers. Do you really think this can find an audience?"
Of course, the film's success (or lack thereof) may very well rest on one entirely non-political factor: as Alexander "Bejamins" Hamilton puts it on Left Behinds: "...the problem isn't the directors, it's that Evey Hammond is played by fucking Natalie Portman. Because Natalie Portman can't fucking act."
Thoughts?










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-28-2005 @ 4:42PM
Mike said...
I'm with Alan Moore on this one. This one will most likely suck because like all the other movies based on his work they always do. Hollywood has a talent for taking a hatchet to a good story chopping it up and adding it to the slop they feed the masses.
Reply
12-28-2005 @ 5:00PM
Andrew said...
Natalie Portman sucks, is the problem. Can't act, not attractive. Booo.
Reply
12-28-2005 @ 5:36PM
Sy said...
I like Natailie Portman in Garden State but to see her bald might be too much. I am not sure about the content for the original graphic novel series but a lot of producers in Hollywood always try to write in some of their own messages or political views where none is warranted. It must be bad since the creator of the comic book disowned the movie.
Reply
12-28-2005 @ 6:24PM
Elrond Hobbert said...
Rumor has it the Wachowskis more or less directed this film. Which could be great if it's The Matrix or terrible if it's The Matrix Reloaded. And Alan Moore always disowns film adaptions of his comics because he's a big fat whiner so he's no watermark of quality here.
Reply
12-28-2005 @ 7:41PM
Travon Boykins said...
Well, I was one of those "fanboys" who saw the movie in Austin a few weeks ago. And, yes...it will be brutalize by Fox and their ilk when it comes out. And yes, i does happen to attack the "values" of a "democracy" that is ran by a man who believes in god. But, then again, it was the same way when the book was written in the early 80s with Thatcher was in charge of England.
Having said that, it was a wonderfully done movie. Sure, it wears its leaning on its sleeve (and cape...and mask), but it has a solid story (what else do yoou expect from Moore) and done in a tone akin to the Matrix movies. I think it will be a matter of how the will sell it. I am not expecting blockbuster numbers, but it's not going to die a flashy death either.
Reply
12-28-2005 @ 9:38PM
Scaramanga said...
It's worrisome that these people get upset about fictional calls for government's accountability and return to it's origins - that is, to serve the people who keep it in place - while all around us here in the United States, our ACTUAL, REAL-LIFE government is pulling trick after trick to support enormous corporations (http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/) and do it under the guise of 'morally correct,' unable to keep 'private industry' and 'government' in their appropriately seperate bins - and fueling fear of terrorism as a means to keep the public agape and stymied.
I hope this movie continues to upset people, and although the hysteria will only last a few weeks, it may inspire more people write and create more things like 'Common Sense,' 'Catch-22,' and '1984.'
It's OK to question the government if you don't agree. You're still an American.
Don't lose sight of the prize: "V" is only showing what could happen if you allow government to get to that point.
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 3:22AM
Boazer said...
Natalie is brave, beautiful and smart. I'm sure her husband will be glad that she... errr...
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 3:30AM
Snikers said...
I think this film will be nice...because Natalie Portman is there...also i want to say that Andrew is damn bastard...every stupid monkey dont like Natalie Portman
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 5:17AM
Alexander "Benjamins" Hamilton said...
Thanks for the link, but just to be totally clear: the movie could make a pile of money and I'd still be bummed, because I love the comic and hate Natalie Portman.
Oh, and people who complain about the politics of any film months before it comes out are complete twats. People who think a film's politics will have any effect on its box office whatsoever are probably stupid twats.
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 7:56AM
rather_chilly_Hugh said...
Would be quite nice if North Americans would refrain from referring everything back to them. It seems that this costume-fest will be as pertinent to those in the UK-where it is based-who believe that their country is undergoing many freedom-destroying changes (cf. new law that makes it illegal to hold a demonstration within half a mile of Downing Street without prior knowledge from the police). And i don't mind Natalie Portman, she was ace in Leon and Mars Attacks....
The question may be: would those that find fault in the imagery of V for Vendetta find fault in a contemproray remake of 1984?
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 1:52PM
Mike said...
Alan Moore is an excellent mark of quaility since all the books this films are based on are considered to be of high quaility in their medium. As far disowning the films that is an artistic choice as he has state these stories were written to be comics not movies. As far as the movies sucking that is my opinion not Mr Moore's, who as far as I know hasn't seen any of these films so would have no opinion on their quaility. I don't see what this so called whining has to do with anything since he's not involved in the movie making process by choice and probably wouldn't talk about it all if he wasn't asked. Fan response to these movie has been lukewarm at best simply because they aren't very good. The movie plots are different enough from the original source it is hard to say that the story didn't translate well as it tends to be a totally different story, sometimes with different characters. This is true of most comic book inspired movies. The acting can range from very good to very bad, but usally the problem with this types of film is weak plots.
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 5:00PM
Cars-imir said...
From what I've read, V for Vendetta will be a pretty good movie. The cast is excellent, and at least from my point of view, its political background is nothing bad. I think #9 is right...let's wait until we've seen the movie, before we critize it.
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 6:24PM
Carri said...
V for Vendetta is going to be a VERY thought provoking and I can't wait to see it. The film is not taking the easy route and condemning rebellion or terrorism nor is it glorifying rebellion and terrorism. It's simply saying here are characters who have experienced grave trauma in their lives and have decided to take action. Aren't films supposed to be about exploration and examination of the human existence? How we dream, fantasise, interact? This film is not safe which makes it completely relevant to our world today. If this film's politics hurts its box office then at least ALL involved can be proud of a film that cared more about stimulating debate than box office millions.
NATALIE PORTMAN IS AN AMAZING PERSON MOST OF ALL AND AN AMAZING ACTRESS. I LOVE HER.
Reply
12-29-2005 @ 7:18PM
Philip Shropshire said...
First, I think movies with a political bent--be it Passion of the Christ or the newest Mike Moore movie-can sell. You just have to accept that the Mike Moore audience isn't the same as the Passion audience. From what I've seen of the V for Vendetta film it looks to be outstanding but I must admit that I'm a Mike Moore fan.
Two, I think Alan has some right to complain about how his adaptations have turned out. But I sort of blame him for signing away ownership of his books to begin with! That's not something that the world's smartest writer should be doing. For the life of me, I don't know why Tom Strong, Promethea and Top Ten aren't the newest series by HBO or Showtime. He could get excellent directors like Terry Gilliam, and he must have Frank Miller's phone number somewheres. I think he's right in thinking that a 2 hour visual medium couldn't do his work right. But you give me 14 hours on HBO/Showtime, with Terry Gilliam or the Sin City crew producing, and I'll give you some great great art, period. Alan: Let me be your manager. Just once.
Philip Shropshire
www.threeriversonline.com
PS: If you don't like V for Vendetta, then don't watch it. I'm going to be first in line. I think terrorists are made, not born, in films and in real life, whether it's a fictional future England or Iraq...
Reply
12-30-2005 @ 2:16AM
Sam of Norway said...
Why can't everybody see this film as it realy is? A fantasy picture, with a lot of specialeffects, that's about a country (or a world) who is terrorised by it's government and leaders? A world who is like it could have been if the Nazi's would have sucsess with the last world war, and the countrys would have a leadership, building on the Nazi's way of rouling the world. When that's mentioned, I don't think this film will be "dead" because of some political elements that don't fit into our world's "correct" picture. Today, everybody are always conserned about making "the right stuff", so it wount disturb the world picture, and put governments in a "bad stagelight", but if the production companys are afraid doing this, then maybe something realy is wrong? I think that a movie, IS a movie, and nothing else. A story that are made in a fantastic way to entertain us, and whatever the people who sees it may think of it, are their own business... Besides, you who says that Portman is a terrible actor, no matter who you are, I'm giving it a wild guess that your favorit actor is Brad Pitt or something?! Because you don't have a clue of what bad or good acting is! You must have seen her in StarWars, and then made up your mind of this matter! Her acting scills in SW is not her fault-who of the actors are doing a great performance in SW? Not even Samuel Jakcson are doing a great job there. And why? Because Georg Lucas is TERRIBLE doing dialougs!!! That is his weakest point, and his achillies heel! Dialoug is not his strongest side of producing, or directing... So I'm sorry guys, but Portman IS a great actor, and there is nothing you can do about it :-) And I'm really looking forward to this film hitting Norways' screen's, for a 2hours great entertainment, and not beeing forced to think of it's political aspects, and messages...
Reply
12-30-2005 @ 4:44AM
Zeke Hero said...
So I'd like to say that I've really enjoyed the comments on this site regarding this film/topic and based on that I've felt inspired to add my two cents because if there's one thing I've loved as a graphic novel fan for the last ten years, it's been this book. V for Vendetta was something that I never thought I'd read. The art struck me as washed out and the plot seemed very "been there/done that" from the synopsis. The thing is, there I was, at a used bookstore and there it was, with a beaten up wrap around cover and a 50% off sticker. I've subsequently passed on the book to many people whose taste for literature and comics I hold in high regard and this has included three of my professors in college. They have all said essentially the same thing: This is an important book and the message is, "People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people." yes it's the film's tagline, but it's an easier summary than typing up every comment.
Frankly, yes, the majority of comic book adaptations suck unless done by true fans of the material. Bryan Singer, Sam Raimi, David Goyer, Robert Rodriguez and Guiermo Del Toro all made films based on comics that were fun, bright, and well done and all cared deeply for the respect of the material they drew from. I think the Wachowski's also share this attitude. I liked the Matrix movies for what they were: fun and flashy with some sort of vision (albeit steeped in hubris). I think they'll do this material justice and I think we'll get a great feature. I also think there will be controversy of the anti-1st ammendment variety and I think that too is important.
Please read the book and then see the movie and then come back and trash talk this film. It's important that we don't forget that the internet is a place to talk about similar intrests. Not to pontificate about how much smarter we are about something that we truly know nothing about.
ZH
Reply
12-30-2005 @ 7:31AM
Sam Pay said...
I think we're using the wrong wording here. Surely we can all agree that, if the government is a facistic dictatorship, action against it takes on a different meaning. Regardless of your opinion of the Iraq war, the soldiers involved attacked the architects and supporters of a dicatorial government - no-one would even think of calling them terrorists. V's actions are not completely dissimilar, he's just working alone.
Moreover, V doesn't target people in order to create terror, he targets leaders in order to create anarchy. So he's an anarchist, not a terrorist.
There's going to be a lot of jerking knees over this film, we need to be careful.
Reply
1-04-2006 @ 10:48PM
jenny hilario said...
i am an admirer of the talented Ms. Portman. i think whether we like her or not--we ought to give her due R-E-S-P-E-C-T that she DESERVES. contrary to popular opinion, she CAN act. i'm sorry but i agree with sam of norway (see comment #15) and carri (comment#13) on this one.Hats off to Zeke Hero, too (comment#16).with all due respect to Mr. George Lucas, too, Ms. Portman didn't have much to work on in the SW scripts.even die-hard SW fans i know(especially those who saw the originals in 1977-1980s--my siblings & i included) squirmed about some of the prequel dialogues (not just Natalie's).but i still love Ms. Natalie Portman and will always do. Ms. Portman is an intelligent and beautiful person who takes risks and is passionate about her craft & its power to educate people.she believes in the value of films to inspire, educate--not just entertain.she does not participate in projects she doesn't believe in. probably the greatest positive thing about her being in the film, i believe, is: her numerous fans (ESPECIALLY those who have never heard of "V for Vendetta" or Alan Moore) WILL watch the film and/or get their hands on a copy of the graphic novel and LEARN in the process.there's no way you can do something WITHOUT learning anything new or different.even checking out the official site will be enriching because of the historical background on Guy Fawkes. heck,even Ms. Portman--intellectual creature that she is-- did her assignment and read related literature in her desire to understand better, which IS the wise thing to do for ALL of us.not all of her fans go for JUST her looks--we STUDY up so we can learn and/or UNDERSTAND more/better.she makes us all a little better.Alan Moore may have "disowned" the film, but i'm still going to watch.i know i'm going to love it no matter what.---Ms. Natalie Portman's handmaiden :-D
Reply
1-24-2006 @ 5:43PM
Chris said...
Wow, people can be ignorant. Look at our government today, you think they tell the truth? You guys must be blind. Even in the comic of "V for Vendetta," Alan Moore makes a reference to Ray Bradbury, the author of "Fahrenheit 451" (Although he made a reference to a different novel of his). It's all about anti-government. Maybe people are to ignorant to see how things are now and believe whatever people tell them, but the comic and the movie is all about anti-government. All you people who believe in Nationalism and trying to be the "#1 Country" are too blind to see what's really happening, so open your eyes. Oh yeah, and about "acting skills," you guys think Portman can't act, then you go try and see how you do.
Reply