Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

olePigeon · Mar 18, 2006, 11:18 PM

Awesome!

ambush · Mar 18, 2006, 11:23 PM

didn't like it at all. my expectations were way too high. I guess i wanted something on par with the first the matrix.

funny how it relates to the current political atmosphere. obviously anti-bush-bliar

MaxPower2k3 · Mar 18, 2006, 11:42 PM

I just saw it. I was entertained enough... it wasn't amazing, but it did the job.

goMac · Mar 18, 2006, 11:54 PM

I thought it was awesome, so did the people I watched it with.

olePigeon · Mar 19, 2006, 12:17 AM

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

MaxPower2k3 · Mar 19, 2006, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

yeah, definitely not.

I Bent My Wookiee · Mar 19, 2006, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

Ya, they hate seeing the truth.

Actually, I can see a great number of Americans hating it because it is very bush/911

Totally awesome movie though, I give it 4.5 out of 5 and I don't normally hand out stars like that

itistoday · Mar 19, 2006, 12:58 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

Cool, that comment makes me want to see it more.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

I've already seen some reviews of the movie claiming it promotes terrorism. :rollseyes:

I think it could also be viewed as a commentary on the American Revolution, but the conservatives wouldn't want to see it that way because of the other more modern parallels it draws.

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 01:27 AM

Some of you will make anything political. Must be a lonely world.

PookJP · Mar 19, 2006, 01:32 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Some of you will make anything political. Must be a lonely world.

It's kind of tough to discuss an overtly political movie without relating it to politics.

I enjoyed the movie -- a bit too on the nose for me, but I wholeheartedly approve of its message. Nicely done, well acted, and generally entertaining. 4/5 from me.

King Bob On The Cob · Mar 19, 2006, 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Some of you will make anything political. Must be a lonely world.

Maybe because this movie IS political? (The movie is about a terrorist (Freedom fighter) overthrowing a government.)

Steve · Mar 19, 2006, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

If you're a conservative Republican or fundamentalist Christian, you probably won't like the movie.

That's not what I've seen on my (fundamental Christian) college campus.

I saw it last night, not knowing what to expect, and enjoyed it immensly. Everyone else I've talked to on campus has liked it as well.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Some of you will make anything political. Must be a lonely world.

Ummm... the entire movie is a commentary on government? I think there was... what... one action scene?

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 02:12 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

Ummm... the entire movie is a commentary on government? I think there was... what... one action scene?

Yeah mean gov't gets it's but kicked by freedom fighters. Thats such a new concept! Lets compare all the bad guys to George Bush and Christians!

It's a g'damned movie. Enjoy it and discuss as such.

And yes, I saw it yesterday. No "I bet you didn't even see it <eye roll emote>" for you!

Hi I'm Ben · Mar 19, 2006, 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Yeah mean gov't gets it's but kicked by freedom fighters. Thats such a new concept! Lets compare all the bad guys to George Bush and Christians!

It's a g'damned movie. Enjoy it and discuss as such.

And yes, I saw it yesterday. No "I bet you didn't even see it <eye roll emote>" for you!

you started the argument with your pointless comment don't play it off as if someone else was the troll.

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by Hi I'm Ben

you started the argument with your pointless comment don't play it off as if someone else was the troll.

I started an argument and now I'm trying to make someone else look like a troll?

Ooo Kay.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Yeah mean gov't gets it's but kicked by freedom fighters. Thats such a new concept! Lets compare all the bad guys to George Bush and Christians!

It's a g'damned movie. Enjoy it and discuss as such.

And yes, I saw it yesterday. No "I bet you didn't even see it <eye roll emote>" for you!

Yes. The one butt kicking scene in a 2 hour long movie.

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 02:37 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

Yes. The one butt kicking scene in a 2 hour long movie.

Yeah I was totally saying it was a 2 hour butt kicking movie. That's exactly what I meant.

itai195 · 03:08 AM

I thought it was good. The political discussion got a little simplistic, but had its moments. Frankly I didn't care for the overt references to current events at all, and the ending (though viscerally entertaining) was really weak. These sorts of stories are a lot more powerful when the events are abstracted and the ending a little more, unresolved... or at least a little grittier. But the movie was very entertaining and pretty well done over all and I recommend seeing it.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Yeah I was totally saying it was a 2 hour butt kicking movie. That's exactly what I meant.

There is one butt kicking scene at the end that is five minutes long. The rest of the movie they don't even bother showing anyone dying. Heck, he kills one person by lethal injection while she is sleeping and they don't even show that...

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 02:57 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

There is one butt kicking scene at the end that is five minutes long. The rest of the movie they don't even bother showing anyone dying. Heck, he kills one person by lethal injection while she is sleeping and they don't even show that...

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by greenamp

greenamp · Mar 19, 2006, 03:19 AM

gomac, I saw the movie. When I said, "Yeah mean gov't gets it's but kicked by freedom fighters. Thats such a new concept! Lets compare all the bad guys to George Bush and Christians!," I was making a sarcastic exaggeration.

I'm trying to be nice here but... seriously.

hyteckit · Mar 19, 2006, 03:33 AM

The movie is a politcal commentary. It is suppose to incite political ideas and discussion. If you've seen the movie and don't think it had much to do with politics, you didn't get the movie.

hyteckit · Mar 19, 2006, 03:41 AM

Oh, great movie by the way. More political than I thought. Less action than I hope. Still, I highly recommend it.

Macfreak7 · Mar 19, 2006, 03:58 AM

Very 1984ish, but with a good twist. Totally loved the emphasis on the nature of an "idea" (which is pretty synonymous with revolution in this movie).

Super Mario · Mar 19, 2006, 04:13 AM

Hollywood Politics For Dummies and a steaming pile of terrorist loving crap.

Guy Fawkes was no freedom fighter in the first place. The message should have been violence begats violence and we should blame fear using people in government and population. Shouldn't side with anyone who uses violence and fear no matter what they think they are doing.

ambush · Mar 19, 2006, 07:11 AM

The movie points out that violence is useful to change stuff.

And it's just true, look at history.

Super Mario · Mar 19, 2006, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by ambush

The movie points out that violence is useful to change stuff.

And it's just true, look at history.

What about peaceful non-cooperation?

The most successful revolutionary is

Intelligence doesn't sell enough seats to teens

V For Vended

Weyland-Yutani · Mar 19, 2006, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

Guy Fawkes was no freedom fighter in the first place.

I have not seen the movie, but if it claims Fawkes was a freedom fighter it is wrong. He was a Catholic militant who was working towards the goal of bringing Catholecism back into Britain after Henry VIII's reign.

Saying he was a freedom fighter is absurd as he was not fighting for any freedom. He was a conservative and a man with strong faith. He was fighting for his faith.

cheers

W-Y

Super Mario · Mar 19, 2006, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

I have not seen the movie, but if it claims Fawkes was a freedom fighter it is wrong. He was a Catholic militant who was working towards the goal of bringing Catholecism back into Britain after Henry VIII's reign. (Elizabeth's

)

W-Y

The movie starts with Guy Fawkes and tries to make him look like a hero. In reality he was Catholicism's version of an Islamic terrorist.

ambush · 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

What about peaceful non-cooperation?

The most successful revolutionary is

Intelligence doesn't sell enough seats to teens

V For Vended

Unfortunately, sometimes violence is necessary. Ask your ancestors.

Would you peaceuflly non-cooperate with the SS in Nazi Germany?

pooka · Mar 19, 2006, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by itai195

I thought it was good. The political discussion got a little simplistic, but had its moments. Frankly I didn't care for the overt references to current events at all, and the ending (though viscerally entertaining) was really weak. These sorts of stories are a lot more powerful when the events are abstracted and the ending a little more, unresolved... or at least a little grittier. But the movie was very entertaining and pretty well done over all and I recommend seeing it.

Agreed. I left the theater feeling a little pissed considering what could have been. Damn shame they had to beat the audience over the head with certain references and the ending was just freakin lame.

Pretty solid cast, too. Shame they had to dumb it down.

Weyland-Yutani · Mar 19, 2006, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

The movie starts with Guy Fawkes and tries to make him look like a hero. In reality he was Catholicism's version of an Islamic terrorist.

Henry VIII converted from Catholocism to "the Church of England". Elizabeth was his daughter thus Fawkes was working "towards the goal of bringing Catholecism back into Britain after Henry VIII's reign." as I said.

Regardless, Fawkes was "the only man to ever enter parliament with good intentions". Terrorists attack civilians to create fear among the population. Fawkes and co were going to behead the English executive and legislative branches in one stroke.

He was not a terrorist nor was he a freedom fighter. He was fighting for power, for in that day religion *was* power. If there wasn't some direct support from Spain to attempt what he did, I'll be mildly surprised. Spain was one of the super powers of Europe at the time and the Catholic church her protector. There were direct hostilities between Spain and England and the Vatican wanted England back in the fold.

cheers

W-Y

amsalpemkcus · Mar 19, 2006, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

What about peaceful non-cooperation?

The most successful revolutionary is

http://www.wildewildeweb.com/gandhi/...dhi_smile2.jpg

Intelligence doesn't sell enough seats to teens

V For Vended

Right on!

meelk · Mar 19, 2006, 10:48 AM

Gandhi was a pansy. He is only meaningful to liberal idiots like yourselves, normal people look on him as pathetic. The real world requires action, and violence, and the deaths of others. Its not pretty, but its still true.

ambush · Mar 19, 2006, 11:20 AM

Sad but true ^

davesimondotcom · Mar 19, 2006, 12:20 PM

I'm curious to see V for Vendetta mainly because I like the look of the film.

I have a feeling I'll loathe the political message, though. For some reason, liberals think that this day and age is somehow the end of days.

Maybe because they can't win an election.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

Hollywood Politics For Dummies and a steaming pile of terrorist loving crap.

Guy Fawkes was no freedom fighter in the first place. The message should have been violence begats violence and we should blame fear using people in government and population. Shouldn't side with anyone who uses violence and fear no matter what they think they are doing.

Guy Fawkes was never trying to kill anyone though...

itistoday · 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by meelk

Gandhi was a pansy. He is only meaningful to liberal idiots like yourselves, normal people look on him as pathetic. The real world requires action, and violence, and the deaths of others. Its not pretty, but its still true.

No, the man was just ahead of his time, you've got to start sometime afterall. He managed to win independence from Great Britain without a war--imagine that! Oh, and "liberal idiots"? If there was ever an oxymoron...

itistoday · Mar 19, 2006, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Maybe because they can't win an election.

It has more to do with the fact that there are too many morons in this country.

itai195 · Mar 19, 2006, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

I have not seen the movie, but if it claims Fawkes was a freedom fighter it is wrong. He was a Catholic militant who was working towards the goal of bringing Catholecism back into Britain after Henry VIII's reign.

However, Catholics were severely persecuted in England at that time. One man's terrorist may thus be another's freedom fighter. I agree that the message of the film, relying on the Fawkes story, should have been a lot more ambiguous about the use of violence and when it is justified. But it's meant to be an entertaining action film, so I'd cut it some slack on that one.

Super Mario · Mar 19, 2006, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by meelk

Gandhi was a pansy. He is only meaningful to liberal idiots like yourselves, normal people look on him as pathetic.

???

M. Gandhi was a religious man, a unitarian Hindu with Christian influences, was in favour of prohibition of alcohol and cigarettes and total ban of drugs (opium was a problem in India and China) but opposed to the caste system and borrowed from the West women's rights, democracy etc He wasn't liberal about anything. When he started out he wanted India and South Africa to continue to be part of the British Empire but only give all subjects same rights as people in Great Britain.

Super Mario · Mar 19, 2006, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by itai195

However, Catholics were severely persecuted in England at that time. One man's terrorist may thus be another's freedom fighter.

Wrong wrong wrong. England had the right to break off from corrupt Rome to create a church of their own and keep their money for their country. Catholics were hungry to bring England under Rome's control again so were banned from government. When James came to power he took a united stance and gave Catholics a voice again. Soon the Catholics were found conspiring to grab power again so James said publically he hated Roman Catholicism and banned them from parliament. The Gunpowder Plot was a response to that and an assassination attempt of King James.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

M. Gandhi was a religious man, a unitarian Hindu with Christian influences, was in favour of prohibition of alcohol and cigarettes and total ban of drugs (opium was a problem in India and China) but opposed to the caste system and borrowed from the West women's rights, democracy etc He wasn't liberal about anything. When he started out he wanted India and South Africa to continue to be part of the British Empire but only give all subjects same rights as people in Great Britain.

Sounds like a liberal to me...

itai195 · 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

Soon the Catholics were found conspiring to grab power again so James said publically he hated Roman Catholicism and banned them from parliament. The Gunpowder Plot was a response to that and an assassination attempt of King James.

I don't see the point in arguing this, just that I don't think the movie's take on these events is altogether unreasonable, though as I said I would have preferred that Fawkes was portrayed much more ambiguously. I tend to prefer the view that history is too complex to be conveyed in declarative statements such as 'Fawkes was a terrorist.'

I Bent My Wookiee · Mar 19, 2006, 04:06 PM

I thought it was one of the best political movies to come out of Hollywood ever. It had a greater impact on me than Fahrenheit 9/11

Felt like a combination of 1984, Equilibrium and Demolition man.

davesimondotcom · Mar 19, 2006, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by itistoday

It has more to do with the fact that there are too many morons in this country.

Yep, they don't agree with your beliefs, so they are a moron.

What an enlightened soul you are.

FeLiZeCaT · Mar 19, 2006, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by itai195

I thought it was good. The political discussion got a little simplistic, but had its moments. Frankly I didn't care for the overt references to current events at all, and the ending (though viscerally entertaining) was really weak. These sorts of stories are a lot more powerful when the events are abstracted and the ending a little more, unresolved... or at least a little grittier. But the movie was very entertaining and pretty well done over all and I recommend seeing it.

I agree with this point of view.

The end, although entertaining from the aspect concerning the heroes, lacked some flair. Special effects were like a nice climax, but rather innoffensive. The meaning was clear, but could have been murkier.

Regarding the actor's play, I thought the verbal gargarizations of "V" were quite funny, reminiscing of that French actor in the second movie of the Matrix trilogy. BTW, paralleles abound between "V" and the general ideas of the Matrix. Pretty much the same themes.

Portman was quite competent as an actress, and played a lively part that seemed quite genuine. Hurt seems like he is never really getting much older.

Some clichés were useless (the "V" towards the end), even though impressive, was rather of a cold esthetic and superfluous. Also, the slow motion fall of raindrops when Portman leaves the room to get under the rain; I understand the parallel drawn with the man flesh-burned coming out of the fire, but the effect was unecessary. A close up on Portman's face would have been more effective imho.

Nevertheless, an enjoyable piece of the 7th art.