V for Vendetta responses
--posted by Tony Garcia on 4/04/2006
Well, it seems some people took issue with Marty's review of V for Vendetta. Sadly, most of the response is in a members only forum called Phantom Gerry. Too bad they did not take up the discussion here. Some examples of their gripes with Marty's review:
I found a rather disturbing article or, should I say review on the movie. Personally I can't see how anyone could NOT like this movie, at least without a good enough reason. And I'm happy to report I have not found one in this review. But anyway here it is, and I hope it gives you as big a laugh as it did me:It should be noted that this person's life experience is a mere 16 years.
http://alwaysrightusuallycorrect.blogspot.com/2006/03/v-for-vendetta.html
MissDay
it did give me a laugh, i signed up and told them i pitied themAnd finally someone begins to say WHY they took issue with Marty.
Angela
Hm. Guess this guy saw a completely different movie than I did. I pity him.I guess this girl (the poster of that was "Carrie") read a completely different review. Some clips from Marty's review:
And you're right. He didn't give any good, any articulated reasons as to why he didn't like it. It would be a lot better if he would have expanded on it instead of his drivel.
The message the film sends about the evils of conservatism (of which I personally am one) is heavy throughout the film. It's an unfair caricature for sure.Sounds like the articulation of poor execution by the director. Marty gave even more than that:
The obvious political message of the movie could be forgiven if it were simply a better film. Natalie Portman's performance is unbearable. It's hard to believe you're in London when the main protagonist can't maintain a British accent. Portman feels almost lifeless in her role. I guess that can be understood when you realize the other protagonist is a guy trying to act through a mask. Hugo Weaving does his best, however it only takes a while to be completed frustrated by the mask. Not only do we never see any facial expression, Weaving's voice is muffled and difficult to listen to behind the mask. Eventually it's simply easier to give up trying to pay attention to the dialogue.
The expectation of these sequences is very high considering the magnificent history the Wachowski brothers (Andy and Larry) have had in special effects and cinematography with their Matrix trilogy. However, all the action sequences (excepting the explosions at the beginning and ending of the film) come off flat and uninteresting. The special effects are lackluster.Carrie, what did you read?
Well, Marty, I think the review was insightful. I'm going to eventually go against your advice and see for myself how bad this thing was (maybe I'll use a free rental with my DVD by mail subscription).
Welcome to the readers of Phantom Gerry. Stick around...and you may learn something here.
1 Comments:
How could have been any less clear? The movie was slow paced and heavy on dialogue, which is bad because the best dialogue was almost impossible to understand between the shifting accents and the mask muffling (mufflation?). The performances were lackluster, the fight scenes were predictable and boring, the cinematagraphy was okay but it didn't make up for the fact that this is a terrible film.
Oh yeah, there were other holes in logic, like: Why would a gay man have a copy of the Koran? Don't Muslims really hate gays? Please, these people on that forum are Kool-aid drinkers, each and every one.
They got a propaganda film which reinforces their worldview, and it's the best thing ever for them. I guess propaganda is popular with the propagandizers. In fact, as propaganda I would give this movie a better review.
As serious film it falls flat. As entertainment it falls flat.
I really would like my 8 bucks back.
Post a Comment
<< Home