V For Vendetta Delayed until March 2006

datemenatalie writes "According to Sci Fi Wire, V for Vendetta, originally slated to open on Nov. 4, has been pushed back to next March. The film stars Natalie Portman and was written by Matrix creators Andy and Larry Wachowski. This delay comes as quite a blow not only to expectant fans, but also to the marketing campaign of the film, as the clever tagline tie-in 'Remember, remember the 5th of November' is decidedly weaker when you attempt to rhyme it with March 17th."

Comments

Beware the ides of March!

[chill]

And just pull it back 2 days for release.

  -Charles

Re:Beware the ides of March!

[linzeal]

Beware the ides of march
And schedule your gynecologist

Re:Beware the ides of March!

[e-duderino]

I didn't know you had a hand in there too?

Re:Beware the ides of March!

[mldkfa]

How about offering a free glass of green beer at every showing? That would get people there.

Re:Beware the ides of March!

[AndroidCat]

Should you get an ides and nodes specialist?

Sign me up!

[DirtyJ]

...stars Natalie Portman...
...comes as quite a blow...to expectant fans

Uh... where can I get tickets?

Re:Sign me up!

[HeLLFiRe1151]

It didn't say fans should expect a blow.

Re:Sign me up!

[Anonymous Coward]

What can be betta
than V For Vendetta
On the 17th of March,
Natalie Portman and Starch

Hot grits on a leg --
don't make slashbots beg
but fanboys will swoon
and yell "there's no spoon"

So you boys gotta wait
and master teh bait
then watch V For Vendetta
So you can shoot your beretta

    -- some Slashbot

Re:Sign me up!

[Anonymous Coward]

uh, she looks really ugly in the clips of this movie I have seen. I guess I don't go for the sinead o'connor look.

Sure, hair is one body part one may pay attention to, but on the other hand... ;-)

Re:Sign me up!

[WilliamSChips]

Ironic that your username is DirtyJ.

Re:Sign me up!

[DirtyJ]

Not so ironic. I've been known to make an off-color joke from time to time... hence the nickname.

Re:Sign me up!

[Seumas]

Dear Hollywood:

Please stop making crappy "literary cinema" out of crappy comic books. Most of us are not twelve years old any more. Please consider going back to making good, original movies instead of ripping off stupid ideas from stupid comic books that nobody outside of some dude's D&D gaming circle in his mom's basement knows about.

Oh wait, you never really did that in the first place. Okay -well, start doing the original thing for the first time at all, then.

Seriously - that Sin City is the best you've got is sad. It didn't suck, but it was little more than average. And you wonder why you're "losing" money this year.

Re:Sign me up!

[qwijibo]

V for Vendetta could make for a good movie, in theory. It may not be Superman, but it's not quite limited to some dude's D&D gaming circle. I've seen it in most bookstores where I've looked. They wouldn't stock it if no one would buy it.

But seriously, Hollywood ran out of new ideas years ago. They remade Flubber. How much more proof do you need that the idea barrel is empty?

Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[HeLLFiRe1151]

My expectations for anything done by them are decidedly weaker anyways.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Decessus]

I liked all three Matrix movies. There was a lot of depth to all of them. I know the second and third one were not as popular, but there was a lot there, it was just a little harder to see.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[sTalking_Goat]

I put that down tot he sequel curse. All the non-sequel movies they've done so far (Bound and The Matrix)have been kickass. Sad news, a 90 ft Natalie Portman with a shaved head would have had me twicthing in my sleep for weeks.

But As long as Serenity isn't delayed again I'm still flying high.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[QuantumG]

People wanna be spoon fed entertainment. The Matrix wasn't like that so they feel the need to criticise it otherwise they have to admit that they are intellectually lazy. It's like the opposite of the emperor's new clothes.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[gowen]

People wanna be spoon fed entertainment

No. I like plots that make sense, dialogue that actually sounds like people talk, and I don't like pointless 30 minute action sequences that fail to advance the already threadbare plot. Oh, and a lead actor who can actually act wouldn't go amiss.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Decessus]

How did the plot not make sense?

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[QuantumG]

Yeah, see, you actually have to think to understand the plotline. An education in religious symbolism will also help your appreciation of the film a lot. Do you know that kids in catholic schools study and write essays about The Matrix? It's just that good.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Humorously_Inept]

I don't think that it was harder to see, I think that it was incoherent psychobabble as opposed to interesting and thought provoking philosophical questions.

The Matrix got it right but the following two tried too hard to get it right and went way over the top and beyond the point of being a nonsensical sampling of way too wide a body of thought. The sequels tried to top the original by using the same old schtick, just in larger quantities. The original had magic and its sequels did not.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Decessus]

Yes, knowing religious symbolism definitely does help. I'll admit that when I first saw the second and third movies I didn't care much for them. It wasn't until a little later that I found a new appreciation for them.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Decessus]

Perhaps. I could be just much easier to please. This is probably on account that I'm just glad someone at least tried to put something a little deeper in the movie they were making. That's more than you can say about a lot of the stuff that gets put out these days.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Coryoth]

I like plots that make sense, dialogue that actually sounds like people talk...

You know, I'm actually quit fond of dialogue that is not at all how people talk - as long ass it's good dialogue. Try watching, say, a film by David Mamet (random example that comes to mind, I'm not endorsing him as the pinnacle of good dialogue). In a lot of his films the things people say are not what a person would ever actually say, but rather the things you wish you'd said 2 days later when you've had tome to think about it. The dialogue isn't realistic, but it is often extrenely sharp and snappy. Heck, try watching a film like Closer (featuring Natalie Portman no less) that's been adapted from a play: people do not talk like that in real life, but damn there's some good sharp dialogue in there.

Jedidiah.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[maxpublic]

try watching a film like Closer

I did, and damn was that painful.

Max

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Dun Malg]

The dialogue isn't realistic, but it is often extrenely sharp and snappy. Heck, try watching a film like Closer (featuring Natalie Portman no less) that's been adapted from a play: people do not talk like that in real life, but damn there's some good sharp dialogue in there.

Ugh. Terrible example. Closer was a horrifyingly pretentious play inexpertly turned into an even worse movie. The dialogue was painfully stilted, the characters totally unsympathetic, and the interactions were frequently completely nonsensical.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[poopdeville]

The second and third were spoon fed entertainment. Jesus Christ, who didn't see Neo as Jesus Christ? The first wasn't particularly deep, but it hinted at interesting and exciting cinema. The Wachowski Siblings squandered two great opportunities to follow up on the first.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop that right now.

The case was dismissed - the woman who claims to have written them didn't prove her case, didn't supply the evidence she and her lawyers had to supply, and the case was thrown out because of this.

It never even went past the initial steps of discovery.

She's not getting any money out of that, apart from the money she'll score from the publicity for her crappy, crappy novel.

Please, just google her name in google news. It ain't hard. In fact, I'll take pity on you and provide a link to Snopes on just this matter.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[mr100percent]

No, I actually understood the gnostic Christian themes in the movie, and the Neo-Messiah connections, and the "life is a simulacrum" theory they laid out. What I didn't like was weak and pretentious way the film ended, the way the characters wound up in the end, and the not-so-subtle crucifixion theme in the third movie. In short, the ending wasn't happy enough for me. I could be more specific, but I don't want a spoiler.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[QuantumG]

A war ended.. that wasn't happy enough for you? I guess it is old hat, people don't dance in the street anymore.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Jim_Callahan]

It made sense, it's just that if you blinked, you would have missed it. (Robots suck, and Neo is the same as he was at the end of the last damn movie. /end Plot) The rest of it was a bunch of pseudophilosophical babble. Not that i'm opposed to long speeches on philosophy in general principle, but i'd prefer it to be nonobvious, non-sophomoric, or at least something I didn't come up with independently before graduating the fifth grade. Also, lone wolf ascendant characters are no longer interesting after they've achieved godhood. Period. No amount of half-assed references to jesus can make them interesting again.

Also, the action sequences were stolen from dragonball, the english translation of which is generally regarded as the least entertaining piece of literature in the entirety of the language. I only comment about this here because I feel that the action sequences were supposed to, in some way, fill in for the nonexistent plot.

Ok, that's my bitching for today, back to being completely apathetic regarding pop culture.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[Jim_Callahan]

What makes good essay writing is obvious symbolism that is like being hit over the head with a bat if you have even a middle-school level education. This is the matrix.

What makes good storytelling is subtle symbolism that you don't notice until later, and then think 'hey, that's kinda neat' instead of 'hey, that's like being hit over the head with a large blunt object'. This is why Star Wars episode 4, 5, and 6 are generally regarded as good storytelling, while 1 and 2 are regarded as almost complete crap and 3 is usually thought of as at best mediocre.

I did not appreciate the bat-beating i got when watching matrix 2 and 3. At least matrix 1 made a passing attempt at subtlety, and you could connect to the characters before NEO IS A SOPHOMORIC ATTEMPT AT A REDEFINITION OF JESUS IN TERMS OF MODERN SOCIETY flashed across the screen in 50-foot tall neon letters.

Also, plotline is a different beast altogether from symbolism and literary reference. The plotline of, for instance, matrix 3 is "a guy is a black trenchcoat gets in a lot of fights with evil robots". The symolism is, apparrently: NEO IS A SOPHOMORIC ATTEMPT AT A REDEFINITION OF JESUS IN TERMS OF MODERN SOCIETY, according to the flashing neon letters.

Finally, I'll also note that catholic schools also have children draw an uninterrupted stream of teddy bears for almost 6 months straight (I spent my first few years in a catholic school). This does not indicate the supreme literary value of the teddy bear (not that the bears don't have a fair amount of literary value, but the fact that a school uses them as a teaching aid does not in any way imply it).

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[BenjyD]

There was just enough story in the Matrix to cover one film. Beyond that, the cracks started to show.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[mdarksbane]

dialogue that actually sounds like people talk

You must loathe shakespeare, then.

And no, people back then *didn't* talk in blank verse. I think a scene in Black Adder said it best.
Beshrew me, my lord! - Only stupid actors say "beshrew me"

For instance, although the Architect and the Oracle's language is nothing like how people actually talk, they're easily the best written characters in the whole movie.

Or to take another example, Obi Wan Kenobi. Again, nothing like real dialogue, SIGNIFICANTLY better. How you wish every old man you met sounded.

While I'll agree that the dialogue in the matrix movies isn't great in general (and Revolutions was the worst - Trinity's final scene was some of the worst writing I've ever had to sit through) the scenes that *are* great (anything with the original oracle, the architect, agent smith's rant in the end of the first one) are great precisely because they are poetry, not real speech.

Re:Remember Matrix 2 and 3

[gowen]

Shakespeare wrote plays in poetry. His dialogue was artificial, but brilliant. Dialogue in the Matrix 2&3 is artifical and godawful. It's not really a valid comparison.

As to Star Wars, the dialogue is largely shit, but no-one (sane) is holding those up as great and meaningful works of philosophy. If they were, I'd take the piss just as much. The initial Star Wars trilogy, like Matrix I, are great escapist entertainment, and can be enjoyed on that level. Shakespeare is great poetry and philosophy, and sometimes entertainment.

Matrix 2&3 are simply none of the above.

Fuzzy-headed Pr0tman

[ackthpt]

Natalie's going to keep the fuzzy look, so she says. Is this any kind of annaversary of Star Trek TMP? Let's mangle memories and metaphors.

It was the third of september That day I'll always remember, yes I will 'cause that was the day that my daddy died... whoops, wrong lyric!"

Historical signifcance

[Coryoth]

March 17th also has a little less historical significance for vigilantes trying to overthrow the British government than, say, November 5th.

Jedidiah.

Re:Historical signifcance

[riffzifnab]

"1845 - The rubber band is invented"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_17

YES!

Re:Historical signifcance

[The Dodger]

March 17th is St Patrick's Day. :-)

Re:Historical signifcance

[richdun]

...and it is my birthday, so quite frankly I think it has plenty of historical significance. Now all I need is a temporal theorist to explain why that is true (you know, the whole spiel about how even seemingly minor events on a universal scale can have huge consequences if they turned out differently).

New Tag Line

[Earl The Squirrel]

How about:

    Watch, Watch the 17th of March.

Re:New Tag Line

[CGP314]

Watch, Watch the 17th of March.

Only Jean Luc Picard could pull that off.


-Colin

Re:New Tag Line

[Eightyford]

You must be from Boston!

Re:New Tag Line

[Frumious Wombat]

I would have said Colorado, since that's where you go to get your Truck Warshed.

"Warch, Warch, the 17th of March, good buddy"

Bah!

[mangledspine]

Colour me V for vexed!

The 4th?

[corrie]

Why would anyone remember the 5th of November if it would've opened on the 4th?

Re:The 4th?

[Old Wolf]

The evening of the 4th in the USA is the morning of the 5th in Britain.

Clever Tagline

[gowen]

It's not just a tagline. It's a bit of terrorism related doggerel known to every British schoolkid.

Remember remember the 5th of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot
I see no reason
Why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.

The V comic book was great -- this film will suck because the Wachowskis are hacks, living it large off one good film (albeit one with an obvious and portentious, pretentious dialofue carried by its special effects).

Re:Clever Tagline

[FatRatBastard]

Actually, Bound was a good flick too (although I'm sure they didn't get very rich off of that film).

Re:Clever Tagline

[CardiganKiller]

Agreed. The Matrix movies worked out because of the ridiculous amount of "creative" options in the general concept of the Matrix. X = "Vampires", "Ghosties with Dreadlocks", "A Little Asian Guy Who Makes Keys" WB1: "Lets put some X in the movie." WB2: "How?" WB1: "Because the machines made X so X could do Y." or X = "Flying", "Stopping Bullets", "Being A Little Spacey" WB1: "Let's let Neo have X ability" WB2: "Why?" WB1: "Because then we can create mini-plot Y around ability X". Basically each movie has some entirely new set of concepts to wow the pants off of you so that they don't have to worry so much about the intracacies of the previous movies. I loved the movies, and I love cheap thrills, and concepts that wow the pants off of me, and the newest FPS [graphics/physics/AI] w/o improved gameplay. I am 22, and a little ADD. If the V comic book contains any intertwined complexities that aren't just based off of circumstance, then I worry that the WBs won't even be able to follow the comic book completely and just wow the pants off of me again. Of course movies generally turn out this way anyways. The Dune books are ridiculous for what I expect and can handle out of entertainment. I think they're the best things since sliced bread but I'll be damned at how many times I have to go back and work out my fact checking, and fact checking within fact checking within fact checking (plots within plots within plots ;)).

Re:Clever Tagline

[Decessus]

Yes, and there are also people who still believe we didn't land on the moon and that the world is flat.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Tackhead]

> Remember remember the 5th of November
> Gunpowder, treason and plot
> I see no reason
> Why gunpowder treason
> Should ever be forgot.

Remember, Remember, the Fifth of November,
Natalie's turned into rock.
That's all the reason,
in Slashdotting season,
to cover in grits that are hot!

/I am so sorry...

Re:Clever Tagline

[Blakey Rat]

I re-watched Dark City the other day and I realized that the plot and style of Dark City is a *lot* like The Matrix... only about 10 times better in every way.

If you enjoyed the Matrix, you owe it to yourself to go see Dark City as soon as you can. It's from the director of The Crow.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Formica]

If you liked Dark City, you might like Metropolis, where many of those ideas came from. A review.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Princeofcups]

> The V comic book was great -- this film will suck because the Wachowskis are hacks, living it large off one good film (albeit one
> with an obvious and portentious, pretentious dialofue carried by its special effects).

I don't remember many special effects in Bound? It is definately their best film. Jennifer Tilly, Gina Gershon, yumm.

jfs

Re:Clever Tagline

[pete-classic]

I don't know if it was 10 times better in every way, but it certainly had infinitely more Richard O'Brien in it.

(I was listening to the RHPS soundtrack when I saw your post. Couldn't resist!)

-Peter

Re:Clever Tagline

[Blakey Rat]

I know, that's one of my favorite movies. I have the really good Kino Video version on DVD. However, both Matrix and Dark City have the "reality isn't real" angle that Metropolis lacks... that's why I didn't mention Metropolis.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Formica]

Good point, but I don't get too many chances to plug Metropolis, so I had to do it!

Re:Clever Tagline

[comicnerd]

...this film will suck because the Wachowskis are hacks, living it large off one good film (albeit one with an obvious and portentious, pretentious dialofue carried by its special effects).

Maybe not. The Wachowskis are big comic book fans. In the introduction to their own comic book Doc Frankenstein they wrote:

"Comics, more than film, give us an appreciation for the different ways that words and pictures can be used to tell a story... The comic book is superior to film in our opinion because of the excessive compromises that must be made every single day on a film set."

May not change your mind about them or their movies, but I liked what they had to say.

Re:Clever Tagline

[bigbigbison]

I have to say, I find Dark City to be quite silly and altogether lame. Besides the fact that both have somilar clothes and start with the fact that things aren't as they seem, they don't have much at all in common. While the sequels weren't very good, give me the Matrix over Dark City any day.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Lord Raze]

The V comic book was great -- this film will suck because the Wachowskis are hacks, living it large off one good film (albeit one with an obvious and portentious, pretentious dialofue carried by its special effects).

How was "Bound" carried by it's special effects?

Re:Clever Tagline

[poopdeville]

It wasn't. It was carried by its lesbianism.

Re:Clever Tagline

[1u3hr]

I have to say, I find Dark City to be quite silly and altogether lame. Besides the fact that both have somilar clothes and start with the fact that things aren't as they seem, they don't have much at all in common.

Another thing they have in common, Matrix was shot on a lot of the same sets, in Sydney.

Re:Clever Tagline

[slothman32]

I always like how they have different names in that. Robot or android aren't used.
It would be interesting, well not for anybody who likes the original, to see a remake. It would probably just have much effects though, similar to The Matrix.
I did have an odd dream about that movie once. It sounds like it could be from the various movies mentioned in this story.

Re:Clever Tagline

[jesterzog]

I coincidentally watched Dark City on video a couple of weeks before The Matrix was released. I don't remember either of them very well any more, but I do remember thinking, as I was watching it, that the Matrix seemed like a rip-off of Dark City in many ways. It was probably just coincidence in hindsight.

Of course, as others have also pointed out, Dark City itself was preceeded by Metropolis.

Re:Clever Tagline

[fredrik70]

actually, matrix reused some of the sets from Dark City, see here (scroll down to Cinematics). so there's a reason parts of the film liiks the same, just check out that staircase were Neo sees the deja vu!

Re:Clever Tagline

[Jim_Callahan]

I'm a fan of Equilibrium, personally. It's about like the Matrix, but the heavy hand with the symbolism bat comes across as funny instead of painfully pretentious, somehow. Also, it had 'gun kata' which reduced me to helpless laughter for over 1/3 of the movie. I had to keep pausing and rewinding so i wouldn't miss parts.

Re:Clever Tagline

[jhage]

I don't remember any special effects in 'Bound'.

Oh, you mean 'The Matrix'.... Right, never mind.

Re:Clever Tagline

[Maltheus]

The similarites probably aren't coincidental. I believe, in the commentary voice over during the closing credits, it's mentioned that the producer Joel Silver (maybe, could have been someone else) wasn't there to finish up things on Dark City because he left to film "some film called Matrix or something." They both have different feels though and I think the first Matrix movie is better than Dark City, even if the sequels were almost unwatchable.

Dark City is excellent though, but I recommend new viewers fast forward to the part where you actually see Keifer Sutherland on screen. The voice-over in the beginning is unnecessary and ruins much of the movie in my mind.

Re:Clever Tagline

[mink]

I thought the 13th floor was a good film along the same lines as this discussion.

V is for Vuh-yeah-right.

[CGP314]

The spokesperson, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, denied that the delay had anything to do with the movie's subject matter or the current political climate.

I'm not buying it that a movie about terrorism in London just happens to get delayed at this time.

-Colin

Re:V is for Vuh-yeah-right.

[gowen]

Usually "to accomodate post production" means "while we try and fix the uncomprehensible mess the director has shown us." Given the provenance, that's far more likely (have you tried to watch Matrix Revolutions without laughing?)

Re:V is for Vuh-yeah-right.

[big whiffer]

its like the spokesperson only though he was partially anonymous. why else would he deny the reasons for the delay yet give us other truthful information...?

Re:V is for Vuh-yeah-right.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not buying it that a movie about terrorism in London just happens to get delayed at this time.

.
Incidentally, here's what producer Joel Silver had to say about it at the San Diego Comic-Con:

Question 13: In the post 9/11 sort of climate, where Britain and America seem to be getting closer and closer to the world of this movie, what made you decide to make it now, and how do you think it's going be received?

Joel Silver: I think it's a really great time for this movie. I mean, it's a controversial film, and we're in a controversial time. There're some really bold and impressive ideas in the original story, which was written in the late 80s, and it's the perfect place for us to show the film now. What happened is that when the boys finished the Matrix movies, they were kind of burnt out, but they had written a script for me for this before they made the Matrix movies. They said that they were very happy with working with James McTeigue, who had been our first assistant director on the Matrix films, and they wanted James to have a shot to direct a picture. They said, "We were thinking about going back, rewriting V -- we'll produce it with you," which I was happy to have them do, "And we'd like James to direct it." And they said, "We think the time is right for it." So that's why we're doing it, and I think it's going to impress a lot of people and make a lot of people think, which I think is important for movies like this today."

.
And here's the original comic's artist, David Lloyd's thoughts on the subject:

"Question 16: David Lloyd, as a creator of the original story, and the rest of you making it, what are your feelings about the London bombing, and also present-day London with video cameras all over the place... which is kind of how the story of V FOR VENDETTA was.

David Lloyd: Yeah, that's very interesting about the CCTV cameras, because when we did that in the '80s, there weren't that many around. I mean, society has actually become a lot more like the one that we actually painted. The question about London and terrorism, and what's happened there -- I think it's important that we try and understand terrorists. I think there should be lots of movies made about terrorists, and politics generally, and one of the reasons I'm so happy about this film is that it does have a very strong and uncompromising political message, and there aren't many films made like that now. So, in terms of what's happening in London over the last week, I think it's going to be healthy to try and understand what leads a person to terrorism. There's that old cliché, isn't there - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and if we try and understand that, then maybe we might be able to solve the problems that cause terrorism more easily."

Re:V is for Vuh-yeah-right.

[GozzoMan]

There's that old cliché, isn't there - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - and if we try and understand that, then maybe we might be able to solve the problems that cause terrorism more easily.

While I completely agree to Lloyd's point, I wouldn't call the quote a "cliché": it's from Ronald Reagan, about the founding of groups such as the mujahideen in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, and Jonas Savimbi's rebel forces in Angola.

New Tagline

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hey all you /.'s, hot grits have starch, come and see Natalie this 17th of March!"

Re:New Tagline

[sacrilicious]

You ain't never seen th'
likes of March 17th

Hmmmm

[TJ_Phazerhacki]

Wonder if this has anything to do with assumed emotional stress concerning the films bombings?

Although - If they are doing this to maintain the integrity of the film, so as to not remove any of those scenes - more power to them.

Re:Hmmmm

[kae_verens]

Wonder if this has anything to do with assumed emotional stress concerning the films bombings?
Although - If they are doing this to maintain the integrity of the film, so as to not remove any of those scenes - more power to them.

whoops... I wonder if it's the fact that I'm Irish, but I misread that as "more powder to them"

Re:Hmmmm

[Jim_Callahan]

Not likely. Has britain ever actually managed a month without the IRA blowing something up in a large city? The movie would be delayed forever.

No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[WIAKywbfatw]

The lead character in V for Vendetta, V, is basically Guy Fawkes, albeit in a contemporary dystopian setting. Now, you may not know it, but Guy Fawkes was one of the conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot to blow up Parliament, on November 5th, 1605.

So, a November 5th release is very appropriate for V for Vendetta, especially as this year is the 400th anniversary of the plot. Releasing the film in March 2006 doesn't have quite the same marketing effect or poignancy.

I've commented on V for Vendetta in its original comic book form on Slashdot many times. I won't bother to drudge up what I've written elsewhere but I will summarise it all here: V for Vendetta is one of if not the greatest comic ever written, and there is no way that any film adaptation will ever do it justice.

My advice to anyone who will go to watch the film is read the original first and let that blow you away before you watch whatever butchery the story has to undergo to suit the media of film and the tastes of Hollywood execs.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Txiasaeia]

"V for Vendetta is one of if not the greatest comic ever written, and there is no way that any film adaptation will ever do it justice."

I would have said the same thing about Sin City two years ago, and I would have been dead wrong.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[\\]

Frank Miller was 100% involved with the Sin City movie.

Alan Moore has nothing to do with the V for Vendetta movie (his choice), Fate has been changed to be a shock jock, Evey isn't going to be caught selling herself to start the film, in the film there are a great many people dressed like V all being unhappy with the government together (which is always funny, anarchists being anarchists together). The list of ridiculous changes from the comic to the movie is somewhat long.

If you have any love for the comic, you'll be most displeased with the movie.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Logan Smith]

Agreed; I was going to say the same. I wouldn't call this "quite a blow... to expectant fans," considering the movie would never do it justice regardless of when it was released; at least, not as the movie plot stands now, with much of its underlying concept stripped out to avoid the idea that the story may be encouraging terrorism.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Look at how V for Vendetta is set out. Look at the chapter styling, the poetry, etc. How do you translate those elements to film without losing 90 percent of your audience?

The answer is you can't do it, so you don't even try to do it, and, consequently, much of the depth of the story is lost. V for Vendetta is perhaps the least superficial comic that you could ever hope to come across, yet film is perhaps our most superficial medium. It is inevitable that much of what makes V for Vendetta such an outstanding piece of work will be lost in translation.

I'd even go as far as to suggest that certain parts of the story that involve action rather than worlds will be diluted to suit modern sensibilities. Hollywood's primary audience is and always will be US filmgoers, and it's hard to imagine that some aspects of the story (I won't elaborate further, as I wouldn't want to spoil anything for someone who hasn't read it yet) wouldn't be watered down or eliminated totally to fall more in-line with what is and isn't taboo in a society that still hasn't gotten over a 1 second flash of one of Janet Jackson's nipples more than 18 months ago.

Suffice to say that, somewhere along the line, Alan Moore's beautiful nightmare will be so heavily diluted and edited that it will lose much of its raw power.

Where you see a potential Sin City, I see a potential (and probable) Judge Dredd: ie, a Hollywood mockery of the original source material.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[rodgerd]

If you think Sin City is one of the greatest comic books ever written, pass me a pipe of whatever you have.

And the movie, while very good, is also flawed. In some cases, those flaws are a result of the slavish translation from comic to film.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[ryanov]

Hey, c'mon -- this might be the first blow many potential fans have ever seen. Don't take that away from them. ;)

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[pete6677]

I shudder to think of what the Wachowskis' egos will do to this movie. Ever since Matrix Reloaded I can't stomach the thought of seeing any more of their creations. I wonder how many sequels they are planning.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Logan Smith]

Aww, I don't want to be a spoilsport. ^^ I'll say no more!

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[andyt]

Alan Moore has nothing to do with the V for Vendetta movie (his choice)

Which, lets face it, is perfectly understandable after the horrible horrible jobs done on his previous works of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and From Hell.

I think he's pretty much given up on Hollywood now.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[pthisis]

yet film is perhaps our most superficial medium

If you can say this with a straight face then your movie criticism is fairly worthless, IMO. The medium of film is no more superficial than the play, and substantially more complex than radio, photograph, etc. It's true that some real stinkers have been made, but you can walk into the local bookstore and see whole aisles full of superficial, boilerplate romance novels, mysteries, and self-improvement guides.

Films like High and Low, the Last Flight, Requiem for a Dream, and so on have serious depth to them.

I'd certainly put dozens of media ahead of film as far as shallowness (perhaps starting with the billboard and the pamphlet--both of which _can_ have some depth but on average rarely do).

Hell, the sculpture is generally pretty damned shallow; for every Hand of God or Unfinished Slaves, there are hundreds of generic classical-styled garden decorations and huge crappy abstract installation pieces outside of corporate headquarters. Idem painting with all the pseudo-impressionist doctor's lobby pap, cute puppies/kids, etc.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Txiasaeia]

My list of greatest comic books ever written include (in no particular order):

-Moore's The Dark Knight Returns and The Watchmen (and of course V)
-Ellis' Transmetropolitan (and perhaps Preacher by the same writer, though I'd like to see *that* put to film)
-Spiegelman's Maus
-Sin City

Now, I don't know whether you prefer "classic" comic books, but I consider the above comics/series to be the best the industry's offered in the past couple of decades. You got any better ones?

As for the film being flawed: it's a conversion, so it's not going to be perfect, but it's the closest conversion of a comic to film that I've ever seen, not just in terms of story but style.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Sarcastic Assassin]

Honestly I can't comment on the depth V for Vendetta goes into with the "chapter styling, poetry, etc." However, film is certainly not our most superficial medium. Sure, many people watch films purely for entertainment, and no other real (analytical) value, but just because the majority of the film industry's money is made from those people does not mean that film is "our most superficial medium."

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Fuzzle]

That's always been his stance. He takes the cash, absolves himself of it, makes sure they don't tie his name into the marketing, and let's them wander about. However now he's giving all portions of his proceeds to the artists involved in the projects.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[alfedenzo]

Preacher's actually by Garth Ennis, not Warren Ellis.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[dbhankins]

"The Dark Knight Returns" is Miller, not Moore.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Captain Splendid]

You're all completely missing the point! Screw Alan Moore, I want to see Jason Flemyng get a role in this movie, so we can get the Jason Flemyng/shitty Alan Moore film adaptations trifecta!

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[BewireNomali]

Hollywood's primary audience is and always will be US filmgoers,

This is quickly changing. In fact, a good number of films are being designed for moderate American box office success with an aim to get in the black overseas. Put any Tom Cruise film in this category; he's a huge international star, eclipsing his fame domestically. Films like Collateral and American Samurai are examples of how the industry is acknowledging the sheer mass of the international market and catering accordingly.

That said, I agree with you. For the most part, comic book adaptations suffer greatly because the things that make great graphic novels often translate poorly onscreen. It's two critical things, I think: pacing and imagination. Hollywood doesn't want to lose its core audience. They'd rather seem a little behind the curve than ahead of it; this affirms the supposed intelligence of the audience, so dumbing down is a must as far as they're concerned. The second is imagination: film robs the viewer of the opportunity to imagine the unfolding of events, or for a different take on the turn of events. Unless someone totally nails it (Robert Rodriguez nailed Sin City visually) it becomes something people are dissatisfied with.

The problem is that you have smart people bringing smart projects to executives who understand how to sell dumb movies. Nine times out of ten, those executives have final cut, and are beholden to big-money investors who expect significant returns.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[KillerDeathRobot]

No, it still is, because he's not talking about that kind of anarchist. He's talking about the kind that link is trying to say isn't real anarchism, even though it has many adherents (or pseudo-adherents).

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Moofie]

Frank and Alan Moore wrote the comic books, Larry and Andy Wachowski did the movie. What more could you possibly want?

(it's a joke, people.)

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[mbourgon]

My advice to anyone who will go to watch the film is read the original first and let that blow you away

And my advice is to ignore that advice - see the movie first. Think it's cool. Enjoy, etc, etc. Then read the comic book. If it's truly all that, then you'll be blown away again. Do it the parent's way, and you'll probably be disappointed with the movie.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[WIAKywbfatw]

In the words of Andy Dufresne, how can you be so obtuse?

You misunderstand the point that I was trying to make, and deliberately so, it seems.

Of all the entertainment media commonly associated with storytelling, film is probably the most superficial, with the possible exception of pop music (if you want to classify that as a storytelling medium too).

A picture might tell a thousand words, but a film director only has so many such pictures that he can put in the can during a typical film. 24 pictures a second, for two hours or so (two hours being a rough approximation of the length of a typical film nowadays) still leaves a director playing catch up to the novelist who is as free as he likes to be as verbose as he likes about every detail in every scene.

A character might pause for a second or two on screen before committing an act yet that pause can easily be strung out for pages and pages by even a half-decent author who can use it to describe everything from the character's immediate state of body and mind to his motivations, hopes, dreams and aspirations. An author has every luxury to wax lyrical, a director typically does not, hence my comment about superficiality.

Take a complex scene from any movie and try to express it in words. Now add ton and expand on that written description. With the written word, that's easily done, right? Now take a complex scene from any book and try to cram everything that a writer's telling you onto the screen. Sure, you might be able to express what a character's thoughts and actions whilst keeping the action on screen at a reasonable pace but could you do that for, say, four characters without losing anything and without being reduced to a crawl? Or would you have to leave some things to the viewers' imaginations?

And, of course, you can flip back a page or two in a book and re-read it, but you can't do that with a movie being played to a packed theatre. Whereas an author can be excused losing his readers from time to time (because they can go back a few lines and find their way again) a movie director cannot (whatever message needs to be conveyed has to be conveyed in a clear, unambiguous fashion). That's not to say that a book can freely wander meaninglessly about it's subject matter without causing concern or that a film has no room for subtlety, because that's not true in either case, only that time and the opportunity for retrospection are usually on an author's side but rarely on a director's one.

Of course, having said all that (and, believe me, it's far more than I wanted to say), there are some films with more depth to them than some books. My point was a generalisation of the media, not a specific critique comparing novel x to movie y and then a wild extrapolation from that to suit my own conclusions.

Coming back to some of your other points, I'm sorry, but I don't consider billboards and pamphlets to be entertainment media capable of story telling, so what relevance do they have in this discussion, even in its broadest sense?

If you recall, the fraction of a sentence that you decided to pick up on and pick apart was concerned with the translation of the story from comic book to film: trying to pull advertising hoardings into the debate is tangential at best.

Clearly you took umbrage at my use of the word superficial. Well, by superficial I didn't mean trivial or insignificant, I meant, more often than not, barely touching the surface. I think I've illustrated how films often barely touch the surface in comparison to books, haven't I?

I stand by what I wrote but I'll expand on it to eliminate some of the pedentry. Film isperhaps our most superficial entertainment medium for storytelling.

Now, of course, this is where the people who ignored my recognition that this was a generalisation will choose to step in to point out the error of my ways. And that, my friends, is your cue...

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[WIAKywbfatw]

So you'd rather learn about the paintings of Leonardo da Vinci by first viewing sketchings of them made by an art student and then using your appreciation of that student's efforts, no matter how good or bad, to decide whether or not da Vinci's works are actually worth seeing? Gotcha.

Sorry, but that really is ridiculous. However good or bad this movie turns out to be, the original comic book will always be a masterpiece. Appreciating the original artist's vision and then judging the interpretations of others is the logical way of doing things.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[pthisis]

A character might pause for a second or two on screen before committing an act yet that pause can easily be strung out for pages and pages by even a half-decent author who can use it to describe everything from the character's immediate state of body and mind to his motivations, hopes, dreams and aspirations

Of course, you're assuming that an actor cannot convey a huge range of emotion in a brief pause, and that directors never use lingering shots, pans, etc. And that vocal inflection, facial expression, etc do not convey huge subtleties.

Hell, forget film: take V for Vendetta and write it as a novel without graphic art. It's a different experience, and it's not necessarily a less superficial one no matter how many words you use to describe the visuals, or how many deep emotional asides you insert.

And, of course, you can flip back a page or two in a book and re-read it, but you can't do that with a movie being played to a packed theatre. Whereas an author can be excused losing his readers from time to time (because they can go back a few lines and find their way again) a movie director cannot (whatever message needs to be conveyed has to be conveyed in a clear, unambiguous fashion)

Of course, timing is a key advantage of film (or live storytelling) over the written word. A pregnant pause or machine-gun monologue can mean a lot. Suspense can be built more easily, or pacing can be tied to emotion.

Take a complex scene from any movie and try to express it in words. Now add ton and expand on that written description. With the written word, that's easily done, right?

Sure. And it will _still_ lack much of the subtle artistry of the original. I mean, yes, obviously, the written word is going to be better at expressing something in words. That's pure tautology, though--words miss meaning. Often. Have you never seen a well-staged play after reading the script? Performances matter. Sets matter. Visuals matter. And they don't merely matter for flashy MTV quick-edit visual reasons, either; they often convey subtleties that are nearly impossible to put into words.

But even leaving that aside, suppose we cede that the written word is somehow deeper than film, at least in novel format. That's _one_ medium, certainly the longest by word of any common one (epic poetry is all but extinct), and if you're going to equate verbosity with depth then it's clearly your runaway winner.

So how is film more superficial than a play? Or television? Or radio?

The typical script is longer (more words) than a short story or a typical poem.

Hell, how is it more superficial than a comic book? A typical film has more words and more imagery, and if they're used intelligently there's a lot more opportunity for complexity in those images.

Hollywood may make a lot of crappy films, but last time I was in the local newstand there sure were a lot of Archie comics in there too.

The film medium is not the problem. Comparing Watchmen, V is for Vendetta, and Sandman to Pearl Harbor, XXX 2, and Deuce Bigalow isn't any more reasonable than comparing Amethyst and Archie to Brazil and Full Metal Jacket.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[DreamingReal]

Since you got several of the creator's wrong, you'll forgive me if I take your opinions with a grain of salt. And while those are good titles, if you think those (with the exception of "Maus") are the best offerings of the medium in the last two decades, your knowledge of comics is pretty shallow. Check out Craig Thompson's "Blankets", Chris Ware's "Jimmy Corrigan", Daniel Clowes' "Eightball" serials, Jason Lute's "Jar of Fools", Seth's "It's A Good Life, If You Don't Weaken", or anything done by the late, great Will Eisner for examples of transcendent comics.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[maxpublic]

"While Ms. Stewart was shopping her manuscript around, she also sent it to the Wachowski brothers in response to an ad looking for a science fiction manuscript to create a comic book.

During the FBI investigation, it was discovered that, in an effort to avoid liability, 30 minutes or more was edited from the original Matrix film. Further witnesses employed at Warner Brothers came forward claiming that the executives and lawyers had full knowledge that the work in question did not belong to the Wachowski brothers as they claimed.

The witnesses also added that the original work of Ms. Stewart had been seen, and often used during preparation of the motion pictures. During a Sept. 27 court proceeding, United States District Judge Margaret Morrow ruled against several motions made by the defendants in their attempt to get the suits against them dismissed."

The FBI report said that "there was no doubt" that the Wachowskis stole the idea nearly verbatim from Ms. Martin. Are you going to tell me that the FBI is lying about their conclusions?

Max

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[advocate_one]

I think he's pretty much given up on Hollywood now.

funny that... he takes their money though and lets them butcher his work... If he really cared, he would refuse to sell the rights.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[AndersOSU]

I don't think that it's a matter of more or less superficial, I think most mediums have the potential to deeply detail any given moment in their own way.

The problem is in adaptations, often times the depth associated with a particular moment is there because of the original medium, and it is often impossible to translate this to any different medium.

A good director can add complexity where there was none in the book, and can even improve on the original story. IMHO this is why the best adaptations tend to be from mediocre books (Jurassic Park). The director has the ability to expound on the story the author laid the framework for.

I would even go so far as to say that it is impossible for a director to improve on an excellent book, although a good or mediocre movie may still appeal to the American audience more than the original material (LotR).

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[markov_chain]

De gustibus non est disputandum.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[markov_chain]

I agree. A book and a movie based on it are like a polynomial, with the difference that the movie is a little underspecified. Therefore, I find that reading the book first helps with the movie, since the extra data points let make sense of it better. Case in point: LOTR; I would've been totally fucking lost if I hadn't read the paper version first.

Butchering the analogy further, if the polynomials turn out unequal, the degree of inequality shows how far the adaptation strayed from the book.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Rude-Boy]

As others have pointed out, he doesn't actually have the rights to the work, DC does.

He still has to get paid when people use it, but he doesn't have control of how it gets used.

Sounds insane to me too.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[GozzoMan]

Moore has been so disappointed by the adaptation of TLOEG and FH that he refused to accept any money for any other film adaptations of his work.

No control (by "contract" or whatever) and no money (by choice).

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[jabber01]

Now, you may not know it, but Guy Fawkes was one of the conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot to blow up Parliament, on November 5th, 1605.

So, what you're saying is that the significance of an 11/5 release will be entirely lost on all the non-British.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[renderhead]

At first I read that as "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen From Hell", which sounds like quite the summer blockbuster to me.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[mbourgon]

Who said anything about letting the "sketches" influence your choice of seeing? My point is that if the comic book is as good as you say, there's pretty much no point in seeing the movie - you'll be disappointed. Why set yourself up for that? See the movie? Okay, it's good. Cool. Then you'll enjoy the comic book. Say it's bad. Still, cool. You'll read the comic book and that'll be good.

Then again, after seeing LXG, I went and bought The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen graphic novel - and was utterly disappointed. While the story was cool, IMHO the art style was awful. Same with the pr0n that he did, the one with Alice in Wonderland and the two others. Interesting premise, but the art. Ugh!

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[Txiasaeia]

You'll forgive me for laughing when your comment is basically "My opinions are better than yours." I'm glad that you have such a high opinion of yourself, but my opinions are mine, and quite frankly I could care less whether you agree with them or not.

Re:No, that's not how it works - here's why...

[wwphx]

I almost sprayed Mountain Dew all over my monitor (no, I don't drink it regularly, it just struck me that it might go well with the pizza that I had for lunch, I was somewhat mistaken.)

It's not often that a post can produce a spit take on me.

Many moons ago, I took a class in Pascal. Our final project was to write a program that the instructor found interesting and challenging, and he had to approve it. I wrote a fairly simple program that took a file of a couple hundred movie titles, and if the first word of one matched the last word of another, it displayed the results.

My favorite was and still is "Blood Beach Blanket Bingo."

insulting my intelligence

[SuperBanana]

"We have moved the release date of V For Vendetta to March 17, 2006, to accommodate the movie's post-production schedule."

Bullshit. Post-production is "scheduled" to the day. It has to be. You don't suddenly go "whups, let's take another 4 or more months".

The spokesperson, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, denied that the delay had anything to do with the movie's subject matter or the current political climate.

Are we really as stupid as we look? What the fuck is with an "anonymous spokesperson"? If you can't quote them, don't print the story. Oh wait, it's not a story, it's a clever press release.

V for Vendetta has come under scrutiny for the coincidence of its subject matter and the recent terrorist bombings in London.

It has? Could have fooled me. Most everyone in the (US) theaters I've seen the preview have murmered "looks good" etc. Since a few hours after the train bombings, a lot of Londoners were saying "look, could you all get over it? We have." Especially given the typical audience for this film, I doubt any of the said audience will give a crap.

"It's that horrible word: intellectual. I mean, you have to think about the movie"

What? They laid out the entire plot in the trailers (or so we're led to believe). Facist, authoritarian government. Agents of whom attempt to rape Portman. "Good" guy rescues/befriends her. He's doing the whole "government is evil, I'm gonna blow it up, yo" and she's doing the "I'll die for you, yo. I am stretched on your grave, I'll lie here forever, yo." The government is all "Your ass is ours, yo."

What part of that requires any "thought"? The fact that it's blatantly playing off how fascist US/UK government has become?

Appropriate quote: "Ah, MIND taxing time again, now is it?"

The whole thing reminds me of Gilbert Godfried's joke at Hugh Heffner's roast, a couple says after the WTC attacks. "I'm kinda concerned, my flight has a layover at the Empire State building". Most everyone laughed. One or two people yelled "too soon, too soon." So he told the Aristocrats joke, and boy did those two people wish they had kept their mouths shut :-)

Re:insulting my intelligence

[yui_unifex]

"It's that horrible word: intellectual. I mean, you have to think about the movie"

What? They laid out the entire plot in the trailers (or so we're led to believe). Facist, authoritarian government. Agents of whom attempt to rape Portman. "Good" guy rescues/befriends her. He's doing the whole "government is evil, I'm gonna blow it up, yo" and she's doing the "I'll die for you, yo. I am stretched on your grave, I'll lie here forever, yo." The government is all "Your ass is ours, yo."

What part of that requires any "thought"? The fact that it's blatantly playing off how fascist US/UK government has become?

This may be an accurate depiction of the story the movie tells, but it is doing the graphic novel a grave disservice. The plot in the graphic novel -- particularly the part about Evey (Portman) in prison -- is only superficially similar to what you've identified. It deals with concepts such as the pitfalls of contentness, justification of terrorist acts, how the mean fascists are normal people that "are probably nice to their kids".

So unless the script has been changed significantly (and there's reason to believe that it has; I haven't read the script), the plot was certainly not entirely laid out in the trailers.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Coryoth]

So unless the script has been changed significantly (and there's reason to believe that it has; I haven't read the script)...

Given that Alan Moore has read the script and spared little invective when describing it, I think we can presume it has been substantially changed.

Jedidiah.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Bloke down the pub]

Graphic novel? That would be, like, a comic, right?

Re:insulting my intelligence

[yui_unifex]

Graphic novel? That would be, like, a comic, right?
Yes.

define: graphic novel

Re:insulting my intelligence

[gmhowell]

It deals with concepts such as the pitfalls of contentness, justification of terrorist acts, how the mean fascists are normal people that "are probably nice to their kids".

And you would show this in a 2:30 long trailer how exactly?

To be honest, the scenes I saw recently in a trailer for the movie looked like they could have easily been merely filmed versions of scenes from the novel. However, lacking the context of the entire work, one could easily walk away with a twisted perception about the film.

Or, as stated later, they might have screwed it all up to make it palatable.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[yui_unifex]

It deals with concepts such as the pitfalls of contentness, justification of terrorist acts, how the mean fascists are normal people that "are probably nice to their kids".

And you would show this in a 2:30 long trailer how exactly?

Uh, you don't. That was my point: You can't accurately draw the conclusion the OP got from the trailer.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[MechaStreisand]

Sir, you missed explaining one thing. What is the Aristocrats joke?

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Moofie]

In the same way that a Mini Cooper is like a Hummer H2, yeah.

What's your point?

Re:insulting my intelligence

[1u3hr]

What is the Aristocrats joke?

Google. Hit #1.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[gav_b_g]

Bullshit. Post-production is "scheduled" to the day. It has to be. You don't suddenly go "whups, let's take another 4 or more months".

Uhh ... are you serious? i've worked on so many movies that have overrun it's more par for the course these days. At any given point in the production, usually as late into post production as possible, some exec will have some bright idea to completely rejig areas of the plot that used to make sense, and post production will inevitably then run up until a few days before release. Or they'll push the date back if they can.

Anyway, March 17th, as Ireland's national day, is a great 2nd choice as an anti-british government release date!!

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Jim_Callahan]

Generally, it's called a comic if it's meant to be funny somehow. I get the feeling that this particular story wasn't.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Bloke down the pub]

Generally, it's called a comic if it's meant to be funny somehow.

When I was a kid there were comics like Victor, Warlord & Eagle. They weren't funny. Well, not all the time, and when they were it wasn't always intentional.

Re:insulting my intelligence

[Hognoxious]

What's your point?

That pretentious knobs call them graphic novels and everyone else calls them comics?

P.S. When are you retaking analogies 101? You really need to.

Month

[Exquire]

You know, nothing rhymes with month.

Re:Month

[cianduffy]

Hey, I can think of something... you just have to pronounce it the North Dublin way, and all of a sudden a certain word that I'm not sure if its swear filtered here or not; but certainly is by my employers proxy, rhymes with it...

Re:Month

[aaza]

Well, according to Murphy[1], "things equal to nothing else are equal to each other". Extending this, "words that don't have a rhyming word all rhyme with each other".

Therefore all of the following words rhyme:
Month
Orange
Purple
Bulb
Silver

There may be others, but those are all I can think of right now.

[1] All things that have no source can be attributed to Murphy. It's one of Murphy's Laws.[1]

Re:Month

[Moofie]

What the hell is the matter with you? Everybody knows that "nurple" rhymes with "purple". What, did you skip fourth grade or something?

Re:Month

[aaza]

"nurple" appears to be a strictly American word... It didn't really exist where I grew up (which was in a reasonably small town in Australia).

But the rest of the words still stand.

Oh, and a note to mods: The parent post is not "Flamebait", nor is it "Troll". Mod it "Funny" if you must mod it at all.

larry wachowski?

[XO]

isn't it Linda Wachowski now?

Re:larry wachowski?

[cephyn]

I saw that movie! wasn't it VI Wachowski though?

Re:larry wachowski?

[WilliamSChips]

try looking on Wikipedia

Re:larry wachowski?

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

I'm confused too, but I think this site may have something to do with it?

Where's the obligatory explain-the-joke post?

Re:larry wachowski?

[XO]

5 informative? I'd figure a 5 Funny, or a -1 Troll.. sheesh.

Better stop calling them the Wachowski brothers. We hear "Matrix" co-creator Larry Wachowski is ready for the sex-change operation that will finalize his conversion to a woman named Linda.

Last May, he wore women's earrings at "The Matrix Reloaded" premiere. At the time, the estranged husband of an alleged Los Angeles dominatrix told newspapers that Wachowski was a client of his wife. The source said he had seen Larry "in her bondage room...lying there in a dress, no panties and a blond wig."

Several "longtime friends" say Larry - who is in the middle of a divorce with his wife, Thea Bloom - is now ready for the operation, reports the Chicago Sun Times.

The agent for Larry and his brother and collaborator, Andy Wachowski, did not return calls yesterday

---
from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/18872 4p-163325c.html

will they really do it right?

[tgibbs]

It's somehow hard to imagine that this will be a faithful version of a story in which the protagonist is essentially a terrorist.

Re:will they really do it right?

[Dominic]

Having terrorist heroes didn't (and still doesn't) stop Star Wars IV - VI being very popular...

The only tagline that's necessary....

[gamer4Life]

Remember, remember, Natalie Portman.

Rhymes perfectly.

Not Happy, But Not Surprised

[Mekkis]

Not that I'm comparing the Washowski Bros. to George Orwell, but this is equivalent to releasing 1984 in 1985. It's a matter of course that the 'anonymous spokeperson' denied any political implications -- just like people under scrutiny in Washington D.C. resign "to spend more time with their families". It's a bullshit excuse but they can't admit it as such.

*sigh* I guess we should just be happy the movie's being released at all. However, I wonder how heavily it will have been edited for content?

Not a good omen

[Anonymous Coward]

When movie release get pushed back, that means it's going to suck so badly that the next 70's sitcom remake is expected to murder it at the box office. The trouble with movie trailers now is that they can't edit them well enough to fool people into thinking that the movie is worth the ticket price anymore.

Re:Not a good omen

[erikharrison]

Or that they're expecting another player in a niche genre to eat into their audience.

I'm not sure what else is opening in that late october to end of November time frame, but there could be other considerations.

It could also suck

Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[Cerv]

V for Vendetta was written by Alan Moore and David Lloyd. The Wachowski siblings adapted it for the screen.

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[NicklessXed]

Right. That's why it says The film [...] was written by [...]" in the summary... not a word about the graphic novel up there. And as far as I know, Alan Moore didn't/doesn't have sh*t to do with the movie.

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[WIAKywbfatw]

There's a distinction between writing a film and adapting a screenplay. Hollywood recognises the difference, even at Oscar time if I remember correctly, as does the grandparent poster.

"Alan Moore didn't/doesn't have sh*t to do with the movie."? Well, apart from writing the original story...

By that rationale Leonardo da Vinci "didn't/doesn't have sh*t to do with" postcards of the Mona Lisa because, after all, he didn't take the photograph or print them, he was just the original artist...

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[NicklessXed]

Alan Moore wrote the graphic novel the movie is based on, but that doesn't mean he was in any way involved in the writing of the story as it appears in the movie.
You see, the difference is that your Mona Lisa postcards are basically reproductions of Da Vinci's work. The film is not a reproduction of the graphic novel in that sense, as there will most likely be many differences. So, congratulations, that was the second worst analogy I've read here today.

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[WIAKywbfatw]

Go watch the movie then. Stay until the credits have run completely. See if "Alan Moore didn't/doesn't have sh*t to do with the movie", according to those credits.

QED.

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[NicklessXed]

I'm sure he'll be mentioned in the credits. You still didn't get what I said, though. He wrote the material the movie is based on, but he isn't involved any further. The actual movie was not written by him. Is that so hard to understand?

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[WIAKywbfatw]

No, you said "And as far as I know, Alan Moore didn't/doesn't have sh*t to do with the movie", to which I said "Well, apart from writing the original story..."

Don't try to backtrack what you said. It might not have been what you meant, but it is what you said.

Re:Oh look, an innacurate /. summary. *shock*

[NicklessXed]

He doesn't have anything to do with the movie, because he wasn't actually involved in writing it (the movie). He didn't actually work on it. That is exactly what I said, and it is perfectly true, argue all you want.

Methinks the lady doth protest...

[moviepig.com]

"The [anonymous] spokesperson ... denied that the delay had anything to do with the movie's subject matter or the current political climate."

"It isn't just a teen slasher movie"

Certain statements seem to scream that Truth resides in their exact opposite ...

wow! it's that good?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you didn't have to think to understand the plotline. You had to be the kind of smarmy pseudo-intellectual assmunch who thinks his views are "challenged" by Gnosticism wrapped up in explosions and gun fights.

Did you know kids in regular schools study and write essays about Yu-Gi-Oh? It's just that fucking stupid.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

Yep. They should put a label on the box.

    Warning: This film contains depth.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

Somehow I doubt you ever even did philosophy 101. The Matrix trilogy is about purposeful self sacrafice for a greater purpose. It's an attempt to present an alternative to today's self absorbed youth. As for Star Wars, you won't find a more formularic hero's journey. As such, it is the perfect thing to study if you want to learn the structure of a hero's journey tale. The Matrix trilogy is the perfect thing to study if you want to learn about creation stories of various cultures. Why your Catholic school saw the value of teaching you the hero's journey probably has less to do with it being a Catholic school than those schools which study The Matrix in religious education classes. I don't know if it is different in the US, but my friends who went to Catholic school tell me that they are openly taught all the popular religions and, these days, tolerance is encouraged. Frankly I'd love to see more of that and if a popular film can aid in that process, all the better.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[Pollardito]

the Matrix that i saw was about one person being singled out to receive special powers, be singled out just for who he was, defy all the rules, and naturally outshine people who worked hard to train themselves to do things. that all seems like hero worshipping to me, and not exactly a humble journey that would align itself with Catholic teaching. maybe Catholics just like Ray-Bans and trenchcoats

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

the Matrix that i saw was about one person being singled out to receive special powers, be singled out just for who he was

Wow, I can't imagine what religious significance there could possibly be in this.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, now explain exactly how purposeful self-sacrifice is so deep like you keep asserting. Is it deep for these Catholic school kids? One of the basic tenets of their religion is incredibly deep?

Yep, the Matrix has fuck-tons of Christian imagery, just like lots of other Western literature. At the end they lay it on so thick it's almost funny (Neo is crucified; <Keanu>whoa</Keanu>). Did you think Signs was a really deep movie, as well?

You can also view it as a case for existentialism. "... an existence without meaning or purpose. ... It's pointless to keep on fighting. ... Why do you persist?" "Because I choose to."

And if we take the opinions of the writers of the Wikipedia, The Merovingian can be seen to allude all sorts of stuff, like Satan and Hades. Is he the personification of part of Tomas Hobbes' philosophy? Is The Matrix essentially the allegory of the Cave? Who knows?

How about our hero's journey from Star Wars? Some excerpts:

• The Call to Adventure -- "Neo, I will show you the Matrix."
• Refusal of the Call -- "Oracle, I am not The One. Then Morpheus got captured and I died. Now I am the one."
• Supernatural Aid -- "Neo, go find the keymaker."
• The Crossing of the First Threshold -- Take your pick. How about The Merovingian?
• Atonement with the Father -- "I am the architect. ... Concordently ... vis-à-vis ... ergo ..."
• Apotheosis -- "Something's different. I can feel the sentinels."
• Refusal of the Return -- "Oh shit; I'm trapped in the Trainman dimension."
• Rescue from Without -- As the Wiki says, "Let's go kick the Merovingian's ass so he lets Neo go."
• Crossing of the Return Threshold -- The Wiki says, "Neo again confronts Smith."
• Freedom to Live -- Neo can now confront and destroy Smith, thereby saving humanity

Well, it looks like The Matrix can be cast as a pretty formulaic hero's journey as well.

So, can you please explain how this stuff is deep? Or does "deep" mean, "I can apply what I learned in my high school literature/philosophy course?" Is Harry Potter deep?

Re:wow! it's that good?

[cnerd2025]

Not to mention a Catholic or even more generally Christian significance. People do want to be sppon fed entertainment. A friend of mine actually had the nerve to say that they needed more fighting in the second and third movies. And the worst part is that a College Professor I know who is a good friend of mine also disliked the second and third movies because of the philosophy. Until we watched the special features together, he did not understand the second or third movies. Perhaps due to my math ("your life is the sum of the remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the matrix..." - this actually makes sense :-D) or perhaps the religion (I am a Lutheran) or perhaps just the philosophy (choice, causality, transcendentalism, metaphysics) really appealed to me, probably the most in the second movie but throughout the entire series. The problems I had with the Matrix series were the unexplained stuff, like how Neo could "see" the machines outside of the Matrix or how he randomly "jacked in" in that trainman part. But that's technocrap. I can even forgive the stuff about the use of humans for power. Morpheus does say "combined with a form of fusion." Very interesting, because some companies are pursuing the use of solar power combined with fuel cells to generate power in the future. I think the Wachowski brothers are artistic geniuses, and their movies were great. I actually have new depth and understanding of what I believe, and what others believe. I have a deeper understanding of being human. It has caused me to be not afraid of change. I am a more powerful and more self-controlled person because of the movies. Not much, apart from my Religious beliefs, can claim that.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

I'm sorry, WTF, are you trying to suggest that Signs wasn't deep? Are you insane? How about Phenomenon, was that deep enough for you? If not, would you care to name any film that you consider to have depth?

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

how Neo could "see" the machines outside of the Matrix

Wireless.

But that's technocrap.

Exactly.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[Pollardito]

the Catholic story of Jesus takes pains to point out that even though he's the son of God he has to work his way through life in the same manner as everyone else. The story of the Matrix is the story of someone to whom everything comes easy, someone whose natural talent lets him skip most of the hard work and drudgery that everyone else has to do to get good at manipulating the Matrix. he's surrounded by people whose only purpose is to help him get better, rather than by people that he can teach to raise themselves.

that seems like the opposite to me, with the only link being that both characters are singled out for extra suffering rather than living the good life like one my expect given their background.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

and then he discovers that he isn't all powerful, that he's just a pawn and that the only way to free humanity is to sacrafice himself.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[QuantumG]

Well, at least we can agree on Donnie Darko.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[poopdeville]

The Seventh Seal. Wild Strawberries. Metropolis. The Grand Illusion. The Rules of the Game. Society of the Spectacle. Un Chien Andalou, Scenes from a Marriage, Aguirre: The Wrath of God, Little Dieter Needs to Fly, Cobra Verda, Heart of Glass, Fitzcarraldo, Chinese Roulette.

Why do I suspect that IHBT?

Re:wow! it's that good?

[gowen]

your life is the sum of the remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the matrix..." - this actually makes sense :-D

Actually, that's a brilliant example of something that sounds like it's deep... and can superficially convince someone that it's meaningful, but isn't. Why's it inherent to the Matrix? What's the equation? What does the equation describe? Why is it unbalanced? What does "remainder" mean in this context?

People read all sorts into the Merovingian and the trainman, but in terms of the development of the plot, they're ciphers. They don't have characters to speak of, there's no personality. They talk in nonsense riddles and aphorisms, particularly of the pseudo-intellectual type that appeal to teenagers. (The fact that teenagers can bolster they're intellectual superiority complex at the same time doesn't do any harm). These characters (and I use the term loosely) fake depth but ultimately they serve no purpose but to get us to the next overlong fight sequence, and to point our heroes into the direction of the next cliche spouting one-dimensional plot device. Never has the phrase "Deus Ex Machina" been more appropriate.

Sure, they're archetypes -- and the W's show they at least have some understanding of the major archtypes of fiction -- but they're so monstrosly lazily used. The reason there's so much being read into Matrix 2&3 is not because it's deep, but because it's shallow. Well constructed, thoughtful fiction, doesn't admit 700 different -- and frequently contradictory -- interpretations.

It's an horrendous mish mash of received wisdom, half understood ideas (which are never explored in any depth), superficial symbolism and pseudo intellectual guff.

And the action sequences simply aren't that great.

"The Matrix", on the other hand, was simple, coherent and groundbreaking.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[Jim_Callahan]

The problem is that you are measuring depth in terms of the web of literary reference, and some of us are measuring depth in terms of the web of meaning created by the tale itself, i.e. the quality of the story. The the former context, sure, signs was deep. In the latter, sorry, no go. Not that (to give credit where it's due) the movie wasn't entertaining-- i actually have a weakness for simplistic movies with a clean moral, and the guts to just ignore glaring logical inconsistencies in the setting. But deep? Not really, the director in this case has never really produced anything 'deep'.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[cnerd2025]

They don't have characters to speak of, there's no personality.

They're Programs!!! That's the point. The only real programs with personality were the Oracle and Smith. If you read into the movie a little, the Merovingian was very important. Remember the scene when they walk off of the elevator to visit the Merovingian for the first time? What does the floor number read? 101. Persephone actually tells Neo that the Merovingian was like him. Of course we don't know if that means he kissed like Neo or if he was like Neo. And he is very important with the whole cause and effect thing. That's the philosophy part for you. The Merovingian is convinced, or perhaps he wishes to believe that there is no such thing as choice; causality is the only constant according to him. Also, the Merovingian is the eventuality of power. "What do men with power want? More power."

The Trainman also is important, not for who he is, but for where he is. In that "area between the real world and the Matrix" he calls himself God (i.e. "Down here, I'm God!"). Neo went to Hell (shock!). Again, I couldn't understand why Christians would be influenced to study this. Many small characters are very important.

Why's it inherent to the Matrix? What's the equation? What does the equation describe? Why is it unbalanced? What does "remainder" mean in this context?

OK. Inherent to the Matrix? Because the Matrix is preselected to be the One. The Equation? The equation is a summation (sigma) of the remainders of some sort of function that approaches infinity. What it describes? Many possibilities. Most likely an irrational number. Why it's unbalanced? Because one can never really determine the value of an irrational number. You get closer and closer, but never find the actual value. The "remainder"? This means that the "unbalanced" parts are added together to generate the "remainder" which is assigned to Neo. He is meant to make everything whole. Some people have suggested that pi is the number being determined. It is derived by increasing the number of sides of a polygon, measuring the difference between the distance to the center of a side and to a vertex, until you get very close to a circle (or you get to a few decimal points). Computers use this equation to test speed. The architect is a very mathematical character. He is the "opposite" or "negative" of the Oracle. She is into the microdetails of the Matrix. The Architect is about the macrodetails of the Matrix. She finds a system that works based on "the One," but he wants a system that works mathematically, no individuals to bring it down and no one lost due to unbelief.

I wish you please do not attack view points which you do not understand, because this probably means you have not analyzed them. It is not taken for face value. You simply said that Mero and Trainman were "ciphers" with absolutely no reasoning whatsoever. And the fact that there are so many interpretations enhances the Matrix's artistic quality. That is a very postmodernist ideal, to just have an artistic form without explaining a DAMN BIT of it. We see it in literature, artwork, architecture, and film.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[gowen]

The equation is a summation (sigma) of the remainders of some sort of function that approaches infinity. What it describes? Many possibilities. Most likely an irrational number. Why it's unbalanced? Because one can never really determine the value of an irrational number.

Nothing you've written there has any meaning. Why is Neo like an irrational number? Why are irrational numbers important in this context? That's not philosophical, it's just enigmatic.

That is a very postmodernist ideal, to just have an artistic form without explaining a DAMN BIT of it.

It's also a total cop-out.

And the fact that there are so many interpretations enhances the Matrix's artistic quality

No it doesn't. It just denies (and nullifies) any interesting artistic statement the W's wanted to make.

I appreciate that there's a school of thought that says otherwise, but IMHO, an artistic work is only as interesting as the ideas put into it by it's creator. Otherwise, it's about as worthwhile an intellectual pursuit as looking for familiar shapes in the formations of clouds. Anyone can randomly scatter unconnected imagery, unless there's a coherent thought process behind it, what's the damn point?

Re:wow! it's that good?

[cnerd2025]

Fair questions. Pi is likely the number the machines are trying to reach. For purely philosophical reasons, the circle represents something that is complete. Neo is the chunk of the circle that can't be filled in, the "remainder" if you will. The Architect would like a system that worked with 100% of all of the people in the Matrix. Unfortunately, such a solution did not exist, so the concept of the one was created. The function is a subroutine inside the code in the Machine Mainframe that determines the One. Neo isn't really being expressed as an irrational number. Humanity is being cast as irrational, because of the concept of choice. With every choice that everyone in the Matrix makes, the Matrix gets increasingly convoluted. Also, Neo being the remainder of this is symbolic in that he is the completion of a cycle. Remember that he is the 5th One. The One "reloads" the Matrix (by "reinserting the prime program"). He completes the circle. This is even more significant because of his both Christ-like attributes. Christ says that he is "the Alpha and Omega" (beginning and end). I hope that maybe now you can have a better understanding of the movie because of this analysis of but one line in the movie.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[drsquare]

Unsubtle religious symbolism is no substitute for a plot, dialogue, characters or acting.

Perhaps you'd enjoy a film which consisted of 5 minutes of a fat man having a big sweaty shit, and then 2 hours of cardboard characters philosophising about the shit, along with religious symbolism about how the shit represents some ancient religious text or something. All the fans could meet up at Starbucks and talk about it over $8 cups of coffee.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[gowen]

I hope that maybe now you can have a better understanding of the movie because of this analysis of but one line in the movie.

I certainly have a better understanding of your understanding of the movie. Is that close enough. My understanding of the actual movie as mutable, protean pseudo-babble, so densely abstrusely packed with arbitrary symbolism as to be completely meaningless (and yet capable of being interpreted in a million ways by anyone with enough free time) has actually been strengthened.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[gowen]

No. Not 'kay. Because it's all claptrap... The world designed and controlled by computers is a lovely Maguffin -- a cute conceit around which the first film is based. But as soon as you start to examine it in any detail it starts to fall apart, essentially because it was never designed to be an internally coherent design, it was a set-up around which to build a groovy chop-socky movie. As has been noted, it's tricky to build a world that doesn't fall apart two days later.

All this talk of remainders, and irrational numbers and choice... they're Midichlorians. In Star Wars 4,5,6 we don't care how The Force works -- we suspend our disbelief because we're happy to go along for the ride.

After that the mythos becomes more important than the movie, and more and more exposition is used trying to explain the backgound. And, because the background has not been built from the ground up (and why should it it's just a MacGuffin) that's not possible.

So what your left with is a film that's neither an enjoyable romp (because it takes itself far too seriously, and indulges in endless portentous, unlistenable dialogue) or a coherent philosophical work (because it's "philosophy" -- such as it is -- has been built from the top down, and lacks any sort of coherent foundation). The W's were unsatisfied with simply making a good film, but the so-called philosophical theory has been tacked on later, and the combination is, inevitably, an ugly mess.

Re:wow! it's that good?

[mink]

Have you seen "Abre los ojos" (Open your eyes)?

Affects my portfolio

[Aeron65432]

Interestingly enough, this news has tanked the stock of V for Vendetta on the popular movie stock exchange, HSX

In the last two days, the stock has dropped from 70 to 50, with no bottom in sight. Sadly, I'm invested 50,000 shares in it, so it's hurt me/the market quite a bit.

For those of you who wonder why it hurts the stock, V for Vendetta first was scheduled for November, which is a good month for movies. March is typically much weaker. Secondly, people don't want to hold onto it for 7 months as opposed to 3.

An interesting claim

[jd]

However, she didn't show up to the court case (always a bad mistake) and the case was thrown out. True, she'd just sacked all her lawyers, but if she'd shown up AND presented sufficient evidence of having a claim, she'd have had time to find others. The one thing the US is not short of is lawyers.

Oh, I can certainly believe that derivation occured - that happens all the time - however the claim itself is questionable. (I'd both read and written plenty of short stories along similar lines by the early 1980s, and the earliest cyberspace novel was written by H.G.Wells)

I think it would have been fair for the parties to have settled for some MODERATE amount, on the basis that some ideas probably were borrowed, with the condition that she then formally accepted that any such borrowings were incidental and accidental with no malice in principle or fact.

My suspicion is that both parties got greedy - a billion is a lot of money - and nothing short of absolute victory (as opposed to mutual recognition) being acceptable. This is no surprise to me - the US is about competition, not cooperation, so all-out victory IS going to matter more than truth or even common decency.

Somehow...

[MsGeek]

...I don't think that a holiday that is not celebrated in the United States (IE Guy Fawkes Day) is going to make any difference as far as the majority of V For Vendetta's potential take. What I think might be going on with this film, however, is Warner Bros. losing their collective nerve over a movie that has as its hero a person whose actions can be interpreted as being "terrorist."

The only time Guy Fawkes Day has figured in a work of art aimed at an American audience is in the "Depth Takes A Holiday" episode of the MTV animated series "Daria." Guy Fawkes Day is portrayed as a surly British punk rocker who looks like Sid Vicious and sings like Johnny Rotten. Since British obscenities barely register in American English, he gets to swear like a British sailor. Of course, when the show aired on English MTV it had to be edited something fierce. Note to the Brits: you didn't miss much. One of the least enjoyable "Daria" episodes, one of the two from the series that almost sent it hurling over the shark tank. Almost doesn't count, though.

No so parallel...

[PhotoBoy]

From TFA: "V for Vendetta ... is set in an alternate universe in which the United Kingdom has a fascistic government"

In this universe Tony Blair has banned protesting within 1000m of the Houses of Parliament, he is trying to introduce trials without jury for many crimes, he now strongly influences what the BBC broadcasts, he is trying to ban criticism of any religion and he is forcing a mandatory ID card scheme on the public and that isn't a facist government??!?

Re:No so parallel...

[Rorschach1]

What are the terms of this protest ban? I was there last Saturday and saw protesters that looked to be a whole lot less than 1 km away.

Re:No so parallel...

[isorox]

The ban was brought in to get rid of the protester in your picture, who's been there for over 4 years (June 2001). It failed miserably, a judicial review a few days earlier found that, due to a technicality, Mr Haw was exempt from the new law.

The law (amongst other things) bans all protests within 1km (about 2/3 of a mile) of parliament, unless you get permission from the police. Like in North Korea, you can apply to the police to have a march celebrating your leader and they'll probably allow it, although they don't have to.

Re:No so parallel...

[Anonymous Coward]

Intriguing.

A quick check shows France and Italy utterly lack trials by jury, have state boradcasters that are significantly influenced by the government of the day, laws against criticism of religions, and mandatory national ID cards.

No wonder Tony Blair is a Europhile, then. He wants to bring Britain fully into the European Union (of Fascistic States).

Re:No so parallel...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're wrong on so many levels.

Blair pandered to various Muslim groups including Muslim Council of Britain to outlaw criticism of religion ... putting PC ahead of everything.

For those accused of terrorism, you know, plotting to blow up commuters and such, ordinary people like you, he wants trials to be able to use (in closed court session) secret intelligence, such as wiretapping someone's IM messages to Jihad Central back in Waziristan Province Pakistan.

That's sensible. Let the perfect be the enemy of the good (any developer knows what I mean) and you will create a situation where the solution will sort itself out ... horribly. Unchecked Jihadis blowing people up left and right ... and the counter-reaction of ethnic purges. So yeah, go ahead and create a Balkans 2.0 out of PC idiocy or political immaturity. Meanwhile, here on Planet Earth imperfect compromises mean Average Joe Brit doesn't get blown to bits in London or Birmingham, and Leeds and London Mosques don't get burnt to the ground with people in them either.

One way or another the British people will stop terrorism.

Moore's book has almost no bearing on current reality; as a prognosticator he's stuck in the 1980's which was the end of the Cold War. He's been unable to view since then a modern world that doesn't have as it's backdrop Atomic-armed superpowers staring down at each other; as opposed to various extremist jihadis with no government but adherence to a sixth century religion.

Point proven.

[hummassa]

After all, there is no spoon.

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[One Louder]

The actual quote "...Remember, Remember, the fifth of November" is from an obscure song by John Lennon called Remember.

So, in summary, you're giving John Lennon credit for a nursery rhyme that's been around for nearly 400 years.

The full text of the original poem, which dates to 1606, one year after the Gunpowder Plot, and was initially delivered as a church sermon is:

Remember, remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot

Why wait?

[plaxion]

It will probably still be available on P2P networks by November 5th ;)

Re:ps - the Wachowskis didn't 'create the Matrix.'

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, not quite

MArch Marketing Campaign Solution

[syntap]

This delay comes as quite a blow not only to expectant fans, but also to the marketing campaign of the film, as the clever tagline tie-in 'Remember, remember the 5th of November' is decidedly weaker when you attempt to rhyme it with March 17th."

Well... "if they used Beware the Ides of March" with an onimous fadeout to black they would get everyone to the theater and in their seats only two days early.

Re:MArch Marketing Campaign Solution

[databeast]

exceptthat has absolutely nothing to do with the film's plot.

RTFA

Re:MArch Marketing Campaign Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't V for Vendetta about overthrowing the government?

The ruler of Rome was assassinated on the Ides of March, leading the way for Augustus to take power.

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[Pentagram]

According to Wikipedia, there's a bit more to the poem than that. No, I hadn't heard of the rest either.

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[CRCulver]

No, in Britain the nursery rhyme is still remembered. Guy Fawkes Day is a national holiday, celebrated much like the 4th of July in the United States. Sorry, but John Lennon had nothing to do with this tagline. The movie is based on the Guy Fawkes incident, thus it makes since to use the song everyone remembers in connection with Guy Fawkes Day to advertise it.

Oh, the one hit wonders are writing it

[doublem]

The twits behind Matrix 2 and Matrix 3 are writing the screenplay?

Damn, I never saw a movie go from "Intersting" to "Avoid at all costs" so damn fast. I'd almost rather watch another Star Wars from Lucas.

Almost.

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[databeast]

you're a damn good Lennon fan, and a really shitty researcher.

Lennon has got jack shit to do with V, Alan Moore, or Guy Fawkes however.

Depth Takes a Holiday

[The Rizz]

Actually, I rather enjoyed that episode.
It may not have been a great episode, but it was just so surreal I couldn't help but love it.

I said it LAST time and ill say it again.. V is

[Cutting_Crew]

for..

previous V post

Quios Custodes

[Johnny Mnemonic]

I think he's pretty much given up on Hollywood now.

Which I guess doesn't help a Watchmen movie get made, dammit. But really, it would suck too. There's just no way it could be done.

Re:Quios Custodes

[Fuzzle]

It doesn't hurt it at all, since he has no rights to the work. DC promised him to give him and Dave Gibbons the rights once it went out of print. It's never, ever, gone out of print, and probably never will.

Re:Quios Custodes

[Cerv]

A Watchmen film (set in the present day) was in preproduction for god knows how long, but stalled earlier this year. It could still happen, and Moore can't do anything about it unless he buys the rights but I doubt he can afford that, or even would on principle.

Re:Quios Custodes

[wwphx]

Best way to do Watchmen would be a mini-series on SciFi. You can't fit a 12 part series into two hours of screen time, you need the multi-episodic format, which also gives you good cliffhangers. Financing it would be a bitch, but this is one movie where I don't think I would mind the extensive use of CGI.

CGI used to enhance a good story: good.
CGI used to prop up a weak story: bad.

He was going to have a sex change.

[Abutambani]

I read somewhere that he was going to undergo a sex change. I'm not sure if he ever did though.

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[Anonymous Coward]

The 5th of November is like Juky 4th in that at night people let off fireworks, or go to a public display of pyrotechnics. However it is not a 'holiday' in the sense that people have the day off work or school.

Moore's dialogue was better.

[Grendel Drago]

I think Moore's dialogue in some spots was definitely better. From the trailer, Portman's dialogue seems to be:

Evey: [bumping into Agent] I'm sorry.
Finger Agent: Not yet, you're not.

The original dialogue from the comic (or at least what I have from memory) was

Evey: I'll do whatever you want, just don't kill me.
Finger Agent: No, you don't get it. We're going to do whatever we want... and then we're going to kill you.

Definitely spookier.

--grendel drago

Re:Moore's dialogue was better.

[91degrees]

It's a bewtter line, but perhaps it's too prosey. Too wany words. It's good to read, but if there's a lot of dialogue like that in a film, it gets too long winded and unrealistic. People just don't talk like that.

best comment ever

[slithytove]

That was the best comment I've read on slashdot in a looong time:) Thanks!:)

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[StarTux]

Thanks for bringing this to attention of those who may not have known this, especially those ex-colonies...

Re:curious...

[The Evil Couch]

I would have accused Terminator and the Matrix files of being ripped off of myths and folklore before I would have said that some obscure author was the basis for the screenplays.

Originally slated to open on Nov. 4???

[httpamphibio.us]

originally slated to open on Nov. 4 ... 'Remember, remember the 5th of November' Uh... am I missing something here?

Harry Potter

[jfengel]

The big genre film around that time is the next Harry Potter movie. But that's not the reason. The reason is almost certainly that the film sucks.

March is a terrible time to release movies, at least according to Hollywood wisdom; people are huddled at home rather than watching movies. March is a good time to dump big movies that didn't turn out well.

Re:Harry Potter

[Maltheus]

March is a terrible time to release movies, at least according to Hollywood wisdom

I never understood this. I don't care for movies in the summer (there's better stuff to do) and I'm way to busy around Christmas time to ever get to a movie. Fall and Spring are the times I'm most in the mood to watch a movie, yet few good ones come out then (well, it seems like bad movies may not be seasonal these days). Although the first Matrix was a March/April movie and that did pretty well.

Watch... Watch...

[Sr. Pato]

New tagline, "It, you will watch; It, you will watch; on the 17th on March". Reportedly, Yoda was seen snooping around the marketing division of the studio when the new slogan was created.

Re:Watch... Watch...

[Jim_Callahan]

For the record, that doesn't rhyme.

Maybe they could tie it in with the soda adds? "Buy a coke, or you'll parch, on the 17th of March." Hm... yeah, still not very good. Too many syllables in "seventeen".

shooting is also scheduled to the day

[YesIAmAScript]

Yet it at times runs over.

Just because something is all scheduled out doesn't mean it can't run over schedule.

Ask Terry Gilliam.

Natalie Portman can't act...

[8086ed]

but I'd pay to watch her if she... somehow couldn't speak.

Not crucifixion actually

[theSpartan]

I believed the ending, when Neo is taken away, actually represented the "great vessel" of Mayahana Buddhists. Of course I see where that part has a crucified feel to it, as did the "birth" scene to me in the first movie (when they pick Neo up from the sewers with a "claw" and his silhouette again appears crucified).

No reptiles in V?

[halleluja]

Darn.

I was expecting a revival of the cult (pulp) V series of the 80s (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_(TV_series)/)..

I'm not waiting for the other V so there's no delay

Re:"Remember...5th of November"

[CoffeeJedi]

i remember this from euro-history class. i always thought it was a rather sloppy rhyme though, the syllables don't match up. maybe it sounded better 400 years ago

For those who'd like to know more about the comic

[CoffeeJedi]

Scott Tipton has done an excellent write up of it in his Comics 101 article series at Movie Poop Shoot. Its a bit spoiler laden though, so read with caution if you're planning on reading the graphic novel for yourself.

Movie Poop Shoot- Comics 101: V for Vendetta

SuperFANboy?

[solomonrex]

...Not that you're bitter or anything.

New marketing campaign.

[Beer Moon]

Beware! Beware the Ides of March Plus Two!!

off-topic?

[solomonrex]

But can we discuss this without getting modded to hell?

"all being unhappy with the government together (which is always funny, anarchists being anarchists together). "

Can we discuss anarchism? Were those awful G8 protestors really anarchists? How do they think this works? We have a global economy with roughly 3 bil people organized economically and politically, and it's going to be overthrown by some young guys who won't even work together? Isn't an anarchy movement an oxymoron?

Does everyone read, 'V for Vendetta' and then curse Bush as fascist and stop voting, using credit cards, buying manufactured stuff? Can someone younger than me explain this? I'm like 30 and took political science, and this has never made sense to me.

Remember, Remember...

[xanderwilson]

the Seventeenth of March.

Huh.

You have made ...

[MrCopilot]

You've made a powerful enemy this day.

I shall not soon forget the injustice done to me and mine.

Sin City

[PCM2]

I would have said the same thing about Sin City two years ago, and I would have been dead wrong.

I'm glad to hear that you've gained wisdom as you've gotten older.

In all seriousness, the first Sin City comic was entertaining as a one-off, but since then it's all been the same silly pre-adolescent formula. I found the movie boring and a little embarrassing to watch, given how much it pandered to the cravings of 14-year-old boys to the omission of pretty much all else.