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

Sign me up!

[DirtyJ]

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

Uh... where can I get tickets?

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

[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

[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

[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.

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.

New Tag Line

[Earl The Squirrel]

How about:

    Watch, Watch the 17th of March.

Re:New Tag Line

[Eightyford]

You must be from Boston!

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

[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.

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.

[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."

New Tagline

[Anonymous Coward]

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

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.

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...

[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...

[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...

[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...

[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...

[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.

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?

larry wachowski?

[XO]

isn't it Linda Wachowski now?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

[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:"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

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

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, not quite

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.