Em’s righteous rating: 9.5/10

However, if you’re deeply offended by references to issues such as neo conservatism, gay rights, terrorism, conspiracy theories, anarchy, pedophile priests, Tchaikovsky, or creamery butter on toast, this film might not be for you.

V for Vendetta is set in the near future, around 2045ish, in a totalitarian Britain. The reigning party (and seemingly, the only party) is Norsefire, led by High Chancellor Adam Sutler (he’s got scraggly facial hair too!). Minorities, homosexuals, and practically anyone in opposition to the government are taken to interrogation, torture, death camps.. Pretty bleak, I’d say. There’s an 11pm curfew, and if you’re spotted outside, the secret-police ‘Fingermen’ will teach you to do otherwise.

So we follow the lead female, Evey Hammond, expertly played by Natalie Portman. Through some unfortunate events, coincidences, or fate, she is associated with (and eventually assists) the sort-a mysterious man-in-the-Guy-Fawkes-mask terrorist, V (the venerable Hugo Weaving). This anti-hero blows up the old Bailey, once a symbol of justice. He hijacks the closed-circuit airwaves, even shows off his broadcast graphics skills (did you see that watermark V-tv logo?!), and announces that he will fulfill what Guy Fawkes and his comrades tried to accomplish four hundred years prior. He will blow up Parliament. And he wants your support. V for Dagger-wielding-mayor!

It’s a non-nonstop action movie. That is, there is a healthy amount of pontification, flashback, wit, and dare I say it, drama. This comes as no surprise (or perhaps a huge one) to fans of the graphic novel, written by Alan Moore and illustrated by David Lloyd in the 1980s as a response to Margaret Thatcherismness. For various reasons across the net, Moore does not approve of this film, and even requested to be left out of the credits. Lloyd fully endorses it, however. I kinda like it. Anyway, there are some departures from the original, and other parts are exactly as they were first written. I myself have not read the graphic novel, so I can’t exactly be an over-zealous fan about every detail. The film I saw was beautiful, touching, bloody, and thought-provoking.

Some argue that it may provoke the wrong kind of thought, though. It appears that the graphic novel has more references to V’s moral ambiguousness than the film, which tends to depict him as a sort of Phantom of the Government Building. Will conservatism really lead to fantastically ridiculous maniacry? There are plenty of references to the current political scene in America and abroad. A Bill O’Reilly tv personality with a mouthful of spit, color-coded alert messages, Abu-Ghraib-ish black hoods for abductees.. and the Q’uran is suddenly a forbidden relic, real butter is reserved for the rich… You get the idea. I won’t deny that there is a heavy veil of propaganda surrounding this version of the story. Another notch on the liberal Hollywood-post? Maybe. For the setting - dystopia, fascism - the progressive themes may seem necessary to balance the message. The almost-unfair ‘criticisms’ are the only reasons why I notched off half a point of my own.

But really, it’s a great film. If people can’t see that V is a real terrorist with psychotic issues, well, I’d prefer not to associate myself with them. No one in this movie is right. Everyone is either brainwashed, or severely disturbed. And that’s alright with me. Remember, remember, the fifth of November had better bring me a DVD!

p.s. Stick around for the credits. There’s a sweet remix with some Indian (I think) tracks. You might also notice some Cat Power, Julie London, and Antony and the Johnsons interspersed throughout the film… Not to mention, Dario Marianelli’s instrumental score can be right riveting.