riskbreaker113 Reviews

V for Vendetta (2005)

Huge Disappointment

[1/10 · 17 March 2006]

Ever since I'd first heard that V for Vendetta would be made into a film, I was extremely excited. Alan Moore's story is outstanding and I figured, with Sin City finally showing people how to make a comic book movie (you just transform cells into shots, it's that easy folks), the film version would do the graphic novel justice.

Unfortunately, the film completely misses the mark and arbitrarily changes some plot points. First of all, the director tries too hard to draw a parallel between Evey's and V's actions. When I say 'tries too hard' I mean that the editing comes off as heavy handed and basically interferes with the story by drawing too much attention to itself. Second, the plot was heavily reworked. I can understand the need to take out some characters in order to make the movie an acceptable length time-wise. What I can't understand is the arbitrary plot changes. The opening scene is completely ruined, in my mind. Evey is not out as a prostitute, which completely changes the feel of the movie, and rather than dispatching the fingermen in the manner from the book, V simply fights them in an utterly conventional scene. Come on, what was the point of these changes? Also, why did they remove the colorful lexicon of Moore's universe? What happened to the Nose or the Ears of the Mouth? In the graphic novel, I interpereted this as a creative adaption of Orwellian ministry names but apparently the screenwriter didn't agree. I can forgive that. However, it doesn't make sense that the police officers are called fingermen if the corresponding ministry isn't called the Hands. I can't forgive this lack of internal consistency.

However, these are all minor quibbles when I consider the fact that they took out Finch's acid trip. THAT'S ONE OF THE BEST PARTS OF THE ENTIRE STORY! Finch, somehow complicit with genocide, empathizing with the people he could not, or would not, protect. Finch putting himself in V's skin in order to find and stop him. Finch hunting down a terrorist who's actions he supports on a subconscious level. Removing this vital part of the story not only compromised the role of Finch's character but also showed just how cowardly Hollywood really is. An acid trip is still taboo outside the confines of 'Fear and Loating'...

In the end, the film has a few effective monologues but overall, falls well short of the mark simply because it doesn't tell this complex story, with its many characters, particularly well or coherently. Bluntly, the pacing was all wrong. Every scene was rushed just so the film could fit into that 132 minutes window. Honestly, I would have preferred a 180 minutes film that satisfied the narrative elements of Moore's novel then this abridged nonsense. Now that I think about it, there are only two things wrong with this movie; it is abridged (the order of events switched around and subplots removed) and gutless (Portman could get tortured but could no be a prostitute?, Genocide is acceptable material - LSD is no laughing matter :(

The Samurai (1967)

Melville's Masterpiece

[10/10 · 31 October 2005]

I just recently saw this film for the first time (a la Criterion) and I was completely blown away. This film can be summed up with a single word: minimalism.

This is a work of true cinema. Hollywood tends to forget that cinema is first and foremost a visual art. Le Samurai is a film that could've been made as a silent movie. The director establishes meaning not with dialog but with the best tools available to a director; editing, mise en scenes, cinematography and composition. There is a constant feeling of solitude and isolation. Even when the protagonist finds himself in large groups, his face is pale, his eyes are cast downward and he is still a constant outsider.

On another note, the film looks surprisingly modern. There's none of the graininess of many other 60s and 70s films. Rather, the lighting and the whole visual aesthetic is pitch perfect, from the black and white nightclub (dualism) to the sparse gray apartment to the subterranean eeriness of the Paris subway.

Personally, I would not recommend this film to people not interested in real cinema, people who like 'movies' rather than 'film', simply because there's a strong possibility it will seem extremely annoying and boring to you. On the other hand, if you're a fan of serious cinema, do yourself a favor and watch this film.