V for Vendetta

Although the visual attacks the highest goals and the idea appeals to me, Vendeta works only as a comic store for effect. Just after it ends, all the stronger moments evaporate from my mind, and with a few years of distance, I only recall the totalitarian-British atmosphere and the always amazing Natalie. A wasted opportunity, which is especially regrettable. There were incredibly many potentially strong stimuli. (05/07/2006)

This commercial variation of Brazil is rather pleasantly surprising in the end. And although this is a very simplified insight, it isn’t at all dumb. Almost no action, very TV standard in visual terms, the actors have thankless roles (especially poor John Hurt, but who else could have given such a great performance?). And it is even more surprising in that it works rather well overall. The greatest positives are the main vocal performance by Hugo Weaving, the soundtrack and the pretty daring act of grafting of the story onto the contemporary political situation with thoughts that are currently not in fashion. At least in commercial America. What brings this picture down is that it doesn’t manage to create a convincing atmosphere of a nation under a dictatorship which would make the term “big brother" a reality. In the end, V stays in the realm of an entertaining Hollywood spectacle. (04/23/2006)

V For Vendetta stands or falls by the comic book original which I assume is far more complex and, let's say, smoother than the movie adaptation. However, the idea is brilliant, as are the acting performances - Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving are excellent, even though one of them has a mask on his face the whole time. Unfortunately, the poorly adapted screenplay and the unbalanced directing took something away from it. I don't know how much the movie would have changed if the Wachowski brothers had put everything they could into this project and didn't settle for mere, albeit extensive, cooperation. Could they have portrayed the environment of a dictatorship better? Could they have given more energy to the first half of the movie? Couldn’t they have maintained the standard of filming Vendetta deserves throughout? Let me put it this way, I will remember Mr. V well, and November 5th will never again go unnoticed on my calendar, but you will not hear me applauding the screenplay. (08/11/2006)

This film has an excellent atmosphere, which basically doesn't let up at all throughout, but also a rather leaky and unclear script. I felt that the director was trying to impress the viewer with an awful lot of big ideas and lessons only to end up serving a slightly above-average effective stew without a meaningful point. It's a shame, because apart from an interesting idea, the film also has high quality actors, yet their skills are somewhat wasted when most of the dialogue is based on a very poorly delivered totalitarian theme. Still, I rate it positively because I've seen much worse three-star films. (07/30/2011)

The comic book of the same name, written by Alan Moore, is considered one of the most famous comic works on the edge between classical superhero and alternative comics. At one point, I couldn't resist and bought it, only to be thoroughly disappointed afterward, although it is a successful work from an artistic point of view and several characters or motifs are also interesting. However, the comic "V for Vendetta" fails in two very important aspects for me, which are primarily the unbelievable portrayal of the authoritarian state, its origin, support, the whole system, and finally its downfall. It is evident in the story that this dystopia was written by a person from a nation that has not experienced true tyranny since the first half of the 17th century. That world is simply lifeless and unbelievable. The second negative aspect lies in the romantic hero who wears a theater costume and a mask in the middle of a city filled with informers and cameras, making him look like an undercover police officer trying to infiltrate a criminal gang. The film version, at least when it comes to the first problem, is much better because a film requires significant costs, and therefore it is necessary to make things easier for the viewer from a commercial perspective, and the script is therefore more explanatory and logical than its literary source. However, the second problem remains, namely the mysterious hero capable of defeating the dictatorship on his own. The comic source allows for the film to be perceived as an action-packed spectacle, but fortunately, the creators took a different path - after all, those two action scenes, especially the final one where the avenger has the 15-member police team fill him with bullets before slashing them with knives, sounds very stupid, like from the dumbest action movies. The film's weaknesses are the weaknesses of its comic source. Natalie Portman in the main role is only average in terms of acting, but naturally still beautiful and with a decent dose of personal charm. And no one can even recognize Hugo Weaving under the mask. Overall impression: 55%. By the way, the comic and the film do differ in many respects despite the basic plotline. The character of Chief Inspector Finch is crucial in both the comic and the film, but in the comic, he is more multi-layered and ultimately more tragic. He is a person who understands that he served a terrible system and did bad things, but cannot overcome his own shadow. (01/08/2010)