Discussion in 'Archive: SF&F: Films and Television' started by Jedi_Master_Conor, Feb 26, 2006.
wasn't this supposed to come out originally on the 5th of November last year but it got pushed back?
I think so, or maybe the 4th. Either way, it was around that time.
I was thinking the same thing. I remember hearing about it for a November release, but then it did get pushed back. Maybe they can release the DVD on/or around the 5th of November. Just to be cute.
i don't think they'd wait 8 months to release the dvd. i'm thinking late august/early september for the dvd release
Now that I think about it, the trailer repeated the "Remember remember the 5th of November" at the end. Then around October they sent us a notice that we had to remove the trailer because it was getting pushed back.
Does anyone know why? I mean yeah, it has some sepcial effects, but even the early trailers had clips from the final fight scene and explosions. Not to mention it's not really a "SFX event" kind of movie. Maybe it was editing? This movie must have been a nightmare to edit. It's so dialogue rich, and yet they were able to keep up the pace the entire 2+ hour time. Not even the Matrix itself was able to keep me that into it for that long of a time.
I think London was still reeling from the Underground/bus bombings.
they claim it wasn't that. the reason they gave was special effects, etc.
Any reason why not? I know of some movies that took quite some time coming out on DVD. "A History of Violence" is one that comes off the top of my head. "Monsters Inc." was another one, and "Elf" also took its time coming to DVD. At least, that's how it seemed.
I've seen it twice now, really great stuff. The use of music was brilliant, definitely one of the more memorable things about it. I love that it wasn't the sort of dumbed down fare we usually get nowadays, it didn't insult the general intelligence of the audience. It helped to see it twice to really process all the dialog and flashback images. And I love that mask, Hugo Weaving was really able to use his exceptional vocal skills and movement (as well as the other 2 who wore the costume) to convey such a large array of emotions.
Oh yes the Guy Fawkes mask is pretty cool. No other film this year really has made the audience truly think. I came into V for Vendetta thinking it was going to be another cookie-cutter action film, but it's not, it has a life all to its own. I left the theater two weeks ago in awe. Definitely see this again at theaters, just not now.
A powerful and thought-provoking film. I'd say it's the best film of the year, but seeing as it's the only 2006 film I've seen, I don't think it's fair.
One of my favorite parts of the film was the sidestory involving the character of Valerie. I thought those flashbacks were very moving and beautifully shot. A great way of showing us how lives were destroyed by Sutler's regime.
I actually didn't like the Valerie subplot. Thought they were trying to capitalize on that issue. Ate up a lot of time, forcing the movie to slow down a bit.
I agree totally. It dragged the story a bit. Sutler and the conservative regime were already well established.
Sorry, but I've got to reply to this with a "well duh".
Moore wrote this during Thatcher's reign, and was never really that shy about saying where the notion came from.
I think that it was a little bit of both. They weren't gun-ho for it, and some of the execs thought someone else was needed to try and reduce any comparisons to The Matrix (despite them having little in common).
I'm guessing this is the difference between growing up seeing Weaving in films, and only being exposed to him via The Matrix. The only thing I thought was that this was vintage Weaving.
From memory reading through an article on it they actually reshot everything that Purefoy had done since they have different enough presence that you could tell. The would have kept the stunt scenes they had already shot though.
Anyway, I enjoyed the movie. Like any movie there were a couple of niggling things, but otherwise it was well done. Some people had issues with the acting in the "rain" scene, but I think that the symbolism of the scene itself doesn't suffer from any deficiencies in the acting in that scene.
What I did find hilarious though is that nowhere at all was Moore credited in the film. They listed Lloyd in the end credits, but no Moore anywhere.
I had never heard of the comics before seeing promotion for the movie.
i'm seeing it again tonight!
I do believe the writer of the original graphic novel had his name removed from the film. It had something to do with problems between him and DC. I believe it stemmed back to the rights of the movie; DC had the rights to the novel, and as such had the rights to the movie as long as the novel was in print. So, whenever the novel was fading from the public eye, DC kept pumping out a new version of it. Now that they have the movie, they've really seen the benefit of this. I believe Moore saw this as sort of "screwing him" out of his rights. But he did agree to it. The details are sketchy to me. I'll have to dig up the direct source, as I'm sure I've butchered this...
As for the movie itself, I agree with most everything said here. The movie wasn't dumbed down, as I thought it would be, and it was very well done. Sure, I had some gripes, but very, very few. I've been meaning to see this movie again, but I haven't gotten to yet. I hope to soon, as most people I speak to say that the movie is better the second time around. I look forward to that.
I can't get over how well Weaving did as V; his voice was perfect, and really captured the character. Not to mention he has this mask on the entire movie, and yet his emotions are still portrayed very well.
The scene where V was without his mask, in the shadows, I do believe he was wearing some sort of "skin mask" as in...it wasn't his bare face. I, myself, wasn't sure of that, but two of my friends confirmed it. I'd still like to see on my own, but in that scene...I very surely knew it was V (Hugo) speaking to the inspectors.
Here's a NY Times article about the whole Alan Moore vs. DC situation:
The Vendetta Behind "V For Vendetta"
Alan Moore may be a great writer, but he's also a very creepy individual.
Yes, yes he is.
As Whedon said about a recent comic panel he sat on "It's the most comics greatness to assemble in one room since Alan Moore sat very quietly by himself". He was very adamant about having his name pulled from the movie. If and when we ever get Watchmen he won't be credited in it either.
It was the fourth. I won't bother with the "joke" I made the first time as it turned into two pages of bickering about release dates
I didn't know that and thought he was just protective of his works since he doesn't want to put his name to the movie. I think creepy's a good word now that I understand him better.
Yet his name was in the credits for The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.
But it was the cause of his request that his name is taken off credits for any movie which he created but doesn't own the rights to.
Did you read the article you posted
Since then (LXG), he has refused to allow any more movies to be made from work he controls. In the case of work whose rights he does not control, he has refused credits on any film adaptations, and has given his share of option money and royalties to the artists who illustrated the original comic books.
I know, it's just weird for his name to appear in garbage like LXG and not something far better like V For Vendetta.
He let his name be credited for LXG Vendetta is a way better movie all around. No questions asked.
It has nothing to do with quality.
It was the overall experince with LXG (including getting sued for copyright infringement on something he created) that lead him to pull anything he owned the rights to off any kind of movie development and he asked that anything he doesn't own the rights to respects his wishes and pulls his name off the credits.
Since they continued screwing with him on V for Vendetta it certainly wasn't going to change his mind regardless of the quality.