Post by kungfuzu on Jun 8, 2024 14:36:25 GMT -8
V for Vendetta is the fevered dream of deviant children, the Wachowski weirdos. The movie is a striking example of “confession through projection” common among today’s leftists. They project on to Christians, and other conservatives, the actions which leftists actually undertake when they are in power. Need proof of this? Just have a look at what is going on today in the USA and elsewhere.
The movie takes place in a dystopian United Kingdom, sometime in the not-too-distant future. A Christofascist dictatorship led by menacing character Sutler, (John Hurt) clearly based on Hitler, rules the country with an iron hand. Propaganda is spread hourly by the media which is controlled by the party. Sutler’s broadcasts and speeches are replete with symbols meant to invoke Nazism. A black cross surrounded by a bright red background is simply the most crude of these symbols to accuse Christians of being fascists. These immediately brought to mind Joe O'Biden's speech a year or so back.
The country is “united” by tyrannical Christianity. Queers and other perverts are targeted for special treatment. Islam is particularly despised and seen as an enemy of the people.
Strict curfews are enforced by goons who resemble nothing so much as sadistic Brown Shirts. They roam the streets at night waiting to fall upon anyone so stupid, or brave enough, to chance capture during the night.
Evey Hammond, played by Natalie Portman, one of the least talented actresses I know of, is out at night and is accosted by a group of government goons. Things are looking bad for her when, out of nowhere, there appears a man dressed like Zoro or a Puritan, depending on one’s point of view, wearing a mask which resembles a clown with rictus. This, it turns out, is supposed to represent Guy Fawkes, one of the famous villains involved in the “Gunpowder Plot” of 1605 which was meant to blow up the House of Lords.
“Guy” (Hugo Weaver) makes short work of the goons and saves Evey. The rest of the movie deals with their relationship, gives a little background on how things got so bad in the U.K. and what “Guy” is planning to do to stir things up in order to bring Britain back on the right path.
Over the years, I had heard of the movie, but had no idea what it was about. When browsing TUBI, I saw it on the screen and thought it might be interesting to watch. My initial reaction was “this is like a cartoon.” That is not surprising since, as I found out later, the movie is based on a comic book. It is therefore not surprising that everyone in the movie has the depth of a cartoon drawing. After giving it some thought, I believe the movie’s popularity is largely based on that fact.
Interestingly, one never sees “Guy’s” face. The only time he is not covered from head-to-foot is when he has removed his gloves to make breakfast for Evey. One can see that the hands have been badly damaged, most likely by fire. That this is the case is hinted at later in the movie.
I believe there are three particular things which hold the audience’s attention. The cartoon action and special effects. “Guy’s” costume, which is black from head to foot. And the pale mask representing Guy Fawkes. Of the three, I believe the mask probably captures the juvenile mind better that anything else in the movie.
In spite of the overall silliness of the movie, one thing of quality did stand out. That was the acting of Hugo Weaving. What he did with his body control and more especially his voice, was impressive. I have noted that there are some actors who can express a multitude of emotions with just their faces. Weaving is able to do something similar with his voice.
Just a couple of ironies before I close. The movie and Wachowski pervs are clearly anti-Chistian. First, I find it humorous that they use Guy Fawkes, a radical Catholic who was willing to kill and die for his religion as their hero. Second, “Guy” is dressed like a seventeenth-century Puritan. How could either be seen as a hero-of-anarchy, except by poorly-educated and hysterical dunces that pass for movie makers today.
By the way, don’t waste your time on the movie.
The movie takes place in a dystopian United Kingdom, sometime in the not-too-distant future. A Christofascist dictatorship led by menacing character Sutler, (John Hurt) clearly based on Hitler, rules the country with an iron hand. Propaganda is spread hourly by the media which is controlled by the party. Sutler’s broadcasts and speeches are replete with symbols meant to invoke Nazism. A black cross surrounded by a bright red background is simply the most crude of these symbols to accuse Christians of being fascists. These immediately brought to mind Joe O'Biden's speech a year or so back.
The country is “united” by tyrannical Christianity. Queers and other perverts are targeted for special treatment. Islam is particularly despised and seen as an enemy of the people.
Strict curfews are enforced by goons who resemble nothing so much as sadistic Brown Shirts. They roam the streets at night waiting to fall upon anyone so stupid, or brave enough, to chance capture during the night.
Evey Hammond, played by Natalie Portman, one of the least talented actresses I know of, is out at night and is accosted by a group of government goons. Things are looking bad for her when, out of nowhere, there appears a man dressed like Zoro or a Puritan, depending on one’s point of view, wearing a mask which resembles a clown with rictus. This, it turns out, is supposed to represent Guy Fawkes, one of the famous villains involved in the “Gunpowder Plot” of 1605 which was meant to blow up the House of Lords.
“Guy” (Hugo Weaver) makes short work of the goons and saves Evey. The rest of the movie deals with their relationship, gives a little background on how things got so bad in the U.K. and what “Guy” is planning to do to stir things up in order to bring Britain back on the right path.
Over the years, I had heard of the movie, but had no idea what it was about. When browsing TUBI, I saw it on the screen and thought it might be interesting to watch. My initial reaction was “this is like a cartoon.” That is not surprising since, as I found out later, the movie is based on a comic book. It is therefore not surprising that everyone in the movie has the depth of a cartoon drawing. After giving it some thought, I believe the movie’s popularity is largely based on that fact.
Interestingly, one never sees “Guy’s” face. The only time he is not covered from head-to-foot is when he has removed his gloves to make breakfast for Evey. One can see that the hands have been badly damaged, most likely by fire. That this is the case is hinted at later in the movie.
I believe there are three particular things which hold the audience’s attention. The cartoon action and special effects. “Guy’s” costume, which is black from head to foot. And the pale mask representing Guy Fawkes. Of the three, I believe the mask probably captures the juvenile mind better that anything else in the movie.
In spite of the overall silliness of the movie, one thing of quality did stand out. That was the acting of Hugo Weaving. What he did with his body control and more especially his voice, was impressive. I have noted that there are some actors who can express a multitude of emotions with just their faces. Weaving is able to do something similar with his voice.
Just a couple of ironies before I close. The movie and Wachowski pervs are clearly anti-Chistian. First, I find it humorous that they use Guy Fawkes, a radical Catholic who was willing to kill and die for his religion as their hero. Second, “Guy” is dressed like a seventeenth-century Puritan. How could either be seen as a hero-of-anarchy, except by poorly-educated and hysterical dunces that pass for movie makers today.
By the way, don’t waste your time on the movie.
