and a mediocre standalone film.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — V for Vendetta
BrunoAntony — 9 years ago(October 11, 2016 04:51 PM)
and a mediocre standalone film.
I realise it's "cool" to like this film because the hero wears a Guy Fawkes mask and the Guy Fawkes mask has been co-opted by Anonymous and protest groups.
That doesn't make this a good film, though.
I'd love to see the comic readapted as a TV series and some respect given to Alan Moore's writing (and the audience's intelligence). -
kingbilliam99993-679-139843 — 9 years ago(November 05, 2016 09:44 AM)
I actually thought it was a remarkable adaption. They did an incredible job of consolidating a LOT of story and characters into a cohesive narrative that kept the essence of the book(with the exception of the bleak ending, though I prefer the optimistic ending of the movie, "as only celluloid can deliver") and they even added that brilliant opening monologue by V, which is praise worthy on it's own.
-
kingbilliam99993-679-139843 — 9 years ago(December 10, 2016 07:23 PM)
I prefer the film as well. I liked Watchmen and thought it was a very faithful adaptation, but I think that story worked better in the graphic novel format, same with Killing Joke. I heard they botched League of Extraordinary Gentleman, though I haven't seen or read it.
-
Milk_Tray_Guy — 9 years ago(January 02, 2017 06:12 PM)
I heard they botched League of Extraordinary Gentleman, though I haven't seen or read it.
Yeah, that is a pretty poor movie. I thought Snyder did a great job with Watchmen and I liked the animation of The Killing Joke (apart from the tagged-on Bagirl prologue).
"A big ball of wibbly wobbly, timey wimey stuff"
The Tenth Doctor explains all. -
a_mysterius_man — 9 years ago(December 29, 2016 02:56 PM)
I saw the movie before reading the graphic novel, and I though the movie was great. There's definitely a lot of changes, but I think the story is just as compelling, and Hugo Weaving + Natalie Portman were great.
33, white, male, straight.
-
mh-newressistance — 9 years ago(January 18, 2017 10:47 AM)
Such an awful adaptation of the comic
Well, that is pretty bold statement, coming from you, the guy who gave Batman 1989 nine out of ten. I mean, that movie is completely faithful to the comics, right?.. -
BrunoAntony — 9 years ago(January 18, 2017 11:01 AM)
Batman has been published since 1932.
V for Vendetta was a limited series.
Do you understand why adapting a character with 85 years worth of stories for the screen differs to adapting ONE story?
Probably not, because you are a moron -
mh-newressistance — 9 years ago(January 19, 2017 02:52 PM)
Batman has been published since 1932.
V for Vendetta was a limited series.
Do you understand why adapting a character with 85 years worth of stories for the screen differs to adapting ONE story?
Not when the character has consistent history and consistent set of rules. The length of the source material does not justify major changes that were done to it in Batman 1989.