Anyone else see this yet?

I thought it was good. Maybe a little overdone in places, and there are certain things that just work better in a comic book compared to a movie, but overall pretty solid.

Strangely enough, in the movie one of the songs on V's jukebox is Cat Power.

I will love it, I bet. I bet.

just saw the trailer… it looks like a movie I would like to watch.

I'm going to see it tomorrow. The comic is one of my favorites, probably my all-time favorite after The Preacher, so I'm sure that I'll be annoyed with it. Still, not as annoyed as I am with every review that dwells on the fact that you're not allowed to publically like this movie without a disclaimer that you don't agree with domestic terrorism.

I saw it last night on an iMAX screen. Didn't love it entirely, but it was a serious enough heavy like-alot to pass muster with me and my friends. It veers away from the comic where it needed to, but didn't completely League of Extraordinary Gentleman itself to moviedom, which was appreciated. Still though, it did Hollywood-ize in a few places that felt a bit too ham-fisted and detracted from the overall enjoyment for me, like the recurring shot of V emerging from the flames howling... sheesh, did we need it five or six times?

In the movie I believe there was also an Anthony and the Johnsons track, and the end track I thought was Spiritualized as well.

The pacing was off in some places - a lot of start, stop, start, stop as far as the build up - but I enjoyed myself.

Alan Moore didn't though. Apparently he asked for his name to be removed from the credits.

Perhaps it was Natalie Portman's acting...

She's a pretty one, but not all that convincing.

he actually asked that his name be removed from any films made from his work that he doesn't have creator control over a while ago (after he was accused of plagiarizing League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and 20th Century Fox didn't deny it outright, which he took as an admission of guilt). He was super pissed at the ones that had been made already and felt it wasn't worth the hassle. So he asked that his name be removed entirely from the projects and that the artiszts who he co-created the characters with would receive Moore's share of the compensation (This is why only David Lloyd's name appears). Needless to say, this is a super ballsy move and I'm sure the artists love him for the millions of dollars they now stand to make from Swamp Thing, Watchmen, that Batman story he wrote, those [/i] Supreme[/i] stories, and whatever other cash cows they'll bleed dry. Of course, he had no idea he'd be turning down as much money as he was and was kinda laughing and kicking himself about it later.

The problem with this movie is that one of the Wachowskis told the press that Moore had seen it and loved it. or read the script and loved it or something that wasn't true at all. Moore had trashed the script in public and then started a bitter personal feud with chatracters he created.

yeah, I'll still see it tomorrow and probably really like it.

I'm looking forward to this. I didn't even like the book as much as the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen comics so I don't really hold the story all that sacred. Probably the best thing about the comic was how it handled all the regular people and the "victims" of Vs actions, but I'm expecting the movie to probably lose a lot of that.

Still, it should be fun, and most of the detracting reviews I've read, as chase pointed out, made really, really stupid comments about terrorism.

I never read the comic, but I enjoyed the movie.

Natalie Portman was better than I expected her to be, but it's pretty obvious that she'll never be a truly great actress, only a pretty face.

I saw the movie last night. Not sure what I really think of it yet. Wasn't as good as I expected it to be, but certainly better than most in the area of comic book remakes (not that I ever read the comic). I pretty much agree with Lester Burnam's assessment.

I really don't agree with the Portman criticism. Of the movies I've seen her in she was great in everything except the Star Wars ones. I blame Lucas and company for that, not her.

Of course, V is a tenth of the work that Watchmen was. Could we hope for 10 times the movie with the latter? I hope so...

Unfortunately, The Watchmen is a very nuanced and complicated set of stories. V for Vendetta's original story had some of the typical Moore depth, but even he has admitted that he was just mad at England and Thatcher when he wrote it and jumped in from there.

If they couldn't get the entire story arch of twelve graphic novels of V to film all that well, then there is no hope for the Watchmen to ever be accomplished with any of the bits that made us love it so back in the day. Best to leave it alone, or do an HBO animated series or something. Same with the Sandman.

Absolutely loved it.

It was good.

It felt a little rushed, but overall, I think a good job was done in bringing it to the screen. Portman's accent was pretty bad, but after the first 15 minutes or so I didn't notice it anymore.

Crap. Never read the comic, but the idea seemed pretty cool. I thought the first couple of scenes was awesome and then all down hill.

The first matrix was a complete fluke as the Wackowski bros. have only done shit since.

I rathered 16 Blocks.

I went into this "Vendetta" free.
I've always wanted to read the graphic novel.

Loved it.

I'm thinking of watching it again.

I thought the movie was alright. Nothing special if you ask me. I did really enjoy the last fight between creedy, his men, and V.

Oh yeah, and the dominoes were great. I thought it was really cool looking.

Yeah, I liked this as well.

I loved the graphic novel, and can't wait to see the movie!!

DON'T READ THIS SHIT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN THE MOVIE






just got back from a few minutes ago. It was a pretty decent flick, but they managed to get so much of the heart and soul of that story wrong. They omitted some of the best parts of the tale (The attack on Prothero on the train, the dolls, Finch's descent into madness/epiphany on the beach, what happens after Evey escapes from V the first time, V's death) were cut wholesale, and a few were so drastically rewritten (the ending in particular) that I barely recognized what was going on. The effect of Pynchon has been wriped clean from the story, and only the most blunt hints of Orwell were noticeable.
You can tell that someone was listening ot Alan Moore's complaining about the script, because a few changes were made to it in line with his criticisms. and I admit, some of the changes were great ideas (the masks in particular), but there were just so many places where the ball was not just dropped, but set on fire and pissed out.
I don't have a copy of the book anymore, but I can't remember if he was paraphrasing Albert Einstein and Emma Goldman in that one as well, probably, though I casn still totally see it as something the Wachowskis would throw in there in an attempt at levity.And seriously those dudes need to chill with the leather. I think in the 5 movies I've seen of theirs the sound of tightening leather is easily the most common. insert dominatrix joke here.
I don't know, I gotta go back and read it now because I'm forgetting so much of the minutia from the graphic novel, but it's only convinced me even more that Alan Moore is one of the best writers of the century and he's dead right by not wanting anything to do with the movies being made. Maybe it's just the medium he uses, maybe it's the fault of the screenwriters, I don't know. But I just feel like the stories are so much larger than life when on the page -which I guess is almost always the case- and these efforts to modernize them just slow things down and make the point too convoluted and watered down. I guess a lot of the stuff they cut seemed frivolous and maybe too confusing for the audience, but they really flesh out the characters and the tone of the story so much better, it's a shame to lose them.

Like I said, it was still a great action movie, shit I'll probably see it again at some point, but it's still a pretty heavy step down from what I was hoping it could be.

I'm also wondering why they changed her reason for going out in the first place. a non-prostitute clause for Portman?

I guess, in referrence to what Redworm said, I am wondering why it is that directors and screenwriters feel the necessity to make these graphic novels open and close within one movie. Is it that sequels lose the interest of the audience? Is it that production companies don't want to sign up for a 3 movie deal, even if the script necessitated it? Is it that the writer's and directors view is too limited? I would have loved to have seen multiple Sin City movies. I feel like character development is so key to graphic novels, not just plot, and you can't really get it in 2-2.5 hours on screen.

They are doing it with X-men. Why not with some of the graphic novels?

they start prinbciple shooting for Sin City 2 (based onthe second book) very soon.

Heard this on The Daily Show during Clive Owens's guest-spot, and it means one thing: more scantily-clad Rosario.

YES!

what'dya mean, second book?