England Prevails.
In what way, I do not know. One of the main things I took from class today was that we are really not sure what happens next. In most books you are given at least a hint as to what happens.
All we know is that Evey becomes the new V and takes on Dominic as her apprentice. One would assume that they are going to continue the original V's work but to what end. We agreed that he wanted an overthrow to at least the Fascist Regime but our analysis began to break down in determining whether he was just anti-fascist or anti-government in general.
I am very glad that pretty much everybody else, with the exception of he whom shall not be named, agreed that in comparison to the novel the movie is a complete piece of junk. The eliminated some of the best parts for the movie and turned the entire story into a criticism of Bush instead of the overarching criticism on fascist states that Moore was going for.
I am quite pleased with the discussion we had. Now it is off to prepare the Wikipage before Spring Break.
3 comments:
Hey! I, the one who shall not be named, didn't say that the movie doesn't fail the book. I'm just saying that it's an entertaining movie. It's fun to watch. It's even fun to watch again. It's cool. It consciously values style over substance and it succeeds at creating a style. Now, if it had failed to make that style, I wouldn't be defending the poor Speed Racer boys.
Although I am most probably biased, I feel like Moore had a tighter focus than just fascist states. In fact, I am of the impression that he was taking shots at big government in general, and did so by examining the logical conclusion of removing some freedoms and civil liberties - fascism. On one hand, I completely acknowledge that there must be some powers and rights controlled by the government. On the other hand, the only war in history that didn't result in a loss of freedoms on the part of the participating countries' citizens was the American revolution.
The current state of affairs in the EU has the surprising effect of showing that big government can in fact be paired with (mostly) efficient operation, at least in terms of social benefits. They also have the "benefit" of having killed each other for so long now that war on their continent is not a viable endeavor - this is an admirable goal, but an unlikely one at best. The Middle East has had various ethnic conflicts going on for thousands of years, and there doesn't appear to be an upcoming cessation of hostilities as things stand, so the EU's example is a optimistic one. If the nations of the Middle East (both Arab and Israeli) were to stop having such tight government control of their citizens' affairs, things would probably improve. You would have much less brutalization of Palestinians at checkpoints (as well as a huge decrease in the large number of young Israeli soldiers who follow orders to be difficult at those points and then need decades of counseling to deal with what they did). You would have less fighting amid various factions of the Palestinians themselves. Is it really a surprise to anyone that the education programs that have sat Israeli and Palestinian children down and made them talk have resulted in friendships? Due to the hatred fed on both sides through the medium of their big, invasive governments, both groups hate each other. Think about the implications if they could live together in peace, as individuals - no need to label one "Jew" or "Muslim," but call each an individual human being of equal worth. Enough of this collectivism fanning the flames of hate through government means - let these people live in peace as free citizens.
-Mike
OK Chris, I get your point. It was an entertaining movie, it just wasn't V for Vendetta.
Mike, please tell me you were joking about the American Revolution not causing the rights of the citizens to be removed. On either side you could be viewed as a spy, tarred and feathered, property seized, and a whole multitude of other horrible things.
Post a Comment