Before going to see V For Vendetta, I heard two things: 1) “This movie really bashed on the conservative party, portraying them as evil, and the liberals as good.” 2) “This movie condones, if not encourages, violence.”
Having seen it, I walked away with neither of these two impressions, nor did I feel there was any strong political message. The movie portrays a more modern version of Orwell’s 1984 using a just slightly futuristic Britain in a fictional, sensationalized comic-book style.
In a nutshell, society gave up too many freedoms, turned the other way once too often, and in doing so allowed a dictator to rise to power. ‘V’ uses “constructive” violence — targeting those personally responsible with justice, resistance where he knows someone’s doing mortal harm, and warned destruction to wake society up to the corruption around them in order to remind them they aren’t indeed powerless. His motives are well intentioned for the betterment of society, although his technique of the ends justifying the means smacks more of a Batman philosophy than a Superman one.
The story was engaging, the acting was well done, and the visuals were on target — only two buildings blew up, and it was in the style and quality you’ve already seen in Independence Day. And, for what it’s worth, the building were unoccupied — he was destroying a symbol, not trying to take lives by this action.
If I had to find a beef about the flick, there’s a few minutes where they show victimization of homosexual lifestyles, and the problem there is that it didn’t add anything to the movie. This set of scenes could have just as easily been cut and the movie would have been just as strong; all citizens were suffering under the oppressive rule, not just one group.
Naturally, one can read more into a story than is there. The message I got was the slippery slope argument about what happens if things go unchecked. A country’s citizens have civic responsibilities that must be exercised or be lost; these include educating themselves, doing what’s right for the common good (even if it isn’t in your own personal best interests), and taking a positive active role in governing society in order to stave off corruption. Random acts of violence, or even violence as an outleashed emotional expression were not endorsed, perhaps because they are so ineffective.
Interally, I would recoil if the liberal side actually views the conservative side in this manner (and also if the reverse is true) — for that would mean we don’t look at what is, but simply project our fears blindy onto another group; this is the exact tactic the movie’s dictator used to spawn division in order to get a strong hold in the first place.
I suspect the more accurate statement is that the extremists have taken over the popular political labels of our times, and that the majority of the population actually shares the same goals, but simply differs on how to accomplish them effectively. If anything, ‘V’ calls for a unification of the citizens to work together, to be something better; meanwhile the dictatorship uses the 1984 technique of redefining ‘unification’ to take on new meaning.
Will this movie inspire citizens to become terrorists? I seriously doubt it.
So, go see the movie, get a big box of popcorn, and have a very entertaining 2hrs and 12min with the opportunity for delightful discussion over dinner afterward.