V for Vendetta

What can one expect from a comic book screening describing near future, fascist government, fight for the human rights - altogether it sounds like a bad idea, used many times before. But that‘s just a wrapper.

Having Wachowsky brothers as producers, this movie could have easily become "Matrix part four", but it didn‘t. Strange thing is that the first movie that pops in my mind when trying to analyze this one, is Michael Moore‘s "Bowling for Columbine". The idea of making people frightened and then manipulating them is scary and too believable not to be true. Many films describe fascist-communist future with no freedom, with police everywhere, with total control of human activities, but there are just a few of them that are reminiscent of the present-day reality, with its political situation and negative aspects of life and the society, showing the downfall tendencies of our world. "V for Vendetta" is exactly this kind of film, depicting the possible turn of the current events.

The movie itself strikes as a perfect cine-play: there is not a single superfluous gesture or object. Even when the main hero, V, starts reading poetry and acts like he is in a middle of a show right after he killed three federal agents assaulting a beautiful girl (Natalie Portman), it doesn‘t fall out of place.

The most incredible thing is that "V for Vendetta" stands as an apologia for terrorism, especially given that the main danger for all the people of the civilized world today is considered to be terrorism, according to the top politicians. My first question after leaving the movie theatre was: "How is it possible that nobody tried to prevent this movie from being seen by people?" Or did they?

But on the other hand, that‘s just what lies on the surface. Beneath this political satire lies yet another poisonous idea. As a proverb says, "the way to hell is laid with good intention". Romantic hero, V, fights for the people‘s rights to live in a free world by exploding historical monuments (London's Central Criminal Court and House of Parliament). His intentions are good, but his methods make one wonder if it‘s really worth it: he is ruthless, he literally and figuratively doesn‘t feel anything, his personal motive is revenge as much as liberty. He is not even human if you come to think about it: you never see his face, which is covered with a mask of Guy Fawkes (the person who tried to explode the House of Parliament in 1605), he is an idea. The idea of revolution, destruction. How many people would understand this in the "right" sense, the same way V meant it to be? And how many people would see this as call to arms and urge to blow things up?

Another scary thing is that revolutions are often made by people who want better life for everybody, romantic heroes, but later they are replaced by fanatics and scapegraces who use romantic ideals in order to control people, gain power and money, and everything falls back into the place where it all started: totalitarianism.

This movie makes you think… This fact alone should be enough to check it out.

PS And of course wonderful actors (Natalie Portman, Hugo Weaving, Stephen Rea, Stephen Fry) make this film as spectacular as it can be.