Re-Post: V for Vendetta
This was originally posted on Negro Please on March 26, 2006. I want to reference it in a post I'm creating to talk about Children of Men and have yet to create a proper archive of the soon-to-be gone site, so here it sits.
V for Vendetta's
futuristic England is an all caucasian country. Apparently the
neo-conservatism masquerading as fascism in the film involved the
complete white-washing of what is currently a pretty diverse community.
Dark skin is no where to be found. It's odd for me that the Wachowski
Brothers would make that choice (or allow that choice to be made by the
director). One of the reasons I connect and enjoy the Matrix trilogy so
much is that it's a world of many hues with the heroes, to a person,
reflecting that multicultural aesthetic. I know that Alan Moore's
source material serves to guide this choice but if they're going to
gloss over the big picture concept of fascism vs. anarchism -- the two
extremes that are the base of everything within the comic books -- and
essentially bring it down to a question of neo-conservatism vs.
revolutionary action, then maybe we could have had some brown people on
the screen. Modern Day England has roots in the Middle East and Africa
and those groups are growing. Surely, a near future UK would be even
more culturally mixed.
But enough of my race hangups.
Or maybe not. It's interesting when we, as Americans, are confronted with revolutionary images we can sympathize with. After all, our country is built on the overthrow of one government for the creation of our own. Those images don't reconcile well in a post 9-11 America but V is compelling. He's seeking to overthrow a government who lies to its people, who institutes curfew, who seeks to keep order by opression and suppresion and the populace goes along with this very easily. My mind kept going to John Brown. How important were his "terrorist" actions at Harper's Ferry and before in moving the cause of abolition forward? Is he a hero or villain or something in between?
The same can be asked about V who uses violence and destruction to move his cause forward. The film is supposed to be raising the question of whether or not this push towards revolution, which is fueled mostly by vengeance, should be celebrated but doesn't really. Even at the key plot twist, we aren't really left with questions about V's "goodness".
There are some thought provoking elements to the film, however. Afterwards, there was a deep discussion about torture and terror, death penalties and revenge. For that I'll forgive the silly and unnecessary love story elements at the end, the sometimes ridiculous dialogue and the pacing of the flick. It felt longer than it should have and took far long to get to the hook of the story. But, for all its flaws, it's a good film and worth the money.
Just remember 2 things: In the future, the cool guys wear masquerade masks and speak in iambic pentameter and a revolution without dancing is one we don't want.
Comments
Great read, second time around...
The "V for Vendetta" of the film makes it too clean and too easy. It assumes that this diverse population, which includes people of color who while still a minority are a very large minority, would go quietly and that the white population would easily accept it. Wouldn't it be much more challenging (and much more realistic) if the jingoism and xenophobia and paranoia that the fascism of the film wasn't confined to just the old creepy white man? That's a tired symbol and not an accurate one. Our prejudices are much more nuanced than that.
Not making that leap keeps "V for Vendetta" from going beyond it's graphic novel comic book roots and becoming something more.
"Children of Men" has none of that lack of imagination.