Completely Misses The Point Of The Source Material

Rating: 4/10 (15 November 2018)

If you go into V for Vendetta not being a fan of the source material, you'll probably love this movie. If you don't find yourself strongly identifying with the anarchist themes of the source material, you'll probably love this movie. As its own entity, V for Vendetta is a solid early-2000s dystopian action film. However, as a fan of Alan Moore's and as an individual anarchist myself, I personally found James McTeigue's adaptation of Moore's 1989 classic to be a "style over substance" dumbing down of a classic work.
The acting is exceptional, even as a non-fan of the movie I have to admit this. Natalie Portman acts her heart out as Evey and her hysterical, out of control emotional breakdown to V after her emotional torture, interrogation and rebirth at his hands marks a career highlight for her performance-wise. She does a wonderful job going to the deep, dark corners of Evey's shock, trauma and embrace of her pain. Hugo Weaving absolutely killed it as V. I can't imagine anyone else in the role, he captures the character's mystery, his charisma and his creepiness wonderfully. He shares outstanding chemistry with Portman and his role here makes me want to see him in more heroic roles. He certainly has the presence for it.
V for Vendetta is also undeniably impressive in its visual storytelling (At least, outside of its laughably over-the-top action sequences) Images like the fall of the Dominoes or the assembly of the rioters or even the explosion of the subway train (In theory, over-the-top and gratuitous, but in practice, unforgettable and beautiful) are all examples of gorgeous, unforgettable imagery that definitely gives some weight to the ideas that the film is at least trying to convey beyond pure dialogue. The dark, murky color scheme does an excellent job capturing the aesthetics of David Lloyd's artwork, while also evoking the odd feel of a 1940s War film. There was definitely deliberate, conscience thought and effort put into the visuals of V for Vendetta and how they would benefit the story.
The biggest problem with V for Vendetta is the characterization of V and how the directing frames him. Alan Moore has explicitly stated that he didn't write V as a character to root for, persay, but as a character who the audience must judge for themselves. V's status as a hero or a villain was entirely up to the perspective of the reader. The film constantly tells us that he's a morally ambiguous character, someone caught on the line between hero and villain, but it never actually shows the audience this. The triumphant musical score and gratuitous, Gun-Fu esque slow-mo of his fight scenes clearly tell the audience visually that this is the unquestioned hero of the film. This Equilibirum or Matrix style directing and fight choreography completely clash with what the film is trying to do. For all the talk of V's humanity vs. his inner monsterhood, we're never really shown what would constitute V as a true monster.
For all the talk of individuality, V for Vendetta spends an awful lot if its runtime telling its viewers what to think. The book was very heavy on the idea that both V and Norsefire were both toxic extremes of their ideologies; Norsefire was certainly worse, but V was still very much a terrorist. Even the title of the book "V for Vendatta" illustrates the deeply personal and subjective motivation behind V's original actions. The inherent message in not just V for Vendetta, but in nearly all of Moore's works, is "don't trust your heroes." It's that there is no such thing as benevolent power. V for Vendetta rejects the deep subjectivity and moral nuance of the book in favor of a traditional superhero. On its own, not unforgivable. As an adaptation of a deeply morally complex and groundbreaking political work, however, I personally found it to be unacceptable.
I also didn't appreciate how the heinous racial connotations of Norsefire's rule are, for the most part, largely ignored until the ending. It's heavily implied, but not a focus of the story as was the case in the book. The undertones of white supremacy in the film are just that; undertones. It's rather uncomfortable and deeply unsatisfying to see the British government make no mention of a concept of racial purity, which is deeply important in any critique of true fascist government, especially an adaptation of V for Vendetta. It felt as if McTeigue and the Wachowskis simply didn't want to mention such a touchy and sensitive topic, which is ridiculous if the film wants to be as rebellious as it superficially advertises itself as. Even Moore was annoyed by the film's dismissive ignoring of the racial politics of the source material.
I don't mean to be condescending at all. If you love V for Vendetta (2005), I can more than understand the appeal. Take the source material and its themes out of it, does it work as a film? Sure. The acting is great. The characters are fine. It has a great visual style. It would be deeply incredulous to call this a worse movie than the likes of The League of Extraordinary Gentleman or The Killing Joke (Both Alan Moore adaptations.) However, my ultimate problem with McTeigue's V for Vendetta is its lack of a spine. Its lack of ambition. This could have been one of the most thought provoking and challenging comic book films of all time, but instead, it's just another early 2000s Gun-Fu action film. And that deeply depresses me, as we're unlikely to see this story re-made or re-interpreted on film.