Movies, both somewhat good and somewhat bad

[stevencwatts]

So I (re)saw V for Vendetta this weekend. The good points and bad points of it were more striking this time around. Anyway, some associates of mine have been very insistant on the idea that it raises a lot of interesting questions. With that in mind, I have a few questions of my own. Cinecast brought a lot of them up in words that I couldn't quite

Comments

[woekitten]

The only fictional dystopian societies I've ever found scary is that in "1984", "The Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood, and, to a lesser extent, "Oryx and Crake" by the same author. People always freak out about Farenheit 451 and especially "Brave New World", but they never made me shudder. Especially not Brave New World, where misfits were simply relocated to islands.

And in the case of Fahrenheit 451, Guy's city got bombed in the end. In other words, the city got what was coming to it. In 1984, you have the Party's never-ending reign, or as they put it, "A boot stamping on a human face--forever."

Question #1

[anonymous]

bloop here:
As far as what was so oppressive, well, you did have the arrests and experiments on religious and sexual minorities. That seems like it would at least qualify as a mild form of oppression. ;-)

Your second question demonstrates where the government was oppressive when it comes to having a free media quite well (but, sure, Dietrich was an idiot about it - still no reason to go all jackboot on his ass). Sure, you can have your flat-screen TV, but watching the tripe (and only that) which the government chooses should be televised seems like a trade I wouldn't want to make.

Thirdly, any government that can just ban the "1812 Overture" just like that is not for me. The inner music freak shudders at the idea.

I am thinking that the gifts from the government were merely an attempt to mollify them into acceptance of their now-limited rights, and the paternalistic way the government treats that which they take in.

Re: Question #1

[stevencwatts]

Good points (see my reply to Bryan below for a better summary of what I meant).

My second question, more than talking about oppression, was about the sloppy direction (or perhaps screenplay). Deitrich's defiance made no logical sense from a character or plot standpoint, and it was obviously placed as a device to get Evey caught. When you have to stick something like that in, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever except to drive the plot forward, removes believability to me. I have to put stock in the characters' motivations, and there was none.

[wattsu]

"Apparently the oppressive governments of the future keep the working man down by installing large flat-screen TVs in everyone's homes that will turn on, from time to time, with the High Chancellor spewing crap. I think I could live with that for the flat-screen."

...That's exactly the type of sentiment the movie's about.

[stevencwatts]

*watches the joke fly right over Bryan's head*

Anyway, my basic point (however irreverently stated) is that the government was oppressive, but not threateningly so. Watch (or read) 1984, and then tell me V for Vendetta seems anything more than mildly inconvenient.

mildly inconvenient...

[wattsu]

unless you happen to be gay, a Muslim, or any kind variety of political dissident. So long as one remains with the prevailing culture, it would only be mildly inconvenient. Outside that culture is where things start to get rather ugly for a person.

Re: mildly inconvenient...

[stevencwatts]

Again, I'm not trying to claim the world is hunky-doory. I'm merely pointing out that there are much more threatening dystopias out there in film-land, and the seeming attempt to make it more believable by being less threatening only made it less believable for me, since the large majority of people have no reason to rise up in revolt, and V is given no proper motivation. If they had stuck with his "confused anarchist with shades of gray" persona from the comics, this may have been more relevant, but the "uberhero" role doesn't fit in a society such as the one presented there. The filmmakers were confused about how far they wanted to take it, and did a very unimpressive job.

Again, I point out: resignation. (Oooooh nooooooooooooo!)