V for Vendetta is AntiChristianity, AntiBush, Anti-US, Pro-terrorism:Conservatives An early review of V for Vendetta from conservatives. This is really funny  http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/l...dex.php?p=1241 A link to the trailer of the movie Quote:
V for Vendetta. A title which may be one of the most intelligent and insightful declarations of the upcoming, not-so-subtly disguised “comic book” film about terrorism, conservatism, and extremist hysteria. But V FOR VENDETTA is, perhaps, not the most accurate title. Here are a few more precise titles for this film:
B for Boring.
N for Naive.
P for Pretentious.
P for Paranoid.
Imagine all the pompous, meandering philosophizing of the two MATRIX sequels without any of their (somewhat) redeeming action sequences. That’s V FOR VENDETTA in an N for Nutshell. And thankfully that’s the good news. Because hopefully people will stay away in droves once word gets around from the unlucky few who’ve endured this view askew of modern politics and morality.
Make no mistake about it (and question all the authorities who tell you otherwise): this film set in the jolly ol’ England of the not-so-distant future is very much about America here and now. Or more accurately: it is a paranoid, left-wing fever dream of what America is here and now. On that level, it can be amusing at times (unintentionally, because this film is oh-so-very self-important…as I’m sure will be the reviews that call it “brave” and “thought-provoking”). It is also educational in that it serves as a psychological study of left-wing projection and paranoia. Needless to say, this is one misguided, naive film that is everything it accuses the government within the film of being: fear mongering, deceitful, hateful, and propagandistic. This irony, unfortunately, seems to be lost on director James McTeigue and writers Andy and Larry Wachowski (who adapted Alan Moore and David Lloyd’s graphic novel).
Conservatives in power. Get it?
From the very opening of this film, it becomes clear that the futuristic England under the reign of evil Conservatives (no brain-dead writer cliche there, right?) is meant to be a stand-in for the filmmakers’ paranoid vision of America - or where they believe America is headed. England, having been drawn into “America’s War,” is now a police state ruled by the Religious Right. This allows the filmmakers to indulge in a laundry list of the Left’s greatest hits of manufactured or downright paranoid “issues,” rants, hysterics, and propaganda (the very thing the film accuses the Right of doing). Here is just a sampling of the bits of “conventional wisdom” found within the world of V:
1. Conservatives have created a false climate of fear in order control the masses.
“V", both the film and the masked “hero” in the film, insists that the “Terrorist Threat” is a ruse, and that the Conservative government is the real terrorist - having manufactured a climate of fear around a so-called “Terrorist Threat.” I find it interesting and revealing that here in the real world (and in the world of “V"), the Left accuses the Right of manufacturing fear (remember, Michael Moore said there is no terrorist threat…as if 9/11 was an accident or a new kind of “once-in-a-lifetime-only” terrorism), but the Left and V FOR VENDETTA have no qualms about creating an environment of fear about a Religious Right takeover.
[Note: like all Left-Wing fear-mongering, this films likes to erroneously equate the extreme Religious Right with mainstream Conservatism, which would be like equating NAMBLA with mainstream Liberalism.]
This film is yet another attempt to manufacture this false fear. Considering that the Religious Right in the real America can’t even keep “Silent Night” in a school “Holiday” party, it’s hard to consider the Religious Right as anything other than a minor annoyance - certainly not the Left’s ultimate Boogeyman. As a result the film is often hysterical - not funny hysterical but pathological hysterical.
The irony, also seemingly lost on the filmmakers, is that the end of the film reveals that the government’s fear was, um, right. Terrorists ("V” and Evey) do in fact strike, blowing up Parliament and leaving who knows how many innocent people dead (not shown or even alluded to - this being the first ever terrorist bombing that magically avoided civilian casualties?).
MoveOn’s next poster grrrl.
2. Christians are evil; Islamists are poetic.
In the askew world of “V” and the Liberal imagination, all Christians are hateful, perverted, and cruel. The evil fascist government is itself implied to be “Christian” (their party flag has a “double” cross emblem on it), and the one religious Man of Faith we meet - who is in the pocket of the ruling party - is a Catholic priest who likes little girls to dress up like Little Bo-Peep before he has his way with them. I find it completely hypocritical that every time a Hollywood plot has to have a bad Islamic terrorists (which is a rarity in today’s movies anyway), it has to be balanced by a good Islamist. Not so for Christians apparently. There’s not a decent one in the entire world of “V". Talk about hateful and propagandistic. Score another one for the tolerant and sensitive Left.
Adding insult to injury, in “V” we meet a character (seemingly the only level-headed person in the film) who, it turns out, is a rebel who keeps a secret museum of banned items. One of these items is a banner comprised of the American flag, the British flag, and a Nazi Swastika overlaid on top of them with the slogan “Coalition of the Willing.”
He also keeps a copy of the Koran under glass. When Natalie Portman’s uber-naive Evey asks why he has it, he says something along the lines of “because of its beautiful imagery.” I’m no Christian, but I’ve read the Bible and it has just as much beautiful imagery. But does it get a shout-out or an endorsement? No. Because in the paranoid fever dream of the Left, anything associated with Christianity must be vile and worthless. But surely, I must be mistaken because the sensitive Left never stereotypes, right?
3. Conservatives created AIDS to kill homosexual deviants.
In the world of “V” anyone who is deemed an “enemy of the state” (specifically we are shown gay couples…and more gay couples) mysteriously contracts an incurable disease that we learn was created by – everyone sing along now – the evil Conservatives. Lions and Tigers and Elephants, oh my. Again, subtlety is not a gift of the writers or director. The paranoid message is that AIDS was created by conservatives to kill off all them heathen, immoral “fags.” [Never mind that the conservative Bush administration has spent more money on AIDS research than the Clinton administration. But when facts get in the way of your fear-mongering, bury the facts.]
4. Bush is Hitler. Of course. Well, not Bush because this is only a “comic book” movie, right? And the Chancellor of V’s England is clearly not Bush, right? Mindless entertainment. Don’t read too much into it. Or so will sayeth the cowardly filmmakers and the publicly traded film company who will likely run for these “covers” once this cat is out of the bag. The connection is made visually, however, that the religious rulers in the world of “V” are Nazis in new clothes. Ergo, in Lib think, they are surely Republicans. Again, this is never stated overtly, but it’s made bluntly obvious that this fascist ruling party is the Conservative party. The horror, the horror.
Natalie Portman, looking very Stepford Wife while doing media for V.
What is it with the Left’s fascination with Hitler anyway? They’ve got Hitler on the brain. You can dislike and disagree with President Bush all you want, but to compare him to Hitler reveals much more about the person making the comparison then it does about President Bush. You want to know what someone is really like? Look at what they hate. It’s Psychology 101. Under the chapter heading “Projection.”
This film, which perhaps I should be endorsing on second thought, is a textbook study of projection. It unintentionally reveals the man behind the Liberal curtain. The Left is what it fears. And what it fears is projected onto the Right. Just ask yourself: which of our two political extremes endorse policies that are more closely linked with Socialism, Fascism, and Hitler? For example, one of the first things Hitler did when he rose to power was to take guns away from private citizens so they couldn’t fight back. Which party wants to ban guns? The party of the Left. You’d think if the Religious Right really wanted to take over the country (and being that all Republicans must surely own guns already) they’d be the ones trying to ban guns…unless this is all just Liberal fear-mongering. But Liberals don’t trade in fear, right?
Hitler also wanted to eliminate Christianity. Which party is in bed with the ACLU - currently attacking Christianity, crosses, and Christmas at ever opportunity? The party of the Left.
And which party endorses and promotes the thought police tactics known as “political correctness?” The party of the Left.
In fact, the Left will often drag out the old false and fearful stereotype that Conservatives want to suppress free speech and crush dissent. But consider how many overtly political Hollywood films (such as “V") have been made recently that voice dissent against conservative “issues” like the Iraq War, the military, pre-emptive strikes, corporations, religion, etc. The answer: dozens. Now consider how many overtly political Hollywood films have been made that voice dissent against Leftist values? None. Whose voice is really being suppressed in this country?
Here to protect us from nasty things like faith.
Or consider how many anti-war, anti-Bush, liberal activist speakers are invited to speak on college campuses versus the number of pro-War, pro-military activist conservatives who are invited. The ratio is at least 20 to 1 (and the few who are invited are more often then not shouted down by Leftist faculty and their “tolerant” student followers, and not allowed to speak after all). Again, I ask: which side is doing the suppressing? Even Howard Stern, whose show was deemed to have crossed FCC lines of decency (and, like it or not, the government owns and leases the radio waves, so they have every right to decide what they deem appropriate) has gone on to even greater fortune at Sirius and his voice will still be heard by millions. This is not suppression or censorship. In fact, Stern should be - and probably is - thanking the FCC all the way to the bank. We should all be so lucky to be censored like that!
Again, the unintentional irony of “V FOR VENDETTA” is that it is (or at least the philosophy of the filmmakers is) what it condemns. The proof is in the final shot. Short of “TRIUMPH OF THE WILL,” you’ll be hard pressed to find a shot of more conformist goose-steppers than the shot (see below) of the parade of masked “V” followers at the end of this film. Talk about mindless followers. I’d love to tune-in to this post-V Revolution world in twenty years when unemployment is through the roof, crime is running rampant, and President V sends anyone who disagrees with him to the death camps.
Don’t get me wrong, I love a good, healthy dose of anarchy as much as the next Marx Brother, but I can’t take hypocrisy and this film reeks of it. What’s worse is that I get the sense the filmmakers have no clue how hypocritical - and paranoid and fear-mongering - they really are. Personally, if I want an anarchic film that entertains and makes me think, I’ll take “FIGHT CLUB” any day.
The marching V-men.
While watching this fearful film, I kept thinking about the famous line from “Spider-Man” – “With great power comes great responsibility.” I don’t believe in censorship, but I have to wonder about a powerful, publicly traded company like Time-Warner greenlighting a film that tries to make a case for, if not downright promote, the destruction of government buildings. I’m sure our friends across the pond will be outraged. As Americans would be if an English studio made a film insinuating that the bombing of the Capital building in Washington D.C. strikes a blow for freedom.
But, then again, I’m not too worried because the film is a bore. The only thing I wanted to blow up after seeing it was the marketing department that made it look so cool and exciting. Can I get an R for Refund?
But for those who do see it, I hope the message they take home is this:
If you want to know what someone (or some group or some political party or some filmmaker) is really like, look at what they hate and what they fear. That is who they are.
I give this film two goose-steps and a “Heil V-itler” for Herr Wachowski and Herr McTeigue. Don’t fall for their paranoid, hate-mongering, and fear-manufacturing piece of faux anarchy, or you may find that you too have become that which you fear.
Consider yourselves I for Informed.
| I must watch this movie
What do conservatives here think about this movie? Is it an anti-America liberal propaganda movie? |
Login 
Civilized Debate 
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? What do you think it is? 
And I hear it's also being considered for cinematic craptation, errr, adaptation, I mean.
