Movies: a new one for a change. by Leah Jean
|Yes, James. I actually remembered to put in a subject this time. The problem is that sometimes I can't think of a subject until I have written my e-mail sometimes. So I just forget to go back and fill it in. Oh well.
Daryl and I actually went to the movies to see one of the latest flicks "V for Vendetta". I really enjoyed it but I think Daryl was hoping for something with a little more action. It leaned more towards the psychological and political with interspersements of romantic yet idealistic love. But being scripted from a comic book, the plot was at times rather extreme and a little corny.
There has been a lot of controversy about this film being a poke at George Bush. So I went to rogerebert.com just to get a little more background on the film. [You all probably know that Roger Ebert is a well known film critic.] Sure enough Roger pointed out that this comic book was published about 20 years ago and just like "Brokeback Mtn." has been in the making for a while. So don't hesitate to go see this film just because of a little political controversy.
The film has one very strong thing going for it though out the film: acting. If you have been a big fan of "Master Piece Theater" and/or "Mystery" on the PBS stations you will probably recognize more of these British actors than most Americans would. But some of them everyone should recognize. John Hurt was literally larger than life on an enlarged TV screen in a "big brother" type role. A critique of the film at Ebert's web site also pointed out that ironically John Hurt literally played "big brother" in the film "1984". The guy who played V, Hugo Weaving, was excellent. I didn't even recognize that he was the same guy that was the villain in the "Matrix" triology and the Elf leader in the "Lord of the Rings" triology. I had to look up the info on who played V's part because he was very impressive with voice acting and body language. [Face it (no pun intended), it is kind of hard to call it true acting when the person is wearing an immovable mask.] There was only one point in the whole film that I though V's body language was a bit over done. V's wearing a total mask was one area where I differed in opinion from Roger Ebert. Roger doesn't like faces without some expression. Even Batman, for example, has some face showing. I was very impressed with how I rarely noticed that the face was expressionaless. The voice was so melodic and theatrical. There was even one part near the beginning where V delivered what I would call a Shakespearean type soliliquoy (spelling?) with an unusual twist. I was quite impressed and entertained. But Roger did have an interesting point that was amusing: how could V be such a good physical fighter when he had no periferral vision?
Daryl and I watched "Lord of War" also the other night from a rental DVD. It is pretty heavy stuff which is very well written. The script follows an autobiographical style about a gun runner's life .. and it is definitely not for the squeamish. I found it very interesting. The ending was surprising but, perhaps, a little too political. It is kind of hard for the average person to judge. You'll have to see it to understand. Can't blame extreme behaviors or conclusions on comic book writing here.
Here's hoping that I never personally have to run into the types of characters depicted in both films!
Ya all take care!