Talk:V for Vendetta (film)

Latest comment: 4 months ago by Doniago in topic 2005 or 2006 film?
Former featured articleV for Vendetta (film) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good articleV for Vendetta (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 5, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 30, 2006Good article nomineeListed
May 8, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
May 23, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
January 27, 2007Featured article reviewKept
January 25, 2010Featured article reviewDemoted
September 21, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
January 17, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

References to use edit

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
  • Booker, M. Keith (2007). "V for Vendetta". May Contain Graphic Material: Comic Books, Graphic Novels, and Film. Praeger. ISBN 0275993868.
  • Keller, James R. (2008). V For Vendetta As Cultural Pastiche: A Critical Study of the Graphic Novel and Film. McFarland. ISBN 0786434678.
  • Reynolds, James (2009). "'KILL ME SENTIMENT': V For Vendetta and comic-to-film adaptation". Journal of Adaptation in Film & Performance. 2 (2): 121–136. doi:10.1386/jafp.2.2.121_1. ISSN 1753-6421. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  • Williams, Tony (2006). "Assessing V For Vendetta". CineAction (70): 16–23. ISSN 0826-9866. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Looks at V FOR VENDETTA in the current political climate."
  • Shay, Estelle (2006). "Overview: Dan Glass on V for Vendetta". Cinefex (106): 15–20. ISSN 0198-1056. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "An overview of visual effects supervisor Dan Glass' and Cine -site's work on V FOR VENDETTA."
  • Winterton, Ian (2006). "Fear Me". Empire (202): 89, 91–95. ISSN 0957-4948. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Cast and crew discuss the making of and the themes in the film V FOR VENDETTA."
  • Wolff, Michael (2006). "R for Revolution". Vanity Fair (546): 44, 46–47. ISSN 0733-8899. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Article considering V FOR VENDETTA as a reflection of the post-9/11 world, and placing it in the tradition of 'cultural sabotage' embodied by films such as IF.... and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE."
  • "The V for Vendetta". Film Review (664): 80–81. 2005. ISSN 0957-1809. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Co-creator Dez Skin and original artist David Lloyd discuss the genesis and controversy surrounding the release delay of V FOR VENDETTA."

References edit

Phrasing edit

"the film centres on V (portrayed by Hugo Weaving), an anarchist and masked freedom fighter who attempts to ignite a revolution through elaborate terrorist acts, while Natalie Portman plays Evey, a young, working-class woman caught up in V's mission and Stephen Rea portrays a detective leading a desperate quest to stop V."

Shouldn't this be written as "... a revolution through elaborate terrost acts, while Evey (portrayed by Natalie Portman), a young, working-class..." The way it is currently written sounds like Natalie Portman is a character in the film.

I don't have the ability to edit it since it's semi-protected. So if someone else feels the same and can, they should. 98.19.56.89 (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

  Done. WanderingWanda (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Setting edit

FATE (V.O.)

                   Good evening, London.  It's nine
                   o'clock, the fourth of November in
                   the year 2019 and this is the voice
                   of Fate broadcasting on 275 and 285
                   of the medium wave.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpascoe (talkcontribs) 08:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Reply 

https://www.imsdb.com/scripts/V-for-Vendetta.html

That script is obviously not the one for the final film and as such no better than any other fan theories. If you search for it on the site, it will even tell you that it's an early draft. Regards SoWhy 12:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Alternative Interpretation edit

I read somewhere that V might have actually been Valerie (the 'V' being significant), and that rather than avenging her, he was seeking revenge for what they had done to her in order to cure her "disorder": a partial change to her sex and/or gender that had unexpected repercussions. I don't know how credible this interpretation is, but it made sense to me. Unfortunately I can find no reference to it now. Anyone come across it before? TonyP (talk) 15:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, this subtext is a valid interpretation of the story, particularly considering Lana and Lily Wachowski are both trans women. According to this alternate interpretation, Valerie was imprisoned at Larkhill for being a lesbian, and experimented on as a result. It is implied that these experiments may have included chemical castration and forced sex reassignment, among others. During this period she left notes in her cell. Eventually, Valerie forgot her past self and began to identify as V. V found their own notes and, assuming they had been written by someone else, was inspired to escape and destroy Larkhill.
There is significant subtext in the fil to support this interpretation, but it is never explicitly stated as far as I know.
It would be nice to see this included in the article, but I cannot currently search for references to support this claim. If you wish to, I would recommend looking into interviews with the Wachowskis'. 192.77.12.11 (talk) 06:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the details. I looked again and still came up short. It would be nice to include a mention of this on the page, here, but without a "reliable source" then it may get pulled down. I will watch that interview but I don't recall any statements from him to that effect. TonyP (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
This interpretation is a stretch, and there is no implication that the experiments included sex reassignments - considering the views of the people doing the experiments, that's the opposite of what they were going for. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

2005 or 2006 film? edit

Should we categorise it as a 2005 or 2006 film? This edit from September changed the release year to 2006, although the film's first major premiere was in late 2005 followed by a wider release in 2006. —Jonny Nixon (talk) 13:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I really don't think preview screenings should determine when a film is released, especially the butt numb a thon or whatever. It's like counting executive screenings as a release date. It should be the theatrical/digital debut date only. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
It came out in 2005. Case closed ShockwaveFPS (talk) 07:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
"Case closed" is a funny way of saying "I'm wrong" when the official website says 2006 nyah. The only places I can see it as 2005 are IMDb and AllMovie which both accept user edits. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 09:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
It looks like 2005 may be correct per MOS:FILMYEAR, which states, "List films by their earliest release date, whether it be at a film festival, a world premiere, a public release, or the release in the country or countries that produced the film, excluding sneak previews or screenings." DonIago (talk) 13:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply