V for Vendetta

So, i went into this film with 7 other cunts,one cunt went missing,wondering if it would be a masterpiece faithful to its source material like Sin city ,a butchered sanitised drivel engineered to please the masses(and still fail) like The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, or something that falls inbetween like Batman Begins(widely accalimed, but somehow just doesn't blow me away). The truth of the matter is, i could not pass judegment in the same manner as i did with those movies simply because i never read the original V For Vendetta. So i simply assessed the movie in its own terms without measuring its worth by comparing it to the highly accalimed Alan Moore graphic novel.
Well, i came off the theater feeling i had witnessed a very good movie, but disappointed that it failed to achieve the greatness it had the potential for.It just lacked that extra bit of spark, to elevate it above to the level of a Sin City, which in my opinion still remains the best graphic novel ever to be commited to celluloid, or a History Of Violence.The overall consensus amongst the fanboys is that movie managed to capture the essence of its graphic novel counterpart, even if it is laden with inaccuracies,as well as being tweaked and updated a little to be more in tune with the current times.
Natalie Portman(delicious even with a shaved head) was competent in her role, though not nearly as good as she was in Closer, perhaps hampered by her struggle with the british accent. Hugo Weaving was impressive as the masked terrorist as were the predominantly British cast consisting of such vetrans like John Hurt(Elephant man himself) and Stephen Fry (the looney colonel from Black Adder) They could have done without the slo-mo matrix inspired fight scenes which was a little too stylized and over the top for my purist taste.It seemed like a blatant attempt by the Waichowski brothers to remind us of their involvement...attention seeking knobs!
I have yet discuss the controvesial aspect of the film which revolves around the main character who is well... gasp...a terrorist. The Waichowski brothers, attention seeking gits they might be, have to be given credit for having the bottle to take on such a project in the current post 9/ll era.But no worries, this movie is by no means a justification or celebration of terrorism. To view it as such would instantly qualify an individual to be labelled at the very least as superficial, pedantic and misguided ,in my own humble tounge-in-cheek opinion ofcourse.This film is not going to inspire more planes to come crashing down on skyscapers all over the world.(though it would be probably benefical to mankind if one such plane came hurtling down over anfield on match day) The story pays tribute to the ideals, not the methods employed to make these ideals a reality.The main crux of this tale revolves around the ideology that one ought to be able to think for oneself to shape one's own destiny rather than to be shepherded like blind sheep.One just hopes that this underlying message doesn't get lost and buried under all the controvesy and notoriety that the film has generated.