Audiences shouldn't fear their movies, movies should fear...

[Honor]

Sort of a long standing tradition 'round here, and important to give folks alternatives after ultraviolet...

I saw V for Vendetta on opening night, and I'm going to see it again today. I think the depth of exposition in places (like the whole middle of the film) might turn some people off, but in all I think it's an excellent and important film. Timely. Watch it, and then go home and stick pins in a voodoo doll of President Bush.

And, of course, have lots of wet dreams about Natalie Portman with short hair. *purrs*

[Squidflakes]

And, of course, have lots of wet dreams about Natalie Portman with short hair. *purrs*

Like that isn't already happening? Ok, so, its not Natalie Portman, but she does have short hair.

I'm concerned though, I've read the graphic novels, and from what I hear the Brothers W took the movie and made it about Theocracy vs. Freedom instead of Pure Facism vs. Pure Anarchy.

[Honor]

And, of course, have lots of wet dreams about Natalie Portman with short hair. *purrs*

Like that isn't already happening? Ok, do, its not Natalie Portman, but she does have short hair.

I'm concerned though, I've read the graphic novels, and from what I hear the Brothers W took the movie and made it about Theocracy vs. Freedom instead of Pure Facism vs. Pure Anarchy.

True. And I can see why. A) The country the Bros W live in is under the threat of theocratic authoritarianism right now, and B) anarchy as a form of government is a childish fantasy that cannot happen in the real world.

I'm always happier when I haven't read the original work a movie is made from until after I've seen the film... They're alsmost never "the same thing" and when they try, they usually suck pretty bad.

[Proconsul Merrok]

I'm concerned though, I've read the graphic novels, and from what I hear the Brothers W took the movie and made it about Theocracy vs. Freedom instead of Pure Facism vs. Pure Anarchy.

There was a bit of the theocratic underpinnings in the original, recall the sermon about "God choosing us to be saved from nuclear destruction", and the high-ranking pedophile priest who was involved with the camps.

(Haven't seen the movie yet, damn it)

[Toawa]

I rather liked the film...

I am not surprised that people would compare the film to the Bush administration, but I do not think that the screenplay was written with such intent. (While there were changes, I have heard that this movie was more faithful to Moore's work than previous films based on his novels, I.E. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. The original work certainly wasn't based on the current administration, if for no other reason than the fact that it was published in 1988.)

[Proconsul Merrok]

Yeah, the government that V for Vendetta's miserable future was an extrapolation of was more of the Margaret Thatcher sort, not the GW Bush sort

[Awkwardschoolgirl]

Ooh! Well, if Honor likes a movie so much that she's gonna go see it twice it must be worth watching. Maybe I'll check it out... some time. Though I do hate movie theatres so I may end up missing it and waiting until it comes out for rental.

[Honor]

Yeah, the government that V for Vendetta's miserable future was an extrapolation of was more of the Margaret Thatcher sort, not the GW Bush sort

I didn't see more than the most faint passing resemblance to Thatcherism in the film, but it did make direct reference to the outcome and extrapolations of "the war that America started."

I'm fairly sure that I'd agree that the Brittish Conservative party is far more frightening than the American, though... If they had the same weapons and cashflow.

Though I do hate movie theatres so I may end up missing it and waiting until it comes out for rental.

I don't think you'd miss -that- much by waiting for the small screen... And you'd gain all those bonus features. Personally, I -love- movie theaters. I just hate the people they're usually filled with.

Now, once I'm Queen of the Universe and I have my own, private dedicated theater where only cool people like us can go...

[Awkwardschoolgirl]

Well it's not exactly that I hate the movie theatres it's just that I'm way too lazy to get myself to the theatre. It's easier just to walk down the street to rent a movie.

[Kingofthemorlocks]

With the exception of the Libertine, my last couple theatre experiences have been pretty bad.

At King Kong, the woman behind me was using the opening credits to teach her ugly little crotch-goblin how to read.

At War of the Worlds, the fucking geezers sitting behind Christine and me didn't shut up once about how cute that little Dakota Fanning crotch-goblin is. During some of the more intense scenes of violence and destruction, Christine buried her face in my shoulder, leading these fucking geezers to make loud comments about how rude teenagers are.

People need to learn how to fucking shut up in theatres.

[Awkwardschoolgirl]

Gah! I hate it sooo much when people talk during movies. I just want to throttle them!

[Honor]

...to teach her ugly little crotch-goblin how to read...

*dies*

That's it... I have an official replacement for "rugrat" and "crumb crusher" in my vocabulary.

[Halo299]

Sort of a long standing tradition 'round here, and important to give folks alternatives after ultraviolet...

I saw V for Vendetta on opening night, and I'm going to see it again today. I think the depth of exposition in places (like the whole middle of the film) might turn some people off, but in all I think it's an excellent and important film. Timely. Watch it, and then go home and stick pins in a voodoo doll of President Bush.

And, of course, have lots of wet dreams about Natalie Portman with short hair. *purrs*

honor i read your post and without a second thought went out and watched the movie myself, like half an hour ago.

so many things i could say...wow.

we went to the bookstore next to the theater and bought the book.

so many things, but my mind is too busy right now to talk about them.

thanks honor

-halo

[Kingofthemorlocks]

...to teach her ugly little crotch-goblin how to read...

*dies*

That's it... I have an official replacement for "rugrat" and "crumb crusher" in my vocabulary.

It just rolls so well off the tongue, doesn't it? Although please keep in mind that while rugrat and crumb crusher can be used as terms of affection, I'm not sure it's possible to interpret crotch-goblin as anything other than derogatory.

[Frombork!]

Saw a pre-showing of this, and I really enjoyed it. I assumed it was going to be terrible beyond terrible, and was pleasantly surprised. Not perfect by any means, but very, very enjoyable.

anarchy as a form of government is a childish fantasy that cannot happen in the real world.

Balk! It can and it has, to at least some degree. Maybe I just read too many Ursala Le Guin books when I was young, but I'm quite fond of the idea of anarchism. I think the biggest problem with it is that an anarchist nation can't really mount any kind of organized defense, which means that anyone with an army can just walk into your country and take it. Not a great plan when you live next to Nazis.

[Indigo Violent]

People need to learn how to fucking shut up in theatres.

And lectures. Apparently the second best place to have a loud boring conversation is in a film lecture.
The best place, of course, is at a playhouse, where you can disturb not just the audience but the actors too.
Bonus points if the conversation is happening on a cell phone which rang right at the very best part.

[Squidflakes]

Some people need to read the Larry Niven short story "King's Free Park"

Nice little warning against anarchy

[Frombork!]

"King's Free Park"

Yeah, IIRC it's a good little thought experiment. Too bad there's so many different definitions of anarchism. It can mean lawlessness (Niven's definition), it can mean terrorism (the Cookbook's definition), it can mean a worker-controlled economy (the National Confederation of Labour's definition), or it can mean decentralized government (Le Guin's definition). I agree with Niven's thesis-of-sorts, that a nation without rules won't last a night. It's a nation without rulers that I'm interested in.

Back to the topic at hand: The thing I liked best about V for Vendetta is that it would have been so easy to make the whole movie a sequence of slow-motion knife fights, and I'm very glad they didn't stoop to that.

[Honor]

*twitch*

*twitch*

See... This is how I get so effing annoyed at the degeneration of language. "Anarchy" is a simple word, with simple origins.

An- Without. Not, non, lacking. Think Anabolic, anaerobic, anagathic, anathema, anti-, anteater (without teater*).

Archy- From the greek Arkhos, from which comes the latin Archon. Leader. Ruler. High Official or Authoritative Figure.

Anarchy is properly defined as a theoretical system of rule that assumes that people don't need governments or rulers.

Any other use of the word "anarchy" is, in my opinion, just as valid (and as respectable) as when George W. Bush calls a clear-cut policy "Healthy Forests", a plan by which factories are allowed to decide how much pollution is too much pollution "Clear Skies", or an education travesty that leaves a few million children behind "No Child Left Behind".

So maybe some of these philosophers start out with this Rosseauesque idea that people can and may rule themselves... Then they form a movement, and they notice that movement has a leadership structure, and suddenly "fuck! It's not 'anarchy' anymore...! It's a system of government...! With leadership...!"

Well, if a system has a leadership structure, then we probably already have another word for it. If we don't have another word for it, then someone should coin a word for it... But in doing so, they probably shouldn't choose a word that means "no leaders". That just doesn't seem logical or honest.

But "anarchy" was getting us support! "anarchy" was a popular idea... "anarchy" was getting us... well... followers! (go figure... tell a bunch of half-educated (if that much) workers that they don't need some manager telling them what to do, and see how they react.) "socialism" isn't going to get us any followers! they already have a party, with leaders! Same with "communism" and so on and so on. We'll use "anarchy". It polls better. They don't know what the hell it means anyway.

*deep breaths*

>.>;;

Yeah... Anyway. If a "culture" has two people or more, and lasts, say, a generation, leadership is going to emerge. Even the text-book anarcho-syndicalist commune, al-la Holy Grail** has a leadership structure... It's just not vested in established persons over the long term.

And, in my opinion***, if you have leadership, you shouldn't be calling it "anarchy".



*Of course I'm kidding.
**We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week, but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major--
***Obviously, a huge percentage of the political science community has become lazy enough and sloppy enough to disagree with me on this one... Which means I'm just being a little dictionary nazi, as usual. But I'm still right.

[Queenhank]

While I agree with your sentiment, I disagree with your calling lingual drift "degeneration". That brings to mind images of the old beliefs in a "Golden Age" from which humans have fallen, which is, in my opinion, a big crock o' shit. While I don't subscribe to the belief that everything we do is taking us toward some future Utopia, I also don't think there ever was a time in history when things were better than they are now. Of course, I've gotten off-topic.

Languages change. There's nothing you can do about it, and there's no use in complaining about it. If languages were things which could be set in stone, and never changed, then we would still be speaking the first language. Hell, in Chaucer's time, English was considered a crude language of the commoners, and not the pinnacle of linguistic perfection so many see it as today. One day, someone may say the same about Ebonics, or Brooklynese. The fact of the matter is: we can't do anything about the change, and so there is no point in making a big deal about it. Hell, "Anarchist" could very well one day refer to window washers. Or, in the case of my avatar, it could be a girl's name