V for Vendetta (Widescreen Edition)
List Price:
Our Price: $2.81
You Save: $3.17 (53%)
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Buy Used: from $1.49 (click here)
Category: DVD
See more DVD details
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
DVD details
Actor: Hugo Weaving, John Hurt, Natalie Portman, Stephen Fry, Stephen ReaBrand: Warner Brothers
DVD: Region Code 1
Audio: English (Unknown), Dolby Digital 5.1; English (Subtitled); Spanish (Subtitled); French (Subtitled); English (Original Language), Dolby Digital 5.1; French (Dubbed), Dolby Digital 5.1
Format: Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, DVD, NTSC, Subtitled, Widescreen
Picture Format: 2.35:1
Running Time: 132 minutes
DVD Release Date: 2006-08-01
Audience Rating: R (Restricted)
Model: 73660
Studio: Warner Home Video
Product features:
- Set against the futuristic landscape of totalitarian Britain, V For Vendetta tells the story of a mild-mannered young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman) who is rescued from a life-and-death situation by a masked man (Hugo Weaving) known only as "V." Incomparably charismatic and ferociously skilled in the art of combat and deception, V ignites a revolution when he urges his fellow citizens to rise
DVD Reviews of V for Vendetta (Widescreen Edition)
DVD Review: A Defense of V
Summary: 4 Stars
As an initial comment, I have not yet read the original graphic novel, although I would like to when I get the chance, but I have read another of Moore's dystopic creations (also soon to be a movie) "The Watchmen." At any rate, my appraisal of the movie is not based on any evaluation of the accuracy (or apparent lack thereof) by the movie in creating a film replicate of the graphic novel. Quite frankly, I'm not sure why a film MUST adhere to the source material. Such criticism is only worth advancing if the film's deviation fails on its own merit, which many here believe, while I do not.
This is the only review I've ever spent much time on, if I even have other reviews, and I only bothered because it seemed like most other reviews were one-sided (pick one side or the other). Either people saw this movie as "telling it like it is" and sticking it to the neocon fascists in the Bush administration (whom I firmly believe possess either a profound disdain for the rule of law, or, a disturbingly cynical view of what "the law" is, but whom I do not believe are personally evil people with per se malicious intent), or, people saw this as the wet dream of rabid and radical liberals frustrated with their inability to really advance an alternative vision or to successfully promote their view of what American values are. I do not think this movie fits either description.
I like this film, not because I am some blind Bush-hating, liberal (or fill in whichever other stereotype you wish, as I've seen too many in the preceding reviews to cover them all). I like it because I think the CORE message, at least the one that resonated with me, was depiction of the natural and easy tendency within free societies, to cede liberties and adherence to the rule of law, rather than the rule of men, in order to obtain greater security, when those societies have long enough enjoyed their liberties as to have either, forgotten what life is like in a society which has made such an exchange, or, the society has enjoyed the benefits of liberty and the rule of law so long that is less appreciative of both its benefits and its demerits (i.e., diminished physical security). I like how the film manages to show that when the people cede power entirely to the government, by giving up the principle that the law governs, not men, and giving up the liberties which maintain that power, the security achieved is short-lived, and the people soon find themselves facing a different fear and threat to their security from those to whom to they ceded power.
Perhaps this is a movie only someone like me can love while still being aware of these flaws and contradictions; someone who believes that the only thing that keeps our society from descending into cruelty, tyranny, barbarism, and disorder, is a strict adherence to the principle expressed in the maxim popularized by Lord Mansfield in the Somersett case: "Fiat justitia ruat caelum" (roughly, "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."). I love it, not in ignorance of its not-too subtle, and inartful jabs at contemporary society and politics, but in spite of its bludgeon to the head on those points, and in spite of its failure to address its own glaring inconsistencies. I care more about that over-arching theme, I suppose, than the particular elemental details which bother me, as well as most of those who categorically dislike the movie.
I am rather young (@25) and perhaps my political views are merely developing, but I neither consider myself liberal, moderate, nor conservative. I find myself uncomfortable occupying any perspective for too long, or at least, occupying any entirely. For me, the appeal of this movie is its points on the importance of why the law, and not men (or humans for those who insist on PC language over John Marshall's), must govern. Yes, the movie definitely takes aim at the current U.S. social and government situation. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Criticism, especially of the government and our own society is not only at the origin of this nation, but that upon which its vitality depends. As a third-year law student, looking at entering the legal profession, these themes resonated strongly with me, though I can see why they might resonate less strongly with those for whom a passion for the rule of law ranks below what they might themselves call "practicality" or "realism". But again, that's what I like about the movie, even if it is so blunt as to be insulting about it (I'm cynical enough to think that blunt may often be necessary for clarity): that fascism and tyranny always begin from a point of "realism" and "pragmatism". The law exists in order to temper passions, and temper the reason of the day, with the longstanding wisdom of forethought and basic rules by which a society and government decide they will conduct themselves. The movie definitely hit my passions there, and that's why I love it. I think it quite dramatically displays why the law must rule, and why, whenever one begins to think there is good reason or some exigency which justifies abrogating this basic principle of ordered civilization, that such thought must be rejected.
However, my reason for liking the movie also leads to the list of things I found troubling in this this movie, many already mentioned:
-V's own inconsistent stance on the use of violence and terror as just means by virtue of the justiciable quality of the ends to which they are employed (from the view of the one employing those ends). I think the directors failed to explore the fine line and the biased nature of the distinctions between "criminals" or "terrorists" or "murderers" or what-have-you, and "revolutionaries" or "freedom fighters". We clearly think that some who violently rebel and engage in violent resistance against a government are praiseworthy, while we think others that are, at least facially similar, are quite the opposite. Why this is so, and the legitimacy, if any, of our distinctions is not really explored or challenged. V is accepted as a "revolutionary" and the government as "tyrannical"...These labels are presupposed, and one either accepts or rejects them, but there is no exploration of why they are so. I thus find myself disturbed by the ferocity of V's violence against individuals who are merely pawns of the tyranny he opposes, and his casual justification of why it is just that he decide what is right and wrong, while it is unjust that the current government do the same. The validity of these distinctions would be far more interesting, and isn't explored. Thus, for me, V for Vendetta is loveable because it gives due credit to the importance of the principle of the "rule of law," but disturbs me, and appears to suffer for undercutting this principle at the same time, by failing to distinguish the "hero" and his ideals, methods, and justifications, from those of the "villains."
-the stylized violence typical of movies these days is all the more out of place in a movie that purports to tell a story of "heroes" who value human life and liberty more than do the villains;
-while I'm not sure what sort of ending I would have liked, I do not think the blowing up of Parliament suits a story that does not have the original source's more anarchic endgame in mind. I thought the ending was appropriate and stirring up to that point: the marching by the unarmed civilians against the army, that passive non-violent resistance, I thought, better resonated with the themes I loved about the movie which I thought were also its best qualities. The destruction of the building was a distraction from the real triumph: that the people, unarmed, and in the face of threats to their lives, nevertheless, boldly marched forth to reclaim their liberty and their rule, by law, rather than by the will or whim of men (be they many or few). THAT was the climax of the movie for me, and I wish THAT had been built upon more, rather than the FX extravaganza and "WOW" or "Cool, dude..." effect of blowing up Parliament.
So, in sum, I found much to love in this movie, but what I loved, also leads me to wish the directors had been as introspective as they demand their audience to be, and addressed these more significant conflicts in character and socio-political philosophy, rather than simplistically defining the good and evil characters for us.
I very much appreciated the way in which the "rule of law" as a principle is celebrated, and the dangers of the rule by human will or whim of the day are demonstrated, but thought the directors ignored the obvious fact that the hero himself, as a vigilante, necessarily engages in this same moral failure. They obviously are aware of the conflict, as demonstrated by the several instances in which Natalie Portman's character questions, or condemns V for his tactics, but they do not really satisfy me (or many others it seems) with their explanations.
Again, perhaps this is only a film only a person passionate about the law, and who has an occasional tendency to become unreasonably idealistic at times about his passions and ideals, can enjoy at those times, while realizing that the movie only matches those ideals in its broad themes, but utterly fails them in the details when examining the characters.
Description of V for Vendetta (Widescreen Edition)
A SHADOWY FREEDOM FIGHTER KNOWN ONLY AS 'V' USES TERRORISTTACTICS TO FIGHT AGAINST HIS TOTALITARIAN SOCIETY. UPON RESCUINGA GIRL FROM THE SECRET POLICE, HE ALSO FINDS HIS BEST CHANCE AT HAVING AN ALLY."Remember, remember the fifth of November," for on this day, in 2020, the minds of the masses shall be set free. So says code-name V (Hugo Weaving), a man on a mission to shake society out of its blank complacent stares in the film V for Vendetta. His tactics, however, are a bit revolutionary, to say the least. The world in which V lives is very similar to Orwell's totalitarian dystopia in 1984: after years of various wars, England is now under "big brother" Chancellor Adam Sutler (played by John Hurt, who played Winston Smith in the movie 1984), whose party uses force and fear to run the nation. After they gained power, minorities and political dissenters were rounded up and removed; artistic and unacceptable religious works were confiscated. Cameras and microphones are littered throughout the land, and the people are perpetually sedated through the governmentally controlled media. Taking inspiration from Guy Fawkes, the 17th century co-conspirator of a failed attempt to blow up Parliament on November 5, 1605, V dons a Fawkes mask and costume and sets off to wake the masses by destroying the symbols of their oppressors, literally and figuratively. At the beginning of his vendetta, V rescues Evey (Natalie Portman) from a group of police officers and has her live with him in his underworld lair. It is through their relationship where we learn how V became V, the extremities of the party's corruption, the problems of an oppressive government, V's revenge plot, and his philosophy on how to induce change.
Based on the popular graphic novel by Alan Moore, V for Vendetta's screenplay was written by the Wachowski brothers (of The Matrix fame) and directed by their protégé, James McTeigue. Controversy and criticism followed the film since its inception, from the hyper-stylized use of anarchistic terrorism to overthrow a corrupt government and the blatant jabs at the current U.S. political arena, to graphic novel fans complaining about the reconstruction of Alan Moore's original vision (Moore himself has dismissed the film). Many are valid critiques and opinions, but there's no hiding the message the film is trying to express: Radical and drastic events often need to occur in order to shake people out of their state of indifference in order to bring about real change. Unfortunately, the movie only offers a means with no ends, and those looking for answers may find the film stylish, but a bit empty. --Rob Bracco
Beyond Vendetta
 The graphic novel by Alan Moore and David Lloyd |  More by Alan Moore |  From Graphic Novel to Big Screen |
 More by Natalie Portman |  More by Hugo Weaving |  More by the Wachowski Brothers |
Bestsellers in DVD
![The Story of Jeremiah [VHS] Image](/images/noimg.gif)
The Story of Jeremiah [VHS]Vision Video; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Wresting With God [VHS]by Vision Video
Vision Video; Published: 1990-10-01; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Price in other shops:
Study Bible Video with Workbook [VHS]Spring Arbor Distributors; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Best price: $7.95
Price in other shops:
Tempo:Childrens TV Favourites Video [VHS]HarperCollins Audio; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Best price: $9.17
Price in other shops:
Tempo.Herbs:Parseley'Sb/ Party Video [VHS]HarperCollins Audio; VHS Tape; VHS Video
![Strike the Original Match [VHS] Image](/images/Strike-the-Original-Match-VHS-0001374079-X.jpg)
Strike the Original Match [VHS]New Liberty Films; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Price in other shops:
![Medjugorje The Miracles and the Message [VHS] Image](/images/Medjugorje-The-Miracles-and-the-Message-VHS-0001373293-X.jpg)
Medjugorje The Miracles and the Message [VHS]JPN Film Production; Release date: 1995-12-15; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Best price: $29.99
Mayo Clinic Echocardiography Review Course for Boards and Recertification DVD 2008by Mayo
DVD
Price in other shops:
Pediatric Diagnostic Imaging DVD: Single Userby Oakstone
DVD
Price in other shops:
Cost Accounting [VHS]by Charles T. Horngren, George Foster, Srikant M. Datar, Howard Teall
Pearson Canada, Toronto; VHS Tape; VHS Video
Similar DVDs, VHS Video, Audio CDs
Terminator 2 - Judgment DayLions Gate; Release date: 2009-05-19; DVD
Best price: $4.98
Price in other shops:
V for Vendetta MaskRubies; Rubie's Costume Co; Toy
Best price: $4.60
Price in other shops:
Sin CityBuena Vista Home Video; Release date: 2005-08-16; DVD
Best price: $2.90
Price in other shops:
The PrestigeBuena Vista Home Video; Release date: 2007-02-20; Published: 2007-02-01; DVD
Best price: $5.81
Price in other shops:
Blood Diamond (Widescreen Edition)Warner Brothers; Release date: 2007-03-20; Published: 2007-03-01; DVD
Best price: $4.08
Price in other shops:
Constantine (Widescreen Edition)REEVES,KEANU; Release date: 2007-05-15; DVD
Best price: $4.00
Price in other shops:
The Last Samurai (Two-Disc Special Edition)Warner Brothers; Release date: 2004-05-04; DVD
Best price: $2.97
Price in other shops:
300 (Single-Disc Widescreen Edition)Warner Brothers; Release date: 2007-07-31; DVD
Best price: $3.14
Price in other shops:
Watchmen (Director's Cut)Warner Brothers; Release date: 2009-07-21; DVD
Best price: $5.09
Price in other shops:
Batman Begins (Single-Disc Widescreen Edition)DC Comics; Release date: 2005-10-18; DVD
Best price: $2.99
Price in other shops: