V for Van Dyke

By sizemore Last edited 161 months ago
V for Van Dyke

More American fretting we're afraid. It seems that the troubled production of Alan Moore's V for Vendetta movie has hit another glitch. Should the release date be moved back from November the 5th (which was kind of the whole point as far as the idiots making the movie were concerned) since some bombs went off in London in July?

Can't quite see the logic there ourselves, but then we wouldn't have adapted one of our very favourite books by ripping its guts out and then pissing in Alan Moore's eye. Different strokes and all that though. Comic Book Resources have the scoop on the story and a word or two for the WB mob:

Since I understand Warner Bros representatives read this column, and in some cases act on it, as a London resident who walked to work through the chaos last Thursday, I'd like to voice my support not to change the date. We've had bombs before, we've had bombs again, much of "V For Vendetta" revolves itself around the concept of terrorism— one of the appeals of the movie. The recent events have made it more relevant, not less.

We actually considered the book not to be about terrorism at all, but rather fascism and how easy that slide into totalitarianism becomes once you start looking for scapegoats. From what is mentioned about the script in the same story we're guessing that the movie falls even further from the book than we feared:

It's impossible to read this objectively. I keep running up against Evey not setting out as a prostitute before she gets attacked, the V V V V speech, the abandonment of any mention of anarchy, the allegory of Guy Fawkes being boosted, the lack of subtlety in dialogue, V not being God in his address to the public, the reinvention of the Voice Of Fate as a shock jock and the mixture of Americanism and Dick Van Dykeism of London

Shock jock? We really must get around to filming our version of A Catcher in the Rye with Bruce Forsythe as Holden Caulfield.

Last Updated 12 July 2005