felipef

Primeiras cenas reveladas na Wizard Chicago?! "Fellas, good news. On Wednesday when I was set spying I was told by two different people that not only would TDK be there but there would be footage! My guess is that it will take place at the Wizard Mega Movie Panel on Sunday at 12:30 - 1:30 where it clearly states "Get the scoop on the next wave of comic movies... 'The Dark Knight Returns'."

Pra quem ainda não ouviu a ligação da comic con com aquele número nos ceús da convenção: http://38.119.88.37/dl/22272cb2be62995ebe612d768305b9a6/46b799e0/audio/joker.wav O Coringa forçando um refém a falar de suas ameaças...

Não leia se não quiser saber possível parte do final do filme: In the scene, the Joker's semi has already been flipped. As Dent is walking in the clip, it is behind him, but I didn't get it in the shot. It is in the same spot as it was in the images in my OP, so you can look there. It is very difficult to see, but the cops are putting some of Joker's goons into the paddy wagon as Dent (in the gray suit) is walking toward the top of the screen toward the large groups of reporters. As he gets there, you can hear one reporter say *LAST CHANCE TO AVOID SPOILERS* "Mr. Dent, Mr. Dent, was it your plan or the Batman's that led to the arrest of the Joker." You can't make it out completely in the video, but they are shooting the scene over and over, and I finally filled in all the words. I kept waiting for someone to pop out and throw acid on dent (I was hoping), but no dice.

Batsucada-do-Tumbler... Ainda bem que corre. Pelo menos deu pra conferir no som... felipef2007-08-06 18:59:04

Código F não é a minha pessoa. felipef2007-06-17 16:45:46

Será que o Bono verá o filme?

Gustavo, esse filme n�o vai dar pra confiar em quase ningu�m. Vide o review dos liberais norte-americanos. Vai ser mais ou menos assim, os f�s-nerds desse Green Day marketeiro v�o ficar de joelhos pelo filme. E aquelas pessoas incisivas contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo, v�o atirar no filme. bem, green day marketeiro? eu nao gosto do green day, mas eles fizeram muito bem em expressar sua opini�o num clipe e na musica!! falta isso no meio da musica, alguem que expresse a sua opini�o, o mundo e a criatividade artistica est� muito mediocre e robotica! veja a Madonna, fez um clipe pesado, e tirou pq teve um retorno negativo dos f�s americanos essa sim foi marketeira, se fez, tem que ir at� o fim!! contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo? ent�o sao as mesmas que s�o contra a guerra do iraque na verdade, a essa separa��o � mais politica do que idealista, os que s�o a favor(a maioria da imprensa, e alguma parte da popula��o mundial) da politica externa americana ir� odiar e criticar de forma agressiva o filme, j� os que s�o contra ir�o adorar o filme, se o filme for desse nivel, se for ruim, acho que s� quem � fanaticamente idealizado contra os americanos � que adorar�o, e ai s�o os nerds!! mas ai existe tanto os nerds pro americanos, quanto os nerds anti americanos...!! pois nerd � essencia, muito mais que conceito, se for conceito, j� se torna incoerente e inutil tal taxa��o!! na verdade, o filme n�o � uma critica aos americanos, diretamente, � uma critica a uma politica totalitaria, que usa a violencia e a opress�o pra conquistar os seus interesses, que no momento, a politica externa americana encaixa com alguma dessas caracteristicas, no passado foi a politica externa inglesa, a portuguesa, ....!! ent�o, os pro americanos que criticarem o filme com criticas claramente politizadas, ser�o os nerds pro americanos! Mas ou menos isso a�. Agora, o Green Day n�o d� n�o, Gustavo... Nem o maior surfista do Brasil consegue uma onda t�o boa... Madonna ent�o... Bem, essa nem consigo botar numa discuss�o dessas... E olha que eu dan�ava ao som dela em festinhas no final dos anos 80... �, concordo plenamente, ele nada havia feito antes, e agora, depois que todos criticam os americanos, o Green day faz american idiot!! diferentemente do Bono que bem antes de 11 de setembro j� tentava combater a pobreza, n�o que ele n�o seja marketeiro, mas ele tbm faz isso por acreditar naquilo que faz, n�o s� por marketing mas ainda sim falou, fez uma critica, por mais que seja pra vender, que foi, ainda sim foi uma critica!! tem seu lado positivo, e acho que tem que se levar em considera��o, por menor que seja a considera��o !! *engra�ado, hj mesmo tava discutindo algo assim com um amigo, ele dizendo que U2 � marketeiro e faz pra vender discos e musica realmente � ruim, e eu dizendo que � marketeiro, e tbm pq acredita nisso, e que era uma boa banda, e agora me lembro do Green Day, esse sim foi marketeiro de primeira!! aah, e o site do orkut n�o ta entrando mas andei vasculhando no orkut e achei isso aqui: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434409/ O U2, pra mim, � assim: ou�o a banda desde o meio dos 80, e me senti envergonhado com os �ltimos discos. Tenebroso... N�o entendo como pode haver falta de criatividade quando se est� t�o perto do caos... Na verdade mesmo, eles pararam no Zooropa. Infelizmente... MAS desde os tempos, mesmo antes do projeto Passengers, j� estavam lutando pelas causas do mundo. Sunday Bloddy Sunday, me lembro bem, foi uma porrada na �poca... E o Bono � uma pessoas BEM evolu�da, eu diria. Estar de cara a cara com o problemas do mundo, apertar a m�o de v�rios pol�ticos podres etc e tal. Nem o Moby que � budista faz isso... Voltando um pouco mais para o centro do t�pico. Procurem no orkut pelas comunidades do Alan Moore ou v for Vendetta. Eu tamb�m acompanho o U2 desde os 80"s, e eles foram sempre assim, n�o � modismo, pode ver desde os primeiros discos, como WAR por exemplo, e aquele primeiro disco "ao Vivo" da capa vermelha, onde Bono empunha uma bandeira branca e canta Sunday Blood Sunday. Bono sempre foi esclarecido politicamente e sempre lutou contra as desigualdades sociais, mesmo porque na Irlanda existem muitas desigualdades. Quanto ao Marketing, ele o usa a seu favor para chamar a aten��o do mundo para as causas socias e injusti�as, j� o que o Green Day faz � oportunismo barato. Big, me referia quanto a estétisa sonora ao som... Em relação à postura de causas, sim. Sempre foram... A minha tisteza é que ele não espelham isso mais nas músicas... Se é de propósito ou não, tudo bem. Eles fazem o que quiserem...

Gustavo, esse filme não vai dar pra confiar em quase ninguém. Vide o review dos liberais norte-americanos. Vai ser mais ou menos assim, os fãs-nerds desse Green Day marketeiro vão ficar de joelhos pelo filme. E aquelas pessoas incisivas contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo, vão atirar no filme. bem, green day marketeiro? eu nao gosto do green day, mas eles fizeram muito bem em expressar sua opinião num clipe e na musica!! falta isso no meio da musica, alguem que expresse a sua opinião, o mundo e a criatividade artistica está muito mediocre e robotica! veja a Madonna, fez um clipe pesado, e tirou pq teve um retorno negativo dos fãs americanos essa sim foi marketeira, se fez, tem que ir até o fim!! contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo? então sao as mesmas que são contra a guerra do iraque na verdade, a essa separação é mais politica do que idealista, os que são a favor(a maioria da imprensa, e alguma parte da população mundial) da politica externa americana irá odiar e criticar de forma agressiva o filme, já os que são contra irão adorar o filme, se o filme for desse nivel, se for ruim, acho que só quem é fanaticamente idealizado contra os americanos é que adorarão, e ai são os nerds!! mas ai existe tanto os nerds pro americanos, quanto os nerds anti americanos...!! pois nerd é essencia, muito mais que conceito, se for conceito, já se torna incoerente e inutil tal taxação!! na verdade, o filme não é uma critica aos americanos, diretamente, é uma critica a uma politica totalitaria, que usa a violencia e a opressão pra conquistar os seus interesses, que no momento, a politica externa americana encaixa com alguma dessas caracteristicas, no passado foi a politica externa inglesa, a portuguesa, ....!! então, os pro americanos que criticarem o filme com criticas claramente politizadas, serão os nerds pro americanos! Mas ou menos isso aí. Agora, o Green Day não dá não, Gustavo... Nem o maior surfista do Brasil consegue uma onda tão boa... Madonna então... Bem, essa nem consigo botar numa discussão dessas... E olha que eu dançava ao som dela em festinhas no final dos anos 80... é, concordo plenamente, ele nada havia feito antes, e agora, depois que todos criticam os americanos, o Green day faz american idiot!! diferentemente do Bono que bem antes de 11 de setembro já tentava combater a pobreza, não que ele não seja marketeiro, mas ele tbm faz isso por acreditar naquilo que faz, não só por marketing mas ainda sim falou, fez uma critica, por mais que seja pra vender, que foi, ainda sim foi uma critica!! tem seu lado positivo, e acho que tem que se levar em consideração, por menor que seja a consideração !! *engraçado, hj mesmo tava discutindo algo assim com um amigo, ele dizendo que U2 é marketeiro e faz pra vender discos e musica realmente é ruim, e eu dizendo que é marketeiro, e tbm pq acredita nisso, e que era uma boa banda, e agora me lembro do Green Day, esse sim foi marketeiro de primeira!! aah, e o site do orkut não ta entrando mas andei vasculhando no orkut e achei isso aqui: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434409/ O U2, pra mim, é assim: ouço a banda desde o meio dos 80, e me senti envergonhado com os últimos discos. Tenebroso... Não entendo como pode haver falta de criatividade quando se está tão perto do caos... Na verdade mesmo, eles pararam no Zooropa. Infelizmente... MAS desde os tempos, mesmo antes do projeto Passengers, já estavam lutando pelas causas do mundo. Sunday Bloddy Sunday, me lembro bem, foi uma porrada na época... E o Bono é uma pessoas BEM evoluída, eu diria. Estar de cara a cara com o problemas do mundo, apertar a mão de vários políticos podres etc e tal. Nem o Moby que é budista faz isso... Voltando um pouco mais para o centro do tópico. Procurem no orkut pelas comunidades do Alan Moore ou v for Vendetta. felipef2006-2-23 9:44:57

Fato ou opinião? Raz, constatação.Na boa... Ou seja (e na boa tbém), pra vc é fato. E para muitos. Quem dá valor para a opinião de "muitos" é vc, não eu. Mas pode ter certeza de que há muitos que discordam de sua "constatação". E olha que nem falei os poucos críticos que gosto de ler. Mas não precisa ficar assim só porque você gosta do Nerdelete. Não te ataquei em nenhuma momento. Porque você gosta ou não do site. Eu esculhembei apenas o site. Tomastes dores e etc...Continue lendo o site, você e seus muitos...Abraço. Sei que vc não me atacou, mas vc precisa entender que qdo falam tão mal (e com tanta certeza) de algo que a gente gosta, é da nossa natureza ficar na defensiva. Que tal se vc colocasse suas razões para não gostar do site? Pode ser que assim eu entenda seu ponto de vista, e até lhe dê razão em alguma coisa (ou não, he he). Abraços tbém. Não vou falar mal de alguma coisa que você gosta. Ser espírito de porco é algo que não tolero. Mas não gosto do editorial, da fala de bagagem e principalmente da atmosfera. Mas isso não importa mais agora... Tem orkut?Veja a visão de algumas pessoas a respeito do filme: http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=15313&tid=2447045 814329993607&na=3&nst=-2&nid=15313-2447045814329 993607-2447625828184894030 felipef2006-2-22 23:46:32

Sim. felipef2006-2-22 13:26:15

Fawkes no filme. Melhor foto até agora.

Conferência de Berilm: http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/cmp/berlin_video_presscon .html E as fotos: http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/cmp/berlin_photos_pressco n.html felipef2006-2-22 9:45:17

Confirma-se então as opiniões diversas...

E o Mike D´Angelo (que gosto) deu [51] para o filme. C+ Lucky Number Slevin (54) Wassup Rockers (53) Isolation (53) A Cock and Bull Story (52) A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints (52) V for Vendetta (51) Factotum (50) Right at Your Door (49) Friends With Money (49) Steel City (49) Flannel Pajamas (48) The Peter Pan Formula (48) TV Junkie (48) Free Zone (48) http://www.panix.com/~dangelo/bygrade06.html

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22472 It’s been interesting to sit silently on the sidelines for this one so far, having seen it at Butt-Numb-A-Thon with everyone who rushed here to AICN to sing hosannahs about this “revolutionary” motion picture that would “change the world,” and also paying close attention to the brewing controversy so articulately summed up by a reviewer on the Liberty Film Festival site, who I know has also seen the film. I haven’t written about it yet because... I just haven’t. Other things took priority. It’s not coming out until March, so it’s not like I missed anything. This past weekend, it finally started screening for the public at WonderCon in San Francisco and at the Berlin Film Festival. That odd dichotomy should say a lot about what kind of film this is. It’ll play well at a serious festival like South by Southwest, certainly, but it’s also perfect for the New York Comic-Con, where it’s showing as well. Publications like THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER and VANITY FAIR have flipped for the movie, while VARIETY dismissed it and took the opportunity to fire off a few more shots at the MATRIX trilogy for good measure. Finally, audiences are getting their first chances to decide for themselves what they think about this provocative film from writer/producers Andy and Larry Wachowski, directed by James McTeigue, and adapted (loosely or succinctly, depending on who you talk to) from the work of Alan Moore and David Lloyd. Before we even begin, I want to address the elephant in the room and say that anyone who thinks this film is just a simplistic attack on conservative America is missing the point. I’m sure that right now, being on one side of the wall or the other in the polemic war that’s been simmering ever since Bush took office must make it incredibly difficult to see something outside the narrow prism of current political metaphor, but not everything that has a political opinion is, in fact, about Bush. There is imagery in this film that refers to our present, but just as much refers to our past and even a hypothetical future. Alan Moore’s book, and this movie, are larger than any simple direct political targets, though. They are instead a reminder of how fascism works, and if the conservatives in this country are going to get upset about that, then perhaps they need to examine their own agenda. Are you a fascist? No? Well, then the movie’s probably not directly about you. Remember when the source material was written... Margaret Thatcher is a more direct political target in terms of the origins of this story than Bush is. And there are many other real-world parallels that find their way into the film that have nothing to do with any current administration anywhere. And remember... the Wachowskis first started trying to adapt this and get it produced well before Bush took office. All of that is real world business, stuff that some people will choose to carry into the theater with them, and maybe you’ll even argue that you can’t help but carry that baggage into the theater. I would argue back that anytime you do that, you’re limiting your own ability to enjoy or even understand a film. Yes, THE CRUCIBLE was written as a direct reaction to McCarthy and the Hollywood blacklist, but the reason THE CRUCIBLE will endure is because it’s a potent piece about any situation where mass hysteria and crowd thinking gets out of hand, and will always be accurate in terms of the way people relate. It’s great writing. The original Alan Moore/David Lloyd book is pretty damn great in its own right. It’s not the best thing Moore ever wrote, and it’s pretty obvious that it’s early in his career. It’s a major turning point for him as an artist, I think. It is to Moore what RUBBER SOUL is to the Beatles. I’m sure there are people who think RUBBER SOUL is their best record, and I’d never argue against it, but I think more people would say SGT. PEPPER or even THE WHITE ALBUM are their masterworks, so maybe it’s WATCHMEN or FROM HELL that you prefer. V FOR VENDETTA works because of how much Moore and Lloyd believe in the world that they’ve created, a fascist England where freedom was traded for a stifling, artificial safety, and because it focuses on particular characters in a particular situation. Calling the fears that V FOR VENDETTA articulates “left-wing” or “liberal” is rather limiting, and limited. I’m sure no one anywhere ever believes that they would be capable of survival and conformity in a world where fascism is acceptable, the norm. No one wants to believe they’d be capable of having been a “good German” during WWII. No one wants to think they’d allow something like that to happen. But it can. Of course it can. And it has and it will. And that’s why a film like this resonates. This is about the way any monolith that wants to control a nation treats its people, the way they are dehumanized, the way their spirits can be broken, and the way they are treated as less than human by the ruling class. V FOR VENDETTA makes personal that process of dehumanization in such a powerful way that I can’t imagine resisting it. Especially since Evey, the central character in both the book and the film, is brought to vivid life by Natalie Portman, doing arguably her best work since THE PROFESSIONAL. So. All of that is precursor. Let’s get down to the actual film, and let’s put everything else aside. Let’s put aside comparisons to the book. Let’s put aside real-world politics. Let’s just discuss it as a movie. As a movie, I think it’s pretty good. I think it’s got moments of greatness, and I think it also misses some of the opportunites that it sets up. Overall, I think it’s a potent piece of SF that fits neatly into a tradition of films like PLANET OF THE APES and THE OMEGA MAN, movies that wear their earnest metaphors on their sleeves, totally obvious. It’s lushly photographed by Adrian Biddle, his last film, and it’s got a great hyper-real look and feel thanks to the production design of Owen Paterson and Martin Walsh’s ultra-slick editing. The score by Dario Marianelli is particularly good, effective and memorable. What makes the film work, though, isn’t the SF setting or the look or the buckets of money that have obviously been spent on it. Nope. What makes it work is the fact that we have here something that we rarely see in SF films these days... a movie about ideas over action, character over special effects, and emotion over action. Y’know... like THE MATRIX. I’m sure there will be a lot of speculation about just how much control the Wachowskis really had over the film, and I’m equally willing to bet we’ll see a whole lot of “McTeigue didn’t really direct this” comments, and this will probably end up being the new POLTERGEIST in terms of a director being disrespected or ignored in favor of the producer, but without actually having been on-set for the whole shoot, it’s kind of hard to say who did what. McTeigue is indeed the credited director, and it’s a really accomplished bit of filmmaking for someone’s first time out. It’s obvious that the creative influence of the Wachowskis can be felt in every frame of the film, and that this is of a piece with their MATRIX films in terms of production value. It feels like the logical next step fro them, and it will fit neatly into their filmographies when people look back at their careers. Many of the things that concern them the most as writers are on display here, and it helps that Hugo Weaving gives voice to V. There are two performances that have to work if V FOR VENDETTA is going to deliver. The first is Evey, and as I said before, Natalie Portman does really nice work here. I know that James Purefoy was replaced during production, and that Hugo Weaving stepped in to play V. I’m not sure how much of what we see onscreen is Weaving, but the voice is his throughout, and he’s wonderful, commanding and playful and sad and angry in equal measure. He has the incredibly difficult task of never once showing his face, but still having to give a nuanced and subtle performance as a human being, and not just a mask. As with the book, the emotional highlight of the film is an extended sequence in which Evey is captured by the government, held for weeks, and tortured in an effort to get information from her about the identity and location of V. It’s translated to the screen almost word for word from the book, beat for beat, and it’s even more powerful than I expected it to be. It also serves as one of the most succinct and beautiful summations of what torture is meant to do and how it can be withstood that exists in any film. So why am I not raving about the movie the way many of the BNAT attendees were in December? Why didn’t I make it a part of my “best of the year” list like Harry did? Because this film is so heavy on the metaphor, there are places where I think it disconnects from real human experience, and that bothered me. I also think it has an easy third act. There’s never really any danger that V will not accomplish his goals, because he seems to be omnipotent and magic, able to do anything, be anywhere, and ignore whatever laws of physics he feels like. There are a few action sequences where there’s a sort of next-step-bullet-time effect that’s used to show the movement of knives through the air that seem unnecessary. This isn’t an action film, and in a way, the few action scenes that are included sort of stop the show cold. Having said that, I would still recommend this to anyone who wants to see SF treated with respect, or who has wondered when we would finally see a film capture the precise flavor of an Alan Moore book. Even though this film take liberties with the narrative, it works overtime to maintain the same ideas that the book tried to express, and it’s sort of incredible that this is being released by a studio as huge as Warner Bros. Just remember... conservatives aren’t fascists, and liberals aren’t hippies or pinkos, and it is possible to watch and even enjoy a film that deals with political themes without having to agree with every single idea in it. I don’t think V FOR VENDETTA is going to change the world. I don’t think it’s going to cause any sort of revolution. I don’t think this film will even set off a major debate in the media. I do think that it will provide potent fodder for conversation to anyone who approaches it with an open mind, though, and that alone makes it worthwhile. I’ve been down with a particularly nasty stomach virus for a little while, so everything I was working on got waylaid. I’m starting to get up and around, so keep your eyes peeled for the real return of the DVD SHELF and some new reviews for both films and, yes, scripts. Also, get ready for a series of special articles and surprises all designed to help celebrate the tenth anniversary of AICN, all starting soon. 2006 is going to be a great year here at the site, and I look forward to sharing it with all of you. Until then... "Moriarty" out.

V for Vendetta (U.S.-Germany) A Warner Bros. Pictures release and presentation in association with Virtual Studios of a Silver Pictures production, in association with Anarchos Prods. (U.S.) with the assistance of Medienboard Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany). Produced by Joel SilverJoel Silver, Grant Hill, Andy WachowskiAndy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski. Executive producer, Benjamin Waisbren. Co-producers, Roberto Malerba, Henning Molfenter, Carl L. Woebcken. Directed by James McTeigue. Screenplay, Andy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski, based on the graphic novel illustrated by David Lloyd, published by Vertigo/DC Comics. Evey - Natalie Portman V - Hugo Weaving Finch - Stephen Rea Deitrich - Stephen Fry Adam Sutler - John Hurt Creedy - Tim Pigott-Smith Dominic - Rupert Graves Lewis Prothero - Roger Allam Dascomb - Ben Miles Delia Surridge - Sinead Cusack Valerie - Natasha Wightman Etheridge - Eddie Marsan Little Glasses Girl - Billie Cook By LESLIE FELPERINAlthough often visually striking and undercoated by a compelling sci-fi concept, graphic-novel adaptation "V for Vendetta" feels flat as a storyboard. Chiming faintly with current counterculture vibe in higher-browed films, dystopian "Vendetta" posits a masked "terrorist" hero (Hugo Weaving) trying to overthrow a fascist state in future BlightyBlighty. Helmed by James McTeigue, pic suffers from many of same problems as last two installments of producers Andy and Larry WachowskiLarry Wachowski's "Matrix" franchise: indigestible dialogue, pacing difficulties and too much pseudo-philosophical info. Pic should open with a bang in late March but may fizzle quickly. Alan Moore, the author of the much admired graphic novel "V for Vendetta," disassociated himself from this production and had his name removed from the credits. This should make his fan base extra wary, especially since two critically panned pics ("From Hell," "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen""The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen") have already been hatched from options sold on Moore's work. Plot differs substantially from the written version, which was issued complete as a graphic novel in 1989. Simplified movie version, penned by the Wachowski brothers, gamely tries to retain key plot points that will serve as mass market entertainment, while half-heartedly updating Moore's allegorical digs at Thatcher's Britain in the '80s to reflect current leftist fears about what a future totalitarian state might repress -- not just homosexuality but Islam, too. Brit auds, however, may feel pic has missed a trick by not taking a sharper swipe at Tony Blair's regime. Opening prologue shows Guy Fawkes, the Catholic conspirator who tried to blow up Parliament in 1605 and whose "treason" is remembered every Nov. 5 in the U.K. with fireworks displays. Post-credits, story shifts to 2020, after worldwide unrest, mysterious deadly viral outbreaks and fear have caused the populace to elect a neo-fascist state, run by demagogic Chancellor Adam Sutler (John Hurt). On Nov. 4, TV station gopher Evey (Natalie PortmanNatalie Portman) is saved from a gang of Fingermen, thuggish quasi-police agents intent on raping her, by V (Weaving), a poetry-spouting, caped avenger wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, who at midnight blows up the Old Bailey, London's central criminal court. The government tries to spin the explosion, but V breaks into the station where Evey works and manages to get his revolutionary, anti-Sutler message broadcast, promising to blow up Parliament in exactly a year's time. While at the station, he also saves Evey from two coppers, Finch (Stephen Rea) and his sidekick Dominic (Rupert Graves), who've come to arrest her. Pic next metronymically crosscuts between V killing off various characters who wronged him, and Finch and Dominic investigating the murders, which leads to lots of explicatory flashbacks. Thesping lineup offers an embarrassment of riches, which, unfortunately, the weak helming by McTeigue rather squanders. Bambi-eyed Portman cries affectingly, and looks fetching with a shaved head, but her character is essentially passive and not especially interesting. (Portman's accent also wavers distractingly across classes, from Cockney to middle-England posh.) Meanwhile, the film suffers as its most active character, V, is hidden behind a mask and helmeted with one of CherCher's old Cleopatra-style wigs for almost the entire running time. Weaving tries hard with voice and movement to add expression, but there's still nearly zero chemistry between the leads. Supports, cast predictably, are mostly just OK. Sinead Cusack as one of V's victims manages to register one of pic's few moments of emotional complexity. Helming debutant McTeigue cites in press notes that 1965's "The Battle of Algiers" was one of the film's stylistic inspirations, but evidence here suggests he may be thinking of an entirely imaginary film that bears no relation to that docudrama classic. Perhaps helmer thinks that the trite cutaways in "Vendetta" to stereotypically ordinary Brits roused by V's message bear some likeness to the fervid mix of minor characters in Gillo Pontecorvo's film. In the end, competent but bland craft contributions ensure pic looks less like sci-fi stalwarts "A Clockwork Orange" and "Fahrenheit 451" and more like "Batman Begins" or "Van Helsing." Action sequences are serviceable but disappointing given the Wachowski pedigree, the most striking being the final carve-up between V and a room full of heavies. Pic is thankfully light on CGI work and gets its most rousing moments from old-fashioned pyrotechnics and, of all things, a huge domino cascade. Camera (Technicolor, widescreen), Adrian Biddle; editor, Martin Walsh; music, Dario Marianelli; production designer, Owen Paterson; art directors, Sarah Horton, Sebastian Krawinkel, Steve Bream; set decorator, Peter Walpole; costume designer, Sammy Sheldon; sound (Dolby Digital/DTS Digital/SDDS), Tom Sayers; supervising sound editor/sound designer, Glenn Freemantle; special effects supervisor, Uli Nefzer; visual effects supervisors, Matt Johnson, Thrain Shadbolt; associate producer, Jessica Alan; assistant director, Alex Kirby; casting, Lucinda Syson. Reviewed at Berlin Film Festival (noncompeting), Feb. 12, 2006. Running time: 131 MIN. (English dialogue) Variety is striving to present the most thorough review database. To report inaccuracies in review credits, please click here. We do not currently list below-the-line credits, although we hope to include them in the future. Please note we may not respond to every suggestion. Your assistance is appreciated. Date in print: Tue., Feb. 14, 2006, Los Angeles http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117929587?categoryid=31&amp ; ;cs=1 felipef2006-2-22 9:30:3

The new film V for Vendetta is a seriously flawed, but entertaining, take on Alan Moore's comic series of the same title. It concerns a young woman who works in a TV studio, Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman), and her political awakening at the hands of the masked revolutionary known only as V (Hugo Weaving). Together, they fight the Orwellian government that has taken over an England of the near future. This government is lead by the slightly insane, but still compelling, Chancellor Sutler (John Hurt). The plot itself is interesting and well told. It gives the film a purpose and shows a certain amount of political awareness. It suggests that society's problems aren't caused by terrorists, but by our fear of terrorists and what the government does with that fear. Though this idea is the basis for the plot, the film uses it more as an excuse for action sequences then as a complex thematic element worthy of exploration. This helps link the plot-points thematically and prevents the movie from seeming completely pointless, but doesn't provide any material for discussion after the movie is over. The characters don't provide much to hold on to either. Though Evey and V are each given a back story, they are never really fleshed out as characters. A motive for revenge is not the same as showing what compels a character to seek that revenge. The actors themselves never add anything significant to the characters. All of the acting is adequate and no one can be singled out as being the worst in the film. Ms. Portman, however, seems to be rehashing her performance as Queen Amidala in the Star Wars prequels, which prevents the bar from being set very high. Written by Matrix creators the Wachowski Brothers and directed by the Assistant Director of the entire trilogy, James McTiegue, this film owes a lot to those predecessors. The visual style is almost a direct lift from the Matrix films. The use of high contrast film stock is a good example. In this case, the high contrast detracts from the overall aesthetic because it attempts to make the movie seem more “real” and “gritty.” Instead, it only succeeds in making the film look like a car commercial. This technique has been overused in action films and now makes them all feel like they “have been done before.” Add to this an overwhelming score that is spread thick over every frame and the filmmakers prove that they have no confidence in their own visual abilities. Film is a visual medium. Good cinematography and careful editing are usually enough to convey any emotion. Music should be used to heighten that emotion, not as a billy club to beat the audience into feeling a certain way. In The Matrix, the Wachowskis perfected the use of bold, iconic imagery to encode a look of “cool” in the films. In V, McTiegue attempts the same thing, but with much less aplomb. Because of this, the props, costumes, and the sets look a little flat and lacking in detail. Rather then creating powerful images that grab and hold the audience's attention, McTiegue only succeeds in trying to use a gimmick. The failure to create an interesting visual feeling in the movie could be what inspired its editing, which is so fast that even the most patient film-goer may leave the theater with a bad case of ADD. The editor, Martin Walsh, refuses to leave any shot in place for more then a few seconds. This can be a useful technique when in the midst of an action sequence because it keeps things exciting. However, when an entire movie is cut this fast, it becomes irritating. Consequently, when an action sequence comes along and fast cutting becomes necessary, it is no longer effective. Because of this, the movie lacks emotional highs and lows. Everything runs together and each moment feels the same as the one before. This is reflected not just within each scene, but in the pacing of the entire movie. The story takes place over the course of one year, but feels like it takes only a few days. Every event happens so quickly that referencing the date in the dialogue is the only thing that lets the audience know when time has passed. Film techniques are a lot like crack – use a little and get high, use too much and lose that high. If the filmmakers learned this, they might, one day, create a truly great film. Instead, audiences are treated to yet another mediocrity. V for Vendetta is the kind of film you watch once, but never think about again. It won't cause any serious ripples in the flow of cinematic history, but it won't leave anyone in disgust either. The simplistic way it deals with complex issues, as well as its unoriginal aesthetic prevent it from being memorable. It will provide an amusing way to spend an afternoon, but don't expect anything you haven't already seen. Overall Grade – C- http://iesb.net/warnerbros2006/021506.php

Continuando com as news, porque é a única coisa que me interessa. Direto do: http://www.natalieportman.com/ : The one bit of V news today is Australian Empire Magazine giving it 5 stars. v4v posted a summary...

Fato ou opinião? Raz, constatação.Na boa... Ou seja (e na boa tbém), pra vc é fato. E para muitos. Quem dá valor para a opinião de "muitos" é vc, não eu. Mas pode ter certeza de que há muitos que discordam de sua "constatação". E olha que nem falei os poucos críticos que gosto de ler. Mas não precisa ficar assim só porque você gosta do Nerdelete. Não te ataquei em nenhuma momento. Porque você gosta ou não do site. Eu esculhembei apenas o site. Tomastes dores e etc... Continue lendo o site, você e seus muitos... Abraço.

Gustavo, esse filme não vai dar pra confiar em quase ninguém. Vide o review dos liberais norte-americanos. Vai ser mais ou menos assim, os fãs-nerds desse Green Day marketeiro vão ficar de joelhos pelo filme. E aquelas pessoas incisivas contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo, vão atirar no filme. bem, green day marketeiro? eu nao gosto do green day, mas eles fizeram muito bem em expressar sua opinião num clipe e na musica!! falta isso no meio da musica, alguem que expresse a sua opinião, o mundo e a criatividade artistica está muito mediocre e robotica! veja a Madonna, fez um clipe pesado, e tirou pq teve um retorno negativo dos fãs americanos essa sim foi marketeira, se fez, tem que ir até o fim!! contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo? então sao as mesmas que são contra a guerra do iraque na verdade, a essa separação é mais politica do que idealista, os que são a favor(a maioria da imprensa, e alguma parte da população mundial) da politica externa americana irá odiar e criticar de forma agressiva o filme, já os que são contra irão adorar o filme, se o filme for desse nivel, se for ruim, acho que só quem é fanaticamente idealizado contra os americanos é que adorarão, e ai são os nerds!! mas ai existe tanto os nerds pro americanos, quanto os nerds anti americanos...!! pois nerd é essencia, muito mais que conceito, se for conceito, já se torna incoerente e inutil tal taxação!! na verdade, o filme não é uma critica aos americanos, diretamente, é uma critica a uma politica totalitaria, que usa a violencia e a opressão pra conquistar os seus interesses, que no momento, a politica externa americana encaixa com alguma dessas caracteristicas, no passado foi a politica externa inglesa, a portuguesa, ....!! então, os pro americanos que criticarem o filme com criticas claramente politizadas, serão os nerds pro americanos! Mas ou menos isso aí. Agora, o Green Day não dá não, Gustavo... Nem o maior surfista do Brasil consegue uma onda tão boa... Madonna então... Bem, essa nem consigo botar numa discussão dessas... E olha que eu dançava ao som dela em festinhas no final dos anos 80...

Fato ou opinião? Raz, constatação.Na boa... Ou seja (e na boa tbém), pra vc é fato. E para muitos.

Gustavo, esse filme não vai dar pra confiar em quase ninguém. Vide o review dos liberais norte-americanos. Vai ser mais ou menos assim, os fãs-nerds desse Green Day marketeiro vão ficar de joelhos pelo filme. E aquelas pessoas incisivas contra qualquer tipo de terrorismo, vão atirar no filme. felipef2006-2-21 10:30:13

Fato ou opinião? Raz, constatação. Na boa...