Children of Men was a bit better, but they're both ace films.
V For Vendetta: Crap/Not Crap
- Thread starter _pH_
- Start date
Children of Men was a bit better, but they're both ace films.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
V for Vendetta was a moronic take on the story and its clear the Wachowski's and their Director (who's previous credit was 2nd Unit on Attack of the Clones) had bugger all to say about Britain or Englishness. Which was a massive missed opportunity... At least CoM had that.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Nope, it's shite.
LOL! You're crazy, it's shite!
C of M was like a Ballard novel. Crafted but essentially empty- sci fi for people with no taste
Nah, it's just shite, it's not well crafted, it's crap through and through...
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
3 shites and you're out I'm afraid KE
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
What does for shites get me?
CoM was a load of bollox; V was a crap adaption, read the source materials and you can see that the vision of the future, rooted in the 80s, made a lot more sense than CoM lame attempt...
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
Children Of Men is an excellent thriller - exciting, visually interesting and Michael Caine as a dope smoking hippy. And it has that brilliant one take shot of a building at siege.
And it has the best slow car chase ever. All this, despite starring a teak sideboard as the central character.
Shit book though.
And it has the best slow car chase ever. All this, despite starring a teak sideboard as the central character.
Shit book though.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
CoM and some fabulous cinematography, caught the essence of a decrepit Britain and London in a far more evocative way than V for Vendetta. It took in plenty of modern issues, such as terrorism, refugee's etc. V for Vendetta's slickness and lack of understanding of its setting detracted from any weight it might have had. Both films are good, although I said V was shite because I am a comic fanboy, and CoM is by no means 'Shite' whatever level you look at it.
Nanker Phelge
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
CoM is better than V for V, but still a long way off being a great film.
Caine was good, Owen did his usual tree trunk job, it was alright.
There's too much money and time spent on films which are just ok.
Caine was good, Owen did his usual tree trunk job, it was alright.
There's too much money and time spent on films which are just ok.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
CoM bored the shit out of me, Caine wasn't very good. V, for what it was, was quite entertaining in places...I could easily watch V again but you'd have to put a gun to my head to force me to watch CoM.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
How could that bore the shit out of you? I conclude that you are a popcorn munching moron.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Didn't like it the first time through, liked it more the second. Might like it a lot on the third if and when i get around to it.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
no, the crafted side is what LTC was referring to- the thriller element.
And much like Ballard the film C of M is beloved by people who only like speculative fiction when it is presented in a form they can identify with through mainstream exposure to the form the ideas are articulated in.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
I don't care for the scifi label - it was a thrilller, pure and simple
MullahNasrudin
Kick Your Own Arse
Even Alan Moore would now concede that his idea that Britain would turn fascist after a nuclear war was naive. He said as much when interviewed by Stewart Lee on R4's Chain Reaction.
So when your beloved creator contradicts your argument, it means that you are talking a load of...shite!
MullahNasrudin
Kick Your Own Arse
I take it you've met everyone that's seen CoM then? Or are you just being massively presumptuous to fit your own prejudices?
At worst, you could say it's soft sci-fi -- but then again, there's very little hard sci-fi around. I guess there isn't a big audience for it.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
I think V and CoM shouldn't be judged in comparison with their source materials. They should stand alone.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
which used sci fi/speculative ideas to drive the plot. It's typical of the sort of nonsense that people quote as 'best sci fi film of xxxx'. There are very few films that articulate sci fi tropes effectively imo. The exception to this has to be action films like Timecop and Predator which are simply using sf as a vehicle for intense violence and explosions
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
That's impossible for those who've read either or both the source material. There's always going to be bias...
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
I saw it as a thriller foremost.
Fuck hard sci fi anyway, sci fi that's nearer to our time and reality is much more interesting,
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
Like Ballard it is mundane SF.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
Not entirely. It's only impossible for prissy self-important fanboys.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
You really hate him! I think he's great!
Termite Man
zombie flesh eater
Dillinger4
Es gibt Zeit
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
yeah fuck 2001 eh?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I find him incredibly over done and airy fairy. A writer who wins at descriptive, fails on dialogue and fails hard when it comes to scenes of action.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
that's not complete space opera sci fi though
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
but it is hard sf and that is what your post said 'fuck' to.
Similar threads
