Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

V FOR VENDETTA Script Review... And It Ain't Pretty!!

Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...

This guy has obviously read the Wachowskis script for V FOR VENDETTA, the same supposed production draft that I read, and he’s got some serious gripes. Keep in mind, last week’s big hooha in the world of Alan Moore fans was the news that Alan pretty much threw a bitch fit via Rich Johnston’s column and threw some serious aspersions on the project, and on Silver’s conduct as a producer. It’s a well-written piece, and I think many of the complaints he has are serious complaints about the adaptation. I’ve got some issues with it, too, but I think I differ in one major way: I think the Wachowskis are trying to make something that will play as a film, but that evokes the spirit of the graphic novel. The movie is, by design, less complex, less dense. Some of my favorite material from the book is simply gone. It’s a bit of a shock if you read the book and the script in the same 11 hour flight. In the end, I liked the script, and this guy really, really didn’t. I have a feeling there will be a lot of hardcore fans of the book that will echo this reviewer’s complaints when they finally see the movie.

Anyway... check it out:

Hey Harry, figured you might be interested in a review of the V for Vendetta script. I did a review ages back for the abysmal Time Machine and once again bring tidings of muted joy.

V for Vendetta

Written by Larry and Andy Wachowski

2nd Edition

September 22, 2004

166 pages

This is somewhat spoileriffic. Tread lightly.

It simply isn't fair. It is absolutely not fair that the work of someone like Alan Moore is continually abused by hack writers with limited imagination and muted vision. I know we've all decried them already, but let's go through Moore's box office successes, if only for posterity, shall we?

From Hell –

Written by: Terry Hayes and Rafael Yglesias

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen –

Written by: James Robinson


Written by: Kevin Brodbin and Frank A. Capello

Resounding successes aren't they? In all fairness, From Hell, when compared to League looks like a fucking lost work of Shakespeare. Nevermind that Hayes and Yglesias completely gutted (clever, huh?) the original source material and produced a horribly predictable and rather sterile world. It was actually rather peculiar how completely clinical everything in that world appeared, despite all the affected grime and dirt that had been layered on the sets by art directors. The look was certainly black enough, but the film's soul was completely missing. They were unwilling to get anywhere near as black as the comic book had when they adapted it. Not that it needed the extra gore, but the film simply refused to force the audience's nose into the stink and filth of the world, to say nothing of the carnage.

And League. Just a fucking trainwreck. Special effects that looked like they were done on a producer's home computer, an ineffective and generally poorly cast Sean Connery and a storyline that absolutely stands as the pre-eminent definition of "sub par" and "hackish." Even watching it on HBO is tedious. God help everyone who paid to see that fetid pile of shit in the theater.

*Constantine is only an indirect mention, since he created the character, but not the Hellblazer books. The character being turned into an L.A. resident aside (you fanboys always pick on the important details, don't you?), the story was at best competent, at worst another sub-par adaptation that lacked a great deal of the original's spirit. Not great, but competent. Once more, compared to League, it's a work of genius only by virtue of its company. (Sorry, I just hated that film sooooooooooo much.)

All of that aside, what is the binding tie between all three? Besides general lackluster-verging-on-shitty execution, the main connection between all is Alan Moore's request to be removed from the film.

Which brings me to V for Vendetta and the fact that Moore has once again, requested his name be removed from the film. Not only that, but he is severing his ties with DC after delivering his final League book. Now, given that the Wachowski's wrote the screenplay and the Wachowski's certainly possess ample imagination (*cough*), it would make one at least hope that they'd respect someone who possesses a similarly large imagination and recognize the precision thereof.

Or not.

Prime example, as we are introduced to V for the first time in a scene that is taken directly from the book with little deviation up till this point. Those who have read the book know how V first meets Evey, in the dark alley after rescuing her. Here is, word for word, the speech written for V by the Wachowski brothers.

He indicates his mask


"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vangquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.

The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."


Are you like, a crazy-person?

Stop laughing. I still have a review to write.


It's rare that written dialogue angers me, but when I read the first interaction between V and Evey, it made me livid. They had already swept the rug out from underneath the very character that is to carry the entire film. Rather than present him as he is in the book, an exacting and charismatic mind, they first give him the aforementioned speech. Then the event, the very thing that is intended to kick off the entire film, the destruction of Madame Justice and Old Bailey, is prefaced by a misguided and generally retarded approximation by the Wachowski's on what constitutes "charisma." These are the same two people that wrote the heavy-handed monologuing of the Matrix films, so take a guess as to how V is written.

After that point, the character is buying back credibility, not existing as a charismatic and dangerous individual. The destruction of the two landmarks and V's behavior during this is such a hugely negative establishing scene for the character that he never really attains the value that all of the other characters in the film appear to fear him for. This character is not attractive because he conducts Beethoven, conductor's baton and all, while blowing up a landmark. He's attractive because not only are his ideas dangerous, but he has the willingness and confidence to execute them with little or no fear. This does not mean a character who is flippant in their portrayal of detached cool should be written. And yet, that is what we get.

If the Wachowski's could rewrite the first 30-40 pages of the script, they'd have a decent story on their hands, although the script would still need some massive doctoring. Granted, their handling of the passage of a year is paltry and the inter-governmental clawings are glossed over, but the overall structure of the story is preserved. There are no power struggles really alluded to until the very last act of the play where certain character's wife says, out of the blue, "This could be the chance we've been waiting for." Other characters, the Priest and Finch for instance, are brought in to do their one thing to push the story along and never really exist as they do in the book, namely as people living and reacting to the governmental system in place.

Thankfully, the one thing that remains most untouched are the Larkhill moments when Surridge's diary is read and we learn about V's genesis. As written, it is perfect in note and tone to what the original book was trying to do. They make no definite allusions to who V is, make no references to his appearance. Nothing and thank God for it.

Another significant part of the book that remains largely pure is the torture and mind-warp of Evey. It is almost beat-for-beat the same and works so much better without the Wachowksi's editorializing and tinkering. They even leave the letter in. But, once again, provided the audience hasn't gone brain dead from the "V" monologue, the character of V has been pre-emptively sabotaged. The scene doesn't hold the same weight or meaning. Not only that, but the entire conclusion to it is telegraphed with the way Evey is captured to begin with.

The thing that suffers the most, aside from the horrid opening?

Naturally, it is the ending.

And yes, there are huge spoilers ahead. Go away if you want to preserve some semblance of purity when you see it eventually.

Last chance.

As the film is coming to its end, and the riots are taking place, V and Evey are going about executing their final plan. Apparently, at this point in the film the Wachowski's were uncertain of the audience's ability to grasp V as a symbol, as someone representative of each and every citizen of England, so they decide to help them out. Their idea of helping the audience along? Each and every citizen of England that riots is wearing a V mask. Nevermind where these masks have come from (if they're from V, that's simply dumb. If there's some plant in fascist England mass-producing them, that's also dumb), everyone is wearing them and it strikes terror in the hearts of the Bad People.

The script ends about four or five pages before the book does. If you've read it, you know where this is and it is somewhat unsatisfying that the script leaves us with Evey smiling at the camera, but that's where it comes to a shuddering halt.

I'm not at all surprised at Moore's removal. Granted, this is the second draft and there've surely been rewrites (hopefully on the introductory moments with V, especially the monologue), but as it stands the script is not concerned with the ideas Moore had put into play. There is nothing sinister about the government. It isn't subtle and manipulative at all like the graphic novel presented it to be. It is Evil with a capital E, black bags over the head and everything. Pothrero is not the Voice of England, but a screaming voice, devoid of nuance and subtlety, a damning indication of elementary screenwriting by two hacks. He's fucking Fred Phelps, veins bulging and eyes wide. As he is written now, he's a caricature. Not a character. Not the Lewis Pothrero of the book, which is the correct Pothrero, not because it was Moore who wrote him, but because the character of that book was an accurate and critical visualization of a form of propaganda. He is someone people would watch for guidance and support, he would be their voice. The character of the script is a fucking annoyance, someone you'd turn off in a split second only to put an end to his ceaseless bleating. And I don't buy for a second that the moment your society enters into totalitarianism, you settle for bleating. Hitler did not bleat, Mussolini did not bleat, W did not bleat, and the Voice of England should not bleat. But bleat he does.

God, I wanted to love this script. Even after the first 40 pages, when the story finally began to gather momentum, I was cheering for a conclusion that'd dispel the horrible curse that Moore has been suffering under. Up until the V army appears, I was willing to compromise for a very pedestrian adaptation. There are so many sins committed, though, so many horrible characters drawn from the novel that it is almost an alien creation as a result. If I had given birth to a flawed masterpiece such as V for Vendetta in the first place, there would be no way in hell I'd want this mutilated fetus in exchange for it splayed out on the screen for everyone to watch.

If you use this, please let them know that Kurt Hectic sent it in.

Like I said… the guy makes some cogent, well-observed points. I’m still optimistic that the film will be, for the uninitiated, a pretty subversive and challenging ride, and a film that raises many of the important questions that the book did, if not in the exact same way.

I’m really curious to see when they’ll put together a trailer. Could we see one in front of BATMAN? I would if I were DC/Warner Bros. and I were trying to establish my brand. I haven’t heard a peep, though, so I guess we’ll find out next week. In the meantime, thanks, Kurt. Great work.

"Moriarty" out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • May 31, 2005, 5:35 a.m. CST

    With the Wachowski bros. writing, what do you expect?

    by zikade zarathos

    When I heard they were involved with the project, I just assumed they'd be directing and someone else writing. Now I know it was just wishful thinking. Having them write and giving the directing mantle to a first-timer is a horrible misuse of talent. Natalie Portman shaved her head for this?

  • May 31, 2005, 5:38 a.m. CST

    FIRST!! And Sign the Crispin Glover as the Joker Petition

    by RIVERO

  • May 31, 2005, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Not feeling good about this one

    by TheWatchman

  • May 31, 2005, 6:14 a.m. CST

    Hollywood is evil

    by chien_sale

  • May 31, 2005, 6:15 a.m. CST

    Wow, a coherent review!

    by Monkey Butler

    Thanks for that. Seriously, home viewers shouldn't try to emulate Harry when they send in their reviews. Harry's reviews work because we know enough about him to know how much weight to put behind his review of a given movie. Anyway, how good could a Silver/Wachoski film be? Half the films that the Wachoski's have made have been utter dogshit, and 3/4 have been derivitive and unoriginal. I'm not suprised that they wrote such a stupid, stupid introduction. If however's playing V actually pulls off those lines, they'll have my money, because I honestly believe that there is not a single person alive who could say that shit straight-faced.

  • May 31, 2005, 6:33 a.m. CST

    Well, what a fucking surprise this ain't!!!

    by alucardvsdracula

    EVERYTIME the Hollywood money machine gets a hold of something half decent they ruin it, why should this project be any different.

  • May 31, 2005, 6:35 a.m. CST

    Why this makes me so sad

    by Almost Sexy

    I have been dreading (but largely expecting) news like this for some time. Maybe it's cause I don't really read a lot of comics, or I'm just hopelessly contrarian, but I've always found V to be Moore's most moving and engrossing work. That monologue reads like something from the 60's Batman tv show. I wish therre had been a group of fans with the same investment Watchmen fans have who could have ridden herd on the project. I probably wouldn't have the heart to see it in any case. A crummy Watchmen movie I oculd handle, but a matricized V?? Bummer

  • May 31, 2005, 6:56 a.m. CST


    by Trevor Goodchild

    Somebody explain to me why firing a missile at a city being destroyed by bombs would save it. How did Jekyll have a big hat to fit him when he was captured? Did he get changed while changing? Or did grab it on the way out and not bother to get anything else especially made to fit his alter ego? How did he know what to do when in a sinking submarine to save it? How did a naked Invisible man survive artic conditions while naked? Why was the Phantom actually in Venice as it blew up?

  • May 31, 2005, 7:02 a.m. CST

    The Graphic Novel.

    by Trevor Goodchild

    Can a TBer that has read The League Of Gentleman tell me what were the worst omissions and alterations made by Hollywood. Apart from Tom Sawyer. And why Tom Sawer? That's like having Oliver Twist in it and having him know Kung Fu. Why not Billy the Kid or Davey Crocket. I feel bad for Norrington. He is clearly a visionary director and would live to his Live Action Akira.

  • May 31, 2005, 7:07 a.m. CST

    Bet they change the mask.

    by Trevor Goodchild

    Is it still set in England?

  • May 31, 2005, 7:34 a.m. CST

    Should we be surprised?

    by JCubedz

    Since the Wachowskis are plagorizors should we really be surprosed that they dont have the talent we once thought they did? Oh thats right you have never once even bothered to mention how they lost a copyright infringment lawsuit because they stole the whole idea of the Matrix from a black female author.

  • May 31, 2005, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Wow, I hadn't thought of the dialogue.

    by FluffyUnbound

    I just wasn't thinking. Of course in an adaptation there's a good chance that entire new stretches of dialogue will have to be invented, for purposes of compression and exposition. And I guess when you're adapting V, you'll take your best shot at writing dialogue in the style and spirit of his existing dialogue. And I guess in this case the W Bros. just failed. Sometimes you fail, and that's all there is to it. That looks more like something Daffy Duck might say.

  • May 31, 2005, 7:55 a.m. CST


    by darthferris

    Aye, the studios grow more devious with every passing day. By force feeding us this supposedly negative review, they hope to create a ground swell of support for this project. I, for one, will not be fooled.

  • May 31, 2005, 8:18 a.m. CST

    Re: From Hell

    by HypeEndsHere

    "the film simply refused to force the audience's nose into the stink and filth of the world, to say nothing of the carnage." Well, either that or the conspiracy that Moore came up with was completely fucking preposterous. i certainly know why I thought it sucked. (Also, Depp and Graham weren't helping)

  • May 31, 2005, 8:24 a.m. CST


    by PVIII

  • May 31, 2005, 8:26 a.m. CST

    seriously though,

    by PVIII

    The Wachowski's can't really write worth shit...

  • May 31, 2005, 8:34 a.m. CST

    Never had high hopes for Vendetta

    by moviemaniac-7

    It's the Wachowski's, those same guys (or guy and girl) who wrote the decent Bound and the criminally overrated Matrix. Ve for Vendetta is a solid graphic novel that deserves real talents behind the camera and not some self declared pseudo psychological whining bitches like the Wachowskis. I will probably pick this one up on DVD rental a long, long time from now.

  • May 31, 2005, 8:52 a.m. CST

    i hate reading script reviews

    by ZO

    from guys apparently trying out for reader jobs. ponderous reading and the sly humor? not sly enough

  • May 31, 2005, 8:58 a.m. CST

    it's fake

    by Jar Jar 4 Prez

    It's totally fake. The Wachowski bros know what "verisimillitude" means.

  • May 31, 2005, 9:26 a.m. CST

    LXG Alterations -Trevor Goodchild

    by theoneofblood

    What did they change? Pretty much EVERY-FUCKING-THING! Here's just a quick list that I can knock off the top of my head: 1) COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY, that's right. The LXG movie had almost nothing to do with the original graphic novel in terms of the narrative. 2) There were no cars speeding through the streets of Venice. 3) Allan Quartermain was not a hardcore mofo who somehow knew about automatic weapons fifteen years before they were supposed to be invented, he was an old man dragged into a final assignment. He was courageous and noble, but he was nothing like Sean Connery's portrayl as some kind of superhero. 4) Tom Sawyer did not exist, but more importantly, neither did Dorian Gray. 5) Captain Nemo actually made sense as a character and not some random "pirate". Also, his submarine did not magically fit in the canals of Venice or some such utter bullshit. 6) Mina Harker was not some vampire who had a "mysterious past" with Dorain Grey. 7) HYDE WAS A PSYCHOPATH. He was a monsterous killing machine in the graphic novels, frequently indulging in the disembowelment and amputation of his enemies. He often ATE parts of his victims as well. 8) The Invisible Man was evil. 9) The references to classic literature characters were clever and inventive. ALL OF THIS IS JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.

  • May 31, 2005, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Sounds dumb

    by ThingsThatTimDog

    Very dumb

  • May 31, 2005, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Never read this . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . but its been high on my list for a while. On another note, how bout Adam Sandler's lates 'tard fest coming in at #3 for its opening weekend?

  • May 31, 2005, 9:41 a.m. CST

    News Flash: Hollywood rewites authors script.

    by cookylamoo

    This is right up there with "Dog Bites Man."

  • May 31, 2005, 9:46 a.m. CST

    I'm pretty sure this review is of the first draft of V...

    by switters

    ... the script this guy reviewed may be the one from 2000 or 2001. Check out the link below to see what I'm talking about.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:11 a.m. CST

    on adam sandler movies

    by PVIII

    yeah, 3rd place with 60 million dollars with a budget of 88. Adam Sandler is the best bet in hollywood right now. Even 50 first dates came out with 45 million.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:16 a.m. CST

    "Can a TBer that has read The League Of Gentleman tell me what w

    by Stan the Bat

    Well, for starters, in the book, Mina is a tough, intelligent woman who&#39;s the de facto leader of the group. The character is borrowed from a little-known book by Bram Stoker </sarcasm>; Moore&#39;s Mina has unexplained scars, some the kind that can be hidden by a scarf, and some not. But mostly she&#39;s smart and tough and a great character- in the book. In the movie, she&#39;s Elvira, Queen of the Night. There&#39;s no one particular change that ruins the movie- the problem with the movie script is pervasive; Moore doesn&#39;t assume that he&#39;s writing for an audience of idiots, and the screenwriters did. But if I had to pick one change that bugged me more than any other, it&#39;d be the way they completely eradicated the Mina character and replaced her with a Sexy Vampire Babe.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:17 a.m. CST

    Clarification about that lawsuit.

    by Shan

    The author in question has won the right to sue for plagarism, she actually hasn&#39;t won a case saying they plagarised her.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:18 a.m. CST


    by Stan the Bat

    Not that I object to Sexy Vampire Babes per se. I&#39;m all for &#39;em.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:28 a.m. CST

    So if this quote is true ...

    by Shan

    ... then are you saying that the secret identity of "V" is The Architect? As for where all the masks are coming from, well in The Three Amigos, at the end of the film all the villagers have all the stuff they need to make enough 3 Amigo costumes for the entire village and also they somehow find guns for everyone to fight the bandits terrorising them which they musn&#39;t have had before because if they did, they would have been able to fight off the bandits in the first place since they outnumbered them. Oh wait, The Three Amigos was a stupid film ...

  • May 31, 2005, 10:48 a.m. CST

    wow Alan Moore&#39;s not happy...

    by payton 34

    Big fucking surprise. He bitches and moans about every production based on one of his comics, yet he still takes the cheques. He&#39;s almost as big a hypocrite as Frank Miller. If you don&#39;t like how your material is treated quit optioning them...moron.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Shame, but no great surprise.

    by castle4

    One day, an Alan Moore story will be presented properly. I hope.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:53 a.m. CST

    Ugh, wish Moore would stop with the dissassociating with DC

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    I get that he&#39;s pissed, but its the fans that get the shit end. It already sucks that he&#39;s not doing any more Top Ten, now he&#39;s killing his League series too?

  • I&#39;ll just go and reread the comic for the length of this movie to get a good story about these characters. Now I know Watchmen will suck too. Moore&#39;s work will NEVER be done justice. What&#39;s next,Transmetropolitan set in modern day America as a lighthearted romantic comedy?!?!?!FUCK THIS!

  • May 31, 2005, 11:25 a.m. CST

    "yet he still takes the cheques"

    by Stan the Bat

    Actually, he doesn&#39;t. He&#39;s had the proceeds divided among the artists who worked on the optioned projects. If you&#39;re going to call the guy a moron you might find out what you&#39;re talking about first.

  • May 31, 2005, 11:35 a.m. CST

    A link! A link! Gawd bless you sir.

    by RichJohnston

    "Each and every citizen of England that riots is wearing a V mask." Because nothing says "anarchy" more than everyone wearing the same face.

  • May 31, 2005, 11:38 a.m. CST

    A link, a link, gawd bless you.

    by RichJohnston

    Because nothing says anarchy more than everyone wearing the same mask. Gheorghe, League isn&#39;t being killed. it&#39;s moving to Top Shelf/Knockabout. Click the link in the article. Payton, he&#39;s not taking the cheques. On Watchmen, V4V or Constantine. And he&#39;s stopped anything he owns being turned into a film.

  • May 31, 2005, 12:01 p.m. CST

    You mean Natalie shaved her barnet for this

    by proper

    more fool her,though I&#39;m sure a hefty cheque helped ease the pain.Or she had nits.Alan Moore probably doesn&#39;t care what happens,his work was done on this project a long time ago.The Matrix sequels=did they ever unstretch the talkback???

  • May 31, 2005, 12:18 p.m. CST

    hey stan the bat...

    by payton 34

    I&#39;ve been working in the comic industry for fifteen years so I think I know what I&#39;m talking about. I know how these deals work, I&#39;ve done them. If you don&#39;t think that mister Moore has a giant pile of cash from Hollywood then you&#39;ve been duped.

  • May 31, 2005, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Hey, payton, thanks for setting me straight-

    by Stan the Bat

    -I&#39;ve read countless reliable reports to the contrary, but I guess they must all have been wrong. Thank goodness plain folks like me are able to come here to the AICN talkbacks and get the straight dope from genuine experts like yourself- otherwise we&#39;d all have to get our news from those know-nothings at Reuters. Bless you, sir. (I took issue with your original post because you called Moore a moron, but I guess you&#39;re an expert on that, too. Your expert credentials remind me of the George Burns line about how it&#39;s too bad all the people who REALLY know how to run this country are busy cutting hair and driving cabs.)

  • May 31, 2005, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Or am I to busy....

    by payton 34

    creating the stuff you read and watch. Fair enough...maybe I&#39;m lying through my teeth about working in the indusrty and having intimate knowledge about some of the people you worship on this site. Or maybe I&#39;m telling the truth and you don&#39;t want to know that Allen is a huge asshole and one of the hardest people in the industry to work with. He&#39;s hugley talented and sells books, if that wasnt&#39; the case comic companies wouldn&#39;t touch him. Oh and he&#39;s made his fair share of cash from Hollywood. There you go, believe me or not, it&#39;s up to you.

  • May 31, 2005, 12:39 p.m. CST

    payton 34 you are indeed a moron...

    by JohnNada

    ...who&#39;s obviously full of shit! As a result of DC owning his material Moore had no choice but to accept money for his comics being optioned. What he did instead was insist that his name be removed from all of them and had that money split amongst the artists that worked on them. He says he could use the money but the principle was more important, good on him for sticking to his guns. Know what the fuck you&#39;re talking about before you open that sewer of a mouth, because you&#39;re obviously an ignorant bitch who loves the sound of his own voice yet is very ill informed. It&#39;s painful to watch this project getting raped already, it is my favourite of his work and it could be such a good movie if someone who had balls did it right, but as usual they&#39;re dumbing it down for you thick as fuck Americans. If you don&#39;t agree that this is the case (that you are dumb) then how does it make you feel that they dumb everything down as they don&#39;t think you can handle it? Doesn&#39;t it make you feel angry? They&#39;re saying you&#39;re stupid! Do something about it! Stop turning up to these retarded movies!

  • May 31, 2005, 12:44 p.m. CST


    by payton 34

    one day you guys will get this. If you don&#39;t think that he has a stake in the properties he creates you&#39;re a fool.

  • May 31, 2005, 12:54 p.m. CST


    by JohnNada

    One day you&#39;ll get that he HAD THAT MONEY GIVEN TO THE ARTISTS OF THOSE BOOKS!!! You really are a dumb fuck if you&#39;re going to keep ignoring what I say.

  • May 31, 2005, 12:58 p.m. CST


    by JCubedz

    ok first off you cant win the right to sue, it can either proceed or they throw it out " Monday, October 4th, 2004 ended a six-year dispute involving Sophia Stewart, the Wachowski Brothers, Joel Silver and Warner Brothers. Stewart&#39;s allegations, involving copyright infringement and racketeering, were received and acknowledged by the Central District of California, Judge Margaret Morrow residing. Stewart, a New Yorker who has resided in Salt Lake City for the past five years, will recover damages from the films, The Matrix I, II and III, as well as The Terminator and its sequels. She will soon receive one of the biggest payoffs in the history of Hollywood, as the gross receipts of both films and their sequels total over 2.5 billion dollars." maybe not the most widely know news source(yeah I know understatement) but with Time Warner owning most news sources it shouldnt be surprising. but just do a google search and plenty of other websites will also popup with this story.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Film The Filth

    by Trevor Goodchild

    Imagine The Filth directed by Chris Cunningham or Shane Meadows or Michel Gondry. Giant sperm swarms. Vast Ocean Liners. American president with breasts. Sniper Chimp. And Max Thunderstone. Anyone out there that&#39;s read The Filth. Can you explain the Superhero subplot, with the Superman in the wheelchair and the group of superheros at the start. One of which gets his brain shot out.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:09 p.m. CST

    This has come up before ...

    by Shan

    ... That article with that exact same quote has appeared in talkbacks before. However, the link they had to the article had an addendum which stated he hasn&#39;t won anything yet. Whether it&#39;s deemed there&#39;s any merit to her case or whether she gets any money has yet to be determined.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:13 p.m. CST

    In fact, here we go, took me 15 seconds on google.

    by Shan

    On October 28, a student newspaper at Salt Lake Community College printed an erroneous story on Sophia Stewart&#39;s RICO lawsuit against The Wachowskis, Jim Cameron, Gale Anne Hurd, Fox and Warner Bros and others. Poorly reported by one Martha Carter, the story says that "Monday, October 4th 2004 ended a six-year dispute" and that Ms. Stewart has " will recover damages" and that "she will soon receive one of the biggest payoffs in the history of Hollywood, as the gross receipts of both films and their sequels total over 2.5 billion dollars." None of that is true. What is true is that on September 27, 2004, US District Court Judge Margaret M. Morrow made a preliminary ruling that the RICO element of the suit would not be thrown out on purely legal grounds, though some of the charges were dropped against Warner Bros. and 20th Century Fox. There was no finding of fact emerging from this hearing and not even the glimmer of a trial that would find guilt or innocence.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:16 p.m. CST

    "to busy (sic) creating the stuff you read and watch"

    by Stan the Bat

    I guess you were &#39;to busy&#39; to get through third-grade grammar class. I can&#39;t wait to read your literary contributions. Plenty of professional creatives, myself included, read these boards; your attempt to talk down to us as the mere consumers of your greatness is a bit ridiculous.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:18 p.m. CST


    by creaper

    very first post too...

  • May 31, 2005, 1:19 p.m. CST


    by all

  • May 31, 2005, 1:25 p.m. CST


    by blackthought

    i sense anger in this talkback

  • May 31, 2005, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Ok you are correct....

    by JCubedz

    would have been nice to have a link but was able to sift through google once I sorta knew what to look for. Their motion for dismissal was denied. That would have been a much more sensical term to use ;) but thanks for correcting me! but still....could there be any doubt? The second and thrid movie are so different from the first you know they had no idea that it would be a trillogy like they claim and that its far different in tone than the next two despite them trying to retain it.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:34 p.m. CST

    you guys fucking crack me up.

    by payton 34

    It amazes me how you believe everything you read on the internet based solely on how much you like what you&#39;re hearing. Some person you don&#39;t know wrote that Alan is a martyr. Wow he&#39;s great, it must be true. Someone else contradicts that, well he must be a lying douche bag. Fine you love your drug addicted asshole who has no problem leaving the artists that draw his books hanging for months between smatterings of script pages. You guys worship and adore him. Damn straight I make my living in the comic and film industry and I&#39;ve worked my ass off to be here. It&#39;s a shame you&#39;ll never know how it feels.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:42 p.m. CST

    first! i think

    by alb55


  • May 31, 2005, 1:50 p.m. CST

    ARMY OF V... wasn&#39;t that a Bjork song?

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    Can&#39;t wait to see the clusmily computer-animated crowds of Vs all "rioting" in perfect sync. WACHOWSKIS SUCK.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:51 p.m. CST


    by Stan the Bat

    -listen to yourself, man. You&#39;re an unappreciated expert, and everybody else is a moron- is that about how it stacks up? You&#39;d have more credibility if you weren&#39;t expressing yourself like a fourteen-year-old. Rather than play my-job-is-cooler-than-yours with you I think I&#39;ll take what&#39;s left of the high road. Sorry if I gave offense.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:55 p.m. CST

    "could there be any doubt?"

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    If you&#39;ve read anything about her and her claims there&#39;s quite a lot of doubt actually.

  • May 31, 2005, 1:58 p.m. CST


    by ripper t. jones

    I do not doubt your connection with comics, but I&#39;d like to hear a few instances of "the difficult" Mr. Moore, if you have some inside stories, I for one would love to hear them. And a question, if Mr. Moore does give his option checks to his artists, what is the other source of payment from films made from his graphic novels?

  • May 31, 2005, 2:01 p.m. CST

    Stan, that was not my intention....

    by payton 34

    but it is sort of how it ended up. The frustrating thing with this site is how quick people are to not only dismiss you but crap down your throat if you say something they don&#39;t like. As far as my job is cooler than your job..yeah that was pretty immature but I did bust my ass for years to get here. Making less than $5 a page at the start was pretty rough but definitely worth it in the end. As far as the talented mister Moore goes, I think I&#39;ve said enough and I still stand behind what I said (although I could have been less agro about it). Oh and no offense taken.

  • This would piss him of because of his policy of never getting involved in these kinds of film projects, And because of various earlier problems with DC. Seriously, am I reading the wrong page or something? I really need to know as I quoted the address above on my norwegian film blog ( by the way)the other day. I should put it right. Also, if that piece of dialogue is the reviewer&#39;s main gripe... I think it might be possible to pull it off. Context is everything. Call me an optimist. The ending might work, I think. And I actually think the mask idea is interesting. No point in flaming me, I&#39;ve already proved I have no taste several times over on this site.

  • May 31, 2005, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Payton ...

    by DennisMM

    If you&#39;re going to rag on the man, at least look at the previous talkback posts -- or the story, for goddess&#39;s sake -- and see the man&#39;s name is Alan. A-L-A-N. Not Allen. Thank you, a former reporter.

  • May 31, 2005, 2:15 p.m. CST


    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    That&#39;s the brunt of it, but if you read the sidebar (yellow box on the side) you&#39;ll see he does have some problems with the script as well.

  • May 31, 2005, 2:20 p.m. CST


    by NeoAngelus

    Waaaaaah! It&#39;s not exactly like the graphic novel. Waaaaaah! Jesus. Does somebody&#39;s pussy hurt?

  • May 31, 2005, 3:08 p.m. CST


    by Termsak

    Not bad...and first btw....

  • She makes it work, but damn I&#39;d hate for this thing not to work. It&#39;s a great premise.

  • May 31, 2005, 3:14 p.m. CST

    In the DC/Moore divorce, who gets custody of the kids? (Who get

    by FrankDrebin

    Was it Elmore Leonard or John D. MacDonald who, when asked if he was upset how Hollywood had ruined his books, pointed to the books sitting on a shelf and said something like, "No, the books are right there, still the same."

  • May 31, 2005, 3:20 p.m. CST


    by DarthHomercles

    I was feeling left out. :p All talkbacks should be hidden so no one knows if they&#39;re first! Heh heh.

  • May 31, 2005, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Speaking of Adaptations...

    by uberman

  • Learn how to read, you crazies.

  • May 31, 2005, 3:31 p.m. CST

    Gheorghe Zamfir

    by gigaloff

    Thanks a lot. Although I must admit i hate pan pipes. I&#39;m still mildly optimistic, but that cooled me down a bit. The Curse of Alan Moore Movie Adaptations (tm) seems to strike again. Still, I just saw Blueberry a.k.a Renegade, being a long time fan of the french comic it&#39;s based on, and that featured lorry-sized plotholes AND a relation to the comic in name only. And I liked it quite a bit.

  • May 31, 2005, 3:40 p.m. CST

    V. vs V. V

    by AshesOfDonnie

  • May 31, 2005, 3:41 p.m. CST

    Wow. Comparing W to Hitler and Mussolini.

    by Htown


  • May 31, 2005, 3:44 p.m. CST

    The Mask of V

    by Munchausen

    is only a frickin Guy Fawkes mask. That people wear on Bonfire Night - or at least used to in the Future Fascist England. So it&#39;s entirely likely that a large portion of England would still have them around, in attics and bins. Kinda like that 1978 Spiderman mask I still have...

  • May 31, 2005, 3:46 p.m. CST

    Speaking of Adaptations...

    by uberman

    I just saw &#39;RIDING the BULLET&#39; and had to turn it off after 15 minutes. Just friggin horrible. All suspense, sense of shock and awe, of dread, are killed in the first ten. Every conceivable horror movie trick, image and gimmick is thrown up on the screen to see if they will stick. As a result, there is nothing to dread, nothing to stick around for, no sense of peril. And the guy talking on screen with his identical &#39;alter ego?" pure shit. King himself endorsed the move, but is disgusted with Kubrick THE SHINING, which is the classic KING film. Anymore, if KING endorses and adaptation, or has written the screenplay, RUN THE OTHER WAY! And I have read every book of his save for quitting on the el lamo DARK TOWER series which sux after a promising first three books. Which brings me to Alan More adaptations. All have been horrible. A giant Mr. Hyde??? The guy was only 4&#39;5" in the novel. And the Nautilus submarine is the size of New York in the film? THE single worst idea in the history of CG animation. Plus the fact that it cruises through the 4ft deep canals in Venice...BRILLIANT! FROM HELL was just B.L.A.N.D. and sterile-nothing that moved me on any level. I think I even watched it in two sittings as it was to tedious for, on second thought I never even made it through but ended up catching all the movie in tiny fragments on some movie channel over years. NOTE TO HOLLYWOOD: 1. Bigger is not BETTER when it comes to telling a story. 2. LESS is MORE. Save some suspense, build up some tension for god

  • May 31, 2005, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Payton- &#39;it&#39;s all good&#39;, as The Kids are saying thes

    by Stan the Bat

    I think I&#39;ve read Moore quoting the line FrankDrebin mentions about how the books are still there if you don&#39;t like the films. As for the quality of the films, there&#39;s a good H. L. Mencken quote for that: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

  • May 31, 2005, 3:55 p.m. CST

    They could have at write him as SMITH, not THE FUCKING ARCHITECT

    by Uncle_Les

    I mean, they got Hugo Weaving and everything. Peace Out.

  • May 31, 2005, 3:59 p.m. CST

    quality of adaptations

    by Stan the Bat

    These movies are deliberately made to be terrible, though, aren&#39;t they? Subtlety and nuance don&#39;t draw big audiences- at least that must be what the producers believe. The part I don&#39;t understand is: WHY, then, start with something like the LXG books, or Hellboy, or Watchmen? These people must know at the outset that what they&#39;re going to do has nothing to do with respect for the source material. If you&#39;re just going to do the same old thing, why is it necessary to call it, say, &#39;Watchmen&#39;? Surely the fan base for a comic book isn&#39;t so large that they need the name of the comic book on the concept in order to get the project funded? I can&#39;t come up with any theories about how this works that don&#39;t amount to &#39;everyone involved was snorting coke off a hooker&#39;s butt at the time&#39;, and yet that seems obstructively cynical somehow...

  • May 31, 2005, 4:08 p.m. CST

    V for first!

    by JohnnyBlueJeans

    suck it

  • May 31, 2005, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Straczynski seemed to have liked it

    by ZepRosnepsid

    At Enigmacon this weekend, jms was talking about this script. While not mentining whether it was good or bad (so I don&#39;t want to put words in his mouth) he talked about it like he liked it. Mostly he just mentioned how anti-Bush it was and how it went over the studios heads and how surprised they&#39;re going to be when they see what they got. Sounded interesting enough to me...

  • May 31, 2005, 4:47 p.m. CST

    oh wow

    by 81666

    his opening lines sund slike like another scene out of the architechts dialogue, oy!!

  • May 31, 2005, 4:47 p.m. CST

    So, Goatzinger-

    by Stan the Bat

    -am I the Guy in "Alan Moore is God to this guy"? I think a few of his books are unusually good comics- a good lob over a low standard. That doesn&#39;t amount to thinking he&#39;s God, but if you were setting up a straw man, don&#39;t let me stop you. Or maybe you meant something else. My question remains: why use the name of the book and adapt it so broadly? Is the name of the book bringing in a big audience? I can&#39;t imagine so. It seems to me that if you&#39;re going to do as broad an adaptation as, say, LXG, you could call it whatever you want, not pay anybody royalties, and not piss off whatever admittedly small fan base the book has.

  • May 31, 2005, 4:50 p.m. CST

    Payton tell us your real name

    by JUSTICE41

    If you have the balls to call out Alan Moore then have the Balls to reveal your real name. I like how you made fun of those who read what they want to hear yet you want us to believe you&#39;re a comics pro. Tell us your real name and what you have worked on. I was in the Biz for a second at Defiant comics under Jim Shooter but got in just as they folded so I didn&#39;t get much exposure. I have proof how about you Payton? Any idiot can make claims but only a true man/woman can prove those claims. Stand up and be counted.

  • May 31, 2005, 4:53 p.m. CST

    interesting thought there Stan........

    by payton 34

    I don&#39;t think they make them bad deliberately. Well not all of them. I think it&#39;s just that they don&#39;t know what the heck to do with them. It&#39;s definitely a case of everyone else is doing it so I should too. I really believe that comics and film are two completely different animals and need to be handled delicately. The problem is to many of the good books fall into the wrong hands. As to why they bother to do it at all; one word-laziness. Why go out and scour the racks for a good novel to adapt. They would have to read it then. They can just flip through a comic, see the images and have a pretty strong grasp of things in a matter of seconds. It&#39;s sad really. There have been good adaptations though. I enjoyed Ghost World and Road to Perdition. Of course in the eyes of Hollywood those films aren&#39;t considered comic book movies. What I really think it boils down to is cash. They aren&#39;t willing to risk millions of dollars on something that is considered risky. It&#39;s hard to create a franchise that way, and franchise potentail is the killer of a good comic book adapatation.

  • May 31, 2005, 4:56 p.m. CST

    Sounds like the only way I see this

    by Itchy

    is if Natalie Portman shaves another part of her anatomy for it ... and then gives me a prolonged, lewd peep show of it.

  • May 31, 2005, 4:59 p.m. CST

    hey justice41....

    by payton 34

    Go smoke some more crack. Funny how you bitched about me not revealing myself and then you didn&#39;t either. In the end, who gives a shit if you believe me or not.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Ahh but Payton no one knows me and I didn&#39;t make Claims like

    by JUSTICE41

    My Name is Roy Cover. Look it up I have no fear of anything or anyone. I called you out and now your just a bitch with a leaky cunt.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:09 p.m. CST

    You want to be believed Payton, Yess you dooo.

    by JUSTICE41

    "In the end, who gives a shit if you believe me or not." Then why use your supposed position in the industry to give credence to your claims about Moore? You want others to believe you or you wouldn&#39;t say such nonsense. Run along and go back to whatever ditch your digging.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:10 p.m. CST

    yeah...never heard of ya.

    by payton 34

    You know what&#39;s funny Roy? I might have opened my big mouth a bit but you admitted to working under Jim Shooter at defiant!!! Now that&#39;s hialrious.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:16 p.m. CST


    by danowen

    Well, great book, probably a passable movie given the Wachowski&#39;s talent (Matrix and Bound are great). But... I think this film needed a British writer-director, really, who has the balls to get hermit Moore to help hammer out a script that does justice to the source material. Looks like Watchmen will be doing this, which is good...

  • May 31, 2005, 5:19 p.m. CST

    Yes it was and so was the checks he wrote to me for art

    by JUSTICE41

    I drew while sitting on the toilet. It was also funny having him fly me up to New York for a few days as he interviewed me. Yup, a laugh riot. ut those few thousands I made sure was a laugh. Especially since I was paid and only one piece of art was ever printed. I laughed my ass off as I deposited said checks. Yet you still haven&#39;t let your balls descend enough for you to show and display any proof of your claims. I wonder why....

  • May 31, 2005, 5:23 p.m. CST

    I know...

    by Stan the Bat

    ...but it SEEMS like it has to be deliberate sometimes. I think one factor is that a comic book can be made by two or three people, so there&#39;s less dilution of talent and vision. If a studio is going to invest a hundred million dollars in a movie, they want to make sure that the result appeals to as many people and offends or confuses as few people as possible. So- control passes into the hands of a committee. Some of the people on the committee will not be creatively qualified. Some of them will be engaged in political struggles with others of them. Some will want to have a focus group. Some will actually be snorting coke off a hooker&#39;s butt. The thing is, while you wish they wouldn&#39;t screw everything up, it&#39;s hard to say that they&#39;re not entitled to decide exactly what movie will get made with their hundred million dollars. It would be nice if they had some courage, but the fact is, if you want to frighten the horses you kind of have to do it on your own time and with your own dime- which is one big advantage that the comics industry has over movies today: it&#39;s possible for genuinely smart or subtle or subversive stuff to get published in comics, because you don&#39;t need a hundred million dollars to produce the comic; you can find a niche audience and recoup costs. Of course, you can do movie-quality special effects on a PC in your house, now, if you&#39;ve got a few grand to blow on software or you don&#39;t mind using the slightly-ricketier open source alternatives. And you can even publish what you make pretty widely, thanks to the Internet...

  • May 31, 2005, 5:23 p.m. CST

    Laugh at these guys if you will because they were there.

    by JUSTICE41

    "You know what&#39;s funny Roy? I might have opened my big mouth a bit but you admitted to working under Jim Shooter at defiant!!! Now that&#39;s hialrious." Why don&#39;t you tell that to JG Jones and Georges Jeanty who also started at Defiant. Why don&#39;t you laugh at Dave Lapham who also was at Defiant as well as Adam Pollina and Alan Weiss (look those names up) Your a proven joke with zero zip nada balls or proof or relevance.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Poor Alan Moore

    by Exterminans

    I weep for thee

  • May 31, 2005, 5:34 p.m. CST

    you&#39;re funny j41!!!

    by payton 34

    The next time you see any of those talented people you mentioned, ask them how they feel about defiant. I&#39;m sure their answers will knock your rose colored glasses right off your face.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:39 p.m. CST

    something else to think about...

    by payton 34

    Everybody has had a shitty job at some point in their lives and Defiant was that for a lot of people. The fact you brought up a company that fucked so many people over to somehow validate yourself is pathetic.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:40 p.m. CST


    by Stan the Bat

    In a hundred years we will all be dead and the position occupied by your art or mine, whether it&#39;s in the Louvre or on a bonfire, will be no further use to either of us. For a preview of what that&#39;ll be like, consider the many people reading this talkback who ALREADY don&#39;t give a fuck who we are. If it&#39;s a nice day where you are, go for a walk in the sun. Or, if you must, sit and stare at an internet-capable computer. But don&#39;t waste time trying to impress people you don&#39;t know or care about. Observe as I take my own advice...

  • May 31, 2005, 5:40 p.m. CST

    "bitch fit"

    by kiddae

    Show some respect, shitneck.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:40 p.m. CST


    by funkyhouse

    Firrrsstt!!! any way the Wachowskis should make bound 2 with all the actors that were in cruel intentions 3.Renny harlin to direct a script written by the guy that wrote the first project greenlight film.and maybe they should film 3 and 4 back to back to capitilise on the huge success of 2.oh and in the 4th film everyone gets killed by a really bad CGI going to pitch that to Dimension......

  • May 31, 2005, 5:46 p.m. CST

    Further evidence the brothers Wachowski may be one-hit wonders.

    by odysseus

    And by "hit" I don&#39;t mean box office success.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:51 p.m. CST


    by horvak

    Why do they do this ? I&#39;m sure with Batman going back to it&#39;s roots, it proves that you can stick to the source material.

  • May 31, 2005, 5:58 p.m. CST

    To quote some of the "Mother of the Matrix" website...

    by jimmy_009

    which supports Mrs. Stewart...this was too good not to post... "Respect and honor goes out to the vybration manifested as Sophia Stewart. As prophesized by Sophia, she and anyone who standz beside her will come under fire and close scrutiny regarding their interests in Sophia Stewart" "DID YOU KNOW

  • May 31, 2005, 6:09 p.m. CST


    by Mafu

    Great suggestions for the film, funkyhouse. Any film featuring Renny Harlin and a really bad CGI hippopotamus on a teenage killing spree works for me. Anyway, like Moriarty, I&#39;m looking forward to V for Vendetta, despite the negative script review from Kurt Hectic. I remain a fan of the Wachowski Brothers despite the mountain of shit that&#39;s been thrown at them. James McTeigue finally got his opportunity to direct a feature film, but he&#39;s been an assistant and second-unit director for "The Matrix" films, "Revenge of the Sith," and "Dark City," so I think he&#39;ll do a good job. Plus, I read that Hugo Weaving took over the role of V, so I hope that bodes well for the film. It could still suck, but I remain hopeful.

  • May 31, 2005, 6:32 p.m. CST

    Considering Moores&#39; reaction to this project

    by Trik

    Think I&#39;ll bypass it completly. Not even sneek out and rent the DVD. Hope others do the same. Hit these hollywood dickheads where it counts to them. <><><> I don&#39;t know who these assholes think they are, that they can alter anything that fits their whim, but its time to send them the message. *It&#39;s Not OK*

  • May 31, 2005, 6:50 p.m. CST

    some black writer and Harlen Ellison

    by Everett Robert

    I thought Harlen Ellison successfully sued Caeron on the Terminator (or at least the first movie)for plagerizing...don&#39;t know about Matrix...but...///speaking of people who like to Bitch and moan, Harlen is another example, but he&#39;s soo funny about it that it works...hehe, Harlen and Alan should start and bitch group, I&#39;d pay to see it...

  • May 31, 2005, 7:11 p.m. CST

    Harlen Ellison

    by DennisMM

    It&#39;s HarlAn, Evrit Robirt.

  • May 31, 2005, 7:29 p.m. CST

    V is an Uncle Tom, Osama Bin Laden&#39;s a Slavedriver

    by RoomOnFire

  • May 31, 2005, 7:33 p.m. CST

    That&#39;s a shame

    by Ribbons

    Especially considering a lot of those criticisms made sense. As if this production didn&#39;t seem troubled enough: they&#39;re moving on a breakneck pace and they fired James Purefoy (or he "left," or whatever) midstream because supposedly he didn&#39;t realize that he had scheduling conflicts. Yeah right.

  • May 31, 2005, 8 p.m. CST


    by sounding

    no.2 two man in the FBI was bob woodward&#39;s source.

  • May 31, 2005, 8:22 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    "Alter things to their whim." I wouldn&#39;t want to dissect your post and all, because apparently that&#39;s not cool, but I&#39;m pretty sure that writers don&#39;t just change things because they&#39;re feelin&#39; kinda whimsical on any given day.

  • May 31, 2005, 8:37 p.m. CST

    "Oui" For Vendetta

    by Johnno

    Hey that opening intro sounded quite interesting... Never read the comic, but aint V suposed to be some kind of more serious version of the Joker? That the impression I got anyway. I actually like that opening, don&#39;t know how it&#39;ll affect the real story so it&#39;s understandable that fans of the original will be upset over things... heck when are we not? The Matrix franchise kicked ass in my opinion, so I&#39;m eager to see what&#39;ll become of this.

  • May 31, 2005, 9:29 p.m. CST


    by sactoda

    I hope they can work it out. I really want to see Natalie Portman in this movie. Donna A.

  • May 31, 2005, 10:32 p.m. CST


    by Everett Robert it&#39;s HARLAN Ellison...forgive me for getting an a and e mixed did he or did he not sue Cameron (which i also misspelled much worse) or not on T1

  • May 31, 2005, 11:39 p.m. CST

    Speaking of Kurt Hectic...

    by Mad_Radhu

    Someone really needs to make a kick ass MDK movie. It&#39;d be a lot of fun, especially if they include a lot of the funky humor from MDK2.

  • June 1, 2005, 2:02 a.m. CST

    V&#39;s introduction

    by blighty

    Ya know after reading V&#39;s opening lines, I&#39;m reminded of what Harrison Ford once said to Lucas: "You can write this stuff, George, but you can&#39;t say it".

  • June 1, 2005, 2:42 a.m. CST

    re: Ribbons

    by Trik

    Your name isn&#39;t Von Dame by any chance is it?

  • June 1, 2005, 3:11 a.m. CST


    by DarthHomercles

    Too funny.

  • June 1, 2005, 3:13 a.m. CST

    Fuck these hacks!

    by superscape

    Why don&#39;t these people respect what makes a story great in the first place? That opening monologue and the &#39;V riots&#39; made me want to puke. Jesus. I was excited by this at first, but now it looks like they&#39;ve fucked up another fantastic story.

  • June 1, 2005, 4:13 a.m. CST

    very shit

    by DrX

    you cant expect criticism of capitalism or fascism and a love of anarchy from some wankers in hollywood can you...

  • June 1, 2005, 4:28 a.m. CST

    Don&#39;t know what the fuss is about

    by Ted_Naifeh

    Personally, it sounds like the reviewer is blowing things a bit out of proportion. On the one hand, I support and applaud Moore not allowing any more of his comics to be optioned into movies (I can&#39;t imagine what a craptastic epic Promethea would end up becoming at the hands of Hollywood). But it sounds like the reviewer&#39;s concerns mostly have to do with the subtle brushwork of the book becoming broad strokes in the movie script. The thing is, a movie, in comparison with a book, is always going to be unsubtle. A movie has (according to folks like Uberman) 15 minutes to win over its viewers. (no offence meant, Uberman. I have little patience for bad build-up myself). The bit of monologue from the V4V script was certainly hideous on the page, but remember what folks like Hugo Weaving and Lawrence Fishburne did with funky Wachowski dialog in The Matrix. They turned it into brilliant, epic soundbites! In general, movies adapted from books, especially books like V4V with complex philosophical points to make, are always going to seem crudely expressed compared to the source material. I, for one, will wait for the movie before passing judgment. Or at least, I&#39;ll wait for a little more material than the nitpicking criticisms of a total stranger. (Though like as not, I&#39;ll probably end up agreeing with him on every point).

  • June 1, 2005, 4:31 a.m. CST

    By the way

    by Ted_Naifeh

    I hope this Payton guy is an artist rather than, say, a writer or editor. If he&#39;s one of the latter, he might want to look up the word "tact". Or at least the word "research".

  • June 1, 2005, 4:32 a.m. CST

    Wait a minute...

    by Ted_Naifeh

    Is that you, Mika Wright, you old Scallywag?

  • June 1, 2005, 4:49 a.m. CST

    Christ, I ran that speech through text-aloud and the fucking pro

    by Anla'shok

    crystal made it halfway through the first sentence before she squawked with exasperation.

  • June 1, 2005, 5:08 a.m. CST

    Op&#39; Fiend

    by P0PB0T

    People be smokin some crack. The League graphic novel was a great story that they just had to fuck with. The art was a main part i enjoyed it. Idiosyncratic work like this and Hellboy etc. just gets butchered when made live action. Plus They water down what actually makes it good in the first place so a bigger mainstream will suck it up! Polished turds are what the MASSES desire!!

  • June 1, 2005, 5:34 a.m. CST

    Now Dubya is Hitler?

    by jackburton2003

    Silly, silly simple-minded, brainwashed liberals. Open your eyes to the real world. It ain&#39;t that black and white. Democrats ain&#39;t all angels and Republicans demons. Howard Dean ain&#39;t your savior and Tom Delay doesn&#39;t have hooves. Silly, silly, simple-minded kids. When will you people ever grow up?

  • June 1, 2005, 7:07 a.m. CST

    An interesting graphic novel but will suck as a movie

    by Drunken Rage

    That says it all, I think. This is one of the "unfilmable" texts they&#39;re trying to make $$ off of, just like "The Watchmen." Which will also be terrible when compared with the book.

  • June 1, 2005, 10:06 a.m. CST

    Hey Roy Cover

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    I liked your pin-up art. Drawing sexy chicks is the ultimate example of an artist using his powers for good, not evil. Anyway, do you have a website?

  • June 1, 2005, 5:48 p.m. CST


    by Pseudo

    I really want to see a well made version of the comic...scratch that, I want to see the comic made as a film. We know this is possible, why do people have to dumb things down? If ever there were a time when the populace needed a swift kick to the head and a wake up call, this is it. This is the type of material that just might make people think, "Hey, this seems familiar." I can only hope this was an early draft and not the shooting script. ??Pseudo?? out.

  • June 1, 2005, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Did you se it over at Previews?

    by JUSTICE41

    That would be the only piece I have that would come up in a search. My site is a mess and it&#39;s mostly to show crap I did afor commissions. Check er out if you want to and yes I like drawing nudes and sexy broads. It beats my regular job of drawing buildings and houses. Is That Pathetic Payton guy around still or off licking his wounds?

  • June 1, 2005, 8:42 p.m. CST

    Von Dame?

    by Ribbons


  • June 2, 2005, 7:24 a.m. CST

    Bloody Hell!

    by Cpt Kirks 2pay

    Just minutes after I landed today back in London from 2 weeks holiday in New York, I get a phone call from my Film Extra Agent to do a night shoot on something called V for Vendetta. &#39;Cos I&#39;m jet lagged to the balls, I turn it down, I don&#39;t even know what this V thing is. Only for me to change my mind and call back for it. Only &#39;till I come here and read it, I think &#39;Holy Shit!&#39; THIS is what it is! WILL I SEE NATALIE PORTMAN TONIGHT!!!??? Oh My God man! Wish me luck everyone. I start work on it at 9.30 tonight!

  • June 3, 2005, 4:42 a.m. CST

    Hey, Cpt Kirks, how did the night shoot go?

    by JimboLo

    My mate told me it was in Parliament Square with two hundred people, all wearing the V masks. How was it? Am working on V the 8th of June. Am a guard and got fitted into the nasty uniform yesterday. Looks good though.

  • June 6, 2005, 1:51 a.m. CST

    V army?

    by v1cious

    man this shit is just ridiculous. someone needs to be bitched slapped.

  • March 18, 2006, 4:34 a.m. CST

    beethoven? nice.

    by urbanninja

    if you&#39;re going to make fun of the movie, which i thought was great, then get it right. the song he was conducting was "Overture 1812" by TCHAIKOVSKY.