Different Themes in Mediums (feat. V for Vendetta)
V for Vendetta has captivated the minds of readers since 1984. The gripping tale of a masked man taking revenge on a crooked city is familiar to any Batman enthusiast. But this graphic novel (and its subsequent movie adaptation) features more than a mastermind revenge plot. Behind the dialogue between the government and Britain’s most famous fictional superhero, we can see an anarchist’s manifesto written between the lines. Alan Moore ingeniously crafts his story around his core beliefs.
Unfortunately, this is where the movie falls flat. Released on March 17, 2006, the film takes more than a few liberties when it comes to adapting the graphic novel for the big screen. And while the movie did well in theaters, reaping $130 million at the worldwide box office (“V for Vendetta"), the movie misses the mark when it comes to representing V as little more than a symbol, and ultimately highlighting the core theme of V for Vendetta: anarchy and people’s desire for freedom.
Therefore, can we really say that the movie was a success when it came to interpreting its predecessor? As much as I love a good action movie, I cannot agree that this did well in what should have been its primary goal: reflecting the ideology found between the pages of this heralded piece of literature.
No Flesh or Blood Within
Part of the beauty behind the graphic novel, as opposed to the film, is the anonymity behind V’s character. V does not have an actual voice in the graphic novel, allowing him to be embodied as, in his words, “only an idea” (V for Vendetta, 236). Kwashi Tembo argues this point in his article on V for Vendetta: “The medium itself compounds the problem of identity because the comic book page is mute. There can be no sonic confirmation—like the telling timbre of a voice—to support any conjectures about the true identity of the masked individual in the text” (Tembo 4). V is portrayed as an idea more in the comic books than an actual person. But, Tembo argues, the movie causes this identity issue to be fixed. The reader, says Tembo, knows that “there is a man beneath the mask…there is an actor named Hugo Weaving occupying, embodying, and giving voice to a space that is in the comic book a textual void” (Tembo 5). But this is not the only problem with V’s character in the movie. V is given what every human has: a backstory.
In the original graphic novel, V provides few details as to his origins. The reader must rely on the other characters to feed them information about the masked vigilante. Dr. Surridge’s diary, found by Dominic Stone after her death, details the story of a man kept at Larkhill. Throughout her diary, Surridge refers to this man as “Room 5”, and the reader finds out that he experienced a psychotic breakdown during his imprisonment. She notes that his symptoms reflect “certain categories of schizophrenic” (V for Vendetta, 81). Over time, he is trusted by Surridge and the guards at Larkhill to keep a garden of roses. But a few months later, he uses mustard gas and fertilizer to blow up Larkhill and escape. Little else is mentioned about V after Finch finishes reading Surridge’s diary.
But does the reader need to know more about V? James McTeigue, the director behind V for Vendetta’s movie adaptation, seemed to think so. V seems less guarded around Evey, even leaving his gloves off while cooking her breakfast for her. When she inquires about his burned hands, he tells her that “there was a fire, a long time ago” (V for Vendetta). There are other examples of V’s humanization throughout the film, such as when he watches The Count of Monte Cristo with Evey. Perhaps the most profound example is when, just before he dies, V tells his Evey that he fell in love with her, even though, he says, “I no longer believed I could” (V for Vendetta).
James McTeigue made a huge mistake when putting Moore’s masterpiece onto the big screen. He stripped V’s core identity away from the character - an idea- and instead, gave V what the masked character would most likely have dreaded the most - a human persona. James Reynolds summarizes this best in his article: “By foregrounding character and emotion from the beginning, the filmmakers replace V’s anarchism as motivational grounds” (Reynolds 9).
An Anarchist Manifesto
But this was not the only act of literary treason that McTeigue committed against the graphic novel. Moore originally began work on a serial comic strip about a masked fighter who fights against a totalitarian government during the 1980s. The strip was Moore’s response to Margaret Thatcher’s conservative form of control during her time as Prime Minister of Britain. Moore later authored several other comic books for DC, including “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.” It was actually because of the film adaptation of this underrated comic strip that Moore demanded his name to be taken off all promotional material for V for Vendetta’s theatrical release. Tembo quotes Moore’s opinion on his works being adapted to other mediums. “In comics the reader is in complete control of the experience. They can read it at their own pace…whereas the audience for a film is being dragged through the experience at the speed of 24 frames per second” (Tembo 7). Moore would not be the first (or last) author to distance themselves from their work being televised due to differences in mediums.
But according to Tembo, there is another reason Moore would have cause to hate the movie adaptation. Tembo says in his introduction that the film “fails to translate, interpellate, or adapt…the anarchistic politics at the heart of Moore and Lloyd’s comic” (Tembo 3). The film places less emphasis on V’s quest for anarchy, delving more into V’s character and his goal for revenge against those who wronged him at Larkhill. In the graphic novel, V ambiguously hints to Evey his plans to blow up Parliament. In a one-sided conversation with Lady Justice, just before he blows her up, V tells the statue that anarchy “has taught me more as a mistress than you ever did!” (V for Vendetta, 41). In the comics, V is more of a loyalist to the anarchist movement. In the movie, however, it seems that he uses anarchy to his advantage for what appears to be his primary goal: revenge. Tembo says it best, stating that while the film presents (or rather, attempts to present) V’s cryptic identity as a primary theme as compared to the text, “its presentment and conclusions lack the philosophical and theoretical scope of the original text” (Tembo 8).
Redeeming Features
Of course, the movie adaptation was not a failure. It was the #2 grossing movie in the domestic box office, second only to Paramount’s Failure to Launch (“Domestic Box Office for March 2006”). There are redeemable qualities to the movie adaptation, even if it missed some of the central themes. The movie does focus on the secondary theme, which serves as part of the title: revenge, or to put it as V did, vendettas. Throughout the graphic novel, we see V enact his revenge on several key players in the Norsefire agency. The movie captures those moments as well, although sometimes they are altered due to the change in core messages. He psychologically tortures Lewis Prothero by burning his doll collection in the original text; in the movie, he kills Prothero while the latter is in the shower.
Also, Creedy is not the one who kills V in the original story. In the graphic novel, Eric Finch, LSD still running through his veins, stumbles across the Victoria Train Station and realizes that he has found V’s hideout. V finds him and a shootout ensues, with Finch mortally wounding V. But even so, the theme of revenge is still prominent and carries on from book to screen.
Conclusion
V for Vendetta (the movie) is, in the words of The University News, “a cult classic” (“The Powerful Meaning Behind ‘V For Vendetta’”). The movie was a hit in theaters, and many people have read the book because of watching its adaptation. But the movie did not fully capture the true meaning behind Moore’s work. There is always a chance that transposing a book onto the TV screen will result in a mediocre retelling of the original work. It happened to Alan Moore before with “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.” It is tragic that it happened to the same author again, and to such a genius masterpiece as V for Vendetta is.