V for Vendetta? Or Violence.

(SPOILER ALERT)

This renowned movie abruptly ended today with a bang, and I mean that literally. With parliament blown apart to pieces depicted as a beautiful event, I sat stunned in my seat as the credits rolled down the screen.

There is no doubt that this movie is fantastic. With such a cunning and innovative (though based on a theme perfected by George Orwell) plot-line, superb casting, and wonderful directing, how could it not be? Perhaps the special effects were done a little distastefully, and unrealistically, but over all I cannot deny that I was sitting on the edge of my seat throughout the entire film. I found some of the story convoluted and confusing at times but all in all I don’t think one need understand the intricate details to comprehend the entire purpose of the movie.

Interestingly enough, this movie introduces a few very large and controversial topics. The first of which: Can violence be used for good? To this I say: How should I know? This question has a multitude of answers, each of which differing depending on the eye examining it. Good is one of the most subjective words in the English language, apart from maybe beautiful, or bad. For instance, the Nazis firmly believed their violent acts were for the greater good of the world, although this meant murdering millions of innocent people. And Lord Voldemort believes that killing all the mud bloods is violence necessary to achieve ‘good’. Obviously, this is not so from our perspective. So can V’s actions really be justified on the basis of the greater good of the entire country? Personally, I don’t believe violence should be the means to any end, regardless. However, one might disagree. The fascist government implemented in Britain during this movie was flagrantly corrupt and infiltrated with greed and power-hungry individuals who had no ethics or morals regarding the citizens. I am not defending that the events which took place at Larkhill should not have been vindicated. However, I am certainly suggesting that the term ‘violence for good’ can never be accurately answered.

The next question that arises from this film is that of terrorism. Does this film truly promote terrorist actions during a time where we face real unmasked terrorists? I believe it does. Needless to say the people of a country should absolutely have the right to revolt against a government that does not work for them. Yet terrorism is not a subjective word like good. Terrorism specifically means the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes, courtesy of dictionary.com. Whether we agree with the ideals behind V’s mask or not, there is no way to disguise that he is in fact a terrorist. I acknowledge that some may feel threatened by this movie; that perhaps it promotes acts of revolution. Maybe people will begin to think clearly again, and realize what a government should really be about. I agree that V for Vendetta illustrates bombing a national building as glorious; this is a little unsettling. However, the fact alone that this movie is being released to the public shows how unlike the socialist regime demonstrated by the movie our society is. Many conflicting issues are ever-present in this almost-radical movie, however, I believe that all these separate ideas combine to form a film which provokes the watcher to think; that in itself is an excellent motion-picture.