'V' for copying Serenity

POSTED BY: dog13000
UPDATED: Monday, April 3, 2006 13:11
VIEWED: 9711
PAGE 2 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

MATTEBLACK

Sunday, March 19, 2006 7:14 AM

The similarity I noticed was between "V" and "the operative". Both were working to create worlds they did not feel they should belong to.

ROLAND19

Sunday, March 19, 2006 8:12 AM

I thought V was a lot like Mal, cuz they're both guys. Yeah.

-------------------------------------------------
The hardest thing in this world is to live in it. - Buffy

3HEADEDMONKEY

Sunday, March 19, 2006 9:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Seba:
They're the exact same thing.

No. Comics are usually shorter, and span many months. Graphic novels on the other hand are usually longer. "Sin City", for example, is based on a graphic novel, not a comic.

SOLABUSCA

Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:44 PM

You're really completely out of your depth here, aren't you.

Sin City is based on a series of stories told in comic book format that have been collected into trade paperback/graphic novel format.

Allow me to direct you Wikipedia's Sin City entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_city

To wit:

Quote:
First published as Sin City in Dark Horse Presents issues #51-62 and 5th Anniversary Special (June 1991–June 1992), and reprinted as Sin City (The Hard Goodbye) (January 1993), The Hard Goodbye is the first comic book story that Frank Miller drew and wrote about the desperate denizens of Basin City/"Sin City". It was originally titled simply Sin City when it was released in the Dark Horse Presents Fifth Anniversary Special and issues Dark Horse Presents #51-62 , but it was given its own title in trade paperback form.

.j.

JONUS

Sunday, March 19, 2006 2:15 PM

V for Vendetta is a movie everyone NEEDS to see. It is now my favorite movie.

I'm a Jedi.
I'm a Ringer.
I'm a BROWNCOAT.

CHRISMOORHEAD

Sunday, March 19, 2006 3:48 PM

I didn't think it was all great, especially when compared to the graphic novel. The first half of the movie all the scenes felt rushed and consqequently, in my opinion, didn't convey as much information as they should have. The novel does a very dramatic and slow build up to finding little bits about who V "might" be and his possible motives as each different person.

Also, they made him too human in the movie. While they make his fascination with Evey very obviouse in the novel, he never breaks down and cries because of her. In my assumption, I think it's because he's lost a great deal of his humanity. It almost makes him seem god-like, and at the end of the novel he sets out with the full intention of being shot like, "This is how I've planned it to go", while in the movie it was the classic, "I'll do it because I must" hero type of thing.

In all I think it was a decent movie, but they comprimised a lot of the original genius for the sake of attracting more people and not losing the general populace's short attention span.

Have you ever:
Used your teeth as wire strippers?
Given yourself stitches?
Made improvised munitions with no base supplies?
Pissed in a canteen?
Gone a month without bathing?

If so, you MIGHT just be a !HOOAH MOTHERF*CKER!

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:16 PM

Hollywood turned a piece of brilliant mature literature into a glorification of terrorism. I can see why Moore wouldn’t want to be associated with it. In the novel, V was portrayed as corrupt and immoral as the government he opposed, and Hammond was a young 16 year old girl that he brainwashed. The movie made it appear as if V were some righteous freedom fighter and Hammond was a much older and less impressionable women whom V shown the light. That's a poor interpretation. The theme of the novel was to contrast anarchy and fascism, not to portray one as better then the other. The novel was designed to make you think, the movie was closer to propaganda.

And on top of that it was boring. Throughout the movie I kept thinking, ‘Natalie Portman shaved her head for this?’

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SEBA

Sunday, April 2, 2006 3:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 3HeadedMonkey:
Quote:
Originally posted by Seba:
They're the exact same thing.

No. Comics are usually shorter, and span many months. Graphic novels on the other hand are usually longer. "Sin City", for example, is based on a graphic novel, not a comic.

3Headed...I have a degree in Sequential Art and have been making/reading comics & graphic novels since I was 5. I know the difference. As already mentioned, Sin City was originally a serialized comic before being released as trade paperback volumes.

SEBA

Sunday, April 2, 2006 3:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Hollywood turned a piece of brilliant mature literature into a glorification of terrorism.

Given Hollywood's recent craze of raping every source they can for original story material, I've come to expect little but garbage when it comes to these types of adaptations. The last one I honestly enjoyed was LOTR. And maybe Sin City, given Miller's insistance of quality, but really, Sin City was so close to the source material that I didn't really see a need for it at all when I could just pick up the book.

KAYNA

Sunday, April 2, 2006 3:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by singate:
Edit: I think I screwed up. The 'my turn' I was thinking of occured at the end of "Blade". Frost says it to Blade after he gets all powered up. Always mix up my vampire flicks.

I don't know about Blade, it may be in there as well but you were right about Lost Boys. Except it was David who had the line. Micheal had just missed in an attempt to skewer David who then felt very superior and said it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Op: You're fighting a war you've already lost.
Mal: Yeah, well I'm known for that.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE