James Wolcott warns us about V for Vendetta:
V for Vendetta may be–why hedge? is–the most subversive cinematic deed of the Bush-Blair era, a dagger poised in midair. Unlike the other movies dubbed “controversial” (Fahrenheit 9-11, The Passion, Munich, Syriana), it doesn’t play to a particular constituency or polarized culture bloc, it’s working on a deeper, Edger Allen Poe-ish witch’s brew substrata of pop myth. Cultural conservatives will loathe it without seeing it (they love not having to leave their houses to lament the latest installment of civilization’s decline and fall) once they hear of and read about the movie’s disturbing political parallels (a fascistic TV host with a witty resemblance to Berlusconi, fertilizer explosives a la Timothy McVeigh; torture, renditions, and subway bombings; black hoods that will be forever associated with Abu Ghraib). Yet lots of cultural liberals with educated tastes will find it anxiety-producing and irresponsible too, not only because they’re more comfortable with humanistic stories and documentary techniques than with pop spectacle (as Kael discovered whenever she praised upstart movies like DePalma’s Carrie or The Warriors and received letters from profs and Ph.D couples complaining about her soiling the New Yorker’s space on trash), but because V for Vendetta doesn’t just depict a 1984’s dystopia–it advocates radical remedy, and illustrates what it advocates with rhapsodic, operatic, orgasmic flourish.
Well you got the quote right but the context wrong. Considering Franklin was the premier spymaster for the US during the Revolution I think that quote might have meant something a little different then simply giving up privacy in some areas to be secure. You can look up in a Google search the debate over whether Franklin even said that as well.
Which brings up the exact reason why I think people are far too duped by something like a movie nowadays, context. Everyone is so quick to quote and reference that we often forget (or outright miss) what context things are in. Tim, you say you are/were a conservative now/before GW “hijacked things.” The thing is, GW can’t hijack a thought process. Conservativism remains what it is DESPITE the fact that even though GW calls himself a conservative he is far from one. I still stand by principaled conservatism regardless of what the President and current administration displays itself to be. Just the same, Bush is gone soon enough and there isn’t going to be any kind of fascist take over of our government. Movies like this (haven’t seen it but I will to just make sure of what it is about.) tend to overblow things creating a tension where there doesn’t need to be one. Should we be vigilant of what our government does? Most certainly yes, but to wildly swing to a reactionary oppopsite view of things doesn’t help any. If any movies like this should simply remind us (and nevermind that Katrina did this in real life) that big government isn’t the way to go and that we, as citizens, are responsible for our own well being and response to disasters because Big Brother really is going to mess things up.
This is all just a jumble of thoughts here are work but I get uneasy when I see Christians (talking to anyone here) touting something without a note of caution in their statements. Yes this movie is reflecting on today, but that doesn’t mean it is correct or even headed in the right direction in it’s response to the questions it brings up. Christians especially need to be more aware and researched on things before we give a thumbs up or the like. There’s a reason why Paul said test the spirits and balanced thinking is far more useful then reactionary emotions.
And just for a disclaimer I’m not accusing Jefferey or anyone else of that in particular. But it is a trend I have noticed in Christians who deal with the arts that emotions about things often cloud reasoned judgement.
Well, I notice the ‘Sure Defeat Ale’…a reference to Poughkeepsie. Can’t tell what the license plate reads.