This was good, but the movie was much better. They made the story tighter and updated it. The groundwork was laid here.

In times of darkness and great need, we look for a hero.



Book 1:
The backstory and a particularly intriguing story of freedom versus justice emerges in this postnuclear apocalyptic story. Tick-tock, times up for some very bad people. I also recall why my farmboy friends are not stupid. I had a machete and gasoline, and they... well, I'd have been a bigger fan of chemistry, too. The things you learn playing in the shed.

Book 2:
The saga continues, but this time we see Evey and her trajectory. There is an intersection with V and the past and how they have led to now. This is the mindfuck stage and entertaining when you see where it leads.



Book 3:
The future is here. The baton is passed. Do you take it?

I actually found this more cogent than the movie version. While the cinema was beautifully shot, this showed the transitions better, albeit in a longer fashion rather than a few cuts. The power and depth of V as an entity and the use of letter is sketched out better. I liked the movie, but this was superior.

“I didn't put you in a prison, Evey. I just showed you the bars.”

I watched the movie first, I loved it - I knew I would love the novel too and yet it amazed me. It answers Orwell's 1984 question; the way Lion King's Hakuna-matata answered Hamlet's 'To be or not to be'. Alan Moore assures us worst of governments can be broken by a single man believing in a single idea. The prose is simply beautiful - I felt like hugging every word uttered in it, specially in Valerie's letter:

"“But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you. I love you. With all my heart, I love you.”

I'm going to quote it a lot for rest of my life.

Pacifism gets the hardest hit; the fact that V is seen as a terrorist goes on to show that. V creates an anarchy like situation and dies. Moore won't tell you what kind of government is better but simply that one must not give in to a order full of injustice; and that such order should definitely be broken. It shall result in Anarchy but that is not necessarily a problem. Anarchy always result in new order; to be retained if good and to be destroyed again if found unjust.

And, of course hats off to David Lloyd for illustrations.

I freaking love the movie and I love this novel!!



One day I will add the pic of me in my V mask! I just need to get a good hat and cape

That was a great graphic novel!
In dystopian times, the UK government has taken all civil liberties from the citizens, allowing them to spy on anyone without warrant at anytime. V will stand against the oppressive and controlling British government at all costs.

The masked hero V is a good crusader like Batman or Zorro, but for me and because of his relationship with Evey, he has a lot of similarities with the Phantom of the Opera. Both are masked (because of their deformed face) and they have a score to settle....

Masterpiece

One of the best graphic novel i read ever
My second reading for Alan Moore after Batman:the killing Joke and to be fair he is the best graphic author ever , if he was wrote only this novel it will be enough to make him the best coz of the idea and the imagination he had , but we are lucky to enjoy more of his Masterpieces .

Many People don't prefer Alan Moore novels because they see it's so dark and in a Dystopia World , well he is right , the world is a mess and enough with the fairy tales and lies xD



Now about
i loved it really , when the idea is good and touch u that is enough , over the last 6 year we saw a lot that makes this novel is remarkable and got more famous coz we lived it , the injustice , lies , dictatorship .

the novel not like the movie, i repeat not like the movie

it's not like the movie all about Evey and V , here is more characters and more lives , feelings , but same idea , the finale is different a little , i kinda liked the movie more .

-Gordon character in the novel is different not like the movie , i liked Gordon in the movie more , the way he drew him as media critic comedian host like Jon Stewart and Bassem Yousef .

-Valerie story loved it <3 so emotional

-V in his mask , costume , conversations , sense of humor and his ideas are all perfect
Who is V ?
he is my father and my mother , my brother , my friend , he was U and Me , he was ALL OF US .
V character is one of the greatest characters i read about in book and i watch in movies <3

" People should not be afraid of their governments, Governments should be afraid of their people . "

- Evey : most of us is Evey, the people who accept their fate , the injustice messy world , the people in prison all their lives , V set her free " I didn't put you in prison , i just showed you the bars " .

Post-catastrophic dystopias were all the rage in the 1980s. After all, the end of the century was just around the corner, and millennialism was getting into a gentle simmer — it is now, it seems, in a running boil. It was a second “golden age” for science fiction and dystopian visions of the future: the time of The Handmaid's Tale and Neuromancer and Blade Runner and Terminator and V (the miniseries with the reptilian aliens) and many others. V for Vendetta, published around 1988, fits right in there.

The story is set in a fiendishly Orwellian version of Britain, turned into totalitarian Oceania after Europe has been wiped out by nuclear war. The difference with 1984 is that the protagonist is not an isolated and impotent victim. This time, he is a mysterious and androgynous ninja-like hero who speaks in Shakespeare quotes, wrapped in a Guy Fawkes costume, wearing an ever-grinning and creepy doll mask. This faceless superhero saves a young woman from rape in the opening scene. He then takes her in his underground lair, a sort of hidden museum and library, where he keeps copies of Cervantes, Dante, Goethe, Homer, Dickens, Swift, Shelley, Pynchon… the cultural legacy that has been banned by a Labour Party turned into neo-fascism and racism. However, what starts as a sort of Jean Valjean / Cosette relationship will take a different and quite startling direction down the line.

It is altogether a fascinating graphic novel, that starts as a dark superhero story (the closest character to V, in the DC Comics universe, is probably Batman — especially in the unbeatable albums of Frank Miller) and ends up in a somewhat ambiguous way, dialogues turning into long monologues, and direct actions into memories — the evocation of the concentration camps are chilling —, dreams, metaphors, reflections, Cockney wordplay, silence. The artwork makes ingenious and sometimes dizzying use of angles, shadows and repetitions, but the style and looks are conventional. The book was initially published in black and white. For some reason, the latest editions have been coloured: the result is visually shabby and irritating.

Since Moore and Lloyd’s book, V’s mask has become the famous icon of the Anonymous cyber-activists and protesters movement. I guess the authors would not disavow this ideological twist: after all, V for Vendetta is an anarchist vindication of resistance, rebellion and, even, of revolutions — which, as it happens, is a diametrically opposite stance to that of George Orwell. I guess it might also be read as a vindication of media manipulation, terrorism, civil unrest and political chaos — a widespread phenomenon 30-odd years later —, which is one of the many deliberate and troubling ambiguities of this book.

I watched the 2005 film adaptation by the Wachowskis, with Natalie Portman, a few years ago. She, of course, is, as always, outstanding. I particularly remember being both elated and terrified by the opening and closing Bonfire Night scenes, with the pyrotechnics over the London skyline and the detonating cannons in Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture. I forget about the rest.

This graphic novel is supposed to be such “a classic”, but it is in reality a masturbatory fantasy of an adolescent mind who is in love with the concept of anarchy.

Just watch any Alan Moore interview on YouTube about this book and he will confirm that. Don’t let his weird looks, his unusual accent, his great intelligence and charisma distract you from the fact that practically everything he is saying about politics is wrong. Not “I think I disagree” wrong, ”different opinions” wrong, just plain “woah!! What you’re saying is objectively bonkers and you have so much growing up to do” wrong.

In this video (https://youtu.be/QX7ehbE1vc0) Moore says:

“Anarchy is and always has been the only way to run the world, the only morally sensible way to run the world. Everybody should be the master of their own destiny, everybody should be their own leader. Every problem in the world is caused by our leaders. All we need is an administration. We don’t need people to boss us about.”

This off-the-charts unrealistic, Munch-scream childish and shallow worldview is what animates “V for Vendetta”.

The main character’s complexity is a simple distraction: in Moore’s own words, this complexity is not there because his core ideas are deep or complex, but because Moore realized that it would have been “too simple” if V didn’t have any questionable traits about him. The fundamental heart of the narration is a deep-seated problem with authority, which Moore shares with almost every teenager on Earth.

V for Vendetta: Anarchy vs fascism in dystopian future UK (Graphic Novel & Film Review)
Originally posted at Fantasy Literature
For those who claim that comics lack sufficient depth and complexity, fans generally recommend Alan Moore’s Watchmen, V for Vendetta and From Hell, Frank Miller’s DARK KNIGHT RETURNS and SIN CITY series, and Neil Gaiman’s SANDMAN series. These are considered “gateway” titles likely to convince skeptics that comics (often labeled “graphic novels” to lend them more gravitas) are a legitimate artistic medium for sophisticated and compelling storytelling for adults. While I never doubted this contention, I have inexplicably neglected this part of the SFF world for many years, and with no real justification. So after reading Watchmen recently and being completely blown away by its intricate storylines, meta-critique of the superhero myth, and perfectly articulated artwork, it was a no brainer that I would move on to V for Vendetta next.



Well, V for Vendetta is a completely different creature than Watchmen. The cover image is absolutely brilliant: The knowing and enigmatic smirk of the Guy Fawkes mask is an iconic image of debonair anarchistic terrorism thanks to this graphic novel and the 2006 film. Having seen the film already, I knew what the story was about and had a clear image of the central character V and his love interest Evey Hammond. However, when I turned to the first page, I discovered that I really don’t like the artwork. All art forms are highly subjective and produce different reactions in all of us. In the case of Watchmen, I thought the artwork perfectly complemented the story and was precise, detailed, evocative, and pleasing to the eye. But something about the artwork of V for Vendetta just turned me off from the start. The coloring, which uses a very muted palate to match the dreary dystopian London of the future, may be effective but didn’t encourage me to pore over the images the way I did for Watchmen. And the impressionistic visual style just wasn’t what I was expecting. So while everyone’s reaction to the artwork will vary, this wasn’t for me.



Now let’s get right to the story. V for Vendetta is all about opposing political ideologies: fascism and anarchy. Since the setting is a grim fascist white supremacist regime that rules England after a nuclear war destroys much of the world, nobody should expect a particularly upbeat story. In fact, Moore makes this dystopian regime so distasteful and unpleasant that it’s pretty impossible to imagine anyone sympathizing with it, since it eagerly imitates the Nazis in exterminating all its political opponents, as well as minorities, homosexuals, and any other ‘undesirables’, in concentration camps. Now anyone who knows Alan Moore knows he is virulently anti-Thatcher and very skeptical about conservative governments and power elites of any kind. The entire book is a catalog of all the horrid things perpetrated in the name of social order and uniformity: the state’s motto is "Strength Through Purity, Purity Through Faith". Really, it’s not very different from the current lineup of Republican candidates in the US presidential election, and Donald Trump would fit it quite nicely in this world.



However, the only way to make a debate about political ideologies interesting is if both sides have some appealing aspects. Since Moore makes his dystopian England regime so odious, this isn’t really a fair presentation. And one of the most frustrating aspects of V for Vendetta is that the majority of characters are members of this fascist police state (driven by the Norsefire ideology), which is separated into different sections labeled “the Mouth”, “the Nose”, “the Eye”, “the Head”, and “the Finger”. And although I appreciate Moore’s artistic intent in humanizing the members of this government, exploring the inner lives of these people, the bottom line is they are part of a repressive, fascist regime. So it’s really, really hard to feel sympathy for them as V dispatches them with ease, one by one. It’s also impossible to care about their internal rivalries as them scheme to position themselves within the government.



The far more interesting relationship is that between the enigmatic V and his innocent victim/love interest/protégé Eve Hammond. V is almost unbelievably quick, resilient, intelligent, cultured, and has directed all his considerable powers at overthrowing the fascist regime with targeted murders and bombings. He is a terrorist, but what a charming one. He quotes Shakespeare, speaks in iambic pentameter, plays the piano, and lives in his Shadow Chamber filled with the cultural treasures of the past. In him we can see all the artistic accomplishments that have been ground under the boot of the Norsefire ideology, leaving an empty-headed, crass proletariat. What he does to Evey Hammond in the name of truth and liberation is central to our judgment of his character. Give credit to Moore for making it difficult to paint V as a perfect vehicle for an anarchist ideology. Because I’m not even sure to what degree Moore sympathizes with V. He is a ruthless killer and many of his targets probably deserve what they get, but there are many innocents killed along the way.



More to the point, V’s goals are very simple: destroy the fascist government of Norsefire, and allow the people to control their own lives and destinies in an anarchic society called “The Land of Do-As-You-Please”, which comes from a children’s book called The Magic Faraway Tree. V does not present a single detail about this wonderful society in which everyone agrees to participate in deciding the shape of society. It’s quite telling that the concept comes from a children’s book, since the vast majority of “functional anarchic societies” are just that: a children’s fairy tale. Before this ideal society is established, we have instead the complete chaos of “The Land of Take-What-You-Want”. While anarchy has a conceptual appeal to anyone who chafes under the rules of society, let’s think seriously about the alternatives. Communism has been tried and failed, at least the real world examples, while Marxists might argue that many attempts at socialism have been flawed. Instead, democracies have gained the upper hand in the last century, with strong links to free-market capitalism (I’m simplifying here, but bear with me).

How many professed anarchists have proposed anything resembling a realistic, functioning society in which people freely decide the rules in perfect harmony, while still retaining complete control to “do as they please”. It’s pretty ridiculous. We all know that societies need rules to function; the key is to continually examine and adjust those rules to achieve the best balance of freedom and social responsibility. And representative democracy, despite all its shortfalls in concept and execution, seems to get us closer than other political systems. So I really do wonder exactly what Moore would like in his anarchic utopia. He is famously reclusive and curmugeonly, holed up in his small town of Northampton. I don’t imagine you can have a utopia made up only of comic book writers and artists. An anarchist society is bound to fail when it comes time to regularly plant and harvest crops, build sewage systems, maintain infrastructure, educate people, and punish crimes etc.

So in conclusion I appreciate V for Vendetta for presenting fascism in all its ugliness and also painting anarchism is very ambiguous grays. But by stacking the deck and giving V such charm and culture, it’s really a bit unfair. Granted, Moore is brave enough to show that it’s easier to destroy than to create. But this story focuses so much on the people caught up in the machinery of fascism that I had trouble maintaining interest. It’s a story full of ideas but I can’t extract the message the author intended, unless that message is simply “there is no perfect political system, but anything is better than fascism”.

Film version (2006, directed by James McTeigue, produced by Joel Silver and Wachowski siblings)



Alan Moore has disavowed himself of all film adaptations of his works, so we should consider this work separate from his comic. To be honest, I actually preferred the film version. Sure, it stripped out huge swaths of the side stories about all the political elites in the Norsefire regime, but that was my least favorite part of the comic anyway. We lose a lot of the literary references, and much of the details of this dystopia, but the film preserves all the central concepts of the comic. Visually, the Guy Fawkes image is incredibly effective, and remains very popular today in political protests and during Halloween. It has been part of the cultural lexicon and equates to fighting against fascism and oppression.



So the film benefits from having this powerful visual image of V and his distinctive top hat, coat, and belt knives. It’s a very cool and seductive image, no question. Natalie Portman also plays Evey Hammond with skill, as an innocent waif who is slowly drawn into V’s world. When he turns the tables on her, she is suitably shocked. Her transformation after his ministrations is very believable. Hugo Weaving also handles the cool, cerebral voice of V perfectly. I believed in his invincibility. Notably, the film-makers make some crucial changes to the characters in the final reel, which enter spoiler territory to discuss:

Unlike the comic, Inspector Finch in the film is a much more sympathetic character, basically determined to see justice through regardless of where it takes him. Finch in the comic is much more complicated, and his deliberate LSD trip at the end is quite bizarre. The biggest difference by far is that in the comic, when V dies, Evey takes up his identity to further his revolutionary agenda, to the point of taking on a prisoner from the police who she will train as her protégé. In the film, V dies from a barrage of police bullets, but Evey elects simply to give him his Viking funeral by sending his train car full of explosives to 10 Downing Street to destroy Parliament, fulfilling Guy Fawkes’ failed dream. She never assumes his identity.  

V for Vendetta ends with a beautiful fireworks show as Parliament is destroyed, silently watched by the masses of citizens who have donned the Guy Fawkes masks sent by V throughout the city. It’s a nice image of revolution against fascist oppression, but my thoughts always go to the next day. What happens after the regime is overthrown? That’s when things get complicated in the real world. The film is a very stripped-down version of the more complex comic, and it may not have the exact same message, but it remains a thought-provoking and entertaining work.

Prison. What exactly is prison? Is it just the confinement in which we are placed after crime? Or is it something more? Can we become imprisoned without being aware of it? Can we even imprison ourselves? Perhaps even to the state?





Alan Moore depicts these questions in this scary graphic novel that is set in some crazy right-winged London that reeks of fascism and corruption. It’s a dark, eerily real place; it is a place that might have actually been in an alternate history. Just like in Watchmen Moore shows us an alternative past that is stark and weirdly possible. The people struggle under an oppressive regime; they have no voice; they have no liberty or identity: they are in a monumental prison of both body and mind. And, worse yet, because of the mass propaganda campaigns, intimidating armed troop patrols, and lack of freedom in general, the people are not fully aware of their own oppressive plight. They’re ignorant and led along by the voice of power and authority. They have no free will.

This is where V. comes in. In the guise of a shadowy villain, the costumed rogue represents pure anarchy. His way of thought, as he himself admits, would lead to nothing but chaos. But, anything is better than fascism, right? Well, you’d think so but V. is far from the morale crusader he identifies himself as. Despite his form of vigilante justice, he is not morally good. What he inflicts on his protégé is nothing but damn nasty; yes, it opened her eyes to the prison of life, but in order for them to be opened he had to inflict great cruelty. Do the ends ever justify the means? Anarchy is the complete lack of authority over the populace, which is what V. is striving for, but he is acting with the power and ruthless of the very thing he is trying to overcome.

Indeed, what he exacts is a form of manipulative control, which is the very thing he is trying to destroy through his wave of terrorism. He is certainly a dark and complex character. Perhaps his ethos is even slightly self-defeating and contradictory. I don’t think he’s any better that what he is trying to destroy, but perhaps that’s the idea. Perhaps, Moore is trying to suggest that corruption is the very essence of human nature, and that nobody is beyond it. I think V. is less a man than an ideal. He represents something much bigger than himself, which is signified by his legacy. But, what this thing is destructive and extreme; his idea is not necessarily something beneficial to mankind.



I much preferred Watchmen to this; it was less political and focused on human nature rather than the complex nature of politics. I think the right reader could take a lot from this, but for me, I thought it was too bleak. There's little in the way of redemptive themes here.

n  2.5 stars n

5/5

Tavole bellissime, storia intensa e ben rappresentata..

✨✨✨✨