Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I read somewhere that V might have actually been Valerie, and that rather than avenging her, he was seeking revenge for what they had done to her in order to cure her "disorder": a partial change to her sex and/or gender that had unexpected repercussions. I don't know how credible this interpretation is, but it made sense to me. Unfortunately I can find no reference to it now. Anyone come across it before? ] (]) 15:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
I read somewhere that V might have actually been Valerie (the 'V' being significant), and that rather than avenging her, he was seeking revenge for what they had done to her in order to cure her "disorder": a partial change to her sex and/or gender that had unexpected repercussions. I don't know how credible this interpretation is, but it made sense to me. Unfortunately I can find no reference to it now. Anyone come across it before? ] (]) 15:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
V for Vendetta (film) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Misplaced Pages. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anarchism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anarchism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnarchismWikipedia:WikiProject AnarchismTemplate:WikiProject Anarchismanarchism
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.
References to use
Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
Booker, M. Keith (2007). "V for Vendetta". May Contain Graphic Material: Comic Books, Graphic Novels, and Film. Praeger. ISBN0275993868.
Keller, James R. (2008). V For Vendetta As Cultural Pastiche: A Critical Study of the Graphic Novel and Film. McFarland. ISBN0786434678.
Reynolds, James (2009). "'KILL ME SENTIMENT': V For Vendetta and comic-to-film adaptation". Journal of Adaptation in Film & Performance. 2 (2): 121–136. doi:10.1386/jafp.2.2.121_1. ISSN1753-6421. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
Williams, Tony (2006). "Assessing V For Vendetta". CineAction (70): 16–23. ISSN0826-9866. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Looks at V FOR VENDETTA in the current political climate."
Shay, Estelle (2006). "Overview: Dan Glass on V for Vendetta". Cinefex (106): 15–20. ISSN0198-1056. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "An overview of visual effects supervisor Dan Glass' and Cine -site's work on V FOR VENDETTA."
Winterton, Ian (2006). "Fear Me". Empire (202): 89, 91–95. ISSN0957-4948. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Cast and crew discuss the making of and the themes in the film V FOR VENDETTA."
Wolff, Michael (2006). "R for Revolution". Vanity Fair (546): 44, 46–47. ISSN0733-8899. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Article considering V FOR VENDETTA as a reflection of the post-9/11 world, and placing it in the tradition of 'cultural sabotage' embodied by films such as IF.... and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE."
"The V for Vendetta". Film Review (664): 80–81. 2005. ISSN0957-1809. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) "Co-creator Dez Skin and original artist David Lloyd discuss the genesis and controversy surrounding the release delay of V FOR VENDETTA."
References
Wrong Date
The article summary states that V for Vendetta is set in 2020. this edit changed it recently and then it's gone back and forth. While the virus in the film started in 2020, the film was set in 2032. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.226.195 (talk • contribs)
Can you provide any information to support your claim, such as when in the film it's stated that the virus starts in 2020? Thanks! DonIago (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
I've reverted back to 2020, all reliable sources I could find mention "set in London 2020" and only Misplaced Pages mirrors and self-published content (possibly citing Misplaced Pages) mention 2032. 2032 was inserted in November 2018 by what appears to be a date vandal. – Thjarkur(talk)13:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Rewatching the movie tonight, 2032 seems to match better but there isn't anything specific to that date that I've found yet. The flashbacks to the story from the detention center states that in 2015 Valerie met Ruth and then they were both taken by the government after 3 years together. This would put the very beginning of the actual V story arc at 2018. Meanwhile it would seem that Norsefire's rise to power and the situation in the movie would have taken longer to happen due to things like inspector Finch stating he was a party member for 27 years. Additionally, in the scene where Finch is reviewing Prothere's file he states he was one of the richest men in the country before becoming the Voice of London and the info on his screen states that Prothero bought stock in Viadoxic in 2020 and at some point later has been working for the BTN for four years. This would imply that the absolute earliest year the movie could be set in was 2024 (36:51 in the movie). The only other timestamped thing I found is another screen grab from Finch's computer showing that Father Lilliman's position has been Bishop from 2020-present. I think it is safe to definitively say the movie is not set in 2020. While 2032 is a feasible setting, I am yet to find anything that specifies that exact year but it for sure isn't 2020. Theyoyomaster (talk) 04:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on the discussion below it appears that the year has been definitively locked down to 2027-2028. Does anyone else have any thoughts on it before making the change? Theyoyomaster (talk) 20:23, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
If people don't want to cite IMDB that's fine but the rogerebert.com article is directly contradicted in the film. For a page about a movie, said movie should be the ultimate primary source, especially over a movie critic's article. Screenshots easily prove 2027/2028 as the setting so what is the consensus on the best way to cite that?Theyoyomaster (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Does anyone have any inputs on either citing IMDB or just considering actual dates visible on screen during the film to be a primary source? If no on else chimes in it would seem there is consensus here. It simply can't be 2020 since it is directly contradicted by the film itself. Theyoyomaster (talk) 01:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't support using IMDb per WP:RS/IMDb, and given that we're even having this conversation, I'd prefer a source other than "dates visible on screen" only because sometimes dates shown on screens in films aren't as thoroughly vetted for accuracy as they should be. DonIago (talk) 02:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not ideal but the dates on the screens are all consistent and point to the same answer. The bottom line is this is a page about a movie and the movie itself presents the answer to this question. A single source of a movie reviewer claiming a date that directly contradicts hard facts from within the movie shouldn't count as the "official" answer simply because rogerebert.com is arbitrarily considered "more academic" than the primary source itself. The desire to use secondary sources shouldn't extend to arbitrary sources (Roger Ebert had nothing to do with the production of the film nor does he cite any sources for his claim of 2020) that directly contradict the primary source. Theyoyomaster (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
It's still directly contradicted by the primary source. Other than the filmmakers chiming in one way or another I don't see how it can be reconciled that they are not in line with what is shown in the film. Would the plot section get changed to say that Evey dies at the end simply because a reputable source claims it and then it is repeated? Maybe "set in the 2020s" is the best way to compromise between both since it matches both the movie and the articles.Theyoyomaster (talk) 15:58, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The year isn't significant enough to be obvious in the film, so I don't see a need to put the year in the summary. I think the current version is fine. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
I would be inclined to agree except for the meme going around with the incorrect year. People see that and come here to verify it so if the movie itself shows it being in a different year and it becomes relevant. I would bet that a large portion of recent traffic to this page is simply to verify what year it is set in, otherwise I would completely agree "near future" is all that is actually important. Theyoyomaster (talk) 20:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't see the relevance of the Anonymous section under the heading "Reception", since there is no reference to Anonymous having made any comment on the film whatsoever. I suggest delete it completely.--Shantavira|14:12, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed; as that section is currently written, I have no idea why or how it belongs in this article. Editors who wish to retain it should rewrite it to draw a direct line between the group and the flim. DonIago (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Phrasing
"the film centres on V (portrayed by Hugo Weaving), an anarchist and masked freedom fighter who attempts to ignite a revolution through elaborate terrorist acts, while Natalie Portman plays Evey, a young, working-class woman caught up in V's mission and Stephen Rea portrays a detective leading a desperate quest to stop V."
Shouldn't this be written as "... a revolution through elaborate terrost acts, while Evey (portrayed by Natalie Portman), a young, working-class..." The way it is currently written sounds like Natalie Portman is a character in the film.
Good evening, London. It's nine
o'clock, the fourth of November in
the year 2019 and this is the voice
of Fate broadcasting on 275 and 285
of the medium wave. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpascoe (talk • contribs) 08:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
That script is obviously not the one for the final film and as such no better than any other fan theories. If you search for it on the site, it will even tell you that it's an early draft. Regards SoWhy12:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Alternative Interpretation
I read somewhere that V might have actually been Valerie (the 'V' being significant), and that rather than avenging her, he was seeking revenge for what they had done to her in order to cure her "disorder": a partial change to her sex and/or gender that had unexpected repercussions. I don't know how credible this interpretation is, but it made sense to me. Unfortunately I can find no reference to it now. Anyone come across it before? TonyP (talk) 15:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
To-do: E · H · W · RUpdated 2007-03-08
Done.