| Revision as of 15:47, 8 November 2022 editTonyproctor (talk | contribs)209 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Revision as of 02:21, 9 November 2022 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,784 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:V for Vendetta (film)/Archive 7) (botNext edit → |
| Line 96: |
Line 96: |
|
==References== |
|
==References== |
|
{{reflist}} |
|
{{reflist}} |
|
|
|
|
== Wrong Date == |
|
|
|
|
|
The article summary states that V for Vendetta is set in 2020. 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. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> |
|
|
: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! ] (]) 20:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::Checking the edit history, 2032 was the status quo prior to January 2020. I've restored it and added a source. ] (]) 20:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Beat me to it; I concur with your change. Thanks! ] (]) 20:30, 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 by what appears to be a date vandal. – ''']''' ] 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. ] (]) 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? ] (]) 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?] (]) 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. ] (]) 01:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::I wouldn't support using IMDb per ], 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. ] (]) 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. ] (]) 03:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:It's not just Rodger Ebert. See also , , and . These are all from 2006. Note, the did mention being set in 2020 once in a "differences from the graphic novel" section. ] (]) 13:30, 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.] (]) 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. ] (]) 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. ] (]) 20:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::If it becomes relevant, I'm sure a modern reliable source will let us know. ] (]) 20:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
===Date revisited=== |
|
|
The "2027" date strikes me as ]. If the date is not clearly stated in the movie, there is no need to mention it in the article. I'm going to remove it. ] (]) 16:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Anonymous == |
|
|
|
|
|
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.--]|] 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. ] (]) 14:44, 6 November 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Phrasing == |
|
== 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.
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.