Could this film have been made (in the US) with it being set in america instead? The white house being blown up at the end of the film, etc?
Would the answer be the same today in 2012 as in 2005 when the film was made?
Could Fight Club have been made in 2002?
Very interested in peoples opinions here...?
What do you want to discuss? WTF does fight club has to do with V?
Yes, the movie could just as well been set in the US, or any other modern society.
What answer are you talking about?
If my point sailed right over your head I apologise
Maybe comprehension would come easier if you replace all instances of "could" with "would"
I don't know if you are mocking me, but maybe comprehension would be easier if you actually stated something your thread is about.
Could this film have been made (in the US) with it being set in america instead?The white house being blown up at the end of the film, etc?
Would the answer be the same today in 2012 as in 2005 when the film was made?
Could Fight Club have been made in 2002?
Could this film have been made (in Mexico) with it being set in Mexico instead? With them dealing Mexican drugs etc.share
Would the answer be the same today as 7 years ago, or when the film was made?
Could Alice in Wonderland be played by a male leading role?
Very interested in peoples opinions here...?
I am merely asking others for opinions on the questions I asked, and in my experience giving ones own opinions initially tends to muddle the discussion somewhat.
I guess that what I meant was, how closely does the film industry cater to the geopolitical situation of the world. After 9/11, there were numerous songs that were not to be played on the radio for a certain period of time (Rage against the machine amongst them if i remember correctly) But what about a film that makes a hero out of someone who blows up buildings?
You are correct that fight club is unrelated to V, but they are both related to what I was trying to get at.
This is the type of hypothetical question that no one can answer for certain, which is why I expressly pointed out that i was interested in peoples opinions.
For me, the answer to all three questions I asked would have to be "I dont know"
I am guessing, however, that the success of the matrix might not have overshadowed the potential risk of depicting blowing up the white house in a heroic act of defiance that potential investors may see.
It seems to me however that the US has devolved somewhat further towards the V paradigm since 2005. Liberties being constantly replaced by more and more efficient techniques of control. (I do not live anywhere remotely close to the US, so my opinion is quite irrelevant in regards to this issue) And indeed this appears to be a worldwide phenomenon.
Sorry if you interpreted me as purposefully vague, it was not my intention. I just did not want the thread to quickly devolve into yankbashing or the like.
I guess that I should make a thread on the fight club boards as well, asking if people think that it would have gotten the backing in a post-9/11 world
Nevertheless I am still interested in peoples opinions on this matter
Ah great, I thought you were mocking me in the reply, I just wanted to know the exact context of your questions.
The matter is what building is blown up I guess: blowing up the old Twin Towers would be out of the question. The White House, I don't know. I do think there are some more conservative publishers not wanting to publish this, or which are afraid of people protesting. HOwever, I am fairly sure now in 2012, this would pose no problem to find a publisher willing to show that.
In 2005, I think it would be too soon for a big production.
And well, Fight Club is more or less the same story: no big producers on board, especially in 2002.
People are always bitching and being offended by movies, and since the majority of people show this behaviour, many would not dare to produce such a movie.
Indeed, it seems we landed more or less at the same conclusions... Appreciate the input :)
I guess this is the type of situation where new fortunes can be made by the upstarts willing to take greater risks, provided the people like the end result
[quote]It seems to me however that the US has devolved somewhat further towards the V paradigm since 2005./quote]
Well, the PRISM surveillance program was launched in the USA under George W. Bush in 2007. It was a clandestine mass electronic surveillance data mining program created by the NSA. I would say 2007 is closer to 2005 than 2012 is.
And nowadays in the USA, most states believe that gay people have the right to marry. We've done a massive turnaround since 2005 on that issue. The states are falling like dominoes on the issue, because gay people who want to marry are challenging state bans on gay marriage, and the federal government keeps saying that not allowing gay people to marry is unconstitutional.
I k ow the post is old, but God damn you are an idiot if you think the metric for freedom in a society is "how tolerant of homosexuality" it is. There have been times in the United States where government had a smaller role, freedoms were values, and homosexuality was still discouraged. Things have gotten worse in the past 15 years, not better.
Please excuse any typos, this was typed on an iPad
"I just did not want the thread to quickly devolve into yankbashing or the like."
...And unfortunately that is exactly what this turned into. It seems I can't go onto an IMDB message board these days without reading some extremely hateful attitudes towards Americans...It's pretty ironic because the people who are spouting the hatred typically claim it is because Americans are close-minded and ignorant. But isn't generalizing an entire nation (populated by a myriad of people with varying beliefs, cultures, and backgrounds) the very epitome of close-mindedness and ignorance? I implore those who feel so negatively towards Americans to visit more than just one or two of our diverse regions and stay long enough to form a valid observation. One thing you may notice about Americans is we are currently more divided than ever over important issues and ideas. Some would probably view this as a sign of a pretty gloomy future, but I'm encouraged. What I see and hear from the majority of Americans (political/religious beliefs aside) is that they are demanding change. They are waking up to some nasty truths about our government and questioning what we've learned of our country's history and involvement in wars. They are beginning to fully comprehend the travesties committed by the politicians we repeatedly elect to office. They are learning that these politician's allegiance lies not with their constituents, but with the wealthy corporations they whore themselves out to. There are a lot of things about my country that I do not agree with and am certainly not proud of. However, I believe because we are such a culturally diverse nation, we possess the power to bring about the radical adjustments this country needs. I just hope I never become so arrogant and short sighted as to write off an entire country while placing my own on a pedestal.
I have absolutely nothing against americans, the ones I have met have all been exceedingly agreeable
Then again, as a superpower they definitely suck... so what to do, who to blame?
A lot of people voice their displeasure any way they know how
''...it is because Americans are close-minded and ignorant.''
I don't really believe this myself, but when some Americans come out with ridiculously patriotic (nationalistic?) statements such as, (and I paraphrase): ''a God given country'' & ''the greatest nation on earth'', it makes me wonder just how Americans can believe such populist utterances?
''I implore those who feel so negatively towards Americans to visit more than just one or two of our diverse regions and stay long enough to form a valid observation.''
I have visited the USA many, many times on business, but, how about Americans getting on a plane and travelling overseas now and again? The most broadminded Americans appear to be those who have travelled off-shore and I have met a few. The average American has an appalling knowledge of world geography. Ask a university student to point out Australia and Austria on a map - you will be surprised - or not, perhaps.
''They are waking up to some nasty truths about our government and questioning what we've learned of our country's history and involvement in wars.''
Yes I fully agree here. America involves itself in international struggles to its own peril, and additionally, seems successful in dragging its allies along. Australia, is one of these allies which blindly followed the USA in to the Middle East and we are paying the price. We can do without the terrorist happenings, thanks very much.
''I just hope I never become so arrogant and short sighted as to write off an entire country while placing my own on a pedestal.''
Again, I applaud this sentiment too.
Could Alice in Wonderland be played by a male leading role?
no, this film is based on a comic book produced in the early 80's by british writers with very british historical themes, which is set in london. could a generic film with anti-goverment sentiment and terrorism be produced in america then or now? maybe. but that isn't the question you asked.
share[deleted]
The US is turning fascist, but we're not Marxist or national socialist. We're more accurately described as turning into a corporatist plutocracy. Which in itself is a form of fascism.
To my knowledge the Patriot Act doesn't prevent a movie like that which you describe from being made. It however would be very difficult to get the approval of such a film for many different reasons including the 'never ending war on terrorism' and the interconnectivity of major corporations which benefit from it financially.
Perhaps that is why this brilliant film didn't even get nominated for an academy award; let alone win one.
Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot are British and I can't think of an American equivalent. For it to be set in America it would have to be completely rewritten, so my answer is no.
The Long Walk stops every year, just once.
After reading the script, the man who wrote "V for Vendetta", Alan Moore, remarked:
"[The movie] has been turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country.... It's a thwarted and frustrated and largely impotent American liberal fantasy of someone with American liberal values standing up against a state run by neoconservatives — which is not what the comic V for Vendetta was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about England."
Probably not in the direct aftermath of 9/11 but people have short attention spans nowadays and don't connect the dots as much as they used to so it probably could be made in the US by now.
shareI'll join in on this discussion.
I think the fact that the Occupy movement used the mask from V for Vendetta to represent themselves shows that the anti-government sentiment in the movie absolutely translates to United States citizens, and that the movie touched a nerve with us Americans. So yes, absolutely it could have been set in the US, but probably not so much in 2005. Back then we were tired of the Iraq war but it the blame had still been squarely on the shoulders of our then-president George W Bush. The economy hadn't tanked yet, and so anti-government sentiment hadn't been nearly as strong in '05 as it is now in 2013, with the economy still in a recession and a public that is starting to see there is more at play here then whoever the President du Jour is. Now there is more public knowledge of government officials working with the very bankers who caused the recession and the President's blase stance on killing American non-combatants has caused worries in this country that, for the first time in a very long while, have sparked discussions transcending democrat vs republican and have taken on disturbing notions of increased governmental power.
So could the movie be made now, set in the US? I would say yes, but I think now it would sit too close to home, mentally speaking, with a lot of Americans who feel we are slowly headed in the George Orwell's 1984 society to be passed off as entertainment.
Maybe someone feels that the public's perception on our government hasn't changed as much as I think it has from 2005 to now?
That would have been stupid. Just keep the setting the way it is. I think it makes it more unique compared to other gritty superhero films.
http://thecinemareviewed.blogspot.com/
i am assuming that you live in the united states. and i'm bemused that someone could even begin to think the way your thinking. I visited that country few times, before 2001 and after 2001. It is a lobotomized country. Hence the surprise!
sharethis would suit the U.S more as they are crazy and retards
they are all brainwashed into the concepts of foreigners i.e not white and not speaking english evil, the evil communist boogey man hence we need guns
why do you think they keep starting illegal wars killing heaps of people
why do you think there's always racist and stereotypical concepts of "if you have a foreign accent like russian or german you are evil"??
just like the new film coming out "its a good day to DIE HARD"
even when bruce willis was questioned about gun control he says "rights are more important and need to be protected"
i mean what rights are these exactly?? the right to eat? the right to live under a roof and love our family? NO...its the right to a weapon that has no PROTECTIVE qualities because it is a OFFENSIVE weapon, it was designed to kill..you can't PROTECT people with it
this story suits the states more, and them getting all the countries to attack china secretly is proof how insane they are
And exactly what country do you live in, where you obviously feel that your society is perfect enough to justify you making such an idiotically hateful post about a nation that's not even your own?
shareNo. Two reasons. One: America, the most democratic of countries, would simply not allow such an image of itself to reach the big screen. Two: The procedures that led to the 'utopic' country shown in the movie could not be implemented in a country like America, a country with more immigrants then natives. Add to this the fact that there was not one African-American in the movie and one quickly realizes that well over half the country's population would have had to be wiped out if it were to happen in the USA, which would make for one disturbing movie, would it not?
shareYou have no clue what you are talking about do you, you were passing by and felt like commenting. Would not be set in America as not enough African Americans in the film let alone if it was America...... erm.... yeah.... the lack of African Americans may be that its set in England
Point.... missed
Meeting adjourned
America, the most democratic of countries
Two: The procedures that led to the 'utopic' country shown in the movie
I agree with the rest of your post, but:
Also america is not a country.
Then you disagree with basic geography. America is a continent, not a country. United States "probably" is the country's name, but that's that.
I am from India of Asia by the way.
There would only be African-Brits in the movie, not African-Americans. And there WERE African-Brits in this movie. The fact that so many people didn't see those of African ancestry in there is disturbing. Are they invisible to so many? There are a lot of people who also claim there were no African-Americans in the Andy Griffith show. They were all over the place on that show. This is the only website I can now find about it, but there were many more African-Americans on that show than are shown here: http://legendsrevealed.com/entertainment/2012/07/24/tv-urban-legends-r evealed-were-there-really-no-black-people-in-mayberry/
I'm aware that Andy Griffith show has nothing to do with V for Vendetta; just pointing out a blindness that most American citizens seem to have (no matter what ethnicity they are.) I think people who say that about either V for Vendetta or Andy Griffith Show are not watching either very closely.
America, the most democratic of countriesBWAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHA ROTFL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL !!!!