A Geek History of Time - Episode 39 - V For Vendetta Part II

Episode Date: February 1, 2020

This week, comic book writer Tim Watts joins Damian for a discussion of the changing resonance of V for Vendetta over time and across media (the comic was better, fight me, sincerely Ed).

You know, Stalin and the Nazis were these welfare state types. One of us is a stand-up comic. Can you tell me it is, ladies and gentlemen, everyone brick. Um. But the problem. Oh my god. That's like, I could use that to teach the whole world. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha a geek history of time where we take nursery and relate it to the real head come back, come back at who miss you. Something about we bring nursery into the real world. I am not at

Blalock, as you can see, I'm Tung Tiedemian Harmony, I am a Latin teacher who sometimes dowels in world history. I'm also a father of two, one of whom just turned ten and I bought him his very first Calvin and Homs to try to get him away from Garfield. Sitting across from me is again another special guest. Please introduce yourself, sir. I am Tim Watts and I am a past podcaster, also a sometime comic book creator, writer, artist, and post-apocalyptic aficionado. I like it. And we talked last time about your comic book. I'm gonna let you plug that again at the end.

Okay. But I do wanna ask, what is the name of your podcast? Cause I hear that these are still available for download. I don't believe they are. Really? The podcast was certainly ended probably five years ago, four years ago,

four years ago, because it rents course. And then just through a sequence of events, the server that was hosting it, I think that other people were in charge of paying the upkeep for that and that stopped. So I do not really, it's available anymore. It was called post-apot-aclips. Okay, well y'all can try to find it

Yeah, you might be able to find it I don't know if some Places may still have it. I don't have control over that sure so but yeah We talked about all kinds of post apocalyptic goodness and yeah, so that's cool And as we talk about last episode some yeah some similar themes. Yes Speaking of which now we're gonna talk about the movie of V for Vendetta So last time we talked about the comic book and I brought everybody up to speed about the text and the print of Vifra Vendetta, which is totally overblown in the 1980s, but it's totally not

overblown. Now, the movie itself is also kind of totally overblown in the early 2000s and yet it totally wasn't, and it certainly isn't now. Again, it's a long title, but we're workshopping it. Now, the history of the comic turning into a movie is actually a really sad one from the artist's perspective. Alan Moore maintains that DC all but stole the rights to two of his favorite properties, V for Vendetta and Watchman.

And it was their treatment of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen that soured him entirely. By the time V for Vendetta was in production he'd specifically asked DC to take his name off of these properties. He's basically pissed and thinks he was dooped, he says, quote, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was the reason why I decided to take my name off of all subsequent films. And why Sean Connery retired? Yes, although frankly, that man was out of touch by that point anyway. It true, and yeah.

To be honest, I thought League was kind of fun. Yeah, I don't know why. I didn't take it seriously. I didn't know what we were supposed to be looking for with League. There was no death to it. It was just a spectacle. It wasn't supposed to be. And from the point of spectacle, it was just fun.

I mean, the comic itself didn't have much depth. Yeah, maybe 20,000 leagues, but that was about leagues but that was about it. If you're lucky. Yeah. But yeah he also says yeah a lot of things which had to do with league made me decide I really wanted nothing to do with the American film industry in any shape or form which is why SDC if I could possibly have my name taken off the films and the money redistributed. So he did put his money where his mouth was. Yep.

This went fine with the Constantine film. This was because my name was never going to go on the Constantine film in the first place. Because that had gone so well, I distributed the money amongst the other artists. My name hadn't been on the film and I was completely happy. And Constantine was original creation of his? I guess so. I was nowhere of that. I didn't think that he did.

OK. I assumed when DC then sent me paperwork so I could sign my money over to David Lloyd on the V for Vendetta film that this is going to go fine. David Lloyd is the artist who did the drawings. It didn't. I had an American producer actually lying about my involvement in the film, which

made me look like a liar. When I said I'm not taking any money from these films and I'm not interested in them, he makes a statement that's completely dishonest and was saying the complete opposite. So I felt I had at that point to exercise my right to completely sever my tie- myself from DC Comics, if assuming they weren't able to just get a simple retraction, nothing humiliating, just a simple retraction apology and clarification that would have said we regret that due to a misunderstanding blah, blah, blah, that all would have been all. DC told me they were really trying hard to get that. I kind of got the idea that in fact,

they probably, they were just hoping that if they stalled for long enough, it would all blow over and there wouldn't be anything I was able to do about it. So essentially they're gonna say, hey, we'll get to that. Take it down the road. Take it down the road. Yeah. enough it would all blow over and there wouldn't be anything I was able to do about it. So essentially they're going to say, hey, we'll get to that. Take it down the road. Take it down the road. Yeah.

About a few weeks, or I'm sorry, after a few weeks it turned out that they hadn't been trying to get any apology or retraction or at least not very hard. They certainly weren't able to offer one that was anything like what I'd asked for. At this point I said that it's, I said that's it. I'm not working for DC again and also I still want my. At this point, I said that it's, I said that's it. I'm not working for DC again. And also, I still want my name off this film. If they don't take my name off this film, I will be taking my name off the books

because it means that much to me to sever my connection with this whole painful process or business. The way that I've left it is this, or the way I've left it is, all right, DC can take my name off of V for Vendetta and stop paying me the money. And if that doesn't happen, take my name off all the books

and stop paying me the money. So no telling where this could run to. I mean, believe me, I would be completely happy if my name came off everything I do not own. I'm not expecting DC Comics to be shamed by my asking to have my name taken off the work. I don't think anyone's going to be shamed. Wow.

Yeah, he's pissed. Yeah, well, I get the impression that there's not a lot of middle ground with him. No. You know? It kind of reminds me of the Dicco character, Mr. A, I think it was. It was a character that Steve Dicco character, Mr. A, I think it was. It was a character that Steve Dicco created and then saw things in a very black and white manner. And he created him back in the 70s.

Oh, okay. 60s, 70s. Is it a Marvel character? No, I think it was just his character. Oh, okay. And I don't know a lot about him, but I get the impression that Alan Moore made like him. Yeah.

Because he's very arbitrary in his worldview. Okay. Which I get the impression that, I don't think Alan Moore is an arbitrary. I do think he's rigid. Better word to use. Yeah. Better word to use. He clearly came to it honestly.

Oh, yeah. Yeah, that was a process. No, he wasn't too face it and flip the coin. Oh, yeah, yeah, I think it was like, it was this for now. There was a process, no, he wasn't too facing it, it looked the point. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It was thought out, but staunchly adhered to. Yeah, yeah. Ed being a calf, like, would appreciate that.

So V for Vendetta was acquired by DC and had a number of pressing since the mid 1980s. Is it called a pressing? A printing, sure. What, in comics, press pressing? A printing, sure. What? In comics? Pressings for records, I believe. Yeah.

Yeah. So by 2006, they sold over 500,000 copies. The Wakowski's were interested since the mid 1990s, and after the Matrix blew up, they had the capital to get their way. Warner Bros. optioned the movie, and the Wakowski siblings modernized the script, Americanizing it. More didn't like that either. Oh no, I did.

Because to me, if you're optioning a piece of art, you have the option to, when you change the medium, you get to change it. And I think, I think his, here's why I liked it. His book was perfect for its time, making a movie that's perfect for that time makes no goddamn sense to me. I understand that, but and I'll retread some of the stuff that we talked about last. Please tell us as we talked about this a little bit. What I learned from the last episode is how much they diverge from the source material. Yes. And now that I know more of what, and we'll go back Yes. And how, now that I know more of what,

and we'll go back to creator and intent, now that I know more of what the intent of the piece was when it's originally written, I have no problem with modernizing it. I can also understand when you move from one medium to another, sacrifices have to be made for storytelling purposes and various other reasons. But I think the choices they made diluted the impact of it

because before it was very clearly fascism in the comic and as it has had last episode much more generic. There's much more theocracy in my opinion because they leaned hard into faith and they focused as the class that they want to persecute is primarily homosexuals. And Muslims, which gives very much into a Christianity point of view. Absolutely. So they didn't get into minorities and other things like that. That was something that was dealt with in the film.

So, and again, I totally understand, I'm not sure, you know, when I sell my comic, I'm perfectly fine with changes being made because I understand that you you can't match the market. Just like if you make a comic book of a pros novel, you have to make changes. Absolutely. You know, so I get that I just think that the comic as you explained it last episode is much richer in what the ground it covered. Yes. And had and and had much more depth, which is usually the case for a written even a graphic novel.

I would say it's also the film. It's the case for the first aspect of that media of whatever medium it's it. It's the it's the case for the first aspect of that piece. So if you took a novelization of a film and you would make a novelization. You have the opportunity to expand. I don't think it's as rich though. I think whatever the first of it is, I think it could be. It could be.

It could be, I think it could be. Yeah, but you're right, because episode three of Star Wars, the novel of it is so good. Oh, is it? It really is. And so, whereas by the nature of the medium, you know, a film runs anywhere from 100 to 120 pages of a script.

True. You know, you physically can't put in everything unless you make a 16-hour series like Lord of the Rings. Right. And I would argue, you still don't have everything in those. No, so many fans are pissed that Bombadill's not in there. Right, and what do you do? Do you make an 18-hour movie? Well, if you're Peter Jackson, yes.

Yeah, or Amazon will spend $300 million to make the series. Right, right. Or, you know, like the shining, for instance, if you include the shit that's from the book, then you're confusing people. Like, what was that dog thing? You know, like in shining, for instance, if you include the shit that's from the book, then you're confusing people. Like, what was that dog thing? You know, like, in the book, there's 30 pages explaining that the whole thing that got to that.

But choices are making the Joker the one that killed Bruce Wayne's parents in the first movie, which I hit was, you know, so unnecessary. And it's been the purpose of senseless violence. Yep. Because the event didn't have to have a connection. Right. And that was the whole point. Right. But I understand that they were talking of senseless violence because the event didn't have to have a connection. That was the whole point.

But I understand that they were talking down to the audience that if this guy didn't come back around somehow, that the audience would be confused or something. Right. I vacillate between yes, the movie going public is stupid or give them some credit. I don't know where I land depends on the day. Sure. And I would say though, even just with that though, there was that wonderful line of, you made me, but I made you mine.

No, that's a great line. And I loved that little thing, but they didn't really explore that even. Like these guys existed so far away from each other. Right. It was just a great line and that was it. So I agree with you 100%. So I think that the choices they made while they may have been necessary, lessened the overall texture and depth of the film versus the book.

But I dare say, and here's, and maybe because it's the thesis of what I'm coming to about this, is that this. The fascism that's brought about in the movie, and I would even say it doesn't even lean that heart on theocracy, It's just the thing it leans hardest on. It only mentions faith in print twice and then verbally like three times. That's it. It's much more of a generic myasma fascism. And I kind of like that, the generic brand of fascism, because that makes it more of a universal thing, which to me, and I'm going to get to why I think that, but to Alan Moore, you're absolutely right. It ceased to be about these

extreme ideologies of anarchism and fascism, and about England specifically, and it became an American story that lacked the satirical content that he purposely explored. Which goes to the homogeneous quality of Hollywood, of the pundit, the lowest common denominator, for profitability. Yeah, but at the same time, like, that fixed Star Wars. And I'm talking about the original trilogy. But more stated that the story, quote, 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 neo-conservatives, which is not what the comic V for Vendetta was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about England.

Now, again, here's where I disagree with him. Yes, he's right. The movie, despite being said in England, is not about England. It's not. And yes, he's right, it avoids all kinds of shit that's important, the racism, the white supremacy, the ethosate bullshit of the ruling party's fascism.

True. Hell, it leaves out the fascism. But it alludes to it, not very subtly. Oh, it absolutely does. You've got the, I can often see is all over it. And that's the thing about a movie. It's a visual medium. You can get away with not saying, hey, we're fascists.

Because they're posed in front of black end and they get to the top. It's a flash and the red. It's just his 1000 words. Exactly. Yeah. Which is interesting that a comic book guy has pissed that a visual medium. A comic book writer.

Ah, good point. Good point. He's not a visual story of how he helped me. He understands that he understands the medium. I don't get you wrong. Right. But his primary focus is the written word. That's so interesting.

Why? If he's so written wordy? Well also he's historically has established himself to be very precious about his creations. True. That's true. You know and someone else went in and stomped all over it and walked around and made changes to it. And I mean if somebody went in and changed everything about my book, it would probably upset me, especially the choices that I thought substantively, like for example, in my book I have several prominent female characters. And if someone's like, we're gonna make a movie

and all the leads are white males. Right, and they're all 12 year olds. That would bug me. Yeah, no, I get you. That makes sense. Yeah. So yeah, I think precious is a good word. I said he's purity testy, but you're right.

He's precious. And I think he runs a good word. I said he's purity testy, but you're right. He's precious. And I think he runs into the same problem that a lot of my leftist friends run into too, forgetting that the real enemy is fascism. And this is where you get into that wonderful scene on Monty Python, Life of Brian, Judean People's Front, People's Front of Judea, all that. They're tearing each other apart, forgetting the front of the G.A. All that. They're tearing each other apart,

forgetting the Romans, the original fascists. Um, any chipping away at that fascism, no matter how timid, good, good, and if it takes a very watered down version of what he did to reach a mainstream audience, cool enough for me, man. Uh, plenty of people read the comic only cool enough for me, man. Plenty of people read the comic only after seeing the movie, too. Me included.

And since the comic is from two decades earlier, it had become a bit of a snapshot, as any art is, a relic of the 1980s in England. And that's not who needed to hear the message anymore. And I would also add that you denounced and used before the Ted Turner colorized thing. Just because this film was made, his work didn't cease to exist. Right.

People were still welcome to read it. And who knows? Like you said, maybe the film drove somebody to read it that hadn't read it before. Yep. And they got the message that he was trying to communicate in the original novel. Yeah, that they would never have gotten had they not seen the film.

Right. And you know, as a lover of the Star Wars EU, they got rid of the entire EU. Right. I still have all the books in my bookshelf. I don't read them anytime I want. Right. And they have used elements of that in my beloved movies too. Mm-hmm. I mean, they absolutely have. And they have used elements of that in my beloved movies too.

They absolutely have. Now David Lloyd, his co-creator for V for Vendetta, the guy who did all the drawings, he liked it. He said, quote, it's a terrific film. The most extraordinary thing about it for me was seeing scenes that I'd worked on and crafted for maximum effect in the book, translated a film with the same degree of care and effect. The transformation scene between Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving is just great. If you happen to be one of those people who admires the original so much that changes to it will automatically turn you off, then you may dislike the film. But if you enjoy the original and can accept an adaptation that

is different to its source material, but equally as powerful, then you'll be as impressed with it as I was. And that is a visual storyteller looking at a visual media? I had never thought of that. And that blows my mind that I had missed even that simple distinction. Because he speaks that language of film, even the way it's not a film maker. Right. He's still in Alan Moore does.

Yeah. That's really, wow. He, like I said, he seems not to be stuck to the purity of the art, even the importance of the message and given the evolution of the art. But I think it's 100% what you're saying, too. Now that said, here's what Moore got right. Okay, from the time that he wrote and published V for Vendetta and its resurgence with DC and with the movies, a lot of the world has changed.

Alan Moore's warning against fascism and nuclear war seemed quaint by the early 2000s. Because people had stopped being concerned about nuclear war. Right, right. Because Soviet Union had fallen. Yep. And other things, rogue states had become the main people term. War on terror. War on terror.

People term, individual or small group actions were more of a concern than any large state. Well, and the main oppressor wasn't a... Well, it was what he had called out, a fascism with a pretty face, you know, a kind face, a good with a smile and a sharp suit, because you do have the war on terror. You do have people being thrown into camps. And I think I'm gonna get to that later, or I might be mixing up my episodes. Kind of a theme for me. He called out that an upcoming generation who would see the Fervendetta on screen, which he thoroughly disassociated himself from, said, quote,

they think they're growing up under the threat of Islamachi Haad. They're in fact growing up under the threat of nuclear winter, just like we were. I don't know if I go down with that road with him. I wouldn't until 2016. I still don't. No. I still don't. I think. I've got a bigger button and it works better than Kim Jong Un's. Oh no, I understand. Oh no I understand. Yeah I understand but I think that as as frightening the rhetoric is I think just a certain degree it is braverado and rhetoric. I also think that the the withdrawal from Syria gave me a window into, there is a line where as his own people will go, no, you fucked up.

I don't, no, I don't cling to that as comforting that eventually they'll draw a line, but it's interesting. There's at least something there. I don't know if it will make it, but ultimately, I think that the idea of going down, opening that door, there's enough people that I would say if you had to be a Betty man, I would lean 50% plus on the someone intervening.

Okay. Then not. Not that it couldn't happen. Absolutely. Right. Right. Yeah, you said 50% plus. That's not it. That's not it. I want to hear. Here's why I would argue otherwise.

Reagan himself offered a deal to Gorbachev in the 80s of total elimination of nuclear weapons in exchange for certain things. The leaders, though their rhetoric was jumped up, were working furiously behind the scenes to ratchet it down. The time at which he was writing his stuff, nuclear war was absolutely an existential threat, but it had become like it had become a car alarm. Right. You hear it, but you don't listen to it. It's been going on so long you ignore it. Yeah, but also people were working at,

I mean, you had salt one, salt two. You had strategic, you had all these reduction arms happening at that time, whereas now you, we don't quite know who's got what kinds of nuclear weapons and now people don't have those back channels anymore. And so I would say that that's why to me, it's more of a threat, even though we're not as aware of it. That's a possibility, yes.

But either way, I don't think he's that far. Large scale, 500 missiles both flying back and forth at each other, I think, is less likely. I think an isolated event is more likely. Yes. So I'll agree with you on that. I think it's much less Hmm how to put this It's much more likely that it's going to start like World War one did

Mm-hmm, then it will start like the Napoleonic War did right I could see leads to the other leads to the other oh shit now. We're all dead Whereas before it was two giant states it starts at the top right. Yeah, now it's oh, I can yeah I can definitely see you know push comes a shove and Israel decides they want to be preemptive on something in Iran and you know Don't forget Pakistan and then shit goes and India. Oh man. India is getting more fashy by the day India is yeah, yeah, not to go too far a field, but yes. Yeah, yeah. So, and that's what I'm saying, like a lot of people, and then don't forget, you know, Korea,

don't forget, you know. Yeah, I was thinking more of a US-Ove Union level large scale exchange, but you're right, small regional things. Yeah, that is the pulse of that. Kick up a lot of dust. Yeah, yeah. So, he says, and again, I don't think he's that far from the mark, he says, I was saying back in 1981 or whenever it was, I was setting this in the absurdity, absurdly far future

period of 1997, where Britain would be run by a computer centralized right wing government. Now, that's a thing in the, in the comic that was a thing, like the, the leader was in love with and being told what to do by a computer. Oh, really? Yeah. Yeah, they took that. I think they took that completely out. And they went right to take it out.

I don't think it was germane to the message. Not at the time, yeah. And to show what they were really nasty, and to show what they were a really nasty right-wing government, the easiest and quickest shorthand was to put monitor cameras on every street corner. In 1997, in England, I believe it first began in the town of Kingsland, they had a monitor camera saturation where you could track someone from one end of town to the other without

them ever going off camera. Now, is that something that, at this point point I know that the UK is one of the most camera failed. Surveiled countries in the world that had to do with the Olympics. That was the big excuse. But was it ever really objected to by either side? No and that's the remember what I said last time about how England didn't suffer? Right. There just went with it. And when this was successful they shipped it into every town in the British Isles. So yes, there are monitor cameras everywhere. It's fairly obvious. It's what I would do if I were going to start a fascist political state, so I assume

it's what anyone would do. It's like terrorism. You were talking about people being more frightened of dying in a jihad. No offense, but that is perhaps more of an American perception than a global one. You have to remember that over here there there were teenagers being taken out of seller bars and separate carrier bags all through the 70s and 80s because of the war in Northern Ireland, which in that case, the IRA,

were largely being supported by donations from America. That's true. Yeah, yeah, sure. That was why I was a bit worried when George Bush said he was going to attack people who supported terrorism. I thought, oh my God, Chicago is going to be declared a rogue state and they're going to hunt down Teddy Kennedy and people like that. Now, I would say, see overblown, overblown, overblown, and yet, I read Twitter. Right, but also Twitter is a microscopic section of the populists where I can

read what the president is saying. Well, and that's what I'm talking about. Okay. I thought you were talking about as a whole, and I just follow the media and the president. The movie departs strongly from the comic in that it generalizes fascism into a series of images, like we said. It mentioned Islam maybe twice and often in the same breath as queer folk. Nothing about white nationalism, nothing about hyper militarism, and it doesn't have to. It's done by montage and or just ignored.

Right, but they are very clear on the hyper militarism just through images. Yeah, they don't talk about it, but it's everywhere. It's montage, it's like the American Civil War is done blow up. Yeah, but just the military presence in the UK, they're everywhere. Yeah. So yeah. And I would point out that the UK does have a tremendous surveillance system.

They also have a lot fewer shootings. And that's, you know, he's afraid of fascism. And I'm afraid of schools getting shot up. There's some room there for discussion. Now the focus becomes, in the movie, becomes V. He becomes, because it's an American movie, so we've got to focus on the Lord Godman. Yeah, we have to have our knifemen.

Yeah. It becomes his quest to write a wrong, to save England and by extension, Western culture, from itself. So he fights against the specific cruelties and hypocrisies of those empowering the movie and punishes them for their transgressions. He also tortures Evie into her existential choice

and she grows from all of it. And in many ways, she's the avatar, not he of the national character. It's an apparel issue with what he does to her. It's interesting, because I... See, you know, he tells her, and she grows from it. And I'm like, it seems dismissive of what he does to her. Yeah.

Now, I understand that. I really, I get that I should be more bothered by it. Rewatching it, I really found myself having a serious problem with what he did to her. And I didn't. Yeah. I don't know why I retreated to intellect so quickly on that yeah because I mean just Whether or not why he was doing it I

I'm not an I don't just find the means guy Yeah, I don't remember if I mentioned slash I think I did that he In the book, mm-hmm. He's doing it to refer to reach that epiphany and growth and whatever. That is not what I saw in the film. You and I have some disagreement about that. Whereas I saw the timing of which was she could out him and ruin his plan so he took her and need to find out because he kept asking her, just tell him, just tell him. You know, pretending to be, you know, the interrogation.

Yeah, absolutely. And to me, I took that in, and she go into break. Is she gonna give me up? This kind of like Odysseus coming back to Patelope. You know, there are four lights, you know? Yeah, yeah. So that's, okay, but here's the thing. He doesn't grab her after she, she tattles on him.

No, he grabs her after the media guy gets beaten down and she sneaks out of his room and he grabs her then. Right, but I'm trying to remember if when something happened that somebody's and he couldn't grab her when she was with the bishop, I think that they come in, he just got away. Yeah, he ran and couldn't take her at that time. I don't think it was a choice that he didn't take her.

I don't think the situation allowed him to, whereas when she was at the TV presenter's place, he was able to infiltrate the police. And when I originally saw the film, I didn't catch that it was him. On a rewatch, I could see the burn scarves in his eyes when he grabbed him. Yes.

But I still have issue with what he did and the general discussion we had about Anarchy and The the need to do this horrible thing in order to make them see the light and lack of a better description. Yeah That kind of goes straight into an insjustify the means argument. Oh, it really does. I can do these horrific things. Right. So you will come to my ideology. You know, and when you might not, you might not. Straight up waterboards are. Yeah, it does. Yeah. I'm sorry. Enhanced interrogation is what he does he does well And I don't think that that's accidental given that this came out in 2006, right? you know

I I think it's like when I don't understand modern art. It's not the arts problem It's clearly me that's the problem here. I think your take on it is far more reasonable and empathetic than mine was And I give you a full credit on that because because I, for some reason, I'm like, oh no, that's existentialism, it's fine. Maybe because you're more focused on the end goal, I think it's because I look at movies with the philosophers' mind sometimes.

And to me, it was so, and I, small part of the bigger picture. maybe? No, it's, here's what it is. I had a friend once who told me, he's like, the reason you don't like poetry, Damian, is because poetry is like an essay without the blanks filled in. I said exactly. I want the blanks filled in. He's like, yeah, that's it. And it was so clearly obvious to me. She's all alone, there's abandonment. Whatever choice she makes is going to be painful, despair, right? And this is going to hurt anguish. That's literally like the template for what Jean-Paul Sartre did

in the 1950s. What he said is what existentialism is. Now people got into existentialism and start feeling sorry for themselves. But that's what he said. And He said, it does not matter. You still have to make a choice. And that choice is what tells us who you are. And to me, that's so fascinating. That I don't, that I look past the torture is like, well, yeah, that's the English part. I get it. Let's go on. That's, yeah, that's the void of humanity. Right. I get it. And it's me retreating

to the intellect, not entirely sure why, because very often, the ends never justify the means for me. Right. And here, and this is by design completely, it's set up to make you uncomfortable. Yeah. And I was totally fine with it. Because they're, you know, he used the exact same tactics that the bad guys use exactly exactly. And if the if the if the ends don't justify the means, if the means are reprehensible no matter what, right, then he shouldn't use them either. Right. I agree. I agree with you completely. And yet it didn't strike me at all. Interesting. Yeah, I just watched you recently too the research for this, right? So to me, I think, is that the difference is

between the book and the movie, is that the chaos that he employs in the movie is a means to an end. It's not the means to the end. He's not trying to bring about anarchism. He's trying to tear down fascism. He's trying to give humanity another chance. It's no longer about the freedom and destruction necessary

with anarchism, which is used to destroy fascism. It's about mass action, peaceful protest, and how we were all cout into submission, and therefore we must all band into submission, and therefore we must all band together in protest and peaceful confrontation. I'd agree that's what the movie is. Yes. Not the book, more.

Yes. But I would argue that that might not even have been intentional. Oh, I think it was 100% intentional, because he didn't send guns to everybody, he sent masks, and they all walk up on armed peoples. Right. He sent guns to everybody, he sent masks. And they all walk up on armed peoples. Right, but again, I go back to choices made and cuts made when you transfer content from one medium to another. And I don't know if it was just more expeditious to write that way.

Due to that way for the film purposes, or if it was intentional, we, or if the Wachowski said, we want to send this message. They were well could have yeah but I acknowledge that it could you know because there's a lot of films out there that we import meaning into them and it goes going back to the consuming content thing that if we get that meaning out of it then it has that meaning for us. Right.

But I don't know that I think it's entirely possible that they do not have that intent. I think they didn't, here's why. There's a couple reasons why. Number one, they did show a few people using the mask to hide their face to commit violence. Right. Right. And that was part of the montage. But by and large, the 250,000 people who stormed the government, the soldiers stood

down and let them pass peaceably. Right. And you even had Finch saying what normally happens when people, without guns, run into people with guns, right? So it's very clearly mass action. And everybody after that point removes their guy, Fox Mask. And then we see that V is all of us. Disease cured, mass action.

We fixed it. Now in 2006, this is a couple years later but there had been a million people in the streets in London. There had been hundreds of thousands of people in the streets in all kinds of cities in San Francisco. In all kinds of cities in the United States there had been people around the world protesting the invasion of Iraq, mass peaceful action, though. And that is the antidote to increased fascism. Disease is cured when you have everybody come together.

I would love for that to have been true, but, you know, and that's where I think Alan Moore is correct that this is a liberal ideology going against neocon stuff. This is not anarchism by any stretch, and it's not. It's a liberal fantasy that we can all stand together, and that would be enough.

We want it to be, and fuck, I want it to be, but I don't know that it is, and that's scary to me, because that means that... You're gonna have to get violent. Oh, yeah, I'm gonna say, yeah. If that isn't the way that can do it, what is. And here's the other reason why I think that this was their intent. to get violent. I was going to say, yeah, if that isn't the way that can do it, what is. And here's the other reason why I think that this was their intent.

Here is, so in the comic book, Alan Moore yelled it in England with the fireside chat. In the movie, the Wokowski's yell it, America in the fireside chat. Here's what they say. Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the conference of everyday routine. The security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke.

So just right there, he's sympathizing. Way more than the other dude. The other dude was chastising. Right, but I would question whether that was designed intended for an American audience specifically or just a different approach. Well, I think it was an American-made movie made for an American audience. And I do think yes, I think ultimately it is because we all have TV, we all are in different worlds. Right, not even. Or we've seen that that way because we are Americans and we go, oh yeah, that's totally us. Just like identifying with the horoscope that is a story everybody.

You see yourself in what they're seeing, horoscope that is a scary book. You see yourself and what they're seeing. That was aimed at me. And yeah, this was much more watered down. It was common denominator. But in the spirit of commemoration, where upon important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle are celebrated with a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the fifth, a day that is sadly no longer remembered by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. Again, no violence. Now and again, yeah, flipping my own argument about it not being specific to Americans, fireside chat. Yep. It's up very American. Yes. Yeah. There are, of course, those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now orders are being shouted into telephones and men with guns will soon be on their way.

Why? Because while the truncine may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and impression, and where once you have the freedom to object to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have sensors and systems of surveillance, coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. First off, by the way, I just I love the amount of elimination. That opening speech with all the Zs was so much fun.

Oh yeah, and the fact that it completely made sense. It wasn't just a verbal trick. Right, it was great. Yeah. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable,

which I love that line. But again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be war, terror, disease? There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. If you're got the best of you, then in your panic you turn to the now high chancellor Adamler, in the book he's called Adam Susan. He promised you order. He promised you peace. And all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, it's not to end that silence.

Last night, I destroyed the old Bailey building to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than 400 years ago, a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. OK, timeout. Great citizen. Yeah, now, now like they did not do their research at all. The whole reason for it. Well, I'll talk about the mask later. But his hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice and freedom are more than words. They are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you,

then I would suggest you allow the fifth of November to pass on March. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then ask you to stand beside me. One year from tonight, outside the Gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never ever be forgotten.

Now at that time, so again, just very different speeches, despite them having tonally very similar implications, they're wildly different. One was anarchist, one was liberal. At the time Natalie Portman and Hugo, weaving stars were on the rise, right? So it made sense to cast the both of them. They'd both shown remarkable range and other things. But I'll give a shit. What I think is interesting is who they cast

as Adam Sutler. John Hurt. John Hurt is the fascist dictator in this movie whose face is so enormous on the screen. It's overpowering. It's overwhelming the other characters and the audience. on the screen, it's overpowering, it's overwhelming the other characters and the audience. What's interesting there is that John Hurt played Winston Smith in 1984. Yeah, exactly what I was thinking. Yeah, stunt casting. Oh yeah, you know, we're gonna do a 180 and have him play another guy. I loved it. It's like having Hulk Hogan be the bad guy.

A man who is crushed by the totalitarian government, right? Now he's the disembodied head avatar for it. The parallel did not go unknown as by movie critics, by the way. Ebert said they'd looked like the embodiment of big brother. Film itself, very successful, made 132 million in box office, another 58 million in DVD sales. None of those existed.

Right. None of which more accepted. Hugo Weaving, who played V in the movie and discussed the overall disparity between the graphic novel and the movie, he said, quote, Alan Moore was writing about something which happened some time ago. It was a response to living in a Thatchwright, Britain.

This is a response to the world in which we live today. So I think that the film and the graphic novel are two separate entities. I would agree. I would agree as well. And while the film was commercially successful, it was critiqued rather universally as not going far enough and being pureil in its approach.

In the Atlantic, Vifor Vendetta's climatic destruction of the architecture is considered vapid. Quote, indentinating Westminster, the Waukowski's and McTieg go at once too far and not far enough, too far and expecting us to applaud the senseless destruction of one of the historical cathedrals of democracy, and not far enough in hesitating to make their point by blowing up the White House or the Capitol dome.

The true targets of their juvenile political ire. This is the Atlantic. Juvenile political ire. Yeah, okay. This is the Atlantic. It's a conservative magazine. Which, by the way, the Atlantic is a conservative magazine? Doesn't seem that way anymore because that's how far we've shifted

Their film is a bank shot against Bush simultaneously radical and cowardly in the end. It's not clear which characteristic is the more embarrassing So they got dragged yeah a major difference between the two as you can can see, is that the comic is set in Britain, 1997, post-Nuclear War. There's a utilitarian ethno state that's been legally elected to power. The main tension is between an anarchist shaking people up and the government up and giving a second option to fascism. These are done directly, not subtly, in the comic.

In the movie, it's 2020, in England. But really, the setting is less important and less specific. It is, however, a call out to the Patriot Act. Lots of cameras is more set, right? And there is a not insignificant abundance of references to black bags, right? Similar to the ones that they used at Algrave and Gitmo, Guantanamo Bay.

In fact, several parallels are shown visually and usually in a montage kind of atmosphere between Guantanamo Bay and what the North Fire government also legally elected a set up. There's more of a call out in the movie against Citizen Conplacency, too, which is again a liberal thing. The anarchist is like, fuck it, we're going to blow it up ourselves.

Here we go. And then you have to choose from the rubble. It will be your canvas. Right. He's saying, let's all do this together. Right. And shame on you for not writing more involved. But you know what?

We still have a chance. Right. Instead of like, no, we're gonna burn it all down and you have to build it, right? It's less of an existential choice. It's more of a retraction. All of which is done through images, there's nothing really direct there. Now sometimes though the impact of a film can be

iconic, even if it's not critically acclaimed. And this brings me to the Fox Masks that are used in the movie. Here's what David Lloyd said about the Fox Masks. The Guy Fox Mask has now become a common brand in a convenient placard to use in protest against tyranny. And I'm happy with people using it, it seems quite unique and iconopopular culture being used this way. V for Vindetta is... And it was done to anonymous. Yeah.

Oh yeah, yeah. It's been seen by many political groups as an allegory of oppression by the government, libertarians and anarchists have used it for their beliefs. More thought also thought that American audiences missed a mark with the mask, libertarians and anarchists have used it their beliefs. More thought also thought that American audiences missed the mark with the mask. Quote, and also they're making way too much of this guy-fox thing. Guy-fox was not a freedom fighter, he was a religious fanatic. I was just using Guy-fox as a symbol without really any reference to the historical Guy-fox. It was the Bonfire and Guy-fox that I was referencing

with at the same time easily available Guy Fox masks although weirdly we say we started doing V for inded in 1980 something like that Up until that point here every November you'd be able to fight by fireworks and you'd be able to buy a guy Fox masks at the shops So it's just kind of it's kind of like Michael Myers Right, you know just using also I's kind of like Michael Myers, you know, just using, oh, I think you've right, you know, Americans got it wrong. I think part of it was, it was something new. Anything new, people jump on and, oh, what's this? And it's iconic and take it and run and it's incredibly iconic. And it wasn't a pervasive part of our culture. So we didn't

have that context to look at it correctly or accurately, should say. Yeah. And he definitely wasn't a hero, right? More says, I don't want to say he's the hero any more than I really want to say. He's the villain. Which reminds me in the film, he made the comment in the speech about a hero said, blah blah blah, a hero did whatever. Does more refer to Fox's hero in the book? No, okay, no. So that speech, they made that for the film, okay? Yes, yeah. And that's why you had that weird ass prologue in the film, too. Right.

At the scene of him. Right. And it's like, and some people need to know what a hero is. Like, that bitch wasn't a hero, you know? Right. But he says, I don't want to say he's a hero anymore than I really want to say. He's a villain.

He's a force. He says, it's funny with fascism or anarchy. Yes, that they are the two poles of the politics. But neither of them are actually strictly speaking really want to say is the villain? He's a force. He says, it's funny with fascism or anarchy, yes, that there are the two poles of the politics, but neither of them are actually strictly speaking a political system. Fascism is a kind of weird mystical system, and anarchy is an attempt to move beyond the need

to be politic, the need to manipulate large masses of people. So I tend to think V is pretty much an allegorical force and idea given human form. And obviously, I have a lot of sympathy with some of his basic ideas, but I think that killing people is wrong. Okay, you're at the best. But don't kill anybody. Right. And your whole film, not film, your whole comic is about the destruction of... I have to make you suffer. Yeah. To get to the place that you should be. I think he's both sizing it there.

No, yeah, no. He's definitely getting himself an out, so there's a lot of monster. Yeah, yeah. Now, the mask itself did become an icon. And it was not the icon it set out to be, so often is the case with high cons. Anonymous, the Occupy Movement Project Chanology. Guy Fox himself was a regressive man,

part of a larger conspiracy of assholes who wanted to blow up a legal and democratic, democratically for its time elected government because they didn't like that their religion wasn't supreme. Other groups mentioned who adopted it. They were all about the opposite. Some adopted the anarchism that the comic promoted V is having. As the economy began to tank, the masks are showing up more and more where activists and haktivists coalesced, especially in the Occupy Wall Street movement,

as well as Arab Spring a few years after that. By this point, the Guy Fawkes image, specifically the one from Vifu Vendetta, was seen as a signal of popular protest. So it's moved beyond meaning and it's now just populism protesting. It was used throughout the early 2010s internationally, getting made illegal in a number of countries, even Canada banned its presence in a riot or otherwise unruly mob action. So you can wear it, but if shit turns violent, you're in trouble now. As recently as October 2019, the Hong Kong protesters started using them in protest against the government's anti-mask law.

protesters started using them in protest against the government's anti-mask law. But the best one was about July of 2019 when nearly a hundred anti-vaxxers went to the Comic Con in San Diego wearing fox masks to protest vaccines. They called themselves V for vaccine. I don't have a lot to say about them. Well, here's what these fuck with said. Good evening, San Diego. And allow me to first apologize for this interruption we need to discuss the state of ignorance in this nation across the globe.

Well, points for presentation. Yeah. Your government, scientifically and medical community, scientific and medical community has failed you. They have failed to inform you of the very basic truths of vaccines. You think that they work? Yeah. They have exploited your fear and ignorance,

and this is made it easy for them to strengthen vaccine mandates and eliminate exemptions that have been in place for decades. These fucking people. See, at this point, Ed would be kicking them under the table. This is the beginning of the end of your ignorance. Activists right now are flooding the area with easy to digest truths about vaccines. Armed with science so big and messages so short, rapid glance and the information is

absorbed. We shall continue education to demonstration until every man, woman and child has appropriate knowledge of vaccine program. By the way, you can't be ignored. Really? Yeah. By the way, the anti-vaccine movement predates vaccines on this continent.

Just so you know, it actually does by like three years. Your government, your media cannot stop our words of truth. Words will always retain their power. The power will enlighten society, giving them the ability to make informed decisions and the conviction to finally fight and to retain their power. The power will enlighten society, giving them the ability to make informed decisions and the conviction to finally retain their human rights. Also, quote, if we do not fight now, then there will be nothing left to fight for.

And I think that is where everyone in this room, I pray you realize how important you are in this historic moment. We will never be stronger than we are right now. We will never be stronger than we are right now. We will never be healthier than we are right now. Our children are looking like this generation of childrens. We've said on the doctor's television show that this is the first generation of children that will not live to be as old as their parents. Are we going to stand?

Are we going to sit down and take it? Or are we going to stand up and say, this is a historic moment that my forefathers, those from Jefferson all the way to Martin Luther King. Overfucksake. The moments where people stood up now and said, and something inside of them said, I'm going to stand for freedom and I'm going to stand for it now. That is in our DNA. It is pumping through me and I pray you feel it pumping through you because we must look back. Our grandchildren will look back and thank

us for having stood up one more time and been the generation that said, we the people of the United States of America stood for freedom, stand for freedom, we will die for freedom today. And you know why you could stand because you had a polio vaccine. You know you're gonna die because you didn't get your measles vaccine. Oh my god. Cosplay is real yo And sometimes people they've got shit way too seriously. Like way too seriously a reporter said quote I'm not gonna point to the doctors television show as their their their icon of reality. Yeah show as their icon of reality. Yeah. Grifters. Dr. Oz said, yeah, a grifter. The guy who's been sued more times than I can count.

Yeah. Here's what our reporter said. A disturbing number of them really do view themselves as harried freedom fighters defending their children against a totalitarian menace. This is especially worrisome given that I've been seeing more and more insinuations of violence as in this post by anti-vaxxer Larry Cook. In it, there's a tweet of how a glock works. These are the same folks who dressed up like Star Wars characters and tried the same shit

at Disneyland, which is where an outbreak of measles originated from about four years ago. Quote, coupled with the not-infrequent violent rhetoric of the anti-vaccine movement, seeing how much anti-factors identify with rebels, heroes, and terrorists, fighting despotic regimes, or even a dark Lord, and how they act out those fantasies by cosplaying Star Wars characters and characters like V worries me.

And I don't think my concern is unreasonable. It's like a scientifically ill-literate Westboro Baptist Church. Yeah, that's exactly it. Both right and left whack jobs are adopting this symbol for their own. Yeah, yeah. By the way, the right and left whack jobs

tend to coalesce right around the anti-vaccine movement and cryptocurrency. Because of course they are. Symbols are precisely the thing that view is striking out against to start with. So why not miss the point that big? They miss the validity of decades of scientific research. Why not miss the point of the film?, looking back at both media in this current time, okay?

So because I have the DVD and because I still watch DVDs and because I have the comic book and I'm living right now, they both need something different now. Yeah. When V for Vendetta came out in a comic book form, it was a British comic written about a specifically British sensibility. Alan Moore and

David Lloyd saw eventual anarchism as the anecdote to creeping fascism in the face of apathy. When DC optioned it to a movie with Warner Brothers in 2006 it was a movie that was about the American War on Terror and the effects of militarism on a civilian society By the way, it's a little bit just a little bit before our smartphones, by the way Where we all took the surveillance for ourselves to actually protect ourselves from the police state the changing of words's meanings Featured in much more heavily than it did the message of anarchism

Featured in much more heavily than it did the message of anarchism this time around Okay, and that that's important to me because you had torture being turned into what was it extraordinary rendition? Oh no In the enhanced interrogation that too. Yeah Currently the same change is a very important theme in the movie too. By the way the change of language as is the presence of camps The anti-queer emphasis of the fascists important theme in the movie too, by the way the change of language. As is the presence of camps, the anti-queer emphasis of the fascists in charge of the movie, and further the comic book itself is coming back into Vogue. How to put this? The amount of energy that went into Let's Storm Area 51, they can't stop us all. Which I already know is not a lot of energy that went into let's storm area 51 they can't stop us all. Which I already was not a lot of energy.

No, but it pissed me off because if you'd just gone a couple of miles south you could have actually freed some kids who are now dead. Who didn't get vaccines by the way. Right. According to writer Emily Asher Parent on tour, who I got permission from to quote, she's rad. Follow her Twitter, Emily Asher parent, two ours and parent, on tour, she said quote, V for vendetta is a film that has managed to grow more poignant over time rather than less, which is an achievement in its own right. She wrote an article a little after the Orlando Night Club shooting in 2016

just ahead of the election. She pointed out a number of things that the film did right, specifically by taking away its specific Britishness and universalizing some of its overarching themes. Which we talk about, right? Which you know I love. Quote, director James McTeague was quick in interviews to point out that while the society they depicted had much in common with certain American institutions, they were meant to serve as analogues for anywhere with similar practices. He stated explicitly that while the audience might see Fox News in the Norse Fire Party News Station, BTN, it could easily be Sky News over in the UK or any other numbers, or

any other numbers of similarly like mine did venues. I would also point out that England just had an election where they swung way to the right. Overwhelmingly conservative. Yeah. So more than even the conservatives thought. Yeah. And so you're seeing these predictions all come true, essentially. She also points out how queer centric and queer friendly the film actually is, which in hindsight makes even more sense given who the Wukowski Sibs are now. Right, right.

The Wukowski script, quoting her again, the Wukowski script focused even more on the struggle of the queer population under the Norse fire party, which was startling to see in a film like this even 10 years ago. I didn't put that together of all of the things to emphasize that makes most more sense because that was a much more personal issue to them to put the focus on. And if something had to be cut, minorities and other groups would be cut in order to

focus more on that. Because I'm sure they had to whittle look down for time and things like that. Yeah, that makes sense. I didn't put that to two and two together. I would point out that they did include minorities in both of the scenes where queer folk are getting back. But they're not, but yeah, it's not because they're minorities. Right. Yeah. Or it might be double dipping. It could be, yeah. Yeah, maybe, yeah. And that's their way of doing it. It just didn't Specifically call it out. Yeah, yeah possible. I you know

Yeah, because the only place you see people of color is in the camp who have been exterminated Who the bodies are getting thrown or the gay the gay male couple that gets stormed in on during the monologue from The woman who wrote the paper down. Oh, right, right, right. I would also point out that it's interesting that the Wokowski's keep touching on themes of going through great pain and then awakening into a newer, free yourself that no one recognized. Yeah, actually, you know what? Yeah, very much.

Yeah. So, oh yes, we're very sorry, the screen, oh yeah. Yeah, so it's, which was startling to see in a film like this even 10 years ago and still is today if we're being frank. To be fair, giving an audience a crash course in the Anarchy and how it should oppose fascism in a story where no one is a definitive hero, she says,

would have been a tall order for a two hour film. can how it should oppose fascism in a story where no one is a definitive hero, she says, would have been a tall order for a two-hour film. Yeah, which is what you're talking about. Yeah, yeah. This, to me, is what Weaving and Lloyd both got right that more got wrong, too. The movie had to stray from the original source material so that it would make sense. I was just going to say, if you were slavish to the source material, a lot of it would have been lost on a larger audience.

Well, because the comic book had literally years to unfold, the movie had two hours to do it. Get you into the world, take you through the world, and get the message across. The comic book literally had years. And also, it was pointed towards a very specific audience. Yes. So people who are already steeped in that mythology. Right.

So it's a little bit of a short term. Yeah. And they step in and they're already up to speed. Yeah. And you don't have to tell them as much. Yeah. And you know, if, again, if you do a faithful adaptation, OK, there might be a smaller group of people

that think it's awesome, you'll lose a ton of your audience. Yeah. Sometimes the universalize the ideas behind the content, you have to do that in the first place. And even the existential crisis that V creates for EV is less ambiguous in the movie. Yes. Okay, and the comic, it was kind of ambiguous. And it has to be, and it's less a problem now

than it was in 2006. Let's do a problem of hell. Well, we don't have time to be nice now. We don't have time to dither now. We have decisions to make about our national identity now. And that is 20.06. That's her. A quote from 20.06 or a quote from now?

No, that's me analyzing. An analyzing. OK, got it. I think now it is more dire. I still am not comfortable enough saying the end is just to find the means. But I do understand the direness of what he did a lot more now than I did in 2006. So, and if we need a crucible to burn away the bullshit exterior to who we are so that we can live out our personal identity better, quicker the better, because

people are literally gunning for us. Quote. Evie is unable to live honestly, to achieve any amount of personal freedom to break away from a painful past. The entire film is about how fear numbs us and how it turns us against one another, how it leads to despair and self enslavement. I would also point out that it also leads to not just turning against one another, but turning away from each other.

That someone else who's walking down the street, bummer for them, should have followed the law. So easy to do. Those are kids they shouldn't have broken the law when they came across the border. What are you going to do? That the Wachowski Sibs are trans-folk does not escape the author's notice.

Nor does it go without analysis vis-à-vis the film. Quote, the possibility of trans themes in V for Vendetta are born out clearly in EVs and V's respective transformations. For EV, a harrowing physical ordeal where she is repeatedly told that she is insignificant and alone leads to an elevation of consciousness. She comes out the other side, a completely different person, told that she is insignificant and alone leads to an elevation of consciousness. She comes out the other side, a completely different person, later telling V that she ran into an old coworker who

looked her in the eye and couldn't recognize her. On V's side, she says, when Evie tries to remove his mask, he tells her that the flesh underneath the mask is not me. The body that he possesses is not truly him. While this speaks to V's desire to move beyond mortal man and embody an idea, which is very much what's being looped into there, quote, it is also true that his body is something that was taken from him brutalized and used by the people at Larkill. Having had his physical form reduced to the status of experiment, V no longer identifies

with his body. More importantly, once he expresses this, he never attempts to remove his mask again, respecting his right to appear as he wishes to be seen. Keep in mind, she wrote this piece in the aftermath of the Orlando Nightclub shooting. And at that time, the most alarming thing that Donald Trump about Donald Trump

wasn't that he'd won the presidency, but that he was actively campaigning based on hate. Quote, I think about the candidate for president who used Orlando as a reason to say, I told you so, to turn us against each other, to feel more powerful, to empower others who feel the same way. And I think about this film and the erasure of the victims at Larke Hill locked up for any difference that made them a threat to the state. Two foreign, two brown, two opinionated,

two queer. Remember, EV's parents were taken away to a camp for being political. Yeah. Quote, then I think about the fact that my partner was followed down the street a few days after the shooting by a man who was shouting about evil lesbians and how ungodly people should burn in fires. I think about the rainbow wristband my partner bought in solidarity, but decided not to wear because there are times when it's better to be safe than to stand tall and make yourself a target. She goes on.

And I think about the fact that this film is for Americans and for everyone, and the fact that it still didn't contain the themes of the original graphic novel, and I dare you to tell me that it doesn't matter today, that we don't need it, that we shouldn't remember it and learn from it. We need these reminders at this exact moment in time. Now, this was 2016 before the president had become the president.

Continues. Do not let your leaders make you afraid of your neighbors. Do not be complacent in the demonization of others through an action. Do not let your fear of other, the past of being seen dictate your actions. Find your voice, act on behalf of those with less power than you. Fight and above all, love. Love your neighbors and strangers and people who are different from you in every conceivable way.

Love, art and mystery and ideas. Remember that that is the only true trauma front response to hate." End quote. For her, V for Vendetta in 2016 was, quote, a visceral reminder of my own revelation all wrapped up in a tale about a man wearing a Guy Fox mask who wanted a government to be afraid of their people who wanted revenge on anyone who would dare hurt others

for being different. A tale of a woman who was reborn with a new capacity for love and a lack of fear. Now that's just three years ago. Now we can add on to that. Kids are being kept in camps. You can add on to that the constant gaslighting of over, over formerly agreed upon definitions. Add onto that the Muslim ban. Add onto that the so all sorts of totalitarian tendencies.

They're floating the idea of a third term now. And suddenly, and that by the way, that floating the idea of a third term, he did that two years ago. And they're doing that again. And suddenly, everything that Moore was warning us against, everything that he was writing about in that very British sensibility, in that very British story,

going anarchist, epiviricist, fascism, everything he's warning about with fascism is becoming much more pressure. So to me, it was overblown. He was hyper-reactive to thethaturism. I don't know that he was wrong because here we are and To me the movie in 2006 was Way watered down from what he did and I'm really glad that it was because it's much more universal and it warned us against what we were becoming

And now you watch it and now you read it and It's it's telling you what happened. It's a farmer's alma mater. So finally, here's a fun fact about the Guy Fox masks. They're trademarked by Warner Brothers, which is owned by Time Warner, right? One of the largest media conglomerates in the world. Very powerful.

Every single mask sold means a licensing fee going to Warner. That's comedy. Originally it was adopted by anonymous to protect their identities to protest the Church of Scientology, which good on. Oh yeah. But it morphed from there.

Quote, it had a chilling effect. There were literally thousands of people standing silently in front of the Church of Scientology wearing the same Guyfawks mask, as Coleman said. The photos and videos that appeared in the news from the protests cemented the mask as a symbol of anonymous. Quote, with the help of anonymous,

the mask has become one of the most popular disguises and in a small way has added to the $28 billion reserve in revenue, I'm sorry, $28 billion in revenue, Time Warner accumulated last year. It is the top selling mask on Amazon.com. It's such a hot item that people selling it have only recently learned what its popularity stems from. Quote, we sell over 100,000 of these masks a year, and it's by far the best selling mask that we sell said Howard Bage, executive VP of the Ruby's Costume Company, a New York Costume Company that produces the mask. Ruby's.

It's big in the costuming community. Yeah. In comparison, we usually only sell about 5,000 or so over other masks. The vendetta mask, which sells for about $6 at many retailers, is made in Mexico or in China, Mr. Beige said. Not surprising. So I really like that.

No, that's the drips of irony. Yeah, for sure. Damn the man, here's your licensing fee. Right. It's not even like we'll sell them the ropes to hang themselves with. You know, it's not even that. So yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, so first, you know, I would just like to thank, well, thank you for being here to start with for this. But I also really want to just actually thank Emily Asher Parent for her enthusiastic support of me getting to use

her votes. Because to me, that really drove home the modernity of this movie. And why, despite it being overblown in 1983, it's absolutely applicable now. And whether you think that society is going that direction or not That right that theme that message is something to always you know always keep an eye out. Yep always watch these things You know depending you know whether you how far along that path you think we are or are not right, you know

It's still worth paying attention to yeah, so but no, thank you for having me. Absolutely. What have you cleaned? What have I cleaned? I've cleaned that you and I are different people. Fair. Fair. But no, I, to be serious for a second, one thing that I do appreciate from being here is for a while, I used to really enjoy conversations like this.

And in recent times, I've stopped having them because they go from zero to worse than Hitler very quickly. Yeah. And there is no intellectual joy in having the conversation. I can see that, yeah. Because everybody runs to their mic drop meme of choice. Oh, yeah. And just wants to get in the shot of,

oh, I'm bad ass, I took that guy down. Instead of, you know, why do you think what you think and that's interesting? And so... There's even an intellectual, because I always try to convert people. I'm a proselytizer. I'm a propagandist. I'm fine with that.

Propaganda is not inherently bad. Oh, no, no. It's a drundive obligation in Latin, actually. It's that which should be pushed forward. But what do you call it? There's an intellectual honesty to my proselytizing. I'm not looking for a point. You don't pretend to be something you're not. Right. And I don't try to score points. No. For me, I want to win. Right. My goal is to get you to think that you're the same way I do. Not that I'm

right, but to think the same way I do. But, you know, and it's not, and it's because I genuinely believe that it's a good way to think. It's not like, hey, look right, look who I scored. You know, yeah. So, I don't want to dunk on people. Oh, yeah. And so, so yeah, from that standpoint, I enjoyed this to be able to have a conversation without it getting to be, you know, I know, because there's people that I know well that I might even be related to that I don't have conversations, you know, with. Yeah, I have the same, and there might be

for opposite reasons, but they might also loop around and be for the same reasons with other relatives. Right. But yeah, absolutely. So yeah, no, this has been great. Good. Well, fun little thing at the end. Alan Moore recently voted for the labor party. And he said, quote, I'm an anarchist, but the reason that I will be voting in labor in this election is that I am convinced that if we have another four years of these monstrous, rapacious torres,

we may not have another meaningful vote upon anything. Who won? The conservatives. It's funny that... Even Alan Moore voted. And he did what so many people in this country should have done. No, no, no. Villify people for. He chose the lesser of two evils.

And over here people that argue for certain candidates as more bankable more winnable right better choices get shredded by members of their own party that's what I was talking about earlier for you know you know yeah yeah and if you you know I'm gonna die in that hill and that's great, but if you plant your dying But also if you plant your flag, you know, I believe way out here Then fine you'll lose with your integrity. You'll still lose right Or would you like to plant your flag a little closer and then drag us that way?

You know after this election. After the fact fight for whatever. Yeah. You have a better chance of getting something out of it. And that's the thing. Who shoulders do you want to jump from? Right. How far to the right?

How far to the left do you want to be? In another life I was insurance and insurance claims adjuster and I had to negotiate settlements with attorneys and I would always tell them, you know, in my mind, if we both walk away feeling like we both got a little screwed, it was probably a some a pretty fair, you know, settlement because I don't I truly don't believe that one side of the other will ever get 100% what they want, right? It's not the system we have, thankfully. Right. And I think that, like you said, if the guy that is more on your side, but not exactly what you want, is the guy that you vote for, and they say, it didn't, afterwards, fight

for what you want, and see what you can get. But there's a fascist in the room. Get rid of that. Well, that's a placeist in the room. Get rid of that. And then, and that's a place to start. Yeah. And that was like I'd said earlier on was that like the left gets into that purity testing. Right. And the infighting.

Right. And it's like, hey, you forgot. And is that you're too focused on winning the argument? What surprises me that if there's any other time in history, there should be a unifying factor to one side of the political spectrum, there should be a unifying factor. You would say, if one side of the political spectrum, you would think it would be now. Yeah.

Yeah. It's almost like, you know, I wanna cut off my own nose despite my own face. Yeah. Oh yeah, 100%. Yeah, that's so. Anyway. Well, all that from a comic book.

Yeah. Who would have thought? Speaking of comic books. Yes. Oh, yes. I am working on a comic book. Yeah, who would have thought? Speaking of comic books. Yes. Oh, yes. I am working on a comic book called The Republic. It is a post-apocalyptic story that, as I described it last episode, I likened to Game of Thrones meets Walking Dead,

but with no dragons and no zombies, meaning I am a fan of the human element in those stories and how they react to the safety net of civilization being pulled out from under you and and how people live on from that. So it is in a process of being worked on and as we said before in a perfect world I hope that I can find a publisher and maybe get it out by the end of the year of things go well. Alright, so publishers, I know you're listening. His name is Tim Watts and it's called The Republic. And you can email me at Tim at fullcourtstudios.com.

There you go. Do you have a Twitter presence at all? I don't know. I have it set up, but it is not active at the moment because we're so early in the process that we haven't started sending that stuff out yet. Oh, okay. If you want, you can put that here too. Okay. Okay, if you don't. So, nope, okay. You can find us at Geek History Time on the Twitter.

You can find Ed at EH Blalock on the Twitter. You can find myself at duh Harmony on the Twitter. And we're myself at duh harmony on the Twitter. And we're actively recruiting and looking for sponsors. So if you want to sponsor us, that would be much appreciated. You've noticed these last two have been without commercial break, unfortunately. So please give us a commercial break

because I'd like to feed my kids meat again. So anyway, so for Geek History of Time, for the absent Ed Blahillock and for our guest Tim Watts, I'm Damien Harmony and remember, remember, this isn't November.