V for Vendetta
Missed this one in the theater and it finally came up in the Netflix queue. As seems to be the case with movies made from graphic novels these days, the filmmakers did a great job of capturing the visual style of the comic while not necessarily retaining the story or underlying meaning. This was even more egregious in this case, where V is portrayed as a heroic figure whose victimization justifies the means by which he extracts his revenge with the added bonus of freeing the enslaved citizens of a nation. Sorry, but I think I understand why Alan Moore chose to remove his credit from the movie: in the graphic novel, the ending is ambiguous and serves to underscore the question of whether the means ever justifies the ends. The most effective sequence is Evie's torture and subsequent "freedom," but the film breaks down in the last fifteen minutes where the directors fall back on hoary blockbuster tropes with slow-motion mega-violence and big blow-'em-ups. For a movie that wants you to take it seriously as part criticism of where the U.S. and the U.K. might be headed in the name of fighting terrorism, the ending betrays any thoughtfulness for spectacle. Disappointing, to say the least. It's not the fault of any of the actors, who were uniformly wonderful, including the understated Stephen Rea as the inspector. This flub has to be laid solely on the screenwriters and directors.


Have you seen Ghost Rider? It's bad in exactly this same way, only much, much worse. The bastardized story doesn't even make *sense* and is a pretty big insult to the intelligence of the viewer.
No, I haven't seen Ghost Rider, and I probably won't, although I was tempted. It had several strikes against it (Nicholas Cage, for one) and your comment was the tipping point. Maybe I'll put it in the netflix queue, but probably not.