why do people who hate movies write about them? the march 20 new yorker contains a nasty movie 'review' of 'v for vendetta'. in the second paragraph, denby claims that 'in normal circumstances, only a literal-minded prig would treat graphic novelists or big-screen fantasists as if they had any responsibility to truth.' this assertion serves as a prelude to the rest of the article, which is essentially a rant about the irresponsibility of glorifying politically motivated violence (as opposed to, say, drug related violence) in pop culture. he also seems offended by the movie's orwellian portrayal of the uk, an 'icon of liberal democracy'. in the course of this rant, denby postures himself as an apologist for the very real abuses of power spawned by the bush administration's war on terror, which include inhumane prisons and the domestic spying program. he downplays this role with an aritificially casual reference to the 'ineptitude and folly of the bush administration', but the makers of this film would have been lucky to get away with such light criticisms.

needless to say, i went to see this movie asap after reading the review. it wasn't phenomenal, but i didn't think it was a bomb, or 'blowup' (maybe B or B-). according to denby, if you did like this movie, then you're either a 'matrix lover', a 'punk, goth, or grunge' devotee, or 'an aging kid stoned on pop rapture' (i would probably fall into this last category).

(sorry this post has nothing to do with music, but the soundtrack was uninteresting.)