V for Vocabulary

[tealin]

When I got home from V for Vendetta on Wednesday night, I spent a couple hours writing stuff down in my actual paper journal in the hope that once it was on paper it would stop tap-dancing in my head. There is little hope of making a cohesive review out of them (at least not until I see it again, mwahahaha) so for now, and likely forever because I never get around to finishing things, here are my notes [paraphrased].



The fact that I'm up at 11 pm [I finished at 1 am!] writing about this movie, and that it hasn't left my mind in the last four hours, and has grown on me in that time, makes me think I will really like it tomorrow and probably see it in the theatre again at least once.

Some random thoughts from my disorganized mind, which I will try to organize a little better now that I can drag and drop to rearrange things:

V for Verisimilitude:
#1 Cool Thing (Personally): This movie felt so real. Its premise was obviously extreme and the visuals did nothing to lessen that, but it was approached from such a down-to-earth direction, and the director and actors treated it so seriously that I was immediately sucked in and believed everything that was happening, something which is increasingly uncommon in my movie-going experience. It was delicious to get so wrapped up in it. Maybe it was because there was no wirework or superpowers or overwhelming dependence on CG, or because I know enough history to know that in times of crisis people welcome powerful regimes. But not only did I believe the political context, the whole thing had me in a grip of powerful realism no matter how far out it got. I'm curious to see if it does that again or if I was just in an odd mental state the first time; I walked into the movie theatre not knowing what to expect, not having seen a trailer or commercials or even knowing what the story was about until the previous week (and even then it was just 'sort of Guy Fawkes') so I consciously decided to let it take me wherever it was going. I should see movies like that more often... I walked out of the movie theatre expecting to hear there had been some major terrorist attack (not blowing up the Old Bailey or the Houses of Parliament, of course, I know that was in the movie and not real life, but I was irrationally expecting some sort of cosmic irony in the news) and desperately wanting to see or hear something with Stephen Fry. Anyway, it might not have been just me: the movie seemed to also work its spell on the smartasses* in the row behind me. They spouted stupid comments all through the opening presentation by the various media people in a big obnoxious outdoor voice, but after a couple comments at the beginning became miraculously silent until a few minutes from the end. If that's not power, I don't know what is.

V for Vowels:
Natalie Portman is a good actress – surprisingly, to me, as I think the only thing I've seen her in is Star Wars where she's as bright and dynamic as two short planks. But she was really good, sincere and sympathetic, which I find few actresses are, at least in recent movies that I've seen. [I did a finger count of live-action movies I've seen recently with prominent female roles and didn't even fill a hand, so that might explain some of it...] However, she needs a better accent coach or to spend a couple weeks immersed in England or something because ... yee. I am not British but I've listened to enough BBC to know what sounds right and her vowels were just not on. Especially both the long and short O, which are more complex in English than American. I am being really obnoxiously nitpicky but this was one of the very few things that had any effect on my suspension of disbelief, which was in most other respects incredibly strong. Actually, many accents in the movie were a little wierd ... I've gotten so used to the incredible diversity of dialects on Radio 4 that the very subtle (from a North American standpoint) sort of upper-middle-class Southeast accent that everyone had seemed stilted at times. Of course, the flaw in this argument (besides the fact I don't live there) is that I am familiar with radio, which depends entirely on the voice to differentiate the personalities. So I don't know if it's a valid point at all.¹

V for Visage:
Another trivial detail: The guy who played Mr Finch, the ... sort of lead detective guy (what was his official job title?), looked so much like he could be movie-Neville's dad. Look:

This was actually distracting for the first ... oh, I don't know, ten minutes he was in the movie. I just kept watching his nose and eyes and upper lip (Neville's unfortunately doesn't show up so well in that picture I found of him) wondering if they were actually related. (If they are, their names don't reflect it. So much for that theory.) But then I also thought the Chancellor was played by the same guy who played Barty Crouch, so that just goes to show my facial recognition software has a bug or two.

V for Vitriol:
My BBC addiction has gotten me so used to hearing measured, calm, objective commentators that Lewis Prothero's act, so much like the incensed, choleric demagogues on American television and radio, being delivered in an English accent with Big Ben² in the background, was extremely jarring. A good start. A very good kick-in-the-pants start.

V for a word starting with V that means 'pretending to know more than I really do':
All through the movie I was thinking the party in power shouldn't be the Conservatives, it should be the BNP. I know almost nothing about British politics but I at least felt I knew that. Then I learned that the original graphic novel was written to cock a snook at the Thatcher government so of course it had to be the Conservative party. It also makes it more accessible for international audiences because everyone has a conservative party, but if they'd said 'BNP' people would have either been confused or thought it was a fictional party. Which would work, for storytelling purposes, but would diminish that important realism.

V for Vocational Virtuosity
I'm sure the vast majority of praise should go to Alan Moore for the writing, but I have to give some credit to the Wachowski brothers for keeping the screenplay good. It would have been so easy to make terrible. The preservation and excellent delivery of the occasional humourous line is also to be commended, whoever I commend for it ... I am a big fan of black comedy (that is to say, gallows humour, not ... 'street' [is mercilessly unhip]) and (call me ... er ... culturalist?) it seems only the British can do it right.³ The occasional laugh only makes the dire situation feel direr, and the sprinkles of laughter were all the funnier for being surrounded by such neverending direness. I just can't get enough of that stuff. It's like some horribly addictive emotional drug. Need ... more ... [buzz! Hesitation and deviation! Right, moving on.] The pacing was also fantastic. I was worried, when I found out who had made the movie (two days before I saw it), because Matrix: Reloaded⁴ really, really suffered for lack of editing, and I was worried this would get bogged down in the self-indulgent bloatedness that extremely popular moviemakers (and writers, ahemahem) are prone to. But it didn't! Even though it was very complicated and felt about five hours long (it's only just over two, surprisingly) it never got boring nor did it feel too rushed.

I suppose I should include this under Vocational Virtuosity because it's part of the technical side of things: there was a significant lack of special effects, which was extremely cool, and the ones that were used were excellent. That is how it should be, ladies and gentlemen.

V for VOMG STEPHEN FRY!!
I had no idea he was in this movie.⁵ When he appeared onscreen my reaction was 'Gasp! Stephen Fry is in it! Yay!'⁶ He's one of the first actors I learned to recognize and name, and since I've seen/heard him in as many things where he's himself as where he is a character, I tend to think of him as Stephen Fry rather than whatever role he's playing, whereas with most other actors I consciously and subconsciously dissociate the person from the character quite effectively. Needless to say all his scenes were brilliant and he was a very likeable character⁷ so I should have known what was in store... And it was, oddly enough, probably the most disturbing thing, to me, about the whole movie; at least, it's what stayed with me the longest and banged around loudest in my head afterwards. I figured it out on the way home: in every role, in every production I have seen or heard,⁸ he has always been in control. If he’s not in control of other people, or of the situation, he thinks he is, and at the very, very least he is in control of himself. So to see him, Stephen Fry, completely at the mercy of other characters and very, very, very much not in control was unexpectedly shocking – and, due my surprise at the horror I felt at this scene, deeply affecting.

Of course all this gives that TV show, which was pretty darn hysterical to begin with, an emotional twist that makes it chokingly tragic yet somehow, at the same time, even more wildly hilarious for its sombre context. Heck, I would see the movie again just to see the TV show. What was I saying earlier about some sort of crazy emotional drug?

[time out: good grief, I had better get a move on – I’ve still got two pages of notes to cover]

V for Villification
I know it’s irresistible for shocking and rebellious writers and artists but I am really starting to get tired of the evil priest thing. It’s getting so that as soon as a priest (and, increasingly, any religiously devout person) is introduced to a story he’s probably going to be a pervert and definitely be a bad guy. There was one movie my sister and I saw recently in which we were heartily surprised that the priest didn’t turn out to be evil (no memory what it was, now), and I had the same reaction to Nightcrawler being and staying a good person all through X2 even though he was openly religious – not just religious, but Catholic, the surest sign of evil in Hollywood. Persecution complex kicking in? In another context I might think so, but I think this has enough empirical evidence to back me up. When was the last time you saw a good priest in anything that wasn’t about exorcisms?⁹

V for Veiled Facial Disguises
I am very glad they didn’t show V’s face. [and here I copy from my response to ari_enchanted’s notes] I was totally expecting them to, either to make it a Phantom moment or some sort of 'love is blind' schlock. I was sure they were going to, because that would be so expected, but at the same time I was thinking 'oh, no, don't show his face, it's what everyone will expect and it won't accomplish anything.' So when they didn't, it was a very refreshing proclamation of 'we don't have to do it just because you want us to.'

Of course, she summed it up best by saying ‘It's totally infuriating when you never see his face, and therefore great. I love stuff like that.’ Hear hear. Stick it to the audience! Besides, it wasn’t about who or what was under the mask, it was about who that person had become, a person personified by the mask. There’s no reason for us to see under it except to make the audience go ‘yeurgh,’ and they’d be more ‘yeurgh’ed by their imaginations than anything you could see onscreen. It’s not about the ‘yeurgh’ anyway.

V for Vindicaton
I hate to be annoying about this but I KNEW IT! I knew Evey’s imprisonment was fabricated by V. We never saw any other prisoners, the prison personnel were always in shadow and gloved and, while possessing a wider variety of accents than all the other characters in the movie, all had Hugo Weaving’s sonorous tones. The only exception is the guy who shaved her head ... dunno where he came from.

V for ... it’s too late to keep doing this.
I loved how, right up to the very end, I didn’t know if Evey would actually send the train on its way or not. I knew she had to, plot-wise, otherwise there wouldn’t be enough of a resolution (the story wasn’t about mercy and non-violence), but I was never quite sure. I mean, everyone had congregated at Parliament intent on revolution anyway, why bother blowing up the buildings? Start the revolution right there and then! I was a little surprised that no one mentioned the possible ‘collateral damage’ caused by blowing up a building to which you’d personally invited the entire population of the country... I guess they must have not climbed over the protective barriers. Anyway, another thing I liked about it was that it wasn’t a matter of ‘her character is so poorly established I don’t know what she’ll choose,’ it was ‘her character wouldn’t know which way to choose.’ This is what’s known as character development, Hollywood people. Either that or I am just utterly dim.

V for Vignettes (short notes for sake of time)
- Gotta love the period drama at the beginning. I tried really, really hard not to think of Alfred Spangler or Mr Trooper. I really did. Do I get half credit for that?
- It tended towards Beauty and the Beast at times but was refreshingly absent of the sexual tension and/or romance that it could have fallen prey to. ari_enchanted informs me that there was even less romance in the book, which makes me a little bit less grateful for the insignificance of the romantic subplot, but considering what they could have done...
- For a one-man revolution, V was astonishingly successful. I'm just a little surprsed that he was the only one. Well, okay, there were other people secretly defying the government but there was no sign that they were really allied in any way. I say this because one of the only ways I would have liked this movie more is if there was an underground resistance movement – I am a major, major sucker for stories about underground resistance movements, probably because they prove you can fight evil in a cunning, non-directly-confrontational way. A one-person revolution is a new take on things but is not an underground resistance movement.
- a couple things that poked little holes in my amazing suspension of disbelief:
How did Evey find her way back to V’s place? How did she find her way out?
How does V afford to do all he does? How does he buy all those explosives? How could he afford all that shipping, sending masks and capes to everybody? (just realized he probably simply steals the money... duh)

Um ... there is more, but I don’t remember and my brain is done for the week. So that’s where I’ll leave it, until I see it again and remember what I’ve forgotten...


*I don't usually use strong language but there was no other word to describe these guys.
¹On a related note, I thought the priest sounded like the Professor from Old Harry's Game, which would have been amusingly ironic, but I looked him up and he's not.
²Yes I know that's the name of the bell and not the clock tower, but what am I supposed to write that will be instantly recognized?
³Thank you niteflite for confirming that Mr Moore is British!
⁴I never saw Revolutions, I disliked #2 so much
⁵I had no idea most of the people in this movie were in this movie, and I don't exactly follow his career closely, but it was still a pleasant surprise.
⁶Followed closely by a recollection of when he appeared on Just a Minute, when they introduced panellists like this: '___ from ___, ___ from ___, and Stephen Fry from ... everything.'
⁷They're always gay. Why are they always gay? Before long I'm going to start suspecting everyone who is even remotely appealing of being gay. And I really need to lay off the footnotes.
⁸Which is hardly even a fraction of his œuvre... [There she goes ... there she goes again, with that footnote thing – someone make her stop! Someone make her sto-o-o-o-op! (rest) nanananananana]
⁹It’s hard to make the priest a bad guy when his opponent is the devil. Besides, exorcisms make for great politically correct entertainment.

Also, be sure to check out ari_enchanted's notes – all very valid, often amusing, and she's read the book. And she totally got first dibs on the best subject line.

Comments

[azvolrien.livejournal.com]

I don't know anyone who calls Big Ben by its full name. After all, 'The Clock Tower of the Palace of Westminster' is something of a mouthful.

[ari-enchanted.livejournal.com]

Do you know, almost every review I've read has accused V for Vendetta of being too much like the second two Matrix movies. Everyone's been saying that halfway through, it gets boring and pedantic. I didn't see this at all, and can only assume that when it gets to the point where Evey comes out of prison and Finch starts to understand V people thought the movie was being pretensious. I didn't think it was hard to understand, as some have said, although this may be because I've read the book and deciphered some of the more cryptic things Alan Moore was saying, but I felt that it was made simpler in the film.

Personally, I think this movie was a lot better than other movies that have been made from Moore's work. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is a great graphic novel, not particularly lofty, but fun, and the movie just lacked all the spark of the book. From Hell is amazingly uncomfortable to read, and there are certain parts that are so creepy they make me feel ill, but the movie just seemed like it wasn't a lot more than a vehicle for Johnny Depp's quasi-cockney accent. I'd say From Hell was better than League, but they really took out all the ideas behind the action in that one. I think that was what made V work so much better; Moore's work is very idea-driven, and they left that intact in the movie.

[gets off soapbox]
Er...feel free to disagree...

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I'm afraid I have to agree with you on all those things, merely adding that From Hell was also a vehicle for the director's 'artsyness.'

[ari-enchanted.livejournal.com]

True. Those "Oh-I-took-opium-now-everything-is-green-and-vivid" scenes were a bit silly.

[peacefuldragon.livejournal.com]

Hurrah to you for dedicating a V section to Stephen Fry... He was absolutely fabulous in the movie, and ever so endearing.

You know, I thought that the police inspector man looked familiar, although I could never put my finger on it until now. Thanks. X3

And finally- I agree with you about the mask thing. For one I thought that if she took his mask off she would be seeing his physical body and not actually him, which was his point all along. Plus then it would feel way too much like Phantom of the Opera.

V for Vacuum

[ianfinerty.livejournal.com]

The other major problem which would have occured as a result of showing V's face would be the fact that he is now Agent Smith- the one saving grace of the last two Matrix films- (and a little bit Elrond).

Being British, I also considered the Conservative/BNP question you discussed, but chosing the Conservatives worked better to me as they are not only seen as the most ight wing of the leading parties, but also out of the Tories and the BNP, the former is the only one who has any chance of taking control (the BNP being a farce and just generally crap). This way it meant that the film makers were almost making a warning of what could be to come- a relevant point at a time when Toy Blair is attempting to introduce laws in which peoples rights can be thrown aside for the 'good of the country'.

Barty Crouch looked like Hitler. The real Barty Crouch. That is all.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Except that Tony Blair is Labour, which kind of throws the right-wing conspiracy for a loop. But then, the Nazis were socialists, so ... I guess it's how you rule rather than the ideology. Kind of. That sounds all wrong, not what I meant at all... Argh, language centres in brain shutting down.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Okay, I gave my brain a little time to reorganize itself and realized what I was meaning to say for a reply was this: you'd think at some point someone would say 'Wait a second... you're starting to sound like the BNP and they're a farce and generally crap!' Of course, maybe someone did say that and no one listened, or they got silenced, or ... something. After all, ridiculously extreme governments have come into power in places populated by seemingly rational people so it must happen somehow.

[poisonedwriter.livejournal.com]

V for Vocabulary was totally the phrase leaking out of my mind when I left the theatre. V's opening speech (you know the one I'm talking about) was really amusing in my mind. Not for the obvious reasons, but because I could hear everyone in the audience thinking, "Huh?" to themselves while I enjoyed what he said.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed it immensely – though it was one of the things (the last thing till near the end) that got the smartasses behind me to comment, in this case: 'Speak English!' Which is just too ironic a statement to forget. :) I kind of missed the every-word-starting-with-V in the rest of his dialogue. What an excellent introduction to a character.

[ari-enchanted.livejournal.com]

Jeez, the smartasses behind me just babbled about how they found a glow-in-the-dark plastic wedge of cheese in their pocket. Er, their collective pocket.

My smartasses must be defective.

[disneyboy.livejournal.com]

I almost posted what was intended to be a few little comments, reacting to what had already been posted here. Well, surprise surprise, many pages and several hours later, it took on a whole horribly mutated, gigantic life of its own, so I moved it to my journal page - any and all gluttons for punishment are invited to peruse it there: http://disneyboy.livejournal.com/4145.html#cutid1

A for Agenda

[noodledaddy.livejournal.com]

Yeah, well, I read your notes after seeing the movie last night, and you are spot on. The movie would have been so much better had they laid off the agenda stuff . . . Conservatives=bad . . . Christianity=bad . . . homosexuality=good (I mean the only reason the Bishop wasn't with a little boy was that it would crimp the gay agenda). Note to Hollywood: Look at despotic regimes in the 20th century. How many are/were politically conservative (Right) and how many are Liberal (Left)? Thank you.
Otherwise, terrific flick, with one of my favorite lines from a movie in a LONG time. “The people should not fear the government, the government should fear the people.” Of course, that would require an informed populace . . .

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

There's no way you could make this movie – or at least make it involving and entertaining – without some sort of agenda. It's about agendas, the government's vs. V's, and if the moviemakers didn't take sides, it would be a fictional documentary rather than a drama. For the purposes of plot and sentiment it made much better sense to take V's side, and I have no problem with that.

While most despotic governments were politically and economically left-wing (socialist/communist) they were socially conservative: usually a strict 'moral' code (admittedly dictated by the ruling party's philosophy and not a religion) was encouraged or enforced; deviant behaviour or thought was forcibly eradicated; and nationalism, calling upon racial or historical pride, was emphasized and often used to coerce conformity. Ideals of morality and nationalism are most frequently accociated with social conservatives, and as they are the things that affect the populace's hearts and minds most on a regular basis, people tend to assume those with a strict idealistic code of behaviour who call on national/racial pride are right-wing (therefore capital-C Conservative).

That said, some of the auxilliary agendas could have use a little trimming, though I thought they were unexpectedly reserved with their agenda-pushing, all things considered. And it wouldn't have made any plot sense for the priest to be with a little boy because Evey is a GIRL.

Point by Point

[noodledaddy.livejournal.com]

>There's no way you could make this movie . . . without some sort of agenda.

But why does the agenda have to be always the exact same agenda?

>While most despotic governments were politically and economically left-wing (socialist/communist) they were socially conservative: usually a strict 'moral' code (admittedly dictated by the ruling party's philosophy and not a religion)

You make my point here. And why was the ruling party pointed out as a real current party, but the TV network was not? They didn't have the stomach for BBC bashing?

>Ideals of morality and nationalism are most frequently accociated with social conservatives.

True. But associated by whom? Why, because it is the common perception? Morality I agree with you, nationalism, I do not.

> . . . national/racial pride are right-wing (therefore capital-C Conservative)

National I'll give you. In the United States. But each country has its own form of nationalism. Canada's happens to be "we're not the United States," and it is strong. China and the Soviet Union are and were also highly nationalistic and hardly conservative. Racial, I will not agree with you at all. It was right-wing Republicans that allowed the big Civil Rights legislation pass in 1964. It is Conservatives who will not accept the soft racism of lowered expectations, it is Liberals who belittle the gains made by black Conservatives, simply because the black Conservatives do not fit the liberal stereotype of what blacks should be. Also, racial pride is highest in the black community in the US, and 92% vote liberal.

>I thought they were unexpectedly reserved with their agenda-pushing.

I see the exact opposite. The "Coalition of the Willing" poster with the US, British, and Nazi flags jumbled together? Please. The Bishop and the baby-doll little girl? Reserved?

>. . . it wouldn't have made any plot sense for the priest to be with a little boy because Evey is a GIRL.

Easy, she is the delivery driver for the little boy. Or, she is just supposed to keep the Bishop busy until V arrives, so bind her up and cut her hair and she is 12 years old. V needed someone with acting talent, right?

A²

Re: A for Agenda, Point by Point, etc.

[disneyboy.livejournal.com]

Should I stay out of this? I feel kinda responsible...anyway, a couple of thoughts:
-I think it's actually possible to enjoy this film whether you think that the filmmaker's really intend it as a serious critique of contemporary conservatism , or that they believe that this is a real possible future scenario, based on the direction things are going in, or you just accept this as a fantastic, perhaps even preposterous "what if" premise, based on elements of reality, rearranged and juxtaposed in surprising ways, and exaggerated for dramatic effect. I think it's probably intended to be somewhere in between, and moreso, as already mentioned, a critique of any populace of any nation(no matter who's in charge) that sacrifices their freedoms and their personal consciences for some form of "security". And, hey, if the filmmakers do have an agenda, can they be blamed for pushing one that they believe in? Right or wrong, at least it's sincere. And it's an unsurprising reaction to the current political climate (this is also not meant to validate the rightness or wrong-headedness of the reaction) - artists tend to respond to/react against the most powerful forces of their times (but they also tend to be liberal, which is not necessarily indicative of a purposeful conspiracy)
-I would have been happy if they could have left out the priest subplot altogether (no boys or girls!), although I suppose it was a convenient way to clearly show the hypocrisy of the ruling party (who protected this priest) publicly decrying sexual deviation but privately turning a blind eye to nearly anything within the realm of heterosexuality (something I have seen a lot which drives me crazy). It's probably worth noting that the novel was written some time ago, long before, I believe, the big controversy over pedophilia in the Church broke, and if this element of the story originated with the book (which wouldn't surprise me), it may have simply been intended as really black, perverse humor (however tatsteless). I just wish that a little "equal time" could have been given to someone associated with organized religion who wasn't either a clueless dupe or a monster (but that almost never happens in the movies).

Re: Point by Point

[tannhaeuser.livejournal.com]

National/racial pride are right-wing (therefore capital-C Conservative)

Re: Point by Point

[disneyboy.livejournal.com]

You make some very good points. It is always easier to complain about a situation than to get your hands dirty and DO something about it. Not giving the "thumbs up" (by giving more money to) films that do not deserve your support, the kind that you would not like to see more of, and going out and supportingthe few films (with your cash, while they are still in the theater!) that do champion religious and/or conservative values, or show religious people in a positive light, is a great place to start. One would hope these films would also be well-written, well-made, well-acted, etc., etc. - since this is, sadly, not often the case. So it is up to you, and people like you, to create excellent art that says something you really believe in, and now, more than ever, is a time when you don't necessarily NEED a billion dollars or a big studio behind you to make a movie that will find its intended audience (the digital revolution, the huge rise in independent filmmakers/filmmaking) - but you do need talent and real determination. Go forth and conquer!

Question

[snowflakie06]

I'm the maintainer of a Harry Potter icon challenge community, hp__ichallenge, and for one of the contests, I was thinking of having a Harry Potter fanart theme. Could the members be given the option of using your art for it? You will of course be credited! :)

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

As long as I'm credited, all is good. thanks for thinking of me! : )

[anglophilic.livejournal.com]

Hi, a friend linked me to your journal after I did a brief review of this movie. Rather is was just my thoughts after the movie, instead of the actual movie. But I really liked how you summed up the plot and intricacies going on in it. So much of this I agree with that I can't even begin to start. Wait, yes I can. The moment they mentioned that the first person hired was a priest, I groaned inwardly. I knew they were going to make him bad. And I also figured out that V was the one torturing her. He had gloves on!!!! But still, it was a good movie.

Oh I added you to my flist. I hope that is OK. :-)

PS- Imagine those postage fees to mail costumes to thousands of people!

[yoodi.livejournal.com]

I'm just coming from the movies and am still a bit speechless.
Thank you for your very throrough analysis, I especially agree to V for Verisimilitude.

*off trying to write her own review*
Yoo

[leia-grace.livejournal.com]

Shockingly enough to me, the Chancellor, who reminded me of Hitler as well, looked like Barty Crouch, Sr. to me too, but, in fact, he was played by John Hurt, ie, Mr. Ollivander.

Strange and small world we live in, eh?

[http://users.livejournal.com/_etaoinshrdlu/]

i think i need to lay off your drawings because the whole time i was watching v, i was seeing your drawings of him. (come-on, if these scenes weren't in the movie what was the likelihood of you drawing something like it anyway?: v in apron, v watching tv, v clipping his nails, etc.)

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Except ... that ... I've never drawn him. ?

(Though I have to admit, when I saw him wearing that apron, I thought that was totally something I would draw.)

[http://users.livejournal.com/_etaoinshrdlu/]

that's what i meant. you've never drawn him and already i'm seeing your drawing-version of him; thus, my need to lay off. :)

(re: apron, what i meant as well. burnt v is something i could see you spoofing as well. crisp voldemort?)