如果恐懼成為了維繫政權的工具，那麼人民是否應該拿起暴力作為武器？

一， 電影

很久沒有看過這麼全方位精彩的電影了。

之所以說它全方位精彩是說不管你喜歡電影的什麼方面，你都能在VFV （V For Vendentta）裡面找到自己的最愛。

你喜歡政治哲學的，裡面有問題讓你思考「如果恐懼成為了維繫政權的工具，那麼人民是否應該拿起暴力作為武器？」

你要是喜歡平等自由，公民權力的，裡面有保護少數群體權益（比如同性戀），反對國家思想檢查，支持言論自由等等。

你要是喜歡咬文嚼字（英文了），喜歡文字遊戲的，裡面有似韻非韻的偈語，裡面有莎士比亞的台詞。

你要是就喜歡視覺刺激，聽覺享受，就只圖看個熱鬧，聽個動靜。裡面有場面宏大的爆破，《駭客帝國》式的華麗打鬥，憂傷的Cry me a river，柴可夫斯基的1812序曲。

你要是喜歡演技的，那麼Natalie Portman在電影裡面的演出絕對讓你滿意。她的角色在片中感情跨度相當之大，從屈辱到感動，從鎮定自若到disbelieve ，她都把握的絲絲入扣。這部電影是我感覺她演的最好的一部。不光是她，裡面若干配角不管從選角到表演都有出彩的地方，特別是那個 Chief Inspector Finch。

二， 如果恐懼成為了維繫政權的工具，那麼人民是否應該拿起暴力作為武器？

這個問題其實早就有答案了。

1. 獨立宣言（The Declaration of Independence）裡面
先說 人的基本權力是 Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
然後說 That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, 政府建立的目的就是維護人的這些基本權利

接著說 That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it. 不管什麼樣的政府，只要危害到人民的這些權利了，人民就有權改變或者廢除這樣的政府。

當然這不是說你隨便找個小事情（比如被開罰單了）就可以推翻政府 Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes

但是，當追逐同一目標的一連串濫用職權和強取豪奪發生，證明政府企圖把人民置於專制統治之下時，那麼人民就有權利，也有義務推翻這個政府，並為他們未來的安全建立新的保障
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

這裡 it is their right, it is their duty. 不光光是權利，而且是duty， moral obligation 起來造反。


2. 傑佛遜 湯瑪士 Jefferson 有句話更直接
what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? 如果統治者不被人民的反抗意識所畏懼的話，什麼樣的國家可以保障自由呢？

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.
自由之樹木需要不時地用愛國者和暴君的鮮血來澆灌。

3.林肯也有類似的思想，比如在他的就職演說裡面，他說。
This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.

其實這樣的理論，我們祖宗也有的。
有人問孟子，推翻 夏桀、商紂，是不是弒君，是不是不義。
他說 「賊仁者謂之賊， 賊義者謂之殘，殘賊之人，謂之一夫，聞誅一夫紂矣，未聞弒君也。」


三，台詞

這部電影的台詞對於整部電影的意義完全可以用畫龍點睛來形如。

V 出場的自白，一長段話裡面幾乎每句話的每個單詞都是以v開始，真的是帥呆了 ：）

Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.



hehe, 真的很cool，還有這個

Evey Hammond: Who--who are you?
V: Who? Who is but the form following the function of what... and what I am is a man in a mask.

Evey Hammond: I can see that.
V: Of course you can. I'm not questioning your powers of observation, I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is.

和這個

A revolution without dancing...is a revolution not worth having!

特別是這個

Creedy: Die! Why won't you die?
V: Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. There is an idea, Mr. Creedy - and ideas are bulletproof.

這裡有更多的台詞：

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434409/quotes

4 總結

這樣精彩的電影因為主題的關係應該是不會在國內上映了。
如果以後出了D版DVD的話，請大家一定收藏一份，保證絕不讓你失望！

最後，用V的兩句話來收尾吧。

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth having!