Obscurity, yay

[ravenclaw42]

It was time for another totally obscure animated icon to be made. I'm pretty sure it was a Firesign Theatre skit (really hilarious radio comedy group -- I cannot recommend highly enough what are arguably their two best albums, "Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers" and "How Can You Be In Two Places At Once If You're Not Anywhere At All") that

Comments

[ravenclaw42]

I agree entirely. I was really astounded when I found out that Edward Norton played Baldwin; I had simply never thought of Norton in contexts much different from Fight Club or Italian Job... but going back on the DVD now I can tell that it's his voice. But, just, wow. Between V and Baldwin I'm really starting to appreciate the talent it takes to act without the use of any skin at all -- no face, no hands, muffled voice, barely-visible eyes. And yet, both characters are just wonderful and haunting.

At some point in my random readings last night someone brought up the question of whether they shouldn't have shown Baldwin's face. That got me thinking about how they didn't show V's, and the merits of both approaches... I think they way they handled Baldwin worked, though, because like you said, he was so handsome -- in his voice and his mannerisms, just everything. There was a certain majesty to him that was muted but not entirely hidden by his physical weakness. So showing his face just emphasized whatever way in which the viewer saw him as handsome, rather than slighting his dignity. Or that's how it was to me, anyway.

Anyway, rambling. But one other thing -- have you seen the Director's Cut or the original cut? Just curious -- I haven't seen the original, but every source I have has told me that it pretty much sucks in comparison to the Director's Cut, which was actually the real way the film was supposed to be shown, before the studio ordered the director to change it up. The D.C. is just amazing.

I shut up now! XD

[yma2]

I saw the vertion they showed at teh cinimas, not the directors cut. The film itself didn't impresse me that much, but as I said I did love Baldwin.
I think I agree with you about the Mask thing. The use of a mask, both in visuals and themes, really does a lot. I'm VERY, VERY glad they didn't show V's face in V for Vendetta. If they had done that it would have ruined it. Because the point of V is that he doesn't have a face...
Actually, when you think of it it's rather interesting...
In these two situations the use of masks is utterly opposed.
Baldwin used his mask to reinforce his identity. He WAS King Baldwin, he maintained his identity as 'king,' as 'leader' through use of the mask. When the mask is taken off there is a lepar, not the king. The Mask is again used as a sort of... new identity. The mask IS the person Baldwin, more so than the flesh is.
Contrast that to V. The point of V is that if we did see him with the mask off he would be human also. V isn't a person, he's an ideal. An icon. You can't kill icons. If the mask was taken off, if we knew who V was, then he wouldn't be V, he'd be Joe Bloggs who takes an alternite identity of V. But under the mask he'd always bee Joe Bloggs, the 'person' of V would be lost.
This is what Valarie lears at hte end (or at least at the end of the comic) it doesn't matter who V is under the mask. V isn't a who. He's a what. Anyone, everyone, no one can be V, that's his greatest gift.
So to take the mask off would ruin the effect. It's about the lauding of an ideal.
But in the film the removing of the mask shows, as you said, the strengh of the man. That he managed to carry on, was so beautiful under the weight of this curse. The removal of the mask serves not to break the ideal, but to elevate the man. And it works so well. A wonderful and poinient moment in an otherwise mediocher film.
So yeah, that's my thoughts on masks.

[yma2]

EDIT: I mean the film of Kingdoms of Heaven, just to clarify that last paragraph.