Eruditorum Press

Pounded in the butt by dialectical materialism.

Skip to content

Elizabeth Sandifer

Elizabeth Sandifer created Eruditorum Press. She’s not really sure why she did that, and she apologizes for the inconvenience. She currently writes Last War in Albion, a history of the magical war between Alan Moore and Grant Morrison. She used to write TARDIS Eruditorum, a history of Britain told through the lens of a ropey sci-fi series. She also wrote Neoreaction a Basilisk, writes comics these days, and has ADHD so will probably just randomly write some other shit sooner or later.Support Elizabeth on Patreon.

6 Comments

  1. Tim Chapman
    January 17, 2023 @ 1:00 pm

    I’ve never been convinced that the film is actually anti-Bush, whatever the makers’ intentions – rather, it seems itself an essentially Neocon fantasy about painless regime change.
    The ‘Sutler’ regime is a broad analogue for Saddam’s Iraq – ruled by a moustached tyrant who gases his own people and whose propaganda spokesman (in the first scene of the film) is simply beastly about the US. The film’s V, meanwhile, carries out a bit of shock-and-awe bombing, broadcasts some vaguely liberal rhetoric, and inspires a bloodless uprising of the masses, in a happy ending with fireworks. That is essentially the pre-invasion fantasy of Iraqi liberation.

    Reply

    • Elizabeth Sandifer
      January 17, 2023 @ 2:12 pm

      I think that reading is transparently counter to the intent of the film, and I retain my longstanding skepticism of the use of readings of the format “it’s obviously meant to read X, but it actually means Y.”

      Reply

      • Tim Chapman
        January 17, 2023 @ 2:44 pm

        It was painfully evident in the ‘00s that there’s a world of difference between intention and results, as with the many erstwhile liberals who supported the military action and neocon agenda. That was the essence of neoconservatism, and I do think the film reflects aspects of that.
        Also, of course, the film does exhibit Chibnall levels of crappiness.

        Reply

        • Elizabeth Sandifer
          January 17, 2023 @ 3:00 pm

          I mean, there’s a world of difference between “the film does not ultimately offer an unproblematic political vision,” which is true if, broadly, a layup of an argument that can be mounted against any Hollywood film, and “the film is not actually anti-Bush,” which is flagrant nonsense that doesn’t stand up to a second of scrutiny.

          Reply

  2. MattM
    January 17, 2023 @ 3:11 pm

    I haven’t seen the film since it premiered in theaters, and disliked it on the whole (that kiss, my god), but I remember enjoying its take on Prothero and the remaking of the “Voice of Fate” into an agitprop broadcast. Maybe that’s just because Roger Allam makes a meal of it (as is his specialty).

    Reply

  3. CJM123
    January 17, 2023 @ 4:46 pm

    Really enjoying this! Wonderful chapter. I just want to throw this out because it’s not the sort of thing a copy editor would spot, but I’m pretty sure Lana Wachowski’s partner’s name is spelt Karin, with an ‘i’.

    Hope that’s not out of line.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.