overrated

Rating: 7/10 (17 April 2007)

'a work of monumental genius' 'an amazing feat of cinema' 'truly unique' 'a bloody masterpiece!'
...just some of the things said about this film.
IMDb rates this 125th best movie of all time. i don't think so. its heart is in the right place, but let's get a couple things straight to start with.
now i'm a Natalie Portman fan, but as it says on the rubric 'evey, a working class girl...' i'm afraid Nat's accent is worse than Rene Zegweller in Bridget Jones' diary. even radio 4 would reject her for being too posh. sack the casting director for starters.
and whilst it is fairly obvious we are sleepwalking towards fascism, to hold Guy Fawkes up as a shining beacon of freedom is incorrect to say the least.
this is a film adapted from a comic and unfortunately that's exactly how it ends up. comic book like. superman at that. not in it's look but in it's heart.
yeah there's some nice touches, but that makes it even worse for not being completely bad which would be OK if it wasn't trying to be serious, but it was.
about three quarters of the way through i thought 'aha! Ian Hurt HAS TO BE v, now that makes some kind of sense!' but no it descended into ridiculousness and in the end i felt it became:
'how one man can stand up to a fascist regime and end up justifying it whilst still remaining totally cool.'
but hey i guess it IS called v for vendetta not r for revolution. maybe it should be called y for why or b for bol**cks.
it's sad that in 2007 that this is what passes for revolutionary cinema (i will forgive you if you're under 15)
oh and a tip for future fascist dictatorships: avoid red and black in your backdrops. it's really unappealling
seen alongside 'brazil', 'nineteen eighty-four' and 'richard III (1995)', v for vendetta can be forgiven for attempting to update these classics. it cannot be forgiven for falling way short.