V for Very bad

Rating: 3/10 (5 March 2009)

I saw this movie without any pre-knowledge what it was about. The title made me assume it was about criminals and some long lasting vendetta.
Not a fan of gangster movies I was pleasantly surprised that it was about a imaginary near future where someone was taking on "the mean and ruthless government": hey, next to some inventive plotting there might even be some profound political comment about media influence and the power of images.
Sadly, the movie did not take one wrong turn, but made it a sport to take as many as possible. The script left the road that was laid out, and instead of making beautiful twists, it just... went nowhere. We have this man that obviously is the only man in this new England where all disturbing elements (foreigners, gays, Muslims) have been put in to boats to either Europe or America, that dares to challenge the powers that be. That's fine, we understand why: the people that control the streets are rapists, that's what is told us in the very first scene.
But after that, we are told that the real reason is that he was subject to some secret government tests for a viral weapon. Why is that reason added? Why do we have to unravel some plot of years ago, with a female Mengele apologizing on her death bed? Why do we have to be told some tear jerking lesbian love story halfway? Those added story lines have no use, slow the movie down and rub up some of the worst melodrama: Evey kissing the toilet paper where the killed lesbian has written "I love you stranger".
Then there are the clear plot mistakes: the late night presenter making fun of the dictator in such a way that he cannot seriously believe he will just pay a fine and do some charity fund raiser! V taking risks to kill all that tortured him: he wants to throw over the government, then they will be punished automatically, so what's the use? Evey, who is hunted down by a totalitarian regime, who leaves V's house to go... where? And her hair not growing an inch during all the weeks after her fake imprisonment! The cliché of them falling in love is so badly constructed that it hurts to the eyes. The inspector having some strange experience where he "sees all", even the flashbacks of the lesbian victims. Is he psychic? It all adds to the feeling of looking at something that was rewritten twenty three times and no one made sure that the movie was about one thing and one thing only: instead it is about a lot of things that all tumble another way.
The ending is especially awful, with some useless killing and a blowing up of parliament when the victory is already safe. Evey saying that V was "everyone" is gratuitous and nothing more than beautified writing: it gave me stomach pains.
It was then that I saw that it was Nathalie Portman I watched: okay, one actress more NOT to watch again.
All in all it left me with the question: why was this movie ever made? Then I went here, and it had a 8.2. And that was the reason I left a comment, for the very first time. This movie is not worth an 8.2. Not even half that.