Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: March 17, 2006
7.4
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 997 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
763
Mixed:
70
Negative:
164
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
2
DavidOct 17, 2008
An all-around dreadful film. Terrible dialogue, subpar acting, wrapped in a story filled with absurd, juvenile politics with obvious and obligatory nods to the present-day "War on Terror" for easily amused critics to fawn over. Provoked noAn all-around dreadful film. Terrible dialogue, subpar acting, wrapped in a story filled with absurd, juvenile politics with obvious and obligatory nods to the present-day "War on Terror" for easily amused critics to fawn over. Provoked no emotional or visceral reaction from me, other than laughter at its banality, and when it ended, astonishment at how such garbage could be so widely praised. If you're out of high school, and like good films, pass on this. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
2
JasonDApr 16, 2008
A waste of time. Tries too many directions at once: arthouse, action entertainment, and moral message. Without any clear direction it failed to make sense or even entertain. I can give up the money for a rental, but I felt robbed of my time.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
CraigAaen-S.Mar 20, 2006
V for Very Very Bad Film - As a fan of the comic, my opinion might be considered biased, but the FIVE people I took with me to the cinema had never heard of Alan Moore or V for Vendetta and we all roundly thought that this film was utterly V for Very Very Bad Film - As a fan of the comic, my opinion might be considered biased, but the FIVE people I took with me to the cinema had never heard of Alan Moore or V for Vendetta and we all roundly thought that this film was utterly rubbish. Don't be fooled by the trailer, there isn't enough action to provide half-decent entertainment. Instead the Wachowski Boys are trying their damnedest to be intelligent and they just make everybody sound stupid. There is a fine line between poking fun at the British and being completely patronizing. Maybe that can explain the good reviews of this film over on that side of the Atlantic, but I can't explain the good reviews of it that we've had over here. There is nothing to recommend this film apart from a mildly amusing Benny Hill type sketch in the middle. Utterly cringeworthy. I was embarrassed that I had recommended going to see it. Expand
0 of 4 users found this helpful
2
NKMar 30, 2006
Very dissapointed, most of the Anti-Bush down with America crowd will resonate with it and give it high marks, I personally thought it was rubbish, I was nodding off. One or two CGI scenes that were done well, the rest was just pretty poor. Very dissapointed, most of the Anti-Bush down with America crowd will resonate with it and give it high marks, I personally thought it was rubbish, I was nodding off. One or two CGI scenes that were done well, the rest was just pretty poor. Too bad, I was hoping it would be much better. Expand
0 of 5 users found this helpful
0
KristinaSApr 6, 2009
The film won
0 of 4 users found this helpful
0
SudhirMar 19, 2006
Just got back from V for Vendetta. Bad bad acting (Portman's pretentious accent sucked) or the boring buildup; the really dull action scenes or the one sided cliched dialogue. And it ran for like three hours. Not to mention HUGE plot Just got back from V for Vendetta. Bad bad acting (Portman's pretentious accent sucked) or the boring buildup; the really dull action scenes or the one sided cliched dialogue. And it ran for like three hours. Not to mention HUGE plot holes. At the end of it all I was completely disoriented. What's with the Tchaikovsky music, or the TV infatuation? Or the overuse of 'bollocks' ? If there was *any* pseudo philosophical symbolism hidden in the movie someplace, they did not make an effort to get the message out. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
ChrisS.Mar 20, 2006
The worst thing about this film is that it makes the ideals of Anarchism and the Libertarian-Left sound completely stupid.
0 of 3 users found this helpful
1
SverreE.Mar 20, 2006
Argh! Forget the politics! This simply isn't a very good film!
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
ShellyC.Mar 22, 2006
I feel this movie skimmed the surface of several American political issues without explanation or justification of any of them. I perceived blame being assigned to the US for terrorism and tyranny. Had this movie's political agenda been I feel this movie skimmed the surface of several American political issues without explanation or justification of any of them. I perceived blame being assigned to the US for terrorism and tyranny. Had this movie's political agenda been properly billed I would have never given my money for such psycho babble politics. One of the "good guys" had a nazi flag with the Koran in his secret room. This movie was pure garbage! Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
JosiahR.Mar 20, 2006
I'm dumber for having seen this movie. Incoherent, lacking in style, over-wrought pretentious dialogue. Like a pissed off teenager who can't get laid wrote it. Geez.
0 of 3 users found this helpful
2
TomO.Mar 20, 2006
Look. Alan Moore had his name taken off the credits for a reason. The original comic is a magnificent piece of subversive, political and social commentary; this film is cynical action fodder, pandering to the feeble idea that we the public Look. Alan Moore had his name taken off the credits for a reason. The original comic is a magnificent piece of subversive, political and social commentary; this film is cynical action fodder, pandering to the feeble idea that we the public are all 'good people' who rise up when oppressed by the forces of evil. Give me a break. Moore tackled issues of complicity and how fascism can be taken as a viable system of government. He created a piece of work that demmands introspection from its audience. This film removes any value from its original source and replaces it with another empty piece of 'entertainment', peddling the usual nonsense that 'good people' (us) only let bad, destructive people into power when they have been tricked. This film is a cop out on every level. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
LukeD.Jun 3, 2006
a quixotic piece of orwellian gargage. watching this movie is like eating bananas without peeling them.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
2
RobR.Aug 11, 2006
This is a simple movie for children, posing as "art". It takes more than a 130 minute running time to make a movie compelling. You'd have thought that after the dreadful Matrix sequels, the Wachowski brothers would have realised that.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
3
CherylC.Sep 4, 2006
Decent acting. Sophomoric attempt at political philosophy. Actually, just plain stupid when all said and done.
0 of 13 users found this helpful
2
ColbyS.Jul 1, 2007
I was expecting a lot better, maybe. It turned out to be a liberal, leftist propaganda vehicle first, story second. The only good press it got was from mainly liberal publications. Go figure. Beyond my disagreement with the beliefs I was expecting a lot better, maybe. It turned out to be a liberal, leftist propaganda vehicle first, story second. The only good press it got was from mainly liberal publications. Go figure. Beyond my disagreement with the beliefs expressed, this could've been made so much better, as the concept could've been riveting. Instead it was boring as all hell and preachy to boot. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
PaulW.Feb 27, 2008
A completely farcical take on Orwell's 1984 with one of the worst 'acting performances' by Natalie Portman to date. Superficiality of characters, plot and politics and not even in a entertaining way. Special mention must go to A completely farcical take on Orwell's 1984 with one of the worst 'acting performances' by Natalie Portman to date. Superficiality of characters, plot and politics and not even in a entertaining way. Special mention must go to the cringe worthy script with a fetish for sophomore-level alliteration starting with the letter 'v'. In short, the perfect film for a general acclaim and fit to shelve next to other recent entries in the IMDb top250 such as Million Dollar Baby, Children of Men and Labirinto del Fauno which most dreadfully shows the abysmal decline in good taste and cinematic appreciation which is sweeping the Earth like a virus. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
1
JayN.Mar 17, 2006
Horrible movie. One of the worst from McTrigue yet!!
0 of 2 users found this helpful
3
PyeMar 18, 2006
Boring. Unengaging. While watching the film, I found I couldn't care less about the characters -- no pathos. Don't waste your time.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
ChrisB.Mar 18, 2006
movie was awful. If you have people you cant stand, suggest this movie to them. The only part i enjoyed were the end credits!
0 of 6 users found this helpful
3
SigwahMar 18, 2006
Rolling Stone hypes up the film and poor me, I see the damned thing. This film is The Political Matrix. There's an attempt at making it seem like this will happen to the world in the next couple of years and that we will have to blow up Rolling Stone hypes up the film and poor me, I see the damned thing. This film is The Political Matrix. There's an attempt at making it seem like this will happen to the world in the next couple of years and that we will have to blow up government to make it better. Natalie Portman even has a Keanu Reeves moment in the train, when she just stares. Guns are better, and so was the Matrix. F... this movie. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
RyanJMar 19, 2006
Turd on a stick. If you're interested in the drama side of this story, read 1984. If you're interested in the action side, rent Demolition Man.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
AaronA.Mar 19, 2006
The whole point about fascism is that it's driven by nihilism. I don't like George Bush either, but maybe if the Wachowski brothers understood this, they wouldn't have spent quite so much time fetishizing Nazi aesthetics and The whole point about fascism is that it's driven by nihilism. I don't like George Bush either, but maybe if the Wachowski brothers understood this, they wouldn't have spent quite so much time fetishizing Nazi aesthetics and celebrating senseless violence for its own sake. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
MitchC.Mar 19, 2006
I was just bored out of my mind by this movie. And did anyone else think the finale was reminiscent of the end of "Caddyshack", when Carl blows up the golf course? It was funny! I don't think that's what the director was going for.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
2
JanB.Mar 20, 2006
Marxists and anarchists will love this movie. The basic theme? Christians are fascists who seek to round up all the gays and Muslims, USA and UK "Coalition of the willing" are nazis who kill their own people with bio weapons to create a Marxists and anarchists will love this movie. The basic theme? Christians are fascists who seek to round up all the gays and Muslims, USA and UK "Coalition of the willing" are nazis who kill their own people with bio weapons to create a police state. The looney left's beliefs brought to the big screen at last! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
EuroMar 23, 2006
I cant believe there are people that actually admire this movie. Its the same people that probably never took a political science class or read a book about history of politics. It over simplifies a totalitarian regime and makes a terrorist I cant believe there are people that actually admire this movie. Its the same people that probably never took a political science class or read a book about history of politics. It over simplifies a totalitarian regime and makes a terrorist look like a hero. If you can make money with such crap..says a lot about the majority of people. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
WongitMar 24, 2006
I didnt know what to expect with this film, i did not however expect to see a terrible film...which is exactly what i got. boring. pure boredom is what i got out of this movie.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
KelR.Mar 24, 2006
WARNING: This movie is a diabolically conceived slew of hate propoganda, don't be fooled. Does terrorism seem cool to you? Yet, we see the ultra left, the so called champions of peace, poison the minds of young americans (who is the WARNING: This movie is a diabolically conceived slew of hate propoganda, don't be fooled. Does terrorism seem cool to you? Yet, we see the ultra left, the so called champions of peace, poison the minds of young americans (who is the target audience) with this tripe, glorifying evil. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
AdamX.Mar 26, 2006
Horrible, horrible movie. Everything in it seemed to be so poorly executed it was quite embarrassing and cringe worthy to witness. It wasn't even engaging enough to be a brainless entertainment flick, just boring pacing, plot, direction Horrible, horrible movie. Everything in it seemed to be so poorly executed it was quite embarrassing and cringe worthy to witness. It wasn't even engaging enough to be a brainless entertainment flick, just boring pacing, plot, direction and acting. The good responses this film has gotten astounds and confuses me. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
NathanF.Mar 26, 2006
Im not saying Hugo Weaving didn't do a good V or that Natalie Portman cant act all those features were what might this movie okay instead of lying in a gutter what i'm concerned about is the story. what were they thinking what kind Im not saying Hugo Weaving didn't do a good V or that Natalie Portman cant act all those features were what might this movie okay instead of lying in a gutter what i'm concerned about is the story. what were they thinking what kind of government what do that besides comunists and who does V think he is blowing up random monuments to show he means business I'm sorry but it's a load of worthless action... NOTE: do not see this movie unless you enjoy raw action then go ahead. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
MarkS.Apr 3, 2006
What a disappointment! Part rambling, babbling political rally drivel, mixed with Natalie Portman dealing with the affections of older men (yuck). Earth to Wachowski brothers!: if you're going to have a man with a British accent, What a disappointment! Part rambling, babbling political rally drivel, mixed with Natalie Portman dealing with the affections of older men (yuck). Earth to Wachowski brothers!: if you're going to have a man with a British accent, wearing a mask, give numerous monologues, please tone down the background music so we might be able to make it all out. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
MikeAug 1, 2006
The movie started out badly and it ended even worse!! An intresting idea, but badly excuted.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
3
JohnN.Aug 16, 2006
Hard to imagine why all of the good grades here for V. Must be an age gap, because I cant think of any reason why anyone over 21 would like this movie. At least Natalie Portman is in it, but then they cut her hair and ruin that too. Very Hard to imagine why all of the good grades here for V. Must be an age gap, because I cant think of any reason why anyone over 21 would like this movie. At least Natalie Portman is in it, but then they cut her hair and ruin that too. Very shallow, undeveloped plot that takes to long to go nowhere. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
2
JamesQ.Aug 19, 2006
Catholic fascists take over England, put up big black and red crosses, repress gays, execute people for possessing the Koran, and rule by fear. Only a masked wierdo can save them. He does this by--well, that would ruin it. Suffice it to say, Catholic fascists take over England, put up big black and red crosses, repress gays, execute people for possessing the Koran, and rule by fear. Only a masked wierdo can save them. He does this by--well, that would ruin it. Suffice it to say, the ending is absurd. Written by the Wachowski brothers and produced by Joel Silver. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
TomS.Jan 25, 2007
Over the top trash unbelievable trash. Revolution? I'd like to see what happens next... It's tried to be too clever. Theres nothing to tell us why the government has seemingly gone crazy and decided to shout at everyone... Over the top trash unbelievable trash. Revolution? I'd like to see what happens next... It's tried to be too clever. Theres nothing to tell us why the government has seemingly gone crazy and decided to shout at everyone... ;Portman's performance is awful, not sure anyone who has reviewed this is English but to me its pretty blatant from the start her voice is dodgy . Silly action sequences where V can withstand 5 billion bullets. Doesn't make you think. Sound is bland. Anything else? Oh yes, its all very well blowing buildings up but it really won't sort anything out. I can see that humankind is supposed to be united under tragedies like oppression but this just wouldn't happen. Not even in a world where people where gimpy masks. There is a reason for law! Anarchy in the UK? No thanks. It's more of a personal thing to express oneself in a rebellious and sometimes stupid way but this film captures what the UK would be like if everyone had taken crack and then decided to terrorize parliament. Ridiculous! Probably the worst film I have seen since Revolver! 1 star because the DVD didn't break. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
DavidHammerFeb 21, 2007
Scarcely a single redeeming quality. Managed to see that other piece-of-shit juvenile myopic lefty vision of a future fascist dystopia Britain Children of Men for I saw this (for the record, I'm left-wing too), but this one, although tooScarcely a single redeeming quality. Managed to see that other piece-of-shit juvenile myopic lefty vision of a future fascist dystopia Britain Children of Men for I saw this (for the record, I'm left-wing too), but this one, although too calamitously silly to be as bland as the aforementioned film, takes biscuit in the laughable stakes. Jurn Hurt LITERALLY has the same expression on his face every time we see him (while he's alive). Portman spends the film sitting in people's living rooms and being tortured and generally struggling to conjure up an convincing facial expression (why is this woman allowed to work in film?), Weaving talks in awkward, pretentious riddles, and stabs people.

It didn't seem possible that the Wachowski Bros could something more cringemakingly awful than the Matrix Revolutions, but it appears they have truely outdone themselves.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
KellyD.Mar 18, 2006
V is for very tedious and tiresome. Totally derivative crap.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
BlancoA.Mar 18, 2006
I have to agree with the user who stated that the best part of the film is the ending credits. Seriously, "Street Fighting Man" by the Stones and the artwork accompanying it were brilliant. But seriously, people, admit that you had toI have to agree with the user who stated that the best part of the film is the ending credits. Seriously, "Street Fighting Man" by the Stones and the artwork accompanying it were brilliant. But seriously, people, admit that you had to struggle a little to like this movie. It has MAJOR pacing problems. At least 7 or 8 times I looked at my friend and said, "Damn! They're got to keep this thing moving!" And I loved the subtle propaganda of such items as the poster that read "Coalition of the Willing" - which featured the American Flag & British Union Jack superimposed with the Swastika. Yeah, attemped to remove a dictator and free 30 million people to create democracy, and you're compared to a regime that exterminated 5 million jews in concentration camps. That's reality. Folks, if the US and the UK are the biggest enemies in the world, the rest of the globe must be a utopia. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
JillJ.Mar 23, 2006
I cannot believe the good reviews this movie has gotten. It ignores the interesting characters (the bad guys) and never tells us how in the world V does everything he does. That would have been more interesting. Poor Natalie Portman, either I cannot believe the good reviews this movie has gotten. It ignores the interesting characters (the bad guys) and never tells us how in the world V does everything he does. That would have been more interesting. Poor Natalie Portman, either looking scared or lost. Stating the obvious in line after line. We spend much time on back stories of people we do not care about - their fate is sealed. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
MattB.Mar 25, 2006
This film is pedantic and takes itself way too seriously and the effect was to make it unintentionally humorous. The writers thought the audience would be too stupid to see the self-inherent evils of a fascist regime, so they needed to This film is pedantic and takes itself way too seriously and the effect was to make it unintentionally humorous. The writers thought the audience would be too stupid to see the self-inherent evils of a fascist regime, so they needed to manipulate us by portraying them as ugly, shifty-eyed rapists. It would have been more thought provoking and real had they been portrayed as charasmatic or, better yet, like your co-worker or next door neighbor, the average Joe. What a cliche that the antagonists were motivated, really, by power and not their ideology. True Belivers are always the most freightening. The writing was hackneyed and overly Verbose in an apparent attempt to give the film some sort of legitimacy through seeming literary. Thick melodrama made it impossible to empathize with the characters or care what happened to them. Five minutes into the film I had a vision of the writers hunched over the 'V' section of Webster's frantically trying to shoehorn every word into a coherent sentence. What exactly is the film's message supposed to be? Buildings can be blown up without killing innocents but instead be capped with an uplifting fireworks finale? Replacing the devastation caused by blowing up a building with a tame 4th of July display is a bone chilling piece of apologist propaganda. Anyone who thinks this film blurs the line between terrorists and 'freedom fighters' is a few cards short of a full deck. The fact that the writers needed to portray England as some sort of cartoonish neo-Nazi dictatorship to gride their political ax proves the lameness of their position. However, Natalie Portman does a nice job despite the poor script. Stephen Rea was the highlight of the film. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
RMJun 18, 2006
I do not want to sound over the top and completely slag this film off but it is officially the third time I walked out of a film because it got embarassing to watch (the last was AI). I thought it would be interesting because I quite enjoyed I do not want to sound over the top and completely slag this film off but it is officially the third time I walked out of a film because it got embarassing to watch (the last was AI). I thought it would be interesting because I quite enjoyed books such as '1984', 'Clockwork Orange' and 'Brave New World', all set in dystopian sociaties, but thought this was a really dumb effort, and it's almost laughable that people can even respond to the message that the film conveys when it is done by such silly means. Perhaps then I can enjoy the action, acting, settings etc instead. Well no actually. The action scenes were just as ridiculous as 'The Matrix' which is partly why I cannot take it seriously. And the acting was some of the worst I have ever seen. I appreciate when people hate a film and write a review they tend to say the acting is bad even if it isn't because they're in rant mode. But here it really is. English people really don't talk like that - i.e. they don't all sound like snobs. The way English accents are done in Hollywood films can be terrible. It was just all very unconvincing and cringeworthy at parts. So not only is the message ruined by how unrealistic it all is, it is difficult to enjoy the story when you are constantly reminded that the characters are all just actors trying to put on a silly accent. Seriously, the British accents here are almost suitable for a comedy. To mention a few postives. There were the odd funny moments - it was not taking itself to seriously thank god. Some of the visuals were also quite impressive. And, in fairness, maybe the actors were not actually that bad and it was just the rubbish dialogue that made them seem like they were. It is a dumb film that wants to be clever but not everyone is like me and enjoys dumb clever films anyway. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful
0
AnonymousMCAug 11, 2006
Entirely self-contraticting, whoever came up with this movie and wrote the script simply wanted to make themselves seem smart by stealing real ideas from people like Orwell, but they werent smart enough to know what to do with those ideas, soEntirely self-contraticting, whoever came up with this movie and wrote the script simply wanted to make themselves seem smart by stealing real ideas from people like Orwell, but they werent smart enough to know what to do with those ideas, so they just used a bunch of verbage to make it sound like they knew what they were talking about. It was hard for me to sit through this movie without tearing its "ideas" apart, and the write snuck in a couple social commentaries that had nothing to do with anything. If you think this is thought-provoking and smart, read Orwell's 1984 to find out what those words really mean. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful