I saw this on Saturday afternoon and I am still trying to sort my way through the film. I haven't read the comic that its based on, but I know as a film, it works only intermittently. V isn't much of a character - Phantom of the Opera with a slice of pretentious political science student thrown in. I generally loathe the "tortured artiste" as they tend to be insufferably narcissistic and I don't believe V is too far from this dynamic. I thought Hugo Weaving did some wonderful vocal work, but the character had no resonance.

Natalie Portman is different - she is undoubtedly one of the best actresses of her generation, and has been for a decade. Her accent never bothered me much - it may have strangled some of her natural vivaciousness as a performer, but it is hardly one of the worst in history and fixating on a less-than-perfect accent is often a lazy way to critique a performance. I thought whenever the character of Evey was given some juice, then Portman delivered - she is best in the film when she doesn't have to pretend like she isn't clued in and can just be a confident woman (apart from the slightly embarrassing re-birth scene in the rain, her role and acting improves immeasurably once her hair is gone). But the role is basically Neo Version 2.0 and Portman is too alert and intelligent an actress to be able to carry off the believable naivety which the part calls for (it’s why she was so believable in Leon).

The rest of the performers range about - Stephen Rea isn't directed strongly enough and he seems to disappear off screen even as he is the focus of a scene. John Hurt is decent but horribly one-dimensional, but the real stand-out is Stephen Fry - just a beautiful example of actor and role enriching each other. I think McTeague does solid, unspectacular stuff with the visuals - the Waschowski Bros may only be writer/producers, but the film's aesthetic is still on bended knee towards the Matrix. The action stuff is flat and unconvincing (whoever thought having the wooshy effects around the spinning knives in the final fight scene should have stayed quiet), but I really liked the design and execution of the lesbian flashback.

But the reason I would still recommend the film is because its ideas are more intriguing than the film that is built around them, and I guess I have to credit Moore with this. There are real issues to be discussed, but the film is too generic to really address them in any but the most cursory way - its the cinematic equivalent of those white wrist bands that people wore last year to end poverty and thought that that was enough. The film would have worked far better without the broad brushstrokes needed for a comic book action film - and would have been far more powerful if Evey, and not V, had been the central agent of the film.

Oh and No Name Given - since when was box office ANY guarantee of quality - have you seen the films which have topped the box office since the beginning of the year? You're welcome to Failure to Launch, Madeas Family Reunion, Underworld Evolution and Hostel...

Just to let you know All Dogs, I have been reading Salon pratically daily since 1998, so I am a long time reader. And considering the films that have opened at no1 since the beginning of the year;

Failure to Launch

Madeas Family Reunion

The Pink Panther

When a Stranger Calls

Big Mommas House 2

Underworld Evolution

Hostel

I am glad Stephanie hasn't given any of these a decent review. The ones she has praised (Eight Below and Glory Road) got generally good notices - as a whole she she isn't exactly out of step with the critical community on these. In the same period, she also gave good to excellent reviews of Bleak House, Something New, Dave Chapelles Block Party, 16 Blocks, Tristram Shandy and Last Holiday which I think is a pretty good sifting of what's available at the multiplex since the beginning of January and hardly paints her as a lone wolf.

I am disappointed that the review of V doesn't seem to go into greater depth, but I still rate her as one of the best critics around

of the posts that have been written so far, all of them attack the messenger and not the message. Isn't that a very Bill O Reilly style of debate - don't actually take on the substance of Stephanie's arguments, merely insult her for a couple of lines and move on.

I haven't seen V yet - unusually, its being opened day and date here in London. I am guessing that the London imagery will add something to the experience when watching it on this side of the Atlantic. At one point I believe there is a sequence involving a Tube train filled with explosives which, considering the bombing last July, should provoke an interesting reaction amongst the Daily Mail readers (ie the English Fox News viewers) here. I love the cast, and really respect the Waschowski Bros' attempts to marry stylish action and deep, relevant subtext. They did it once with The Matrix and I hope they can do it again with V.