I've waited over a year and a half for this film, and if the Zacharek Law of Inverse Taste holds up, I should love it.

that someone who didn't particularly enjoy that comic would feel the need to review the movie.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess how the review would turn out.

"I wasn't crazy about the book, but it had it's decent moments"

"I wasn't crazy about the movie, but it had it's decent moments"

You think?

Why not get someone who hasn't read the comic to review the movie?

Or someone who has given the comic more than a perfunctory read?

I didn't know it was based on a comic book but lets cut the movie some slack here. I mean, there are going to be some elements that may be missing that the producers couldn't put in but how long of a movie would it have to be? Something will always be lost in the translation so she needs to get real already.

But if a movie doesn't star dogs or Cameron Diaz, Stephanie has no business reviewing it.

I know the movie is about today's politics. So be it. I stand in favor of its view. Come get me, 'america'. I say that, being an american (in Lawrenceburg, KY) and in direct opposition to the 'american government'. I support the ideals of our (american) constitution. Join me, everyone else, around the world. Support the constitution. Support individual rights. Support freedom. (how else can I say this) -oppose our president.

I can't believe you missed the Abu Ghraib reference, Ms. Zacharek! A far more potent image, and idea, than the mention of any particular religious text.

"I'm not a huge fan of Moore's and Lloyd's 'V for Vendetta,'"

Really? Gosh, judging by your review, I couldn't tell. And you think the idea that someone could be executed for reading the Quran is "cartoony"? I'm sorry - have you been to the states lately, Ms. Zacharek? Because I live there, and believe me, the idea isn't nearly cartoony enough.

I hate to say this, but honestly, Stephanie, you suck. Please stop reviewing movies. I hate every single one of your reviews. Your opinions are worthless, and I wish Salon would get someone better to do these.

No offense, but this is really sincere.

Thank you.

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.

... on the movie is found here:

http://alternet.org/movies/33579/

And yes. Stephanie does need a new occupation.

I've been checking out the reviews for V in various newspapers and web sites and this one--http://alternet.org/movies/33579/--is the most intriguing. What's particularly interesting is that it's the only one I've found that really explores the film's take on homophobia, difference, and governmental oppression. All of which is being somewhat slighted if not ignored by most other reviewers.

I haven't been able to get into the original V for Vendetta myself, and as a novelist and radio reviewer I don't find the writing of it particularly "elegant," but even Zecharak's bad review makes me curious enough about the film to be determined to see it this weekend when I could instead be home with a fire going, watching something much more at my leisure on our home theater.

...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. - IanIRL

Ian, there never is any substance to her diatribes. As stated, she hates anything with a good message and have 2 or 3 stars who can do no wrong and therefore always get a positive review.

We long-time readers know of which we speak--we can't debate what isn't there. By the way, most of her recent pans have opened at number 1 that same weekend. Yeah, it's not about popularity...but she's so obviously cultivated this lone wolf (or sled dog ;) mentality...and it's grating. And facile. So she's not even a useful critic, like Cleveland Amory, the kind you could disagree with but learn something from a review.

It is long past time for her to go.

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