Critics’ reviews

V for Vendetta (2006)

10 reviews from 10 publications. Critics’ score 49: 2 positive, 3 mixed, 4 negative.

Back to our review of V for Vendetta

49
Positive
2
Mixed
3
Negative
4

The consensus on V for Vendetta leans towards disappointment, though several critics admire its political ambition and visual craft. Praise clusters around the elaborate design and moments of forceful action, even among reviews that find the story unconvincing. Performances offer another point of encouragement: Empire praises Hugo Weaving’s vocal command behind the mask, while Collider welcomes Natalie Portman’s performance and finds the updated political commentary worthwhile.

The divide is substantial: sympathetic reviews see a provocative adaptation with clumsy passages, while detractors find its politics muddled and its dialogue exhausting. Exposition, uneven pacing and an implausible future recur as complaints, with disagreement over whether the film makes persuasive use of its provocative subject matter. The response to the finale makes that split particularly clear: Radio Times finds it moving and relevant, whereas Screen Daily argues that the film has not earned its intended inspirational effect.

Empire
24 February 2006 · Dan Jolin
70*

The critic finds it the best Moore adaptation yet but notes it is uncommercial and talky rather than action-packed. They praise Hugo Weaving's compelling vocal performance as the masked V while noting flaws like clumsy scripting and Portman's accent issues.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Alan Jones
60

It's an audaciously risk-taking yet clunky curio that delivers a stunningly executed and movingly relevant ending despite some flaws.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
19 March 2006 · Philip French
60*

The film cleverly turns a terrorist into a politically correct crusading hero but fails to create a credible future or avoid pomposity. It is handsomely designed with a menacing look from its cinematographer.

Read the full review →
Variety
13 February 2006 · festival review · Leslie Felperin
45*

The critic finds the graphic-novel adaptation visually striking at times but ultimately flat, suffering from indigestible dialogue and pacing issues like the Wachowskis' later Matrix films. She singles out the weak chemistry between the leads and the passive central female character.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
14 February 2006 · festival review
40*

Starts promisingly but succumbs to hokum and silliness, failing to earn its inspirational finale; mixed on politics and action.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
17 March 2006 · Manohla Dargis
40*

The critic finds the film a muddled Orwellian tale about a masked avenger fighting a fascist regime that strains to echo current politics without clear conviction. She singles out the lead performance of Natalie Portman as an impressionable young woman drawn into the plot.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
13 March 2006 · David Denby
30*

The critic calls the film a dunderheaded pop fantasia that celebrates terrorism and destruction in a misguided way. He singles out the elaborate visual design and violent action sequences as skillful but ultimately undermined by the story's muddled politics.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · TJ
30*

The critic finds the film soporific and unpersuasive despite its ideological ambitions, criticizing the exposition-heavy plot and visually uninspired style.

Read the full review →
Collider
13 August 2006 · Nicole Pedersen
75*

The critic finds V for Vendetta a worthwhile smart sociopolitical commentary and the best adaptation of Alan Moore’s work, praising its post-9/11 update and Portman’s performance while noting some plot devices are overkill.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
22 March 2006 · Merlin Harries

The film succeeds as an entertaining action thriller with political aspirations but fails to capture the gritty realism and complexities of the graphic novel, replacing them with glossy visuals and overlong fight sequences. It is let down by sloppy adaptations of the source material despite strong performances from John Hurt and Stephen Rea.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate