I'd seen the movie and liked it. I'd read other Alan Moore graphic novels and liked them. I'd seen Moore's commentaries on how much he hates every movie ever made from one of his books, especially this one. And I thought I should check it out for myself.

I can see why he's upset. The plot is similar, and the point is similar, but the book and the movie go about it VERY differently and the actual endings are quite different. In fact, the movie chose to end with what is pretty much the beginning of the book.

Like most, if not all, of Moore's books, V is about how and why the central characters are they way they are. And they aren't necessarily good people. V is a tortured anarchist who kidnaps and tortures a relative innocent to turn them into a copy of himself. Along the way he fights against a corrupt autocracy. But not because it is a good thing, or a noble thing, but for personal revenge and because V is an anarchist. A violent anarchist.

I like that aspect. This is the perfect example of "comics aren't just happy stories for kids", just in case anyone still believes that old trope. The story, themes, dialog are all something you can find in contemporary social commentary fiction. Except better than at least 80% of what you're likely to find. The images are incredibly well done by David Lloyd. The art is nothing of the flashy lurid colors you might associate with a "comic book". The pallet is very restrained, monochromatic even. Most of the book is illustrated in sepia, washed-out blues, or faded amber/rose with occasional splashes of green intruding into a section. It is dark, much like the material. Shadows predominate.

Ultimately it is a powerful story, powerfully told and powerfully illustrated and it has little to do with the movie. I disagree with Moore about the movie. I think that was pretty good too, but he's right that it wasn't a movie of his book. ( )

No need to really discuss the art of Alan Moore and David Lloyd. The story is incredibly well done, and reviewed and discussed in many other locations. The only addition I would make is that the quality of this edition is a bit light, and in some of the later panels, the selected colors make it difficult to see details. The overall quality is very high. ( )

The first graphic novel I've read, so I can't really compare it with anything else. For what it's worth, though, I very much enjoyed the plot (i.e. Alan Moore's words), but found David Lloyd's illustrations rather confusing in places (I found it hard to distinguish between some of the characters). It's perhaps not quite as 'deep' as it thinks it is, but it raises some very interesting themes and points, and the story is skillfully told.

And, whatever Alan Moore might think, the film's very good, too. ( )

Fortælling om den maskebærende 'V''s hævntog sammen med pigen Evey mod sine tidligere plageånder i en af det nyfascisiske Englands koncentrationslejre. Det gælder om i den grad at holde tungen lige i munden for at få hele handlingen og persongalleriet sat på plads – og dér tror jeg at både den indforståede konstruktion og mine evner svigtede – selv om jeg vidste, at det ikke var Rasmus Klump, jeg var i gang med….
Men ellers er Alan Moores ambitioner og evner er en gevinst for tegneseriemediet – også i denne tidlige historie fra 80’erne, som peger frem mod mesterværkerne fra senere. ( )

Seminal graphic novel, becoming more relevent every day but, at the risk of accusations of heresy, it's not very well illustrated, the text is overly wordy and too often descends into psychobabble, and the whole thing is sadly, just not that enjoyable. Sorry. ( )