His commenters take this opening and run with it. Calling V "a big slap in the face to “Jesusland”", Jim Rockford claims that "What makes this film junk as a film and as storytelling is that it’s explicit pro-Terrorist and anti-American, anti-Bush politics fly in the face of the reality: terrorists really DO want to kill us all; they’ve tried very hard." It will fail commercially, he continues, because "being explicitly opposed to what most of your paying customers hold dear is a good way to lose their business." Michael Hutchinson continues the ideological doomcasting: "Now, the Wachowski Brothers were REALLY lucky that they were able to sell The Matrix with its anti-social message because of its flash and style, but its messages were rather hidden and a huge part of the audience just went for the SFX. Here you have a movie that’s all about its message, even in the trailers. Do you really think this can find an audience?"
Of course, the film's success (or lack thereof) may very well rest on one entirely non-political factor: as Alexander "Bejamins" Hamilton puts it on Left Behinds: "...the problem isn't the directors, it's that Evey Hammond is played by fucking Natalie Portman. Because Natalie Portman can't fucking act."