Would it be such a stretch of the imagination to say that V for Vendetta was one of the most eagerly anticipated movies of the last few years? The works of respected graphic novel author Alan Moore haven't fared very well in the past. 2001's From Hell – a dark, period piece – was praised for its setting and quality of acting, but suffered from a weak plot, while in 2003, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was a box-office flop and a disappointment all around.

V, for the most part, managed to shake off its predecessors' bad reputations. This could be partially attributed to the presence of producer Joel Silver and cult directors the Wachowski Brothers, aka the team behind the hugely popular The Matrix and its enjoyable but underwhelming sequels. Filmgoers may have been too keen to think "It's by the creators of The Matrix, so it must be good!", a phenomenon usually reserved for Quentin Tarantino and M. Night Shyamalan; film companies are quick to plaster Tarantino or Shyamalan's name all over anything they had a hand in, hoping for sales by association.

Of course, I'm not implying that this was the only reason for its generally-favourable release period. The film itself is a terrific one, as both myself and Camus attested to in our respective reviews earlier in the year; it boasts action and anarchy in equal measure, and while it does drag slightly in the middle, makes up for it with its fantastic pyrotechnic effects. Watching the film on DVD (released 31st July) obviously can't compare to the cinema experience, but overall, V translates to the small screen well enough.

Critical reaction to the film, however, was more lukewarm than anticipated. The right-wing Daily Mail opened with the byline "V for Vendetta? More like Z for ZZZZ"; the Evening Standard complained that the Wachowski's script was unnecessarily verbose; The Guardian called it "boring" and "unexciting". On the other end of the scale, The Mirror commended the film's cast, effects and plotlines, and the legendary Roger Ebert praised its ideas, plotlines and characterisations.

With the notable aforementioned exception of the Guardian, it seemed from my usual skim of the papers that the more conservative, right-wing papers seemed to come down the hardest on the film, whereas the liberal, left-wing papers were the ones more willing to keep an open mind and gave it more favourable reviews. This is a theory that I'd supported ever since the release of the film – as the film's plot centres around the overthrowing of a corrupt government headed by a right-wing dictator, right-wing newspapers (and their readers) will be aversed to the idea and thus come out strongly against it, while the ones more in favour of this style of social reform will be more inclined to support V's (essentially terrorist) actions. While I'm certainly not saying that anyone who hates this movie wants to see a police state and dictator in power, objective viewers may have drawn the same comparison.

Something I noticed that irked some reviewers was the way the film encourages the viewer to sympathise with a man who is, essentially, a terrorist. Claims were made that the film was "inciting anarchy" and "supporting terrorism" – personally, I think that these reviewers should learn to distinguish fantasy from reality, but that's neither here nor there. Yes, the film appears to encourage acts of rebellion against the government, but it's intended both as a moral message and as a warning, and not as an incitement to riot.

On the other end of the critical spectrum, the comic book fans' reaction was half-expected: compared to the graphic novel, the film didn't rate highly. Fans complained that it had dumbed down the original intent of the book, and that the romantic subplot between V and Evey had been forced and unnecessary (it not being present in the original). Like all movies based on books, the film was largely viewed in the context of its source material, something I feel is unfair – films should be judged on their own merit, and not by the standards of whatever came before them. Indeed, the majority of comic book fans who had not read the graphic novel came out in favour of the film. It seems that to fully appreciate this film, you must watch it before reading its source graphic novel, or risk having your enjoyment of it marred by needless comparisons.

To talk at length about the film for a second time is unnecessary; I invite you to read the original cinematic reviews written earlier in the year, my myself and Camus:

Warner Home Video has released V for Vendetta in both single and double-disc editions. This is a common practice with Hollywood blockbusters – it allows hardened filmgoers to purchase the two-disc version with more special features, while popcorn-munchers just interested in a night's entertainment can buy the less-expensive one-disc version. Unfortunately, we were sent the one-disc edition by Warner – considering that other online review outlets and magazines were given the two-disc version, I can't help but feel a little cheated.

Framed 2.35:1 and anamorphically enhanced, the transfer is as you'd expect from a modern Hollywood feature and close to pristine. Detail is excellent, colour reproduction very impressive and contrast is very pleasing. Particularly good are the night-time rooftop scenes, which have a genuine filmic quality to them.

The 5.1 soundtrack is also very good, with reasonable use of the saound stage, especially by the score and some of the sound effects. Lower frequences are not as active as you might expect, but make their maek when they are used.

The single-disc edition of the movie includes one special feature:

"Freedom! Forever!: Making V For Vendetta
All too often, "Making Of" special features are designed with TV audiences in mind, especially for big blockbusters. This is because one of the TV networks will snap up the rights to a Making Of featurette, and broadcast it within a few days of the film's cinematic release. Not so with V for Vendetta – this feature is far too in-depth to appeal to couch potatos, focusing almost exclusively on what the producers and directors thought about the graphic novel and how it was translated to the screen.

In fact, this featurette is less of a "Making Of" and more of a "What We Think It Means" – aside from behind-the-scenes stunt shots played in the background, nobody talks about how the film was made – only the concepts behind it. Actors Natalie Portman, Hugo Weaving, Stephen Fry, John Hurt and Stephen Rea are brought in to dissect the plot and motives of the movie, but none of them really talk about their own characters, preferring instead to make general remarks about V and Evey. For their part, director James McTeigue and producer Joel Silver say a little bit more about how they needed to "filmize" the graphic novel, and some of the challenges present in Alan Moore's original story.

All in all, the feature is a frustration – the viewer is given a comprehensive look on the philosophy of V, but is left wanting to know how the scenes were filmed and how the action was shot. This aspect of the production isn't even touched upon in the special features that were held back for the two-disc edition.

Speaking of which, the two-disc edition is (for now) exclusive to HMV customers, and contains the "Freedom! Forever!" feature plus four others:

"Designing the Near Future" – the process of creating the dystopian world of V for Vendetta.

"Remember, Remember: Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot" – a history lesson for those unfamiliar with the story.

England Prevails: V for Vendetta and the New Wave in Comics – a look at the real-world concepts behind the original story.

Cat Power Montage – a musical montage of scenes from the film.

To summarise, the DVD compilation is good, but not exemplary. V for Vendetta is still just as enjoyable and watchable on the small screen as it was on the big screen – after all, the medium (in this case) isn't the message; it's all about the ideas of the story and its protagonist. And, as V might have said, ideas transcend the media.