When is a freedom fighter a terrorist, or can he be both?

TIMEeurope.com: Europe -- The Mad Man In The Mask:

"V for Vendetta, set for mid-March release in most markets, is that movie, and it is the most bizarre Hollywood production you will see (or refuse to see) this year. It's the kind of film that makes you ask questions like, Who thought this was a good idea?"

The pre-release media coverage of this film - at least what I have seen of it - is a bit thin on the details I would want to know before condemning it.

So he blows up things and enjoys his work. But is he terrorizing the good people of London or is he striking blows at the evil powers that be which inspire the people to hope for an end to their oppression?

It appears that we have here yet another example of the absurdity of declaring war on a tactic as if the goal or a violent act were a matter of indifference. We don't do this is in the civil law. When you kill a man because a third party pays you for his death, that is murder; but when you kill a man who is in the process of trying to kill you, that is self-defense - the purpose of the killing matters.

From what I have seen so far, the only error the Wachowski brothers made was not identifying that future dystopic Britain as Britain under Mullahs and Sharia law. That's a movie I'd pay to see; sort of an updated Red Dawn.