Painted into a Corner?

J. Michael Straczynski (jms for short) has reviewed a draft of the script for the upcoming adaptation of Alan Moore and David Lloyds' comic series, V for Vendetta. Read his review here:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/index.cgi?column=litg&article=2163 (About two thirds down the page)

Straczynski makes some interesting points about how scripts need to be read, but he's arguably trapped in his own argument. He says, while commenting on another reviewer's take on the script: "There's an old saying: a book is like a mirror, if an ass peers in, you can't expect an apostle to peer out." In other words, if you're not clever enough to understand what you're reading, it'll seem stupid when you read it. It's all about context and what the reader is capable of understanding. jms clearly feels that the other reviewer is unable to do this properly. Fair enough. However (You knew that was coming), keeping Straczynski's argument in mind, is it not possible that jms is reading too far into the script, making it sound more intelligent than it may actually be? Just as stupid reader will misinterpret an intelligent piece of writing and find it to be dumb, is it not possible that a learned reader may misinterpret an idiotic work and take it as genius?

I haven't read the script in question. I have no take on it myself. It may be as brilliant as Straczynski says. It may not be. I don't know. Nor do I have anything against jms (Or the anonymous first reviewer of the script in question). I just find this to be an interesting situation.