Just saw Sin City

Status
Not open for further replies.
i couldn't wait to see it. i love frank miller. i love ambiguous heros. i love stylized movies. loved pulp fiction, kill bill, am. psycho, fight clup, way of the gun, natural born killers, saving private ryan, we were soldiers, etc...

i did NOT like sin city.

beautifully shot movie. visually stunning. extremely well put together movie. dialog was excellent.

plus, lots of hot girls and guns. carla gugino was increadible! 1911 A1! great fight scenes.

BUT, this movie had no heart. frank miller writes dark heros, but there is usu. some kind of moral grounding. this movie is just about pain. i dont' like watching that.

in addition, there was no humor. in movies w/ that much violence, they need to add a little smart humor (think kill bill, pulp fiction, and the other above mentioned movies). this movie did not make you think. there was no ambigunity in the characters. the bad guys were bad and the good guys were good, but just mean. heros never really struggled w/ their identities, they always knew what they were (think marve).

i really wished it was better.
 
::shrug:: I thought the "take away both of his weapons" and "you forgot to flush" parts were funny, and most of the people in the theater laughed.
 
two words is all it took to make me want to see sin city: jessica alba

gggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
 
I haven't seen the movie yet but if you haven't read the comics do yourself a favor and pick up the graphic novels. From what I've read the movie is a combination of three of the graphic novels. "Sin City", "The Big Fat Kill" and "That Yellow Bastard." The rest of them are worth reading as well.

According to one review I read, Robert Rodriguez used Frank Miller's comics as storyboards, not just source material. The comparison images on this web page would seem to bear this out:

http://www.filmrot.com/images/sincity-comparisons/sincity.html
 
I really like "Sin City" because it was the first film I've seen that remained very true to the visual "feel" of graphic novels. It has the over-the-top violence and anti-hero charactization of graphic novels, too.

This movie is for fans of comics and graphic novels and to a lesser extent, fans of noir. There are plenty of guns, cars, and babes. If you liked "Pulp Fiction", you will probably like "Sin City" although they are stylistically different in many ways. See it for the visuals and the quirky performances of Wood and Rourke.

There are no real "good guys" in this film and the resolutions are not uplifting. There is no redeeming message here really. This not for folks looking for a pleasent couple of hours and it's certainly not for the under 18 crowd.
 
Hmm, maybe I'll have to go see this one this weekend, it's either that or "Sahara" (big Clive Cussler fan, while watching the previews for the movie, I picked out more elements from the book than I've ever seen crammed into a film adaptation. Very curious to see it.)

It'll probably depend on whether I have a date. Like many others have said, I wouln't take a date to Sin City.

I had a feeling when "Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow" came out that we were going to see more of these comic-bookish films shot totally against blue- or green-screen (where nearly everything but the actors is CGI). With that kind of technology, there's so many different ways you can make a movie "look", Sky Captain went for a fuzzy 1930's pulp comic look, halos around faces and everything. Sin City obviously went a very different way, with a gritty dark Film Noir look.

Many people didn't like Sky Captain because they went in wanting a modern-style adventure movie, and groaned at things like 10-story flying robots, P40's that change into submarines, and rockets that will "incinerate the earth" during blastoff with no explanaton as to how or why. Difficult things to accept, I know. I was able to enjoy Sky Captain because I went into it expecting to see a 1930's comic book on film, and that's exactly what I got.

Anybody else think they need to put all this new CGI to really good use and remake Battle of Britain and Midway? (Without adding a bunch of extra side crap like they did with Pearl Harbor)

I look forward to the day when CGI and virtual reality get to the point where you can put on a helmet, fire up a computer, and stand on Seminary Ridge at Gettysburg and watch Pickett's Charge, or ride a Dauntless down to dive-bomb the Akagi at Midway.
 
Anybody know how I could get a copy of that article on converting a 1911 to fire blanks without jamming?

Thanks,
Kevin
 
I saw this movie over the weekend and thought it was great. My friend lent me the Big Fat Kill a while back and it is almost word for word and frame for frame of the comic. I loved how that most of the 1911s had to be cocked before they could be fired and how Chuck Taylors also got a couple of inserts. The violence is so surreal its funny! (Possible Spoiler) My favorite scene involves Marv driving a car, and a guy he needs information from pulled along for the ride. :D
 
"Sky Captain" was visually nice, but it just didn't have the heart to keep up. The acting was VERY spotty, probably due to all the green screening (it certainly took all of Gwyneth Paltrows ability away) and having a novice director.

The big plus to green screening an enitre movie is the ability to keep the shooting schedule VERY tight. You don't have to worry about rain, sunlight, working nights, planes overhead, unwanted wind, prop failures, or remote locations. This lets you focus on the scene and allows actors to come in for a few days, then go home. This is probably how RR got so many names into Sin City (and how he got johnny Depp into OUATIM, Depp was done in 2 weeks). Actors are much more available for a week than for several months on a regular movie.

The downside is that you lose all the acting enhancements a good set/extras can provide. Look at the mostly CGI Star Wars vs the set and prop heavy LOTR series, I feel that the latter had a LOT more heart from the actors because they had better handles on their characters due to the immersion in the set. The skill of the director is also a factor, of course.

As for the 1911s, the comic had all those weapons, so RR didn't insert anything that wasn't already there. The brand name may have been a product placement, or it was just what the prop master had on hand.

I can't believe Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke, Rosario Dawson, and especially Jessica Alba were hanging out only an hour away and I couldn't "feel" it! I know they had to hit 6th street at some point! Hopefully most of the Old Town prostitutes are Austin strippers so at least I can go see them :p
 
A friend from work loaned me a copy of the graphic novel of Sin City. I read it last night, and enjoyed it enough that now I do want to see the movie. I can't wait to see what they do with live action to recreate some of the stuff in the comic! :what:

-Jeffrey
 
I just saw it tonight. Easily one of the best movies I've ever seen, and definitely the best movie I've seen in the past 5 years.

My favorite quote:
(well, of one them anyway! And sorry for misquoting it, I'm sure I will)

Dwight said:

You have to prove to your friends that you're worth a damn. Sometimes that means dying. Sometimes it means killing a whole lot of people.
 
SPOILER ALERT!!!!!








Did I miss Bruce Willis's partner reloading after putting 3 in Bruce's back? Because he then unloaded another 6 from his .38 revolver.... Making this a never never gun (unless he reloaded....)
 
Thought it was a great movie. I think I laughed harder at some parts than at some of the recent comedies I have seen. Loved the part with the arrow. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top