Printable View
Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars.
Tarantino directs a sequence.
Frank Miller writes (and directs- he was on-set all the time according to Roger).
Gritty, pulpy noir? Bring it on Hombre!
Rodriguez is a hell of a director...
Can't wait to see this tommorrow.
Same here. Can't wait till tomorrow. I'll be there at the earliest show - 12:30pm. Will talk about it later.
The trailer looks good ...
that is why I will go watch too!!!
;)
Jesus H. Christ.
What a film. Stop the presses, who is that? Vicki Vale.
No it's SIN CITY- the best film of the year.
Yep, Robert Rodriguez has made a cinematic masterpiece.
And by God, I cannot believe how he did it.
The techniques for telling stories have made progress, kids.
And it's all evident on-screen in Frank Miller's cinematic revelation.
CGI is the "new way", droogies.
It's "the hostest with the mostest", little chillen'.
Damn I'm one bowled over movie-lover.
How can a written review do this film justice?
Lord help me.
Sin City is not only the best film of the year it's the best comic book adaptation ever lensed.
Bar none.
It's "Heaven on the Seventh Floor", "Le Freak, Chez Chic", "Fly Robin Fly" by the Silver Connection, and now, Number Five.
Holy Moses what a cinematic achievement.
Let that Champagne flow, Robby- you've got a masterpiece on your hands.
Sorry, but I'm on Cloud TEN folks, and I must retire now to my tents and my dreams.. I've just seen the best film of the year.
Mahalo.
Well I just saw the film, and it is damn good. I might not be as enthusiastic as Johann there, but there is some truth in the matter.
I am not a fan of CGI now or ever will be, but for the most part it was handled well here. I was able to buy into it because it was in the context of a comic book. I found that at times the all star cast was distracting, and everytime a new character was introduced I had to think of who it was and what other films I'd seen him/her in. I was stuck on Alexis Bledel, and then I remembered where I saw her before, my bedroom. Truth be told I have a friend that looks exactly, and I mean EXACTLY like her, I mean her own mother can't tell them apart.
In all though a fantastic movie, and a truly original (at least cinematically) film. It was very well made, and very well staged, and entertaining as all hell. Mickey Rourke is my hero, and so is Marv. I haven't read anything about the making of the film, but I wonder what sequence QT directed.
A definite masterpiece. This film sets a new standard for how comic movies ought to be made. Panel for panel, line for line, this movie was dead on with the graphic novels it was based on. While I won't call it the best film of the year just yet, I can surely say it's the best of the first quarter.
To add on to that, QT directed the sequence between Jackie Boy and Dwight in the car.
I'm with wpqx on this one. I will admit that this is the best comic book adaptation I have ever seen and it raises the level of qualitative comic adaptation far above anything I've seen. The movie was distracting, too many storylines going on for me (like Pulp Fiction but not as well balanced), it was too jumpy, confusing for me. I would have liked to see a linear portrayal of perhaps two threads of storylines. At a minimum, it would have been nice to have some disclosure that this movie was several in one. The first episode almost seemed over too quick, kind of like the Sunday newspaper version. I would also be interested to see how the movies deal with black and white vs. color because most of the comics I remember seeing were in color. "Dick Tracy" the movie had a rather comic book color scheme as I recall. Regardless how this movie plays out (and it will score rather big), it is one to be remembered this year and beyond.
This film is a hyper crown jewel.
I will post a longer, much much more detailed analysis later.
For now I will say that I sat in the theatre 30+ minutes before showtime, sipping my outrageously expensive coke which had half a mickey of Black Velvet in it. By the time I saw Josh Hartnett
I was buzzing like a hydro tower on a summer's day.
The movie rocketed by with such awesome velocity I could not believe it. I hated I was surrounded by those "people who laugh at all the wrong places", but I'll talk about them later- it's hard to avoid when it's opening day.
Same problem here. It brings me back to the Kill Bill days of excessive laughter at gratuitous violence. Oh well, it didn't ruin the beauty of the film for me.Quote:
Originally posted by Johann
I hated I was surrounded by those "people who laugh at all the wrong places", but I'll talk about them later- it's hard to avoid when it's opening day.
Talk me into watching it guys. I've seen the trailer and my question is....
Is there more to it than stylish sadistic violence? I've seen Kill Bill, and imo, it seems to foster "excessive laughter at gratuitous violence".
The movie will likely entertain those who like comics, violence, or just the technicalities of movie making. ;) I am less certain that our parents or grandparents will like the violence depicted. hiaks hiaks ...
What I like?
-- My favorite scenes are unfortunately the beginning and end: with Josh Hartnett. It really looks cool. Simple, short, and effective.
-- Definitely the visual sequences. Yes, I like the art direction/choreography of some scenes: WOW!
-- In fact, it was wise to present the movie in black and white, with occasional color to accentuate certain items/messages. Besides being more faithful to the comic, the black and white also prevents it from coming across as too gross and bloody!
-- Now the plot ...
(i) the "story" or rather opening and ending scenes with Josh Hartnett is COOL ... ;) ... I like it
(ii) the story with Mickey Rourke is average ... it poses some questions about looks, sex and love, but the meaning (if any at all) is easily overlooked ...
(iii) the story with Bruce Willis, in my humble opinion, is the most meaningful, not without its violence and crudeness ...
(iv) the story with Clive Owen is average ... if you insist on finding a message ... it is about love, loyalty and betrayal ... to different groups of people
-- Overall, the entire cast is good! BOTH the men and women ...
-- The editing and pacing also help make the movie more compelling: the audience are not bored, and would be keen to know what happens next or at the end ...
While the following are NOT necessarily criticisms, some people may find it non ideal or problematic:
-- Some of the violence are indeed gross! It is really not for everyone. Sorry, but I would definitely NOT let my kids watch!!! oops ... please do NOT scold me if you are a teenager ... I am often lost ... ha ha ha
-- The movie comes across as a few separate stories, with some overlap of characters, as opposed to a well conceived connection.
-- The time sequence is not sequential, so at times, one may be puzzled.
-- How will a character die? It is unclear what some of their resistance or vulnerablities are (except for the character Marv). For the rest, at times, you think they have died or will die ... but they did not ... at other times, you think they will not die ... but they had just died ...
-- In order to be faithful to the comic, there is a lot of voice over (and narration), so that the audience understands the THOUGHTS of the characters. In a way, it simplifies the job of any director who tries to convert a written work to a movie ...
Minor notes about casting:
-- Before watching, I didn't know that Elijah Wood is in it. hee hee ... One would think that he will never get another role after Lord of the Rings (because of fixed mindset). His role in Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind was okay. Yet, without needing to act (with little expression), he looked the part in Sin City.
-- Hmmm ... nothing against Bruce Willis ... But he always seem to play the dejected but self righteous person ... did he ask to be in the role?! ... ha ha ha ...
Should you watch it?
Hmmm ... just for "entertainment" ... oops ... what a choice of word ... but definitely for its technicalities ... hiaks hiaks ... if you try to find some meaning to the story ... hmmm ... well, there are if you want to think about it ... I have mentioned some above ... nonetheless, it could be easily overlooked with the excessive violence and sex ... hee hee
;)
This movie is more than a fantastic adaptation of a graphic novel into live action film, at its core it contains a strong macho ethic that includes a piercing belief in the respectability and dignity of women. The interplay between violence, revenge for a principle with a heart is hard at work here. For me, it's more than violence for violence sake.
You take an intriguing concept (a dark, original graphic novel) and some fantastic visuals and throw in some big names (Willis, Tarantino, Elijah Wood) and what do you get?
A great big piece of junk!
First off, anyone who claims to have enjoyed this film is lying through their teeth. It's one of those situations in which the critics are too scared to pan it because it's "different" and they don't want to be seen as passe.
The acting is over-the-top bad, the dialogue is corny and the delivery is pathetic. Powers Boothe, Mickey Rourke, Clive Owen? Come on! Can you have a LAMER cast? Owen couldn't even act in those BMW shorts.
I would laud the visuals and cinematography but the storyboards given on a silver platter. They were done by a legendary artist. All you have to do is translate the beautiful Frank Miller panels into a world of motion and you're done. Oh, you might want to get some decent actors and freshen the corny script up a bit.
The lack of understanding of what good film-noir is (by all involved) is truly mind boggling. The anti-hero of film noir is neither a superhuman comic book hero nor a sociopathic sicko. A true anti-hero of film noir is a flawed, vulnerable, tough as nails reflection of an everyman. He makes decisions based on reason and logic.
Even as a "comic-book" film it's a failure. Viewers were far better served by Tim Burton, Sam Raimi, Richard Donner. (O.K. so their source material was better.) I'm not disparaging Frank Miller or his work. I loved his stuff as a kid, but film is a more sophisticated medium.
As Harrison Ford chided George Lucas at one point "You can write that shit, but you can't actually SAY that shit!"
This film is inept on almost all levels including sub par editing, directing, acting, and writing.
Without any sense of realism, there is no grittiness or real pain. The lame adolescent attempts at humor only accentuate this. Instead of having the stones to go completely over the top a la early Peter Jackson or Sam Raimi we get something Ed Wood might have made in the era of CG. Instead of a legitimate adaptation of the graphic novel we get is a slickly repackaged "Dick Tracy" meets "Dark City".
This film has gone over Steve's head. (surprise surprise)
It's not about the actors and I sense that you resent this film for some unknown reason. Perhaps it's because you haven't recognized & deciphered it's code.
It's an unmitigated instant classic and fathoms away from a "failure".
It's more than merely different. It's blindingly original, and if you cannot see it and drop a knee, then that's your game.
Fantastic visuals, eh? Wow you can at least admit that.
To say that the filmmakers don't know what film noir is is the highest insult I can think of. Steve is quite the self-appointed judge.
Not only do they know it, they've taken that colossal awareness & respect and turned it into something that is better than noir:
other-worldly noir. A new phrase can be coined now: SIN CITY NOIR.
Just think if James Cagney was in this film, or if Bogart played Hartigan. Mickey Rourke is the best thing about this film, and anyone who claims that these filmmakers don't have "stones" are lying thru their teeth.
Rodriguez directed Desperado and From Dusk Till Dawn, two of the baddest, sexiest films ever made. He and QT are a dynamic duo. But with Miller as a teammate they are absolutely unstoppable. A force to be reckoned with, and people like Steve are always at the ready with hurtful comments about things they know squat about.
Give me a 50- page essay on film noir- you're an expert it seems.
No wait, don't. I know your talking out your ass.
These filmmakers have stones to GIVE AWAY.
This movie is a ballistic missile saturated with everything from iron-clad intensity to poetic pump-action Pulp Fiction.
If you can't see it then you suffer from something called
Mentalia Crippilia