# Sin City: A Dame To Kill For



## Emperor Guillotine (Aug 22, 2014)

FINALLY! The new _Sin City_ sequel was released today after delays and being pushed back months and months. I just got home from the theater and wanted to follow up with putting my thoughts for you guys into a quick write-up on the film. 

------------------------------------------

New _Sin City&#65279; _movie in a nutshell.....F--KING EPIC! Well worth the long wait that I have endured until its release today. I try to avoid giving positive film reviews as much as possible because I'm a picky asshole, but I could not find a single negative thing about this film...except that I just wish that they would've picked some different stories/excerpts to pull from "A Dame to Kill For" as opposed to having Frank Miller write new original material exclusively for the film. (But of course that is just me being a fan of the graphic novel series.) Critics complain that the film has no emotional value...and that is true because that just isn't part of the story. Violence is the premise of the original graphic novels. Completely engrossing, dark, twisted, and yet thoroughly entertaining. On par with the first film while remaining true to the original graphic novel. And let's face it...Eva Green&#65279; completely naked for 50% of the film is a big +1. Another bonus +1 to the all-star cast.

This has me SOOOO stoked to start making progress on the _Sin City_ tribute album that I'll be writing and recording.

------------------------------------------

I'll write a full, detailed critic review at a later date, but I also want to hear some of the thoughts of my fellow SS.org members on this film!


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 23, 2014)

I'm going to see it later today, so it's good to hear something positive. All I was seeing were negative reviews but then again there's no pleasing critics.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 23, 2014)

Demiurge said:


> I'm going to see it later today, so it's good to hear something positive. All I was seeing were negative reviews but *then again there's no pleasing critics.*



Gimme a break. The first Sin City was very widely praised by critics. I remember the likes of Roger Ebert giving it 4 stars and saying it was visionary. Several other CGI-heavy blockbusters this summer were almost universally praised by critics (Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain America 2, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes). Don't blame "the critics," if you disagree with their assertions then explain how their specific reasons they have for disliking something are wrong. Most people that complain about "the critics" don't actually read any reviews, much less pay attention to anything they're saying, they just look at the percent on rottentomatoes and go "oh those darn critics are at it again!" Speaking of which, this movie's at 43%, which is bad, but not THAT bad. It isn't clearly a complete pile of shit like a transformers movie or the new TMNT or Let's Be Cops or whatever. In a case like this I'll usually look at a few positive and a few negative reviews and see what the person's reasons were for liking it or disliking it and then see which of those reasons seem more like the kind of reaction I'd have. Frequently I can tell from a bad review that a movie is something I WOULD like, and that will make me see the movie! 

I'll watch it eventually, but I fully believe all the reports it's a gigantic step down from the first. Similar to 300 2, most reviews say "the only reason to ever watch this is Eva Green." Most positive reviews I've seen are like "this is mostly awful but the Eva Green stuff is good enough to make it worth watching." Several people I know who LIKE trashy movies and still like the first one very much hated this! 

I still watch the first once every year or two, I still get a big kick out of it. This just sounds like a big disappointment, since so many of the bad reviews are saying the first one was awesome. There are plenty of other reviews which are are simple moral outrage, which I ignore, since the first one would also cause a moral outrage with the borderline-parody level of political correctness that's developed over the last couple of years with segments of people on the internet to avoid getting tarred by the jezebel crowd or whatever.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Aug 23, 2014)

wankerness said:


> I'll watch it eventually, but I fully believe all the reports it's a gigantic step down from the first. Similar to 300 2, most reviews say "the only reason to ever watch this is Eva Green." Most positive reviews I've seen are like "this is mostly awful but the Eva Green stuff is good enough to make it worth watching." Several people I know who LIKE trashy movies and still like the first one very much hated this!


^ Summed it up a bit right here.

Funny you mention the new _300_ and compare it to the new _Sin City_ since they both are Frank Miller graphic novels, both are half CGI - half live, and both star Eva Green.

Honestly, this was a step-down from the original, and it's obvious. But it's not THAT big of a step-down. The new _300_ was SOOOO god awful in multiple ways, mainly because it was just "poorly made" in nature, but it appeared more so worse because the original set such a high precedent. Same here with the new _Sin City_. This, however, is actually a solid flick, but I think it has appeared a bit worse than it really is due to the original setting such a high precedent.

It's whatevs. I listed my gripes in my original post.


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 23, 2014)

wankerness said:


> Gimme a break. The first Sin City was very widely praised by critics. I remember the likes of Roger Ebert giving it 4 stars and saying it was visionary. Several other CGI-heavy blockbusters this summer were almost universally praised by critics (Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain America 2, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes). Don't blame "the critics," if you disagree with their assertions then explain how their specific reasons they have for disliking something are wrong. Most people that complain about "the critics" don't actually read any reviews, much less pay attention to anything they're saying, they just look at the percent on rottentomatoes and go "oh those darn critics are at it again!" Speaking of which, this movie's at 43%, which is bad, but not THAT bad. It isn't clearly a complete pile of shit like a transformers movie or the new TMNT or Let's Be Cops or whatever. In a case like this I'll usually look at a few positive and a few negative reviews and see what the person's reasons were for liking it or disliking it and then see which of those reasons seem more like the kind of reaction I'd have. Frequently I can tell from a bad review that a movie is something I WOULD like, and that will make me see the movie!
> 
> I'll watch it eventually, but I fully believe all the reports it's a gigantic step down from the first. Similar to 300 2, most reviews say "the only reason to ever watch this is Eva Green." Most positive reviews I've seen are like "this is mostly awful but the Eva Green stuff is good enough to make it worth watching." Several people I know who LIKE trashy movies and still like the first one very much hated this!
> 
> I still watch the first once every year or two, I still get a big kick out of it. This just sounds like a big disappointment, since so many of the bad reviews are saying the first one was awesome. There are plenty of other reviews which are are simple moral outrage, which I ignore, since the first one would also cause a moral outrage with the borderline-parody level of political correctness that's developed over the last couple of years with segments of people on the internet to avoid getting tarred by the jezebel crowd or whatever.



Yikes- did not mean it in any manner to get the diatribe. Was just sayin' that the reviewers I often read are sometimes dismissive of non-high-brow stuff so I didn't want that to dissuade me from seeing it. 

But anyway, I thought it was okay. Performances were good (Christopher Lloyd's small role was hilarious), stories kind of laggy and choppy though, and the visual FX were kind of wonky in places.


----------



## wankerness (Aug 23, 2014)

What does Christopher Lloyd do? I didn't even realize he was still alive!


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 23, 2014)

wankerness said:


> What does Christopher Lloyd do? I didn't even realize he was still alive!



He was the back-alley doctor that the gambler-guy goes to near the end of his story.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Aug 24, 2014)

wankerness said:


> What does Christopher Lloyd do? I didn't even realize he was still alive!


I didn't know that was him either. Shoot, I didn't even catch Lady Gaga in her role as the waitress.

Two roles I thought were funny: the guy who played Henry Hill from _Goodfellas_ playing his role as the cheating husband in the early part of Dwight McCarthy's story. And then the guy who is a cop on _Law & Order: SVU_ (sorry I forgot his name and am too lazy to look it up) got typecasted as a cop in this flick.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Aug 24, 2014)

Demiurge said:


> Yikes- did not mean it in any manner to get the diatribe. Was just sayin' that the reviewers I often read are sometimes dismissive of non-high-brow stuff so I didn't want that to dissuade me from seeing it.



Yea dude. Didnt you know your not allowed to have an opinion without getting a lecture? Jeeze.


----------



## Winspear (Aug 28, 2014)

I'm in love with Eva Green so naturally I'm going to see this in a couple of days haha. I watched Sin City (which I hadn't previously seen) last night and it was very cool! Strange movie. Love the styling.


----------



## 777timesgod (Sep 1, 2014)

The good thing with such a movie is that even if the plot sucks, it will be entertaining.

At least the first one was fun as hell.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Sep 1, 2014)

Well that was an awful film


----------



## ridner (Mar 12, 2015)

this wasn't even in any theatres around me (that I know of). I had been looking forward to it since the trailers started coming out. I was in WalMart and saw the DVD for sale - thought maybe it went straight to DVD somehow. I guess that is not the case as some of you in this thread said you WENT to see it. I dug it. Hard to keep up/top the first one, but it was solid. It actually made me dig out my old copies of the graphic novel and re-read them - about to finish Chapter 7 tonight. I hope they make more Sin City flicks!


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Mar 17, 2015)

I saw it an enjoyed it, but it wasn't anything to write home about. 

Part of the reason is that it was so far in between the first one and the second. Kind of like 300 and Rise of an Empire.


----------



## petersenb9 (May 23, 2015)

I think I would rather watch Gigli in reverse than sit through the second Sin City again.


----------



## wankerness (May 24, 2015)

petersenb9 said:


> I think I would rather watch Gigli in reverse than sit through the second Sin City again.



I'll take the one with Eva Green, thx.


----------



## isispelican (May 24, 2015)

not as good as the first one but very fun to watch nevertheless!


----------



## Carcaridon (Jun 3, 2015)

Saw this a while back. Loved the first. Was not a fan of the second one. I was a bit bummed. Used to be a big Robert Rodriguez fan.


----------

