Sin City

[Dark Jezter]

(Not worth it)

Timeless law of internet message boards: Any time a lot of people are excited over an anticipated new movie, comic, novel, video game, etc. somebody will inevitably arrive to tell everybody how unimpressed they are with it.

 

[takyris]

Inevitably.

But to be fair, this is a "rate", not a discussion forum. Unlike some, I won't trot on over to a "how much does ___ rock?" thread to bash ____ unless the thread is actually asking for feedback from both sides and not simply a "praise ____" thread.

Which this wasn't. Which is why I posted.

If anyone would like to harangue me for not liking the Matrix or Equilibrium (or Underworld, too -- feel free to harangue me for not liking Underworld), we can take it to another thread.

 

[Viking Bastard]

...but everything I've seen of Miller's reeks of "Looklooklook, it's dark and brooding, and the hero has numerous antihero elements, and there's nasty violence!!! How cool is that?"

Well, that's kinda the point.

Playing with the cliches. With purty art.

 

[Klaus]

Not trying to sound rude, but did you read the original Crow comic series? While there are some element overlaps, the two are NOTHING alike. In the comic for instance, you're never really sure if 'the Crow' is alive or dead, demented or supernatural. He's so hopped up on drugs that the reader is lead to assume that's why he's still alive and kicking.

Up to the point in the comic where the Crow gets shot at by multiple thugs and just keeps on fighting.

But true, the movie (while very good) wasn't overly faithful to the comic. Eric Draven's girlfriend fate was far worse in the comic, and there isn't near enough katana action in the movie. And IIRC, the crow actually spoke to the Crow.

 

[Rotogar]

GN <-> Screen

Not trying to sound rude, but did you read the original Crow comic series? While there are some element overlaps, the two are NOTHING alike. In the comic for instance, you're never really sure if 'the Crow' is alive or dead, demented or supernatural. He's so hopped up on drugs that the reader is lead to assume that's why he's still alive and kicking.

Yup! Proud owner of the original issues and a couple of versions of the graphic novels.

I never made the claim that the movie tried to be a completely faithful adaptation of the story from the comic. As has been pointed out, it wasn't. What I did say was that there was a very noticable attempt to translate many of the comic panels directly to the screen. I did a huge report on it back when I was in film school. Two video screens, one showing the movie, the second showing scanned pages of the graphic novel. It's like the film makers cut up the graphic novel, rearraigned it to fit their revised story and shot that. That was my contention.

And the same thing is going to happen to Sin City. They are already merging the storylines from several of the graphic novels (with Frank Miller's participation and permission).

 

[Mark]

Timeless law of internet message boards: Any time a lot of people are excited over an anticipated new movie, comic, novel, video game, etc. somebody will inevitably arrive to tell everybody how unimpressed they are with it.

Yup.

Inevitably.

You've been on double-secret probation since the beginning of the semester...

 

[EricNoah]

I will say the trailer caught my attention, though I have no idea what the movie is. Even after watching the trailer I still don't really know...

 

[Fast Learner]

NO SPOILERS:

I caught it at a screening this morning, and was absolutely blown away. Though I haven't read the graphic novels, the whole thing absolutely and utterly comes across like a (long) graphic novel brought to life. There are no "panels" in the bad sense, but there are lots of shots, stuff with shadow and facial wrinkles and that kind of thing that absolutely scream "graphic novel" while fitting perfectly into the overall film.

I gave it a 9. There were a few awkward moments, a couple of times where the scene went on too long and a couple of times where the action jumped just a bit too much to easily follow, but overall it was simply amazing.

It is very gory, lots and lots of blood, though the bulk of it, interestingly, isn't red (a fanstastic stylistic choice). There was puh-lenty of titillation, and while at the beginning it seemed a bit funky (there are extended scenes with bare women's breasts in the first 15 minutes), after a while it felt like it really fit well, and when you'd see yet another fabulous body in an incredibly provocative pose, it blended seamlessly with everything else.

The three stories fit together very nicely, interweaving with style. Tarantino's influence was obvious (he's listed as "Special Guest Director," and I can easily guess which section he helped with or even directed), but it was a combination of his and Rodriguez's style together that, surprisingly, meshed so well with the noir setting.

Color use, or more specifically the general lack thereof, was really awesome. All of the actors were great, really great. I don't like Mickey Rourke -- I actually quite dislike him -- but he was freaking fantastic here as Marv, one of the main characters. Lots of makeup, but stunning.

And for those who have mentioned concern that Jessica Alba might not look so great as a blonde: va-va-frickin-VOOM! Man, she was stunningly pretty and sexy, and I don't actually like her very much. I really look forward to the DVD for some freeze-frame fun. Wow.

So, to sum: incredibly stylish, shockingly (but entertainingly) gory, hip-grindingly sexy, fascinating stories, and one hell of a ride. Highly recommended for anyone who likes those things in a film. (aka major fanboy material)

 

[Flyspeck23]

I caught it at a screening this morning, and was absolutely blown away. Though I haven't read the graphic novels, the whole thing absolutely and utterly comes across like a (long) graphic novel brought to life. There are no "panels" in the bad sense, but there are lots of shots, stuff with shadow and facial wrinkles and that kind of thing that absolutely scream "graphic novel" while fitting perfectly into the overall film.

Similar to Unbreakable?

Oh, and spoilers please. Seeing that at least some people on this board have read the Sin City graphic novels it wouldn't even be real spoilers, would it?

 

[Fast Learner]

NO SPOILERS:

Much moreso than Unbreakable, maybe because the bulk of the film is black and white (though it's very rich black and white... kinda hard to explain, really... sort of a sepia-tone kinda thing, or along the lines of a duotone, if you're familiar with that), and the light and shadow work is much stronger (a la noir films), so combined with some great camera work, the feeling of a graphic novel is much stronger. The scene in Unbreakable where (Unbreakable spoiler)

Spoiler

the hero is standing in the train station, hands wide, "feeling" for trouble

is kind of similar, but the full-coloredness of that film makes it seem more three-dimensional.

An interesting effect is that the automobile chases were clearly computer generated... in a way that seemed to intentionally make them look computer-generated (gravity "problems"), so in a sense it even more seems less "real," in a way that manages to keep the graphic novel tone.

I don't know what I'd even spoil, really. I mean, describing the plot is one of the least interesting things you can read in a review, imo, and i fyou know which 3 stories the film is based on and you've read the books, there's no point in it anyway.

BTW, Elijah Wood is extremely creepy as a bad guy, and Del Toro's makeup changes him in a subtle but extremely effective way. And I still think Brittany Murphy is a lousy actress, and don't know why she gets parts: she certainly has the weakest performance in the movie.