Sin City: J'ai tué pour elle

I didn't really like the character of Ava, not a lot of depth with her and a little too much back and forth. I also feel like there wouldn't be that many great hands in a poker game happening so often, those scenes felt a little bit rushed. Aside from being a bit more unfocused, it's about the same as the first movie which I liked! The graphic/artistic action and directing were really good and Mickey Rourke was a complete badass, as well as Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Josh Brolin. The villain was definitely good at making me desire justice against him and the actor who played him played a good bad guy. A mediocre follow up but still not that bad!

I got to see an advance screening last night. If you're a fan of the first Sin City, you won't be disappointed. It's more of the same, but that's a good thing: hyper-stylized visuals, intense violence, plenty of splattered blood. Film Noir cranked up to 11.

Jessica Alba doing her stripper grind? CHECK. Mickey Rourke causing much harm? CHECK. Josh Brolin is new to the franchise and he is GREAT! JGL is new to the franchise and he is GREAT! But the film really belongs to Powers Boothe. He is just pure evil. If you liked him as Cy Tolliver in Deadwood you'll love him in this.

The only drawback is that the original Miho (Asian female killer) was apparently pregnant at the time of the filming of the sequel, so they had to replace her. That's kind of a bummer.

Fans of the comic / graphic novel will be happy. Fans of Robert Rodriguez will be happy. GO!

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For is not a bad idea on paper. Frank Miller's Sin City universe is a rich and interesting setting, and as the first Sin City film proved, it translates to the silver screen beautifully. Unfortunately they decided to stick all the best stories into the first film, thus guaranteeing its success, but leaving the possible sequel without much material to use. Not that the stories used here are bad, they're just not as great as the ones used in the first one. Tellingly Miller was actually called back to write two new stories exclusively for the film. It shows.

However, there is one exception. The story named A Dame to Kill For. Considered to be one of the better stories in the original comic books, it's a good thing they still had one such story to wrap their movie around. And it is awesome. Just as good as the stories in the original film with same great quality acting, hardcore action and brutal visuals. No complaints.

The second adaptation story, Just Another Saturday Night, is really nothing more than an Ode to Marv (Mickey Rourke), and that's okay in my books. It doesn't have much of a plot, and the supporting characters are nonexistent, but it's a good opening piece.

The Long Bad Night, the first of the new stories, works because of its actors. Both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Powers Boothe have amazing screen presence and as they're pitted against one another throughout the night the stakes keep getting higher and higher, with satisfying results. A fine story and I could see this as an original Sin City story.

Nancy's Last Dance, our last story, is unfortunately the weakest story by far. They clearly wanted to give Jessica Alba something more to chew with her character, but it just doesn't have that edge. You don't buy it. Still not awful, merely average.

Aside from the material, the biggest problem is the common sequel problem where they want to do the same that worked so well in the original, but with more oomph. Here it means more colour spliced into the black-n-white, and it's very distracting. The original used colour carefully, for emphasis, for popping up important details. Here it seems that every single frame has a splotch of colour in it, usually for no reason, they just wanted colour in their frames. And thus the distinct visual style of Sin City is shattered.

All in all Sin City: A Dame to Kill For is not a bad film by any means. It's disappointing, certainly, but only because I love the first film so much, and wanted more of that greatness, no matter how impossible it is to achieve. Still, a great movie to check out if you're a fan, but don't expect miracles.

Sin City was one of my favorite movies of the 2000s. A fun, creative film noir cartoon with unique visuals and a style all its own. The first problem you run into with this sequel is that it offers nothing new. It's a stylistic retread of the first movie, only less impressive. The visuals copy the first movie but somehow seem cheaper. The makeup effects aren't as good either, with Marv's jaw easily twice the size of the last movie. The action is weaker, with no memorable sequences and a final showdown that is derivative of the first movie. The other big problem is that the writing is very poor this time and the stories don't flow well together. The Dwight story is lame. The Johnny story is pointless. The Nancy story is impossible to take seriously, especially the ghost parts. Sadly, this movie is boring, listless, and disjointed. It's a movie that didn't need to be made. Still, it's always nice to see Eva Green naked. That's something that never gets old.

After 9 years Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller finally made a sequel to their masterpiece from 2005, Sin City, and.... no-one went to see it. One of 2014's biggest and definitely the most surprising box office bomb, critics were also fairly unkind to the film. It's not as bad as some say it is, but it's best summed up as this: The Kick-Ass 2 of 2014. An enjoyable sequel which lacks the original's impact and misses the point, and struggles to hit a peak when the scene stealer from the first is off screen. In Sin City: A Dame To Kill For, we return to the nastiest, darkest and grittiest city in comic book movies for more brutal stories of justice, sin and moral corruption. In one Marv becomes an amnesiac, in another a cocky gambler finds himself in trouble when he beats the wrong man at poker, in another Nancy Callahan takes revenge on the man who caused the death of John Hartigan and another involves Dwight's encounter with a mysterious femme fatale played by Eva Green. What's noticeable about these stories? They emphasize action and that wasn't the point of the first.

Sin City was a great film because of its emotional power and characterisation. Here, mostly we're getting black and white shapes beating each other up like some generic beat em up flash game with little subtlety or grace. The script sags in places and the film refuses to focus on developing its characters or some sort of emotional impact. It never goes into unwatchable territory, but it's just curiously flat some of the time and it's hard to understand why. All you know is you'd rather be watching the first movie. It's still visually mind blowing and has some beautiful shots. It's well acted by its ensemble cast with Mickey Rourke and Eva Green being the standouts. There are many different voice overs but the film manages never to feel pretentious. You'll likely find yourself moderately enjoying it throughout without ever being particularly interested in what's happening. It's pretty safe to say Sin City 3 will not be happening after this, but the legacy of the original has not been tarnished.

6/10