Sin City

Discuss films.
Donal
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:44 am
Location: Fla.
Contact:

Post by Donal » Mon Apr 11, 2005 5:25 am

They could have cut the Hartnett scenes in the beginning and end. THEY didn't need to be there.

Also, If two stories were 45 minutes each, making a 1 1/2hr long movie, which is/WAS the standard running time, then Sin City really didn't need a third story, and scenes didn't need to be cut.

Hard Goodbye, and Yellow Bastard were connected by Rourke. Big Fat Kill didn't need to be in it, but since it was, why bother worrying about running time?
D.
The Myopic Malcontent.
Deviant Art Site.
Crawl before you walk.
http://www.sketchcrawl.com

User avatar
Justin
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Post by Justin » Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:27 pm

Donal wrote:They could have cut the Hartnett scenes in the beginning and end. THEY didn't need to be there.
the last one provided closure concerning the traitor girl in 'the big fat kill', but i guess since you feel the big fat kill was superfluous that point is kinda moot
-Justin
Image
Image

User avatar
Dek
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 7:07 pm
Location: Torontonia

Post by Dek » Tue Apr 12, 2005 10:56 am

Donal wrote:They could have cut the Hartnett scenes in the beginning and end. THEY didn't need to be there.
In my opinion, they definately did. That introduction story - it brought the audience into the world of Sin City gently, at first, then the gunshot makes them jump a bit - if you hadn't seen it yet, it brought you into this roller-coaster of a ride. I wouldn't compare Pulp Fiction, Resivoir Dogs, or Saving Private Ryan to this at all - this violence was far worse, however equally deserved. The ending sort of closed the entire section - showing that A) Every 'villan' in the story got what was coming, and B) There is some semblance of law in Sin City. It really closed some ends, to me.

Personally, I liked this movie. I loved the style, and the originality of the idea of the style. I loved the stories, originally - I'd read them all.
There were only a few things I didn't really like:

1. Marv's fall down the stairs - any camera that tracks a fall, looks off to me. It NEVER looks right, it's just one of those things - people know that it's been composited.

2. Michael Madsen's character - I just didn't like the performance. Weakest of them all.

3. The whole Hartigan-Nancy relationship - I hate to blame it on the non-nudity, but I will anyways. In the comic, Nancy and Hartigan's relationship - besides the fact that he was almost 68 years old, and she was 19 - seemed perfectly normal - it seemed as if there was only a few years apart. In the comic it worked, you felt the love.
In the movie - perhaps it was because we knew how young Jessica Alba was, and how not-young Bruce Willis was. Perhaps it was just something lost in the details. I personally blame it on the lack of nudity - not for those reasons - but Nancy seemed so much more mature when she was...well...actually stripping. It's a very mature job, and she seemed older when she did it. Dancing around seductively is something anybody can do.

User avatar
Coheteboy
Posts: 749
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2003 3:06 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

Post by Coheteboy » Tue Apr 12, 2005 5:49 pm

Quickie review from someone who never once read a Sin City book:

I LOVED IT! And that's all I'll say for now. I just had a lot of fun, didn't know what was coming, and was hooked from start to finish.
My name is Dave.

Scribblemonkey
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 12:53 am
Location: san jose, Ca
Contact:

Post by Scribblemonkey » Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:19 am

I agree with Keen. Madsen and Stahl were horrible at their noir dialogue delivery. Bruce Willis did is great, and Clive Owen, bless him, did it in a way that brings back the ambiance of The Big Sleep, and the classics of old.... a very VIOLENT version of the classics. It was a faithful adaptation though. THe big Fat Kill was my favorite I think, only because Marv's story in the comics is THE best version of that story. Mikey Roarke did a swell job, but prostetic chins are a little distracting.

Rad Sechrist
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:53 pm
Contact:

re

Post by Rad Sechrist » Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:17 am

I overheard a guy in the comic shop say that seeing the movie didn't have the same punch as reading the comic. I had never read the comic, so when I saw the movie, it had plenty of punch. Then, when I went to read the comic, I felt the comic didn't have as much punch, (because I'd already seen it).

So basically, from the point of view of someone who has no idea what Sin City is before going into the theater, wow!!! This movie was amazing. One of the best ones I've ever seen. It took me a while to get used to the weird dialog, but once I did, I really got into it.

User avatar
Joe Shig
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Melbourne.

Post by Joe Shig » Wed Jul 20, 2005 6:19 pm

Woo! It was finally released in Australia last week. I just saw it last night and MAN!... It was tops. That's definately a keeper.

Del Toro was a highlight, as was Rourke, but I'm finding it exeptionally difficult to pick a favourite story... oh bugger it! They all rock!

Can't wait for the DVD.

Oh yeah, and Carla Gugino is HAWT!
--Joe.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests