Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

If there is a thread on this, please help me move this.

A friend of mine wanted to watch this, and I liked the first film, though I'm not completely in love with it nor the work of Frank Miller.
But I liked it.

In fact, it was a decent compliment to the first one. It wasn't a masterpiece, and it was overwrought (but that's how it's supposed to be, natch). What stood out was the 3-D. I'm not a huge fan of 3-D. The only recent films that seemed to make best use of the format was Avatar and maybe that scene in Transformers Dark of The Moon where the soldiers use wingsuits. But 3-D made this Sin City film look pretty damn cool. It actually added a lot to the film, starting with the animated raindrops. When a character deals playing cards they fly out into the audience. And the best shot is when a woman has some target practice. The camera is placed behind the target, and then the bullet-holes appear, the light streaks through the hole and out of the screen!

 

[Saul]

Jesus, really? The movie bombed so bad that only the two of us saw the movie?

I watched it tonight. It lacks some of the bite of the first movie. I almost felt like they didn't care at this stage though.
There are some possible continuity (dream sequence) errors which bugged me along with the recasting of Bob and the non-appearance of Clive Owen.

But it's still worth a gander. It's not a bad movie but it took way too long to come back.

 

[Forbin]

Maybe the novelty has worn off.

 

[the G-man]

I saw this film out of necessity. It was the only thing playing at the mall during the time period that coincided with my car repair appointment.

That being said, it was reasonably entertaining and, as the OP said, the 3D effects were extremely good, perhaps because of the stylized look of the movie.

 

[Gaith]

I would've liked to see it in 3D, but because I only occasionally use disposable one-time contacts at about $2 a pop, that plus the 3D surcharge adds an extra $4-5 to my ticket price, and the reviews were pretty unanimous that that wasn't worth it. I wish I could buy prescription 3D glasses for, say, $30 or so; that might be a good investment. As it is, I only shell out for 3D on truly special occasions, like an Avatar or a Prometheus or Gravity.

Might rent this movie at home at some point, might not. In any case, one Sin City was probably always enough.

 

[Saul]

In any case, one Sin City was probably always enough.

Yeah, we need more Tinker Bell movies instead.

 

[Reverend]

I was really eager to see this film....back when 'Sin City' first came out. Now I feel like the moment has passed.

 

[Beagleman]

I was really eager to see this film....back when 'Sin City' first came out. Now I feel like the moment has passed.

Same here, it just took them too long, my anticipation has waned some time ago...

 

[M.A.C.O.]

I was really eager to see this film....back when 'Sin City' first came out. Now I feel like the moment has passed.

Same here, it just took them too long, my anticipation has waned some time ago...

Same here. If this movie had come out in 2007 (as I recall was the plan), the response would've been better.

That being said, I think the movie told the story of "A Dame To Kill For" (with Josh Brolin, Eva Green) quite well. It's easily the best part of the movie.

I couldn't care less about Nancy/Jessica Alba's storyline. Her star had fallen a long time ago.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Powers Boothe had a cool story but after "Casino Royale" 2006; all other poker movies fall short imo.