I went to a prescreening before it opened with high hopes. I bailed a half hour in. Technically competent but completely devoid of any humanity. It was gross, sick, morose, disgusting and just plain barfy.

Sin City rocked!!!! I read the comics and knew what was going to happen and I still got chills at certain parts. I loved it from begining to end and Jessica Abla is that HOT. If you didn't like it 'cause of the violence then your just a whimp.

There were two old people sitting next to me when I saw Sin City.("Wasn't that already a movie?"- old people's response to the Amityville horror trailer) They didn't even last a half an hour. I personally thought Sin City was one of the best movies I have ever seen. I don't usually see movies at the theatre twice, but I think I will for Sin City. "You're one mistake was, You forgot to flush" "She didn't quite decapitate him, she just turned him into a pez dispenser" - My favorite quotes from that movie

John,

I agree with you on everything (except for the Jessica Alba comment). :-)

I reviewed it at Screen Rant and it was a tough one to write. I wasn't sure which way I would go, but I ended up giving it 4 out of 5 for the performances (especially Rourke) and the style of the film. I think it will improve in my eyes with another viewing.

Having said that I agree with Mitch in that you'd better be a fan of hard core violence onscreen if you're going to see this.

Vic

First off, I have to admit to thinking Sin City was one of the best movies I have ever seen. I came out of the theater thinking I had been kicked in the nuts. All I could say was, "wasn't that incredible?" Now I read all the comics before the movie came out, so I had a small history with Sin City and had loved it greatly before I saw the movie. I was very surprised with how identical the movie is to the film and how well it translated to the screen, even though there was a lot of narration. I think we'd all agree on the look of Sin City. The movie is absoloutly electrifying visually. I thought we'd all agree on the actual story of Sin City. The first thirty minutes "devoid of humanity"? What was Hartigan saving a young Nancy at the beginning of the film? Even after that; what was Marv fighting for? He was fighting for a dead Goldie and Dwight was fighting to save the girls of Old Town. I cannot believe one of the reviewers walked out of the movie after thirty minutes. They should have expected something when the title of the movie was FRANK MILLER's Sin City. I personally thought the last part of the movie, the one with Bruce Willis, was beautiful amidst all the red and yellow. I actually cried near the end of the movie, just like I did when I read the comics. One thing about this movie is that I think it's very intense and stylistic, which will turn some people off to it quickly. However, if you do decide to take a trip to Sin City and keep an open mind, you'll be very pleased you did.

personally, I loved the movie. It's easily one of the most well directed movie and entertaining movies I've ever seen. I agree on Alba, beautiful body, but not the most beautiful woman I've ever seen. I'll get to my opinons on the women in the movie a little later on.

I think that all three lead actors were perfect for their parts. Clive Owen had that insane intensity of his, and his conversation with Benicio in the car (was that the part Tarantino directed? I know he had one of the car scenes) was one of my favorite scenes. I'm really looking forward to him as Bond.

Willis proved again that he's just that fucking cool. he has the love-stuck, father figure role down. He's my personal favorite action star, because he's such a great combination of intelligence and muscle.

Rourke stole the show. Everyone I talked to about it said that Marv's story was the best, and I have to agree. It sucks that he's not a big enough star to be plastered all over the movie posters, but the movie should change that. He had the best voice-over of the three, especially the whole "the hell I send him to..." soliloquy. Clive's "proving your worth a damn" was good too, but Rourke's blunt delivery was so well matched to the character. Everything about him was pure badass.

Even the minor characters were excellent, and the fact that fairly big-name actors played them is all the cooler. Elijah Wood was just creepy. I don't know if I'll ever be able to watch Lord of the Rings again. Nick Stahl's Yellow Bastard was so ridiculous, but at the same time unbelievably scary.

The movie was such a testosterone fest, so a lot of the female characters were just pure eye-candy. There were some standout performances, like the parole officer and Brittany Murphy, but all of the whores/strippers were basically throw aways. gGood looking, but not great roles. Not a bad thing necessarily, since it's that kind of movie.

I'll have to buy the DVD when it comes out, since I think it's going to prove to be one of those movies that keeps getting better every time you see it. There was so much to take in, with the visuals and mono/dia-louge.

Even if you don't like the movie, the trailers were probably the best I've ever seen. They did a great job of hyping the movie without revealing too much. Just perfect,

I agree with you John (twice in a week...miracles can happen....) MARV stole the show...Rourke was fantastic in the role...But the other two storys were nearly as strong...

Overall a brilliant motion picture...

I like my nihilism served in cold black & white, with a dash of colour.

Somewhere between Elijah Wood getting eaten by the wolf and Benicio Del Toro's dead body talking, my family bailed on me to the car, I left the theater soon after. I knew full well that this would be a very violent move, however I did not know that the violence would be abundant enough to warrant and NC-17 rating if it wasn't in black & white. I wasn't familiar with the comics when I went to go see it (the reason I went is that Robert Rodriguez is my all time favorite director ever), but this was pretty tasteless. The storyline was stupid. (Marv slaughters a bunch of people and gets the death penalty just to avenge a hooker; Dwight chases Jackie Boy for basically no reason but 'I Got a Feeling', even though he knows full well the tramps can protect themselves. Overall this was one of the biggest disappointments in my entire movie going life. It's a shame too, as it looked so promising.

I have stopped reading all of the comments because I guess you have to know the comics, unlike pulp fiction where you dont have to know anything to realize how perfect it is, this movie jumped around with nothing cohesive to keep you interested, although all happening in the same city??...
Micky Roarke was AMAZING , but what was the very beginning on the roof, and the ending in the elevator-
and Willis's charachter going back to same house with Elijah Wood, but going upstairs to the yellow man???
AND unfortunately the black and white with gimic like "color additions" and photograms gave me a feel of a "darkroom 101" book. Violence aside, that did not bother me, but the movie should have been a good 45 minutes shorter...... and Brittany Murphy is terrible in this movie- the only hero is Micky Roarke...

I have a feeling that Sin City is gender-biasing...That is not to say that all guys will like it and all women hate it, but if you do the math, more guys will like it than gals.

Also, it appears that people have hang-ups on
A) not enough story continuity (i.e. things just don't make sense.
B) Too much violence

I'm not trying to tell people what they should like or dislike...but rather clarify that a film like Sin City succeeds on the level of 'style is substance'...by magnifying the nihilism of film noir to the point of images and moods (I mean what does a comic/graphic novel do better? and that is what Sin City is trying to faithfully reproduce). If you check narrative convention at the door and go for the mood of the piece (redemption through revenge...at any cost)...I think Sin City is a true winner: its creativity and energy are nearly limitless and the actors willingness to 'look goofy' for that sake of delivering intentionally hard-boiled dialogue which is 50 years out of date, (but relevent as artistic expression) is to be commended.

Obviously, if you go into a movie called 'Sin City' with puritan expectations of pg-13 bloodless violence and no nudity you are going to be disappointed...but my point here is that the extreme violence is a part of the texture of the film, and to remove it would be to destroy the film. It's not real, it's hyper-real. This type of storytelling is necessary to propel the medium forward...

Lastly, at the risk of sounding like a snob...people who do not get 'Sin City' probably have no frame of reference coming into the film. i.e. they are not familiar with the source material or are not in any way familiar with the film noir of the 1940's and early 1950s. While full knowledge of either graphic novels in general or the noir-genre is not necessary, passing familiarity will greatly enhance the experience...To put it another way, if you are just learning english, it's perhaps not advisable to pick up a James Joyce novel and expect to understand it. (On second thought a better way of saying this is that you won't enjoy watching the Wayan Brothers' "SCARY MOVIE" if you haven't seen SCREAM, THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT or those "Whaaaas up!" Budweiser commercials).

For those willing to write this movie off as the worst movie they've ever seen, I suggest you watch some more movies...(Start with Mystery Science Theatre 3000 episodes, and you will see how truly awful films can be).

For what Sin City sets out to accomplish...a no-holds-barred hyper-noir film representation of a graphic novel with cool characters and nihilistic hard-boiled performances from an ensemble of high-profile actors...It gets an A+ in my book and will likely be not only one of the best motion pictures this year, but also be one of the most emulated for the next several years...

This is the next level of the comic-book adaptation. Like it or not.

It's clear to me that both of the comment-leavers fall into two categories (people who went in unprepared, people who couldn't have hated this movie if they tried).

I'm reminded of the time I saw an old couple walk out of Kill Bill - WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING COMING IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!

I'm not saying elderly people can't appreciate movies that slant towards violence, but the ads do a pretty good job of letting people know this ain't Forrest Gump.

If you care so much about movies that you'll leave a bad review because "It's too violent" it seems like you'd put in the investment of checking into a movie before laying down the cash to see it.

The IMDB entry has this to say about the R Rating...Rated R for sustained strong stylized violence, nudity and sexual content including dialogue

What could that possibly mean? Could it be?.....violent? I mean it only says SUSTAINED STYLIZED VIOLENCE before the nudity and sexual content. Ever read a candy bar wrapper? The reason in the ingredients it says Sugar first is because the damned thing is mostly SUGAR! Think McFly! Think!

On to group two (which I belong to)

I sat in the theater wearing my vintage Dark Knight Returns Frank Miller t-shirt (not the black re-issue, but the original gray one from graffiti) and knew that no matter what I'd love this movie. For the same reason I love both (go ahead and take a shot at me) Episode I and II. Call me a loser, but I'm grateful for the chance to see this on the screen (as much as I'm grateful that Lucas made those other three movies - I know they and this aren't perfect, but fuck you if you didn't line up to see them and get the OMG feeling when the lights dimmed).

Truthfully I'm not interested in the mainstream opinion of this movie - it was exactly what the Frank Miller fans wanted and the rest of the world's opionion isn't relevant. Like or not, we don't care. If you didn't like it, chances are they (FM and RR) didn't want you to. I realize it'll probably get popular, but I don't think Dwight will be jumping any sharks anytime soon.

upon re-reading my stream-of-consciousness rant above...I never clarified the point about men like the movie more than women...But it is simple to do that...the movie is not about relationships, it's about one person versus society/the-system/the-enemy...Couple that with the fact that the entire film's perspective is from the guys, and the fetishistic violence (which predominately appeals to young males)...It's not surprising that most of those of female pursuasion that I've spoken to about the film were not big fans...On a positive note though, my wife loved it...(and I love her for loving it!)

upon re-reading the post above, I realize how sexist it sounds (and it was not my intention to start a flame war) to say women will dislike the film because it was not about relationships (a weird typo). What I meant to say was that all the characters in the film are treated like objects, but because the film is not about the relationship connecting the men to the women...the women come off more as objects in the film than the men...and this could be off-putting to women...

Not all old people hate the movie though. I saw the movie with my grandfather and after the movie, the words that came out of his mouth shocked me. "I haven't seen a movie that hardcore in years." I thought he'd hate it because of the excessive violence. He loved every minute of it and during dinner he kept on talking about many of the scenes, especially the ones in the Marv story. He told me, "It's the kind of movie you wanna watch if you're pissed off and you wanna kick the shit outta someone." Damn straight.

I can´t see the film yet, oficially and unoficially speaking. But, besides the excellent arguments displayed, I always wanted Mickey Rourke to come back to the screen. He´s a tremendous, brilliant actor: I can´t wait to see him here, in Domino, and, hopefully, Tarantino´s Inglorious Bastards.

Damn, compare him with Matt Damon in The Rainmaker. And I consider Damon to be a fine actor, but Rourke... he is dynamite.

On the other side, I think Sin City is a mediocre comic, so it is excellent stuff for cinema. Leave Alan Moore in peace, for art´s sake. And Frank Miller... well I think Daredevil is a good, incredibly underrated adaptation of some of his best comics.

Loved the movie , but what was with the first scene with Bruce Willis and Micheal Madsen? I felt like I was watching a high school play,emotionless, it fixed up near the end tho. And I mean i always thought the comics storyline was about a city just gone berserk, the treatment of all the characters seem to fit accordingly.
I bet there are just as many guys who flinched during the movie as girls , they just wont admit it. the rest of us just enjoyed it for what it was, a moving comic book worthy of its name.

there will be some spoilers in this post

must agree that i thought madsens performance was flat

excessive violence? not really

comic book violence, yes

the movie was visceral, just like the comic

this was art pure and simple, it was made to get a rise out of the audience

maybe im a sick and twisted individual, but when i read the original comics, and again when i saw the flik, i saw this as millers attempt at film noir black comedy

my only issue with the movie was that "that yellow bastard" played better in the comic

oh, and clive still doesnt have the american accent down

I have not read the graphic novels, but have been a big fan of Miller's for a long long time.
(Daredevil 158)

I enjoyed every frame of this film. I am sure to see it in the theater at east 2 more times. And the DVD will be in my collection as soon as it comes out.

I hope Miller and Rodriguiz colaborate on future films.

I'm not saying that I walked out because of the violence, I can handle the violence, hell, half of the reason I walked out is because my family did and I didn't want them to wait there for another hour and a half, but still, there is a difference between violence and holy fuck did that just happen? For instance, I love Pulp Fiction, it is my favorite movie, however while the violence is quite extreme, it's only every onec in a while, and understandable, when Benicio Del Toro starts mimicking Harry Potter's Nearly Headless Nick, it really isn't needed, I don't mind Jackie Boy's gun backfiring and lodging in his head, but the dead body talking? No. And this also coming from someone who played through Resident Evil 4 without getting grossed out once even when I was in the meat locker on the island and the thing got off of the autopsy table while it's chest was still open.

Since I slept very little last night and feel like a zombie as I sit here at my desk I will give you my brief thoughts.

I loved this movie, I feel it totally lived up to up the hype and it was everything I expected it to be.

Rourke was the best part of the movie - I loved Marv!

The violence wasn't too harsh, I enjoyed every bit of it even though, yes, I did go "ew" a couple of times. (Hey, I'm a girl! ;) )

I could say a lot about this movie and in a more eloquent fashion, but I have a pile of papers staring at me. ;P

I will end with this. I was the all giddy about seeing this movie and told my boyfriend he had to go with me. He would never have seen it on his own and he totally enjoyed it too. (I have to love a guy who'll indulge my geeky side with no complaints. =) )

Movie sucked. Violence isn't an art. I can understand when it is important to tell a story but this was just watered-down violence. It didn't gross me out or scare me, it was just stupid. I got to say though I used to like FM, but I don't know this movie is ghey as hell. It's a big boring stupid let-down. The comic seemed to work and I thought those stories were good and maybe they really are, but the translation to the big screen hearing it maybe, I don't know...just it all dawned on me how dumb this is.

Sin City was by far, the best movie I have seen in long time. For those of you who are complaining that the movie was "stupid" just don't get it. The movie was BASED ON A COMIC BOOK. Not only that, but it is a well known fact that the movie is the closest adaptation to any comic book ever put to film. I saw the film on opening night and at the end of the movie, people stood up and clapped. I mean, I haven't seen that happen since "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King." This was a fun film folks. If you truly love films, I think you will find Sin City a guilty pleasure that shouldn't be passed up. I tell you what, being a guy and all, (spoiler ahead) I darn near jumped out of my seat when Bruce Willis had his way with the Yellow Bastards reconstructed...ummm.. yeah. Just thinking of that scene makes me squirm in my chair.

I'm going to stop typing now and see if the DVD is ready for pre-ordering yet.

I just saw it and thought it was great movie. Yet I have to agree with some of the comments on the role of female characters in the film. I understand that it was attempting to be faithful to source material, but why couldn't we have had a monologe from a female character. There were female characters that would have been perfect as a centerpiece. This of course would mean cutting down the role of Clive Owen, Bruce Willis, or Mickey Rourke who for all I know could be central characters. but whats the harm in a little deviation? I'm not suggesting a change in look or style or atmosphere, but just seeing Sin City via a female would could have been great.

Greatest movie ever made! People who don't like this movie should be rounded up in concentration camps.

One of the best movies I have seen in a long time. Marvs story is by far the best. Jessica Alba is gorgeous in this movie. For people that thought the movie was dumb because of the violence didnt see the art in the film. It was violent, but I have seen far worse in horror movies. I thought the way the stories were told was great and how they were eventualy tied together in the end. Yes, even I too cringed in the end of the film with the Yellow Bastards.....yeah:$

THis movie sucked so much! half way thru i wanted to scratch my eyes out

THis movie sucked so much! half way thru i wanted to scratch my eyes out!!!!! there was no plot and it was so random! my bf and i wanted to leave but we decided to sit through it thinking it would get better...what a disappointment! it sucked so much! what was up with the star treck yellow guy? i think for this movie it was "anything goes" and they just decided to drg it on and on...this pointless movie is not worth seeing! I would NOT see this movie again.

LOVED IT. The only negative thing i can say about this movie is. WAY TOO MANY guys get hit, shot, or stabbed in the junk. It was painful to watch. I dont even want to imagine the pain. Ad the Yellow guys gets it twice buy Bruce.

I saw the movie yesterday, and yes it was good but maybe not great. I was very much looking forward to it, Sin City was my most waited movie of 2005.

I didn't like editors / director's choise to show all three stories on their own. I think it would have been better idea to litte bit mix those stories, even if that mean alterering little bit the story of the great comic books. In the way the movie was made, it was REALLY loyalty to comics. Haven't seen anything like that before. Most of the shots and angles where just right from the comic book. There was only one exceptation in the story line, and I think it was kind of good.

Actors were all good, except pretty horrible Britanny Murphy. Bonuspoints go for Bruce Willis and Mickey Rourke, who're great in their roles. Also liked very much the work, that Del Toro made. He just made the guy such an asshole.

As in comics, Marv and Hartigan stories were way more intresting than Dwight-story, which was also good and the parts with Jackie Boy just rocked. The ending was much better in two other stories, than in Dwight based story. The main problem in the movie was that all three stories felt so short. I think different editing would have make this problem disappear.

The movie wasn't as violent as I thougt it would be based on the reviews. But I think it was violent enough. Violence wasn't the main think, but it was needed to deliver the story. Visually movie was great, if you just look the style part. But it was pretty disappointment to me, that I did get feeling, that movie wasn't very smooth in a way. Something was missing in storytelling, althoug stories themselfs were good and intresting.

4/5

This movie was pure genius. It was captivating and beautiful to watch, violence and all. For the first time in a long time I walked out of the theater feeling completely satisfied. If you hated the violene, can't stand black and white, don't give a fuck about the comic then this may not have been the film for you. In my opinion, it was flawless, the characters (especially Rourke's) were well acted, the flow of the story seamless. I loved it, every second of it.

This movie was just plain awesome. Being able to sit there and see a scene that looked exactly like the comic book just made it incredible to watch. Sure it was violent, sure it was gross at parts, but what do u people that hated it expect? Go read the comics before deciding to see a movie that you know nothing about. This was by far one of my favorite movies of all time, and will definately go see it for a third time at the theatres.

Finnaly got to see the movie here in Holland. It's been a long wait!

And yeah, it was awesome.

this was as bad as pulp fiction only in black and white, someone please let these film makers know that you just can't throw random scenes together and say well, here's a movie! The comic book was crap too.

On John's Jessica 'Abla' comment. I honestly don't think anyone knows who she is, but I'm sure she doesn't appreciate the harsh comments on her non-existent looks. I think Jassica Alba is very attractive.