Sin City

  • Thread starter Thread starter s0nny80y
  • 79 comments
  • 3,239 views
GTChamp2003
I'll be going to see the movie next week.Looking forward to it.In the meantime i made this wallpaper.



Tell me what you think.
It's very nice. If only it was a higher resolution, but I guess that wasn't possible.
anderton'
Quentin Tarantino, a man for whom I have lost all but a little respect since the debacle that was Kill Bill Vol. 2, thankfully had VERY LITTLE to do with Sin City. He directed a small part of the second story, particularly the part where Benicio Del Toro comes to Brittany Murphy's house and gets his head stuffed into a toilet of his own piss. That small scene is all Tarantino was able to get his pompous hands on
I was supised by that. I can't believe that he had nothing to do withn the first part, where Hartigan hunted down Roark Jr. down and shot off his ear, just like the cop in Resevoir Dogs. What I found humorous was that Micheal Madsen played a big part in that part, where Roark Jr.'s ear was shot off, and he, as Mr. Blonde, was the one who cut off the cop's ear in Resevoir Dogs.
 
Wow, what an a-mazing movie! It's 2-dimensional meaning no symbolic meaning or nething but that's the point! The movie wants you to focus on the dazzling effects and exxagerated comic book acting. Mickey Rourke's (Marv) episode is the best! Marv is the bad ass of all bad ass'!!!!!!!!! And Elijah Wood. Finally the roles have changed! Oh man, his role is going to be an eye-opener for people who think he was going to be Frodo forever.

BTW, Tarentino's scene he directs is hilarious! (the scene where Benicio Del Toro severed head talks with in the automobile.)
 
s0nny80y
Wow, what an a-mazing movie! It's 2-dimensional meaning no symbolic meaning or nething but that's the point! The movie wants you to focus on the dazzling effects and exxagerated comic book acting. Mickey Rourke's (Marv) episode is the best! Marv is the bad ass of all bad ass'!!!!!!!!! And Elijah Wood. Finally the roles have changed! Oh man, his role is going to be an eye-opener for people who think he was going to be Frodo forever.

BTW, Tarentino's scene he directs is hilarious! (the scene where Benicio Del Toro severed head talks with in the automobile.)

...you know Elijah Wood has been in many movies before the LOTR series....

And maybe you just weren't deep enough to notice any symbolic referrences, hmm?

And Quentin Tarantino's movies are more focused around artistic originality than moralistic references.
 
PS
...you know Elijah Wood has been in many movies before the LOTR series....
.
yeah, like... umm.... The Faculty? Anyone seen that movie? I saw it on Sci Fi once. Very bad. Elijah was Frodo in that movie, just with smaller, less hairy feet and went to school.
 
Firebird
Alba was nothing compared to Carla Gugino. Nothing.
I'd say she definitely was hotter also, but didn't think Alba wasn't that bad.

I just came back from seeing this flick. Finally an $8.25, well spent!
Below this line, some might consider it an SPOILER!(really minor).
Good: At first, it looked like the movie was made up of 3,4 separate short stories. I just loved how everything came together in the end.

It'd be simply be too long to list all the "good" in this movie, so I'll just add that the casting was near perfect. It was good to see Benicio Del Toro in it, because I haven't seen his work in a while(and also, because I've shaken hands with the guy before 👍 ).

Bad: Extreme violence & the comic book style. This bothered me just a tiny bit, and should be no problem for most people(especially guys). Without the violence and comic book, it wouldn't be the "movie" it is. It's just a matter of my personal taste.

I give this movie an "A+" 👍
 
This may sound ludicrous, but it pissed me off that Jessica Alba thinks she's a big enough name that she doesn't have to go topless in the movie. Her part as a dancer at that bar would have been topless had she been someone else, but she's such a prude. Well, she can go screw herself, I hate her. The same thing goes for Brittany Murphy. Who the hell is she? She sucks, and her strained attempts at fitting into this movie inconspicuously show it. Kudos to Carla Gugino and Jaime King for baring those boobs.
 
Yes I think also think Jessica Alba should have gone topless.

Hopefully I can see this movie when it comes out in the U.K, and what rating does 18A mean, because 12A means you need an adult if you are under 12 here so could it be a 15 rating in the U.K?
 
Anderton Prime
This may sound ludicrous, but it pissed me off that Jessica Alba thinks she's a big enough name that she doesn't have to go topless in the movie. Her part as a dancer at that bar would have been topless had she been someone else, but she's such a prude. Well, she can go screw herself, I hate her. The same thing goes for Brittany Murphy. Who the hell is she? She sucks, and her strained attempts at fitting into this movie inconspicuously show it. Kudos to Carla Gugino and Jaime King for baring those boobs.
Brittany Murphy does the voice of Luanne on King of the Hill, if you didn't know. (But I'm sure you already knew that, being the Movie and TV buff that you are)
 
No, of course I KNOW who she is, since she's been cast in such stellar movies as 8 Mile and that piece of drek with Ashton Kutcher (Just Married or some such generic crap-denoting title). What I meant when I said "Who is she?" was actually "Who does she THINK she is," or something to that effect. I hate when little-or-no-talent actresses decide they've got some sort of imaginary reputation to uphold and that by baring their breasts they would suddenly lose their screen-virginity.
 
Anderton Prime
No, of course I KNOW who she is, since she's been cast in such stellar movies as 8 Mile and that piece of drek with Ashton Kutcher (Just Married or some such generic crap-denoting title). What I meant when I said "Who is she?" was actually "Who does she THINK she is," or something to that effect. I hate when little-or-no-talent actresses decide they've got some sort of imaginary reputation to uphold and that by baring their breasts they would suddenly lose their screen-virginity.
I just don't see your fixation on everyone being topless in the movie. I would like to see Brittny Murphy and Jessica Alba topless as much as the next guy, but you seem to think it would be necessary for them being nude.
 
In this movie it is almost NECESSARY, and if you can't understand why then you have failed to grasp both the point and the underlying theme of Miller's work and this movie. Basically, every man is either corrupt or a murderer, and every woman os an over-sexed harlot exuding sexuality right up until the point where they slit your throat for looking at them the wrong way. THAT is what Sin City is all about.
 
Well, I guess I could understand that if I was familiar with the Novels, so I guess you're right.
 
It's not only from the comics...the movie does a remarkable job of translating it onto the screen, except it has obviously fallen prey to the Hollywood trap of young untalented actresses being cast for their popularity with snot-nosed teenagers but refusing to go topless to fit the character - and the movie - properly. Even the title Sin City should prepare you for what kinds of people you will find within the city limits...
 
I was kind of dissapointed with Jessica Alba and Brittany Murphy not going topless, but didn't think it was big deal. Then Anderton mentioned.....................
Anderton Prime
In this movie it is almost NECESSARY, and if you can't understand why then you have failed to grasp both the point and the underlying theme of Miller's work and this movie. Basically, every man is either corrupt or a murderer, and every woman os an over-sexed harlot exuding sexuality right up until the point where they slit your throat for looking at them the wrong way. THAT is what Sin City is all about.

Anderton's right. I do remember noticing, how it was awkward to see an fully clothed Alba dancing on the stage, towards the end of the movie.

P.S. I had no idea Luanne from the "King of the Hill" was Britanny Murphy. That is cool. :)
 
Ruffryder27
Hopefully I can see this movie when it comes out in the U.K, and what rating does 18A mean, because 12A means you need an adult if you are under 12 here so could it be a 15 rating in the U.K?

The Canadian 18A rating is similar to the UK 12A rating, except it means you you need to be accompanied by an adult if you are under 18 years of age.

Canadian ratings are actually set by the provinces. While it is rated 18A in Ontario and British Columbia (for example), it is rated R here in Alberta, meaning no one under 18 is allowed to see it in theatres. As I understand it that is equivalent to a UK "18" rating.
 
xcsti
I'm confused on the whole "guest director" thing going on in this movie. Is tarantino directing just a segment or is he doing the whole thing? I plan on seeing it.

Having 3 directors is like having three drivers in a race car. Either they're going to fight all the time over what is right, or because they're to scared to step on each other's toes due to reputation, they'll just smile and nod when the whole thing starts to turn into a Cluster ****.

The movie LOOKS cool, but as for a story and believable characters, I think it will be a very empty movie indeed. Much like all Hollywood stuff today.

Still I'm gonna check it out. My expectations are very very low though.
 
It's not like all three directors were involved in all the same scenes, for exapmle Tarrantino only did one scene, most of it was done by Miller.
 
There aren't really three directors. There are only two directors, and one of those is the creator of the original material. I think it actually works well here, since Rodriguez was the only director Miller would allow to do the adaptation (since he was wary of the potential for disaster). Tarantino is a long-time friend of Rodriguez, and the two had a previous friendly deal where Rodriguez "scored" Kill Bill 2 for $1.00 for Tarantino, and in return Tarantino "directed" a small segment of Sin City for Rodriguez for $1.00.

The result is almost undetectable. Tarantino's small scene fits seamlessly into the film as a whole, and since the story is told as three short stories that all tie in to each other somehow, there is never a moment when the viewer is really aware that two men collaborated and co-directed the movie.

I suspect that since Frank Miller isn't a seasoned Hollywod director he hasn't grown into a giant pompous pr*ck so there was no "toe-stepping" involved. The Director's Guild doesn't allow for two directors in a movie for a good reason. 99.9% of the time the result is a jumbled mess, but when it's done properly it works just as well as - if not better than - a single director. Sin City is an example of this.
 
live4speed
It's not like all three directors were involved in all the same scenes, for exapmle Tarrantino only did one scene, most of it was done by Miller.

That is true and being as it is a movie broken up into several smaller movies it probably works fine. Haven't been out to see a movie in the theatre since...umm.
Resident Evil 2. After that laughable excuse for celluoid I'm a bit cautious as to what I see. I think this Tuedsay will have to be the breaking point though. I love cheapie nights!
 
Velocity
That is true and being as it is a movie broken up into several smaller movies it probably works fine. Haven't been out to see a movie in the theatre since...umm.
Resident Evil 2. After that laughable excuse for celluoid I'm a bit cautious as to what I see. I think this Tuedsay will have to be the breaking point though. I love cheapie nights!
Last year or two, I've wasted my money on, so many crappy movies(including RE 2). This movie is nothing like them. There is also an added bonus of Star Wars Episode III trailer. ;)
 
Anderton Prime
HEY! I never saw the Star Wars trailer! Well, we did get to see the new Hitchhiker trailer, which was way cool!
Sorry to hear that. :D I'd already seen two previews on TV, but it looks even better on the bigscreen(my 47" TV can't quite match it!). From what I've seen, it's going to be the best one out of the Episode I,II & III. Maybe even better than the original trilogy.................... then agian, I also thought the Ring 2 was going to be great. :guilty:
 
PS
...you know Elijah Wood has been in many movies before the LOTR series....

And maybe you just weren't deep enough to notice any symbolic referrences, hmm?

And Quentin Tarantino's movies are more focused around artistic originality than moralistic references.

Ok, gimme some symbolic references. It was all 2-D as in you shouldn't look into it for sentimental value. Rather, watch it for the dazzling effects and comic book exxagerated acting (which is a good thing).

LOTR is 'the' vehicle for Elijah Wood's career. Gimme a bigger movie (series) than that for his reputation that would make him seen someone other than Frodo.
 
I saw this on saturday and it was amazing. There were a few things that at first I didn't like, for example

s0nny80y
comic book exxagerated acting

but then I realized that it fit perfectly in with the movie.

Elija Wood's character rocked even though he didn't do much.

What scene did tarenteino direct?

I think im going to see it again on friday. I'm going to count up all the decapatations and other serious headwounds.
 
Tarantino did the scene where Del Toro get's his head dunked in the toilet bowl.
 
No, he did the scene where Benicio's dead corpse is talking to Clive Owen in the car. I was mistaken and edited my post to correct this oversight a few days ago.
 
i saw it the day it came out. this movie kicked my ass and i loved it. though i think it would have been much better if it just stuck to one story and went deeper into that. like the story on marv. the whole movie could have done great on just that one story if it went deeper. it had the best acting and the best effects of any of the other stories.
 
Back