SIN CITY: A DAME TO KILL FOR

Basically…

Continuing on from the first installment nine years ago, we return to Sin City as some of the town’s toughest citizens cross paths. Based on Frank Miller’s graphic novels and heavily influenced by film noir, Nancy (Jessica Alba) struggles without Hartigan (Bruce Willis), Marv (Mickey Rourke) gets into more bother, while new characters Johnny (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Ava (Eva Green) take on the dark, cruel town that doesn't forgive.

In other words…

Cinematic beauty in all its glory.

The main men and leading ladies…

Returning favourites Rourke, Alba, Willis and Rosario Dawson continue where their characters left off almost a decade ago while fresh faces spark new life into the community.

Super Joe continues to be perfection, Green continues to ooze sexy power while Ray Liotta does, well, he does what Ray Liotta does best. Josh Brolin meanwhile takes on the role Dwight, replacing Clive Owen.

In the chair…

Robert Rodriguez, and creator Frank Miller, waited patiently for things behind the scenes to click back into place before putting together another Sin City masterpiece. Relying so heavily on the use of green screen was rare back then, but with technology, equipment and even the acting improving over nine years, the double act made this sequel look easy. 

So…?

Some critics say this is noting more than a carbon copy of the first – it’s not – it’s a seamless continuation. And even if it was a replica of the 2005 movie, what would be the problem? Why change something so perfect? Instead of killing the franchise with an extreme change in direction, Miller and Rodriguez have taken another step closer to making it a cult classic. It’s sexy, it’s sassy and it’s uniquely liberating. A film with real punch and attitude, it’s both powerful and daring in equal measures. I challenge you to find a more aesthetically pleasing film this year as even behind the scenes, with it’s graphic novel storyboards, this production was blowing everything else out of the water. The only criticism would be the lack of emphasis on colour compared to the first one. The flashes of red from the shoes, or the ball gown were a lot more striking and memorable in the first movie, but then that may have been because it was more surprising back then.

Worth the money? 
Yes, films like this were made for cinema.