Moore is far more versatile and imaginative than Miller. He also doesn't think all women are whores.

Wow, yeah. I just finished watching it and I'm in the same boat. I remember loving the movie before, but I struggled to get through it this time. I'm still going to see the sequel tomorrow afternoon, but I'm worried it's going to be kind of... boring.

You guys are a bunch of cranky bastards. I just watched it for the first time in years and it was entertaining as hell. I'm actually kinda excited to see ADTKF now.

It's still enjoyable to me as well, but i'm a fan of the comics and rewatching parts of the movie just remind me of them and how well they're adapted.

He also doesn't have cancer. Or whatever the fuck is wrong with Miller.

I like Frank Miller's work up till about 300, but he has lost a lot of steam since then with goofy movies and painful propaganda like Holy Terror. He seems to have let 9/11 turn him into a paranoid kook. I've always seen him as akin to more genre-specific hard boiled authors like Raymond Chandler or Elmore Leonard than as diverse as someone like Alan Moore or Grant Morrison can be. But at his best he was pretty amazing.

That said, I'm hoping his health isn't as bad as it looks in recent photos as he's relatively young still and I'd hate to see the worst happen.

I don't think Sin City has aged poorly at all, however I'm skeptical that Sin City 2 will be great.

I don't know if I'd call the first film "great", so if this can even come close I'll be content.

saw it tonight. I liked the original more. I have never read the comics but I was underwhelmed by the conclusion of each story. It all felt unfinished. I kept expecting more. Even when you accept the standards of it being an ensemble movie with different timelines, I thought every story was underdeveloped. I also thought Marv had significantly less impact in this film. He had a lot of time on the screen but sort of just drifted through the story without much rhyme or reason. Some of the Rosario Dawson scenes were pretty bad. Her acting was pretty stiff in most of her scenes, which isn't entirely her fault because she had some of the worst dialogue in the film. I'd liken it to Ewan McGregor in the PT where even in capable hands the dialogue just doesn't sound good coming from a human mouth.

Also, the movie seemed short to me. When the credits rolled at about 1 hour 40 minutes, I was sort of shocked. the stories were unraveling at such a leisurely pace that when the movie ended, even though every story was finished it felt like it was being abruptly cut short. I was expecting something similiar in structure and length to Altman's Nashville. where everything slowly plays out over an extended period of time.

I dunno, that said, there were some truly BREATHTAKING visual moments and action sequences. The technical aspects and cinematography was awe inspiring.

Overall I liked it for what it was, it was a pretty fun ride, but narrative wise they didn't connect all the dots and string everything together in a cohesive way.

Seeing this at 11:45. I'm iffy on this while I loved the first film.

That might be a good thing for a guy who's best film cost $7,000 to make.

Perhaps, but there're an awful lot of women getting raped in his stories.

this was plain awful. sure the visual flare is still there and it looked pretty, but i saw it all before. the stories just didn't gel and the last was so anti-climatic. the characters, especially Marv swaggered in SC1, had an air of originality and freshness that was sorely lacking. here they seemed to all phone it in. Though i did like Powers Boothe very much. but that was it. every story was anti-climatic in fact and didn't have the emotional or visceral impact as the 1st. very disappointed. plus, the 3D sucked imo.

for a movie that was - what? an hour and 42 minutes it felt jumbled ... and yes the 3D was sporadic from excellent (the opening credits) to pointless. For a film actually filmed in 3D, I felt underwhelmed.

Yeah. Everything felt off. Alba has possibly gotten worse as an actress.

This film had no spirit or energy to it. The originalhad some grand vitality to it. This one did not. Even when the original had some hokiness to it it felt like they were trying something new. Not here.

About Rosario Dawson, I haven't seen Trance yet but remembering Sin City well...her breasts are prominently bigger than in The first film.

Hated what they did to the Dwight not at the end of his tale. Was ridiculous how they did physical transition for that character. I did like Brolin as Dwight though. The B&W really makes him visually iconic with face of his.

Didn't care any of it really. Was ok at best.

Green sure as hell has a body on her. This film made damn good use of it.

I guess I need to see it now.

As a fan of the yarns, I was bored by the ones I knew. The new ones were mediocre.

Is that even possible?

Saw in this afternoon. Solid 3/5.
It wasn't great, didn't break any new ground, but it was entertaining enough to keep my attention through most of it. I would only recommend it for those who enjoyed the first. I like the style. It works. I could drum up a few complaints if I had to, but the one that sticks out the most for me was...



There should have been more Juno Temple, though.

I thought he looked kind of stupid. Which made me sad not to see it done well like in the comic.

He kind of had an emo look to him, but not as bad as Tobey in SM3

Forget the plot. How do you guys rate the boobs in the flick?

This film was a bore I thought. Total style over substance and all the segments seemed pretty anti-climatic. It felt like this was made just because the filmmakers thought people wanted a sequel, but like they had no real spirit for making it. The best parts for me were that Eva Green was extremely hot in all of her scenes and the brief appearance of Christopher Lloyd. I didn't hate the film overall but I also didn't really like it either. To me it was a film that I don't see myself revisiting.

Take a guess at what is going on (hint : It isn't a push-up bra)

They were pretty goddammed big (and bare) in Alexander.