Published: 1993-1994 Written by: Frank Miller Art by: Frank Miller
Dark Horse, 212 Pages
I guess this is an example of Frank Miller’s consistency being an issue with me. I didn’t think it started this far back but after digging the first Sin City story, this one missed its mark, fell flat and if I’m being honest, was a total let down.
There are five more volumes after this one but A Dame to Kill For took the wind out of my sails and I’m not too enthused about continuing on.
The strange thing is that I can’t really peg why this story didn’t resonate with me like the previous one. It just felt like it rehashed some things and grasped on to some tropes too hard. But they really shouldn’t be tropes just after one story but I’m assuming this relying too heavily on familiarity is going to be an issue in the other stories as well.
Compared to the first book this was also kind of boring and became so overloaded with characters it was hard to remember who was who and what the hell was happening. This just felt like a convoluted mess.
The art style is the same as the first story but it actually feels less refined here and it almost looks rushed.
I don’t want to come off as an asshole and completely shit on this book but I’ve got to call a turd a turd.
It barely held my attention, it nearly put me to sleep and it was hard to look at where the original story looked much better in regards to the art.
Rating: 4.75/10 Pairs well with: the other collected volumes of Sin City.
Published: 1991-1992 Written by: Frank Miller Art by: Frank Miller
Dark Horse, 210 Pages
My first experience with Sin City was seeing the 2005 movie when it hit theaters.
At the time that the original comic was coming out, I was aware of it but I was still a pre-teen obsessing over bright, colorful, ’90s superhero comics.
It wasn’t until I got older that I started to get more into film-noir and crime fiction.
Still, I never actually picked up Sin City until now.
I’ve got to say though, the film, at least the Marv stuff, was a beat for beat retelling of this story. That’s not a bad thing, as I loved that the Watchmen movie was very close to the source material.
If you have seen the film already but haven’t read this, there isn’t much in the comic that isn’t in the film. But if you appreciate Frank Miller’s Sin City world, you really should experience it in its original form and in the medium it was designed for.
That being said, I like the comic, at least this first volume, more than I like the movie.
Miller wrote a solid, compelling mystery and his art style is really unique. This feels more like it is pure noir than a lot of the other neo-noir comics of the last quarter century or so.
While I’m not a die hard Miller fan, this is one of his best pieces of work. This was created when the guy was just making magic on a regular basis.
Rating: 8/10 Pairs well with: the other collected volumes of Sin City.
Also known as: Frank Miller’s Sin City Release Date: March 28th, 2005 (Mann National Theater premiere) Directed by: Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez, Quentin Tarantino Written by: Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez Based on:Sin City by Frank Miller Music by: John Debney, Graeme Revell, Robert Rodriguez Cast: Jessica Alba, Benicio del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Elijah Wood, Alexis Bledel, Powers Boothe, Rosario Dawson, Michael Clarke Duncan, Carla Gugino, Josh Hartnett, Rutger Hauer, Jaime King, Michael Madsen, Nick Offerman, Marley Shelton, Nick Stahl, Tommy Flanagan, Devon Aoki, Rick Gomez, Frank Miller (cameo), Robert Rodriguez (cameo)
“Most people think Marv is crazy. He just had the rotten luck of being born in the wrong century. He’d be right at home on some ancient battlefield swinging an axe into somebody’s face. Or in a Roman arena, taking his sword to other gladiators like him. They woulda tossed him girls like Nancy back then.” – Dwight
When Sin City came out, it was a bit of a phenomenon. Well, at least with fans of comic books and especially those who love the work of Frank Miller.
I haven’t watched this in a really long time and I wanted to revisit it after spending a lot of time delving into classic film-noir, which this picture takes some major visual cues from. Well, the original comic this was based on used a lot of noir visual flair, so it was only natural that this film adaptation followed suit.
As an overall cohesive story, the film doesn’t work that well. I get that it is a linked anthology with overlapping characters but it feels like it is just running all over the place. Frankly, this would work better as a television show where all of these characters could be better developed and jumping around with the narrative would just seem more organic.
This is still a cool movie with cool characters but sometimes they feel more like caricatures of pulp comic and noir archetypes. There isn’t really any time to get to know anyone beyond what’s on the immediate surface. Nancy and Hartigan are the only characters with any sort of meaningful backstory and even then, it is pretty skeletal and doesn’t have the meat it needs to really connect in an emotional way.
The film is highly stylized and while it looks cool, it almost works against it, as the grit and violence almost becomes too comic book-y. But this is supposed to be the comic stories coming to life and it represents that with its visual style. And I like the visual style but this is still a live action motion picture and it sort of forgets that.
I’m not saying it can’t have immense and incredible style but it needs to have a better balance between what would exist on a black and white comic book page and what works best for the medium of film. Being that this is the first film to sort of use this visual technique, I think people looked past its faults. I also think that once it was done here, the initial surprise and awe was gone, which is why no one cared much when the sequel came out and why the visual flare didn’t work to hide the faults of Frank Miller’s very similar film, The Spirit.
Additionally, sometimes the comic book elements seem very heavy handed and forced. The scene where Marv escapes the SWAT team may work in the comics but it felt bizarre and goofy in the movie. It would have been more effective if it was toned down and reworked, as opposed to Miller and Rodriguez trying to copy the comic panel by panel. This never works well, which was also why 2009’s The Watchmen had a lot of problems. Personally, I’d rather just stick to the comics if the filmmakers want to just recreate everything panel to shot.
Another problem with directly adapting comics is that the dialogue that works in one medium sometimes sounds terrible in another. Some lines when delivered on screen were cringe worthy moments. Still, I mostly liked everyone’s performance in this despite the sometimes questionable direction and script.
Sin City didn’t blow my mind like it did when I first saw it thirteen years ago. That’s fine. It is still pretty damn good and enjoyable but at first glance, way back in the day, I probably would have given this a nine out of ten rating. But at its core, it just isn’t that good of a film, even if it caused me to fanboy out in 2005.
Rating: 7.25/10 Pairs well with:Sin City: A Dame to Kill For and The Spirit.