IMDb > Sin City (2005) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Sin City
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Sin City More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 3 of 174: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
Index 1738 reviews in total 

82 out of 157 people found the following review useful:

exactly what is wrong with modern society

Author: badtothebono from shaking my head
29 December 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

No redeeming feature or value other than style. The style is impressive. It is not especially unique. Other than that ... nothing. OK, lots of inane violence. OK, one or two funny lines. Yet, people, most people who bother to vote it seems, give it a 10. It brings to mind Natural Born Killers, but at least that had characters and character development and a point of view and some redeeming features.

And generally, the best compliment they can give it is "true to the comic". Reminds me of the saying "Garbage In, Garbage Out."

Do you people vote in elections too? Is that how we keep getting these presidents?

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:


Author: Willy Aka Marv from India
29 April 2009

I watched dis film recently and was blown away by the style of the film!!!! It mite be one of the greatest cinematic achievements of 21st century.... performance's were gr8 especially MIkeyrOURKE AND RosaREio Dawson!!!!Dialogues were witty and mostly in Tarantino style!!! Action scenes were awesome especially scene were Mikey comes 2 kill Kevin..... Bruce WIllis and Jessica alba had a cracking chemistry......Nick stall as yellow Bastard was good... They wanted to have a simple story line to have more comiuc feel and they succeeded by a brilliant screenplay which was uncredited!!! Overall a brilliant film.. Kudos 2 Rodriguez for dis wonderful entertainer!!! My rating 10/10

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

An eye popping experience

Author: Rohit Rajkumar ( from India
14 August 2009

There are very few successful adaptations of comic books and Sin City is for sure a success.The graphic elements portrayed in the film are wonderful and something very different.The story is laid out very well showing different situations.Bruce Willis is good in his role but I wished he had got more screen time.Jessica Alba and Rosario Dawson,the ladies looked beautiful in the movie and played well their respective minuscule roles.Benicio Del Toro was the surprise package of the film as he played the corrupt police cop to perfection.But the scene stealer has to be none other than Mickey Rourke who is magnificent in his screen presence.

The film itself has something new to offer and that is its plus point.Some critics have bashed this film for having less human emotions and giving importance to graphic content in the film.Leave the critics aside, you have got to watch 'Sin City' to have one of the best experiences of your life

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Bruce Willis tag line

Author: kidgoku from Greece
23 June 2009

This film is one of my favorite films ever.In this movie Bruce Willis says something that it should have been mentioned in this page. He said "An old man dies,a young girl lives.Fair trade". That was astonishing in my opinion and the best tag line i've ever heard. This movie has both people who admire the movie and people who don't like it at all.I believe that this is because they think that the whole point of the movie is what they see in the screen and not the true meaning of the film.They believe that it's not realistic at all because of some scenes which seem hard to believe that can really happen.Those people just can't understand the point of the film.In my point of view,the film is not about violence and crimes but mostly for love and fairness.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

Nice Coat you Have There, Mr Miller

Author: tedg ( from Virginia Beach
12 April 2005

I feel sorry for those familiar with the graphic novels from whence the stories and framing come. They are likely to take Rodriguez at his word that this is merely a "translation." I suppose you can believe that and that alone and still enjoy this.

But I am much luckier in that I can take this on its merits as a film, with decisions that are made because it is a film. After all, much of the art here is the selection of just which stories are used, how they are woven together and what the rhythm of the thing is. None of that came from Miller.

For background, you need to know that one of the three great inventions of cinema is the notion of noir, that particular framing of narrative where the very act of watching creates a cosmology that neither belongs to the world of the watcher, nor the characters but which tortures both by arranging coincidences. All these coincidences include the coincidence that you the viewer happen to be there together with the narrator.

The act of watching transmutes the vision into something you'd see, in well... a comic book.

In this case we have noir become cinema, become the genre of "graphic novel" become a specific movie that in its collage is neonoir.

That collage is three stories in a wrapper: Willis is a convict, framed by Senator Roark protecting his son, who protects a stripper; Rourke (the actor) is a convict, framed by Cardinal Roark protecting his adopted son, who gets revenge for the death of a prostitute (and is protecting other prostitutes); Owen is a convict targeted by Roark, protecting a whole society of prostitutes. Each has a hospital stay.

These stories cross at several points as if they were independent threads in the same city. But wait. In neonoir, we have folds that the noir of the forties didn't have. That means that to some extent these stories all collapse into one. And yes, all three main characters (not counting the salesman who is our surrogate) hallucinate to such an extent that they could be imagining their situation into the other story.

In other words, each of the three stories contains a "dream sequence" which is the others, each within themselves, and all within the bar. The wrapper is the salesman who seduces us, selling us one thing and slyly slipping in another.

It must be hell to be a filmmaker with a flood of ideas, the digital means to make many of them happen and have no story to animate. Miller's stuff is just an excuse — a passable one — for the real artistry here. If Rodriguez makes three of these (as we expect), let's hope he tinkers with the idea as much as he did with the spy kids and desperado notions.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 110 people found the following review useful:

An illustration of where we are...

Author: dogsmoke from United Kingdom
13 November 2005

I own Pulp Fiction, Mad Max and Once Upon a Time in Mexico, and was looking forward to this, given the talent behind it.

Stylistically the movie captures the comic-book feel amazingly well. The quality is impeccable, and it moves at a good rate.... However...

Both my wife and I got progressively more uncomfortable as the film went on. The violence slowly got more and more sadistic and graphic, and seemed to be a celebration of torture, mutilation and pain.

Women were reduced to their component parts, and tokenistic "sassiness" given to their characters to disguise the fact they were pure eye-candy for the male element of the audience.

We didn't care about the characters. There were no differences. The 'hero' liked to dismember villains, and get dogs to eat them whilst still alive. I'm not sure why this was OK, or any different to what the villains were doing.

What was this movie about? 2 hours of what could be the greatest guide ever for serial killers to keep their interest piqued? I think the purpose of this movie was to make us realise the world we live in. If you step back from the stylish production, and the white comic book blood, the content and message is very cold and dehumanising.

Neither my wife or I finished watching the film, and both felt angry that we had wasted as much time as we did watching someone else's nasty fantasy.

The only thing that disturbed me more than the film was the fact that people I like recommended it to me with no mention of the violence. Are we really that numb?

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

A Review of Frank Miller's Sin City

Author: ddelarama
9 April 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Just recently Frank Miller's noir-inspired brainchild Sin City made its way into US cinema, opening with a bang. While this film clearly takes a bite out of the apple that is comics making its way to film, this film is a clear cut above the rest. I must say, Sin City is the most faithful rendition of work travailing to the big screen among others. The movie is uncharacteristically mature, witty, and human. Sure, bring out the big guns (the cleavage) to spice up the flick, one might say. But amidst the bosom-enriched characters, these characters are not your stereotypical cardboard cutouts; they are alive. Scenes were faithfully lifted out of the three graphic novels, and what you see in the comic books is what you see in the film. As if one reading the thoughts of the main characters in a comic book, the protagonists in the film literally speaks their mind—Hamlet soliloquies of sorts. Faithfully leaving the mutilation, decapitation, castrations, et cetera, alone in the transition. And this move has worked perfectly. Not to mention the seamless integration of CG, film noir inspiration, A-list acting worthy of Hollywood big names, and pop influences of director Quentin Tarantino.

Sin City is a movie about Basin City and everything in it. Basin city is a place of eternal rain where corruption reeks, where day is night and night is black and white. The mayor is a corrupt politician whose son Rourk Jr. (Stahl; also the Yellow Bastard) is a pedophile. Majority of the cops work hand in hand with criminals, helping each other to eliminate the prostitutes, also one of the more powerful groups. Even the almighty church wields corruption to the fullest; the cardinal being the mayor's brother. And unholy alliances make (or break) the control of power in this god-forsaken dystopia.

The movie features three story lines, clearly Tarantino-inspired: that of Marv (Rourke), (Owen), and Hartigan (Willis). First, Marv is a literal powerhouse whose one true love, Goldie (King), is murdered by an assassin sent by God knows who, and he is bent on seeking revenge. His personal vendetta finally brings him to the assassin (Wood), a cannibal as nimble as a cat and as disturbing as the masked crowd in Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. In the second story, Brittany Murphy plays Dwight's (Owen) girlfriend, who also happens to be Jackie Boy's (del Toro) ex-girlfriend. Jackie Boy is a corrupt cop whose mere presence disrupts the balance of power between the cops, gangs, and the prostitutes; Dwight vows to kill him and is brought to the underground world of his other girlfriend Gail (Dawson) and her band of prostitutes, a force to be reckoned with. While only directing one scene in the entire movie, and the funniest one at that (it's the car scene), we clearly see the influence of Tarantino's Kill Bill character, the Bride, in Aoki's character Miho. Cooler or not, I leave that up to you. The third story focuses on Hartigan. Hartigan vowed to protect Nancy (Alba) from the mayor's pedophile son, who later transforms to become the Yellow Bastard, and a you-take-something-from-me-I-take-something-from-you cat-and-mouse game ensues.

Another reason why the movie is different is because it's in black and white, believe it or not. Well, mostly black and white. They left some elements colored, and with vibrant detail, I may add, such as the red dress in the opening scene, or the red heart shaped bed, or the Yellow Bastard (hence the name Yellow), just like in the comics. CG meshed seamlessly with everything corporeal, like Sky Captain but better. Acting was surprisingly powerful for most of the characters. Rourke portrayed Marv with vigor and enthusiasm, humor and wit, and his character almost reminded me of Hamlet. Well, all three protagonists did, anyway. Owen, for some reason, reminded me of a literal dark knight (not Batman) in messy armor. Willis, while having little chemistry (or lack thereof) with Alba, managed to deliver. And while relegated to the beginning and ending only, Josh Hartnett was cool, for a change.

I always wished that Hollywood does something different for a change. And they did. Wonderfully. This flick is a testament to that.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Sinsational Comic Book Comes To Life

Author: Chrysanthepop from Fraggle Rock
23 November 2007

'Sin City' is a fantastic and very stunningly accurate adaptation of Frank Miller's comic book series. Rodriguez and Miller wonderfully bring out the essence of the very graphic books. Though it is told in a 'Pulp Fiction' type, non-chronological manner, it keeps one amazed and makes full use of CGI. The editing makes it slick while the cinematography brilliantly adds to the haunting gory atmosphere. Colour is both effectively and minimally used as it further gives a comic book noire feel. 'Sin City' is filled with guns, blood, babes, murder, sickness and so many kinds of danger.

While the cast is very impressive as most of the actors blend into the characters well enough, Willis isn't convincing as a 70 year old and he seems to be a little too popular which makes him the odd one out. While many praise Elijah Wood's performance, I fail to see anything remarkable. Throughout the whole film, all the actor does is sport the same expressionless look. That may have been all the character required but then it didn't require much acting and a lot of special effects was put into it. Hartnett does not seem to convince as the Salesman, particularly when he's using his charm (which Hartnett lacks). Roarke is superb and hardly recognizable. Owen and del Toro provide some of the best moments. Stahl is quite adequate. Hauer and Booth are menacing. The women hold their own and all of them do great. Dawson is particularly effective as the dominatrix/godmother while Gugino, Alba, King and Murphy are very good and Bledel and Gugino are particularly stunning to look at.

Though 'Sin City' has been claimed to be a guy film, I don't see why women cannot enjoy it. Yes, most of the women in 'Sin City' are prostitutes but these women are just as powerful as the men and they defend their own territory, their own kind. They are not portrayed only as mere sex objects, mind you.

Everything finely fits together in 'Sin City'. It's Rodriguez's best work to date. Everyone involved in the making should be commended for their effort that's wonderfully paid off. It's certainly not a film to sit down with the family (Yes, it's deservedly and strongly rated 'R') but a great watch with friends or otherwise. I'm eagerly awaiting the next installments of 'Sin City' and hope to catch it on the big screen this time.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Style isn't everything

Author: moxie2 from Netherlands
22 June 2005

It seems to me that a lot of action movies these days are 'powered by style'. That, or an overkill of action, special effects, violence, explosions, and rapid camera movements that make my stomach turn and my mind puzzled. Is this all the movie entertainment business has to offer? The first half hour I was impressed with the movie. Beautiful and 'stylish' black & white imagery, comic wise camera views, all very slick. Then I began to wonder why I kept on looking, while getting more nervous every minute. Beneath that superbly styled skin of the movie was this constant tone of stupid violence, aggression, pure negative energy. Do I really want to look and feel that for two full hours? What's the point? I have to say I like comic movies like the first two Batman movies, Spiderman, X-men (very good balance between story, characters and special effects), and even Hellboy or the not so very good Spawn. And although I must say this movie is an extremely good adaptation of the original comic, I have to say "So what?". Is it a good movie? Well, technically speaking yes. Very good indeed. Is it worthwhile watching it? Well, if you're a designer, photographer or something like that, it can be very inspiring. At least for some time. But for the rest it's a complete waist of time. And I can stand some violence in movies if it's meaningful or 'human'. I liked Kill Bill and I like the movies of Kitano. But this was all just so negative! And if that was the intention you might say this film is a success. But do I ever want to see it again? Never!

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

A perfect translation from page to screen.

Author: lewiskendell from United States
17 April 2010

Well before I left the theater, the first time I watched Sin City, I knew it was going to be one of my favorite movies, ever. It's one of the rare movies that I went to the theater to see multiple times, forcefully dragging along any of my friends who hadn't seen it (and the smart ones who already had). It's just that good. It's the best film ever based on comic books or graphic novels, and I doubt that will ever change (until Sin City 2, that is). 

Robert Rodriguez realized that the source material was basically perfect, all he had to do was get the cinematography and casting right. And he succeeded brilliantly. The nearly frame-for-frame creation of the comic panels works so well, because there's nothing really that could have been added to improve what was on the page. And the sheer amount of great actors and actresses collected here is impressive, to say the least. They embody the characters without overwhelming them.

This isn't the perfect movie for everyone, but I don't see how it could disappoint anyone who is familiar with the novels, a fan of Miller's style, or anyone who enjoys a dark, funny, and stylish action movie. I love it from the very first scene to the very last. Which is great, because I'm sure I'll have watched it at least 20 more times, before a sequel gets made.   

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 3 of 174: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history