I think it's OK. Many scenes are too slow or long. In the first the short scenes helped the comic style and pace. Scenes in this also didn't have the impact of the first, which often ended in creative violence or cheesy noir one liners.
This movie is slower and has less impact. It needed a great story to make up for the sacrifices. We didnt get one. The story also felt disjointed at some points. It seemed the best of the cast wasn't used and the worst were. I can see why it flopped. It starts off good and gets progressively less interesting.
Visually stunning. That's what I love most about Sin City.
Eva Green's scenes were utterly breathtaking! Her beauty was a great addition to this sequel.
Didn't enjoy it at all. I wasn't a huge fan of the first movie but thought it was entertaining. I didn't have expectations to high when I went to watch this sequel. The visuals are still the same as the first but I suppose the flare is gone after you have seen it before and know what to expect. The plot, acting, and action scenes just do not offer enough to keep my interest. It seems the director thought as much too since they shove Eva Green's excellent boobs down your throat through out the movie. Don't get me wrong, I am a typical guy and love the boob shots, but a lot of scenes just seemed forced, unnecessary, awkward and out of place. The action scenes are ruined by unnatural movements. You can tell that people are suspended on wires and pulled from this side of the set to the other. You can not let your imagination accept it because everyone's movements are so noticeably unnatural. Even in my science fiction I like there to be at least some laws of physics upheld. The plot is not fluid and seems to be mini-plots shoved together to form a long movie of semi related task. Now the movie is not just plain horrible and I am sure if you are a big fan of the first edition then this one will be a fun watch, but there is no way I will be watching it a second time.
After much encouragement from a friend, I finally watched the 2nd instalment of the Sin City franchise. I watched the first for the first time a few months ago which I really liked. As much as I liked this one, I think sequels bring something else to the table and you can't really compare an original with its predecessor. Regardless of this, I really enjoyed the film. I found myself impatiently waiting for the resolve of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character arc to find it wasn't really as integral to the story as I'd hoped. It's like the main arc of the film is new characters with the followings of the plot of the first film is a secondary arc with another arc thrown in for character background. This is far from a complaint, I actually quite liked this set-up. However, I would've liked a bit more development on from the first in this sequel rather than spending most of the film on other characters and then having the climax an ending to the first saga. It felt more like a spin-off, to be honest. Also, special mention for the graphics and editing which are one of a kind and will always be iconic.
I rather enjoyed this, but I have been a Frank Miller fan for years. That and the fact that Eva Green and Jessica Alba makes any flick worth watching.
The first one was a brilliant ten, this one a little less :)
I really enjoyed the movie, deserved to do alot better at the box office than it did, some great performances, looks incredible, and great stories
Rosario Dawson v Eva Green v Jessica Alba.......do you need any more than that?
Another great production at the same style from the first movie. It's easy to watch and very much enjoyable. Can't say the same about the story though. Maybe because it's been 9 years since the first Sin City and we got used to it's idea, maybe because we've put too much expectation on it to follow the lead of it's older brother. The fact is that it doesn't surprise us at all.
In time: as a huge fan of Eva Green I can't complain about the cast and her actuation. Jessica Alba is the icing on the cake, giving to the movie the typical sensuality of Sin City.
To sum up: "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For" surely worth the time, but not the expectation.
Death is just like life in Sin City. It always wins
Piece of art!
It's unique, it's new, it's beautiful!!
Don´t know the first one so I can´t compare. The movie lives from it´s unique style and the performance of the cast. If anyone would have made this a normal movie with the same story it is likely nobody would have cared.
You need tons of drugs for that movie. Just like the first one. And Jessica Alba can dance. Breathtaking.
Much worse than the first one. And the feeling just wasn't the same at all.
Well...i really liked the first one but this was just meeww. Got bored really easy, loved the boobs :)
first time : Same style as the previous one, Eva Green is super hot here ,the film not that good as previous one in history and direction.
Second time: Cine Paco image and sound 5/5, 3D 4.5 / 7 best girls in 3D, I liked it more than last time, but is much lower at 1
Not even Jessica Alba's ass at the beginning can save this movie.
It may not be as good as the first one, but I really enjoyed it.
Logra tener algunas escenas brutales comparables con todas las de la entrega anterior, pero a las historias les faltó mucho corazón y eso causó un desequilibrio con la atmósfera pesada que crearon y las tradicionales visuales, que siguen siendo droga para los ojos.
No es mala porque igual se disfruta, pero está lejos de ser la misma experiencia que la previa Sin City.
7 solo por el hecho de seguir la trama de la primera y por Jessica Alba. De resto POOR.
OMG! the wait worth it I really like this movie but there were things didn't understand so I must re-watched the first one.
one of the worst films I've ever seen. abysmal in every way.
The movie lives in no way up to it's 9 year old predecessor.
Yes, the visuals are still stunning, yes the acting is overall still pretty good with many big names, yes the violence is still very overdone without turning into a Tarantino movie and yes it still takes place in the same universe as before and even some familiar characters make a comeback.
But it is very obvious they tried to recreate the first movie, but with a different story and characters. There was no real intention in building something new, innovative or unique with this one. It is perfectly described in a review one of the comments here already shared: "Unlike its first incarnation which had an artistic execution and vision, this version is literally all execution without any artistic vision."
Talking about story. You do keep wondering what will happen next, but it is in no way as interesting as it could be. The timeline is very straightforward, and the connection with characters from different storylines are a bit too easy. And in the end it is just 1 guy who does the heavy lifting and finishes everything (HULK SMASH!) oh, but we don't know how he ends up...
If you did not liked the first one, you won't like this one either. And if you liked the first one, there is not a big chance you like this one too (unless you just want to gaze at boobs and enjoy mindless violence.)
worse than part 1,but still better than most movie
Not as good as the original Sin City, however it is worth watching.
Read this review and "really" see how terrible this crap is; http://www.dearmoviegoer.com/dearmoviegoer/Blog/Entries/2014/8/25_Frank_Millers_Sin_City_2___A_Dame_to_Kill_For.html
Somebody mentioned Eva's performance!!! Really??? Performance??? You mean the porn I guess
Empty, nothing, nada, zero !!! One of the worst I've watched this year.
Thought this was pretty poor tbh.
you know a movie is not going to be that good if it has Lady gaga on the cast.
E(A)va Green, what a performance!
Brittany Murphy as Shellie and Carla Gugino as Lucille missed.
A LOT better than the first.
In 2005 Robert Rodriguez presented us with Sin City, a great cinematic work based on the graphic novels of Frank Miller, who brought something new with a very original style of Film Noir but with an absolutely brilliant visual concept. After nine years Robert Rodriguez returns to carry us to this "world of sin", and this time he is not alone, since Frank Miller leaves only the writing to join him in direction.
In Sin City: A Dame To Kill For, Frank Miller wrote two unpublished tales purposely for the film and two other already existing in his works. The problem is that they all does not seem to have the same impact of the first film. The originality, vitality and energy of the first film is not reflected in this one.
It remains brutal, violent and visually is definitely worth seeing on the big screen, but when it comes to the characters, can not be as strong and charismatic, and the story always seems to be unsatisfactory given each end. The interest that is awakened in each one of us is not even close to what the first film managed to make to the audience. Despite being entertaining, sometimes we find ourselves kind of bored.
The characters we already know from the previous film are not as solid or raise as much interest as the first. As for the characters introduced for the first time, they do not have the same strength and effectiveness. With a cast full of pretty big names, many of the actors are underused having very little time on screen.
I was expecting to see how Joseph Gordon-Levitt would be in this project. He is one of the young actors I most like to see on the screen today and after all this kind of role does not seem to fit well in his profile. That does not mean that he had a bad performance, but it was simply a bad choice of role I guess. Eva Green is the only one who can give the film a certain feeling of seduction and danger, she is totally the femme fatale but the overuse of nudity (nothing against it, I have no problem about it) despite they are quite artistic, just made the most important segment in the entire film turned into something inelegant. Eva Green's performance however is the best of the film, she can be all that her character requires, sensual, engaging and totally fatal.
What was missing in Sin City: A Dame To Kill For was the same attitude, enthusiasm and freshness of the first film. Perhaps the fact that they had waited nine years to make a sequel also was not the best decision.
Shout by AlexanderZBlockedParent2015-08-06T14:56:31Z
Everyone is saying they loved the first one, but hated this one. I don't see how that's possible. They stuck very close to the original in most ways, such as cinematography, soundtrack, and directing, all of which were great (for a Sin City movie). Sure it isn't a masterpiece my any means, and it's not as good as the first, but it's super entertaining, very violent, and is sure to please anyone who enjoys the books or the first film. Forget all those jaded movie snobs saying it sucks. They're just focusing on all the negatives, and letting that cloud their vision of the awesome stuff.