Please don't spend money on this.

Crappy film

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

"A Dame to Kill For" is in every way a copy of "Sin City", just telling a different story. The same team is "behind the camera", and in front of it part of the actors from the first movie reprise their roles, enriched with some other big names, such as Joseph Gordon-Levitt, magnificent Eva Green, Ray Liotta i Christopher Meloni. The only disappointment is recasting of Dwight, although Josh Brolin did a very good job. I consider "Sin City" one of the greatest movies of all time, so it could be assumed that this is a ten too. But it doesn't work like that. A perfect ten, in addition to quality in all aspects, must have something of its own, characteristic, something that stands out from the mass, which will be remembered and that will resist tooth of time. This movie, however good, is a copy of the first one that does not bring anything new and, even if it does not fall into oblivion, it will be remembered as a copy. Extremely good, maybe even as good as the original, but still a copy. I think its bad ratings are not based on objective quality, but on the disappointment of the spectators who expected to be blown away in the way that the first film did. But the same people who was amazed by "Sin City" in 2005 can hardly be amazed ten years later by exactly the same things. If they came out in reverse order it is possible that the ratings would be reversed too. Personally, I think that the film is top-notch in every way, but the effect of "already seen" affects me too, so I have to distance it from the original.8,5/10

'Sin City: A Dame To Kill For' is a quality sequel to an exceptional, unique film. I gave 'Sin City' 4.5 stars and this film doesn't quite match the first film's graphic violence or pure originality. Having said that, however, there's still plenty to love about 'Sin City 2' - it's genuinely funny in parts, has the same great comic book-feel, with fantastic use of black & white, shadows and splashes of vivid colour to highlight certain aspects of a scene. The use of animation blends superbly with the actual actors and the score keeps everything moving.Returning from the first 'Sin City' film are Marv (Rourke), Nancy (Alba), Roark (Boothe), Gail (Dawson), Dwight (now Brolin, not Owen), Miho (now Chung, not Aoki), Manute (now Haysbert, not Clarke Duncan, due to obvious reasons) and Hartigan (Willis, in flashbacks). The characters don't get confusing or overwhelming, since the film's basically split into three inter-connected parts. There's Johnny (Gordon-Levitt) and his poker battles with the corrupt Senator Roark, then Ava (Green, who spends 50% of her screen-time naked - not a bad thing!) & Dwight's ill-fated romance, and finally Marv & Nancy's decision to do something about Roark. Almost each of the three parts has overlap with 3-5 characters from the other parts, all handled very well. There's also plenty of great supporting cast - Meloni, Piven, Lloyd, Liotta, Temple.I really enjoy how it looks like a comic book, but it could easily be the back streets of New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. There's some nice tie-ins back to the first film, still plenty of guns, swords and fighting - Marv/Rourke does remind me of Hellboy/Perlman a lot! - all done quickly (less than 100min) and stylishly.

Of course I was going to seize the opportunity to use this amazing poster of the gorgeous Eva Green for this post. I re-watched the first Sin City the other day and recalled how much I enjoyed the style and the different stories and characters portrayed in it. The sequel was a long time coming but when I initially saw it I thought it was rather disappointing and far off the standard of the first. I still kind of feel that way but hey I might as well share why this time.The sequel is shared in the same format as the first with a few stories, some take place prior to the events of the corresponding segments in the first film, others afterwards. There are character changes (most notably a switch of Josh Brolin for Clive Owen) but many from the first film return. There are also a few steamy addition like Jun Temple and the very SEXY Eva Green. I wasn't sure I wanted a sequel because like most sequels, I thought it would pale in comparison to the original. This is the case with this film.Some of the segments are entertaining. Others not so much. For all the style and blood and violence this film offers, the stories can't help but feel dull. The A Dane to Kill For segment was fabulous looking and so well performed by the sultry Eva Green, but the rest itself was overlong and dreary. The final segment and showdown between Nancy Callahan and Roark was also disappointing. The film and segments definitely could have used more thought out writing.The film is style stylistically excellent. Its a joy to look at on screen and still has an excellent comic book neo-noir feel to it. The bloody violence is still on point. The main pitfall is not being able to avoid to cap on the stories and brilliance in the stories of the first film. It wasn't without effort, but Robert Rodriguez has still yet to make a good sequel (at least in my honest opinion). Its still a decent to good film but it could have been much better.7/10

I probably shouldn't even write a review of this film, but I will.I got this from Netflix for two reasons. 1) I love Clive Owen, the purported STAR of this film, who isn't in it; and 2) I love film noir.A mistake on both counts.I am not an aficionado of graphic novels. I will say the look of it is incredible - some of it was cartoony, some was black and white with a pop of color, some of it had real people against a cartoon background - I loved it. It was all amazing to look at. The violence was graphic, but not all of it, as a good deal of it was animated. Some of the violence was shown in shadow. I have a thing about taking out people's eyes and slashing their throats, however.And it certainly is noirish in its story and dialogue. But I am really sick of gratuitous female nudity. If Meryl Streep can have strong feelings about it, so can I.The cast was impressive: Mickey Rourke, Powers Boothe, Joseph Gordon- Levitt, Jessica Alba, Ray Liotta, Eva Green, Josh Brolin, Rosario Dawson, Bruce Willis, Dennis Haysbert, Christopher Meloni, Jeremy Piven, Christopher Lloyd, Lady Gaga, and Stacy Keach. The only one not in it was Clive Owen. The acting was done in that noirish, cynical style.If Clive is in any of these Sin City movies, I'll be skipping it. Not my thing. I think it's a man's movie.