Read Negative User Reviews for Sin City: A Dame To Kill For

3

JamesCannonNov 21, 2014

The good: The dame kill for story is probably the best of the three and feels like a sin city story, even though it goes on a little too long. The color palette and look of the film is pristine. The bad: Dialogue seems hackneyed and cheesyThe good: The dame kill for story is probably the best of the three and feels like a sin city story, even though it goes on a little too long. The color palette and look of the film is pristine. The bad: Dialogue seems hackneyed and cheesy this time around. The voice over is well over used and doesn't have the impact of the original. The Ugly: The Nancy Callahan story at the end is just laughably bad. It s almost seems like self parody at times. MIller and Rodiguez seemed to get lazy including Marv as a hitman in each of the three stories. The movie just loses its punch by the end. There are also a ton of idiotic scenes where characters say things like "Hold still so I can blow your brains out." and then proceed to shoot them in the shoulder. Or a hangman's noose just appears out of nowhere.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

3

rafafetterDec 17, 2014

Some great visuals and a lot of style... and that's pretty much it...

Bad dialogues, some terrible special effects and a movie that just drags on..

Not a good sequel,.. at all...

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

3

seventhsealOct 20, 2014

Stunningly good to look at, maybe best watched with the sound off then. As for the plot/story of the movie was utter drivel and left me angry at the wasted talent who had enrolled to this follow up to the great Sin City movie.

Very, veryStunningly good to look at, maybe best watched with the sound off then. As for the plot/story of the movie was utter drivel and left me angry at the wasted talent who had enrolled to this follow up to the great Sin City movie.

Very, very poor overall and unfortunately not a title I would like to recommend.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

3

MeIAmIMar 12, 2022

I don't know why this is rated so highly. It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Ridiculously over the top, jarringly gruesome, juvenile in delivery, and generally dopey... though its worst "sin" is being often boring. I liked the firstI don't know why this is rated so highly. It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Ridiculously over the top, jarringly gruesome, juvenile in delivery, and generally dopey... though its worst "sin" is being often boring. I liked the first movie and its stories and characters. This one lost a lot of the heart and believability of the characters. It's a very surface-level schlock shock movie. Maybe Rodriguez and Miller did it for the paycheck. It focuses on cheap endless attention-grabbing thrills, and regurgitates many of the same kinds of visuals and scenes that made the first movie stand out... but gets old fast. I suppose audiences when this came out were easy to please. I found it painfully mind-numbing, and besides a few good performances form a few actors, worth tossing in the bin. Hopefully I'll forget about it soon.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

1

GoodlightAug 23, 2014

Unlike the original Sin City, which I did enjoy, Dame To Kill For fails to interweave the various story lines into a coherent plot. The film tries to build a moody, gritty, noir feel, at the expense of building any sensibility into theUnlike the original Sin City, which I did enjoy, Dame To Kill For fails to interweave the various story lines into a coherent plot. The film tries to build a moody, gritty, noir feel, at the expense of building any sensibility into the characters or sympathy for their various plights. The justifications for the action sequences are ham fisted into place, and the visuals are at times laughably out of place, rather than stylistically atmospheric. Dramatic moments were made laughable by the lack of subtly, light hearted moments passed virtually unnoticed. By far the worst movie I’ve seen in some time, first movie I ever considered walking out of, I wish I had.… Expand

7 of 12 users found this helpful75

All this user's reviews

0

alhypoAug 23, 2014

If you like endless, rambling, insipid internal dialog, then this is your movie. If you like characters who are completely irrational, then this is your movie. If you like... I don't know... white blood? Then this is your movie.

There areIf you like endless, rambling, insipid internal dialog, then this is your movie. If you like characters who are completely irrational, then this is your movie. If you like... I don't know... white blood? Then this is your movie.

There are plenty of scenes where we get to see Eva Green nude. As enjoyable as that is, it's definitely not enough to save the movie. So skip this one. It is truly terrible.… Expand

6 of 12 users found this helpful66

All this user's reviews

1

RetroView25Aug 24, 2014

If you want to see Eva Green **** throughout a movie in Black & White, then this is your MOVIE "Sin City 2"!!! Other then that if your a fan of the first Sin City, prepare to be very very disappointed and be out of $7 bucks and 2 hours ofIf you want to see Eva Green **** throughout a movie in Black & White, then this is your MOVIE "Sin City 2"!!! Other then that if your a fan of the first Sin City, prepare to be very very disappointed and be out of $7 bucks and 2 hours of your LIFE!!! Because it's that KIND OF BAD and not the BAD in a GOOD WAY!!!

Oh where to begin??? First off, I don't think Frank Miller really had a concept for this sequel, other then having him self inserted into mult - roles throughout this movie like he's Stan Lee clones of clones in a Marvel Movie about the Clones of Stan Lee cameo roles!!!

As, CONTINUITY must be a word not used by Frank Miller or not familiar with i e, such as actors not reprising their same roles from the original Devon Aoki as Miho, Clive Owen as Dwight and I can not count Michael Clarke Duncan (May he R.I.P) as Manute but his character did get killed during the final shootout in "Old Town" in the first Sin City because they couldn't leave any survivors??? Right??? But leave it to that All State Guy to stay the day! NOT!!!

And that's the thing about this movie, on one hand it wants to be a continuation from the first Sin City but also at the time not be!!! Such by adding non related material to the movie; Joseph Gordon-Levitt character "Johnny" who whole story arc had literally nothing to do with nothing with the movie but at the same time let's show Nancy Callahan going thru a deep state of depression over the death of Hartigan but then at the same time with no separation of the storyline throw in the back story of Dwight getting his face change episode!!!

And I did I mention Jaime King plays both Goldie / Wendy on screen at the same time, knowing that Goldie was killed in the beginning of the first Sin City!!! WTF!!?!??! I mean, if your going to use character cameos from the first Sin City, then why not used Alexis Bledel as Becky, Benicio Del Toro as Jackie Boy or how about bringing back Josh Hartnett as The Man to explain his story arc to how he knew Becky in the final elevator scene then Johnny!!!

No No No, must have said Frank Miller to that idea because that would have taken too much time being that it's been 10 years between movies to make this PIECE OF **** SIN CITY 2!!!!

And for this Frank Miller, I say to YOU: STOP MAKING SEQUELS TO MOVIES THAT DO NOT NEED ONE!!! STOP RUINING MY MEMORIES OF SOME OF FAVORITE MOVIES THAT I HAVE COME TO LOVE IN SIN CITY AND 300!!! YOU NEED TO STOP DOING THIS TO YOUR REMAINING FANS!!! WAS NOT THE SPIRIT ENOUGH DAMAGE TO YOUR BRAND NAME???

End of Line… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

3

RJLove0697Sep 6, 2014

All style no substance. The film looked great but thats really were it ends. The story is EXACTLY the same in each chapter just as the first one. Characters are all dull and have nothing interesting to say and we learn nothing more aboutAll style no substance. The film looked great but thats really were it ends. The story is EXACTLY the same in each chapter just as the first one. Characters are all dull and have nothing interesting to say and we learn nothing more about Basin City itself. It was just an exercise in excess, showing how much action they can but in each story. Eva Green is the only slightly redeeming feature.I would have thought that after ten years an actually story would have been brought to the table instead you just get three characters which are butthurt and need to kill. Whilst this is going on its just uninteresting mumblings over the top. Really poor effort considering the time they had. It gets a three purely based on its looks but that doesn't get you very far… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

3

GreatMartinAug 22, 2014

The best thing about “Frank Miller’s Sin City: A Dame To Kill For”, AKA Sin City 2, was that I got in for free, plus got a free popcorn and a free soda, all courtesy of The Gateway Theatre Loyalty Card.

I had not seen the first “Sin City”The best thing about “Frank Miller’s Sin City: A Dame To Kill For”, AKA Sin City 2, was that I got in for free, plus got a free popcorn and a free soda, all courtesy of The Gateway Theatre Loyalty Card.

I had not seen the first “Sin City” so I was intrigued for about a half hour by the sparse use of standout color in what is basically a black and white film noir of the 1940s and 1950s shown as a combination of live, digital, comic book, pulp fiction and graphic novels. After the novelty of a slash of bright red across the lips of a black and while character wears off there was a little interest in the name of the actresses playing the female roles as most of the men are more ‘seasoned’ veterans, and recognizable, though even here one or two have face but not name recognition.

Anyone familiar with the old movies, or books, like those featuring Mickey Spillane’s Mike Hammer or Dashiell Hammett’s Sam Spade or casts with Humphrey Bogart, Ida Lupino, Barbara Stanwyck, Lana Turner, Veronica Lake, Victor Mature, etc. will find their counterparts in Sin City 2. Every man is hard boiled and every woman a femme fatale. The main difference between this film and the old films are the amount of violence perpetrated not only by the men but more so by the women.

Written and directed by Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller I would love to know which one has the eyeball fetish! The production design by Steve Joyner and Caylah Eddleblute is outstanding as are all the other production assets such as costumes, hair and make up.

With a cast including Eva Green, Jessica Alba, Bruce Willis, Powers Booth, Mickey Rourke (almost unrecognizable ), Josh Brolin, Rosario Dawson, Stacy Keach, Jaime King, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ray Liotta, just to name a few, plus a cameo by Lady Gaga, keeping track of who is who and trying to remember their real names will keep your mind off of the screenplay that is not at all original in any aspect of film making.

There is almost as much nudity, frontal and rear, by both males and females, though there is a sense modestly, as there is violence. Killings are by guns, arrows, knives, hands, feet, cars, etc., all graphic and far from modest.

The best/only way to see this movie is with a free ticket, a free popcorn and a free soda.… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

2

JamesXAug 25, 2014

If you only care about visuals than this will be a good movie for you. If you care about anything else this movie will be awful. It has nothing going for it besides that single achievement. Friends wanted to leave the theater in theIf you only care about visuals than this will be a good movie for you. If you care about anything else this movie will be awful. It has nothing going for it besides that single achievement. Friends wanted to leave the theater in the middle. The movie was so boring that I actually didn't mind the people around who pulled out their smartphones.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

3

soylinda21Sep 21, 2014

Whatever happened to Robert Rodriguez? Where's the guy who knew how to make cool, witty films? This movie is so bad it feels almost like he's making fun of himself. Many of the fight scenes are just hilarious, and not in a good way. ThoughWhatever happened to Robert Rodriguez? Where's the guy who knew how to make cool, witty films? This movie is so bad it feels almost like he's making fun of himself. Many of the fight scenes are just hilarious, and not in a good way. Though incorporating comic-y special effects could've been nice, poor execution just ruined it all.
And why the omnibus style? Don't they know how to weave several stories together? It's not like there are so many stories that it'd feel too complex if you put them all together; there are three stories if you're generous enough to count Joseph Gordon-Levitt's as a "story". What I also don't get is why they had to introduce all of the characters at once including those whose story doesn't appear for another hour.
The writing is just so childish and superficial, which is ironical considering the film's "mature" look. The story is achingly one-dimensional, and the lines are so corny they could be used in a YA movie.
To sum up, this movie is visually nice but that's about it. It's amusing at best (as in I laughed at the movie, not with it). The original Sin City worked because of a mixture of things, but the filmmakers seem to have forgotten it all and focused instead on whatever looked cool to them.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

0

GildenlockAug 25, 2014

I know sequels are often an exercise in disappointment, but even my low set of demands and expectations was let down in this sequel. You will get literally nothing but sex and violence. I realize that must sound like a no brainer for anyoneI know sequels are often an exercise in disappointment, but even my low set of demands and expectations was let down in this sequel. You will get literally nothing but sex and violence. I realize that must sound like a no brainer for anyone who got to witness the first movie, but trust me when I say finer qualities from the first movie are absent, even it's fine cast could not save it from being a sloppy mess completely absent of storytelling.… Expand

4 of 15 users found this helpful411

All this user's reviews

3

ScannerDromeAug 28, 2014

This is one of the most beautiful movies that i will forever hate - The 3D effects in this film, especially in the beginning were excellent, at times it felt like augmented reality. Jessica Alba did a great job in bring Nancy to life it wasThis is one of the most beautiful movies that i will forever hate - The 3D effects in this film, especially in the beginning were excellent, at times it felt like augmented reality. Jessica Alba did a great job in bring Nancy to life it was like seeing the dance that you never saw in Sucker Punch - that's where it ends.

The rest of the movie basically the story was boring, slow, flat, and in some ways insulting to your intelligence. Why would Miller or Rodriguez ever think this film was worthy to present to their fans is beyond me I really thought they would have done better - If you want to see some cool 3D then go see it at the theater - but if you don't really care about 3D then wait for DVD or a Free night on VOD your not missing anything. http://scannerdrome.com/sdpodcast/… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

0

HaandyFeb 8, 2022

O bom desse filme deve ser so a Eva Green mesmo, porq a lady rata é um fiasco atuando.

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

0

BarbudezJul 20, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. ¿Os acordáis hace ya 9 años, de Sin City?, es posiblemente una película que sorprendió tanto al público y a la critica, una película con estética visual muy de cómic, jugando con sombras, efectos de luz en blanco y negro, un repartazo y aderezado con una historia coral de criminales y perdedores, en una ciudad corrupta y podrida hasta los cimientos. La primera película adaptó bastante bien y con bastante fidelidad los tomos de El duro adiós, La gran masacre y Ese bastardo amarillo, solo dejaron en el tintero el tomo de Mataría por ella.

Lógicamente tras el éxito de Sin City, habría una inminente segunda parte a corto plazo, pero pasaron los años y no salía nada, ni una sola noticia, Frank Miller mientras saca ese ñordo de The Spirit, y hace unos meses nos empezaron a bombardear con imagenes, trailers, que dan a entender entre otras cosas, que Frank Miller ha escrito nuevas historias solo para el film además de llevar el tomo que les faltaba, si la primera película era una muchacha provocativa, sexy y brillante, la secuela 9 años después es el aborto impregnado de heces resultante de una incentuosa relación entre primos.

Sin City 2, es una película que todo el encanto que tenía la anterior, desaparece y se reemplaza por una versión barata y cutre de Sin City, primero tenemos una narrativa, que si en la anterior estaba contada de tal forma, que podías saber en todo momento cuando se situaba los hechos que te comentan, saltando al pasado y al presente sin producir ningún tipo de confusión al espectador que no conociese/ leído los cómics. En esta secuela, al tonto del sombrero y al puto loco de los cojones de Miller Rodriguez y Miller, se la sopla ordenar la historia de una manera que tenga coherencia y cae en el caos narrativo mas absoluto, provocando cosas como ponerte en situaciones que simplemente desconciertan al espectador. Las tramas, exceptuando la trama de Ava Lord (Segundo mojonazo que se mete Eva Green este año) y Dwight (Mataría por ella), que es la que mantiene un mínimo de coherencia, pero las otras historias aparte de innecesarias son terrorificamente malas y que no llevan a ninguna parte. La trama de Joseph Gordon Lewitt es una historia que es tan irrelevante, tan de relleno, que la sustituyes por 20 minutos de anuncios y no notas la diferencia, la trama de Lucy (Jessica Alba), esta bien que hayas cerrado tras casi 20 años que la hiciste, pero a ver...TONTO DE LOS COJONES, ¡SI VAIS A HACER ALGO NUEVO, FÍJATE EN QUE NO SE CONTRADIGA CON LO ANTERIOR!, SOBRETODO SI SALE UN PERSONAJE QUE EN ESE MOMENTO ESTA MUERTO (Y NO DIGO BRUCE WILLIS) O ALGUIEN CON CICATRICES QUE TRAS LO SUCEDIDO EN EL PRIMER FILM, NO TIENE. Luego dicen de X-Men y sus problemas de continuidad...

¿La estética o al menos el reparto se salvara?. Ni eso, la película tiene un reparto de segunda regional, Bruce Willis esta ahi por estar, Rourke igual, ni siquiera Clive Owen repite el papel lo que provoca que la pelicula sea más desconcertante, Lady Gaga eligiendo papeles de mierda como ya le paso con Machete Kills, y luego la estética, no se si la pelicula ha tenido mas o menos presupuesto, pero que una película de hace 9 años, luzca mejor, es bastante preocupante, hay momentos que parecen las cinemáticas de un juego de PSX, y con un presupuesto de 7 duros y unos FX totalmente BARATOS ya ni siquiera se dignaron en currarse la violencia todo es supercutre, cabezas de maniquíes sin detalle, lefa sangre cutre, trajes que parecen del salón del manga de Matalascañas. En serio, la primera peli de Sin City esta mejor hecha que esta, y ¡tiene casi 10 años!

Sin City: Una Dama por la que matar, es una verdadera vergüenza, chapucera, incoherente e inconexa. Rodriguez hundiendose cada vez más y Miller ya nos desmuestra que si en comics tocó fondo, ya cinematograficamente esta muerto y enterrado.… Expand

3 of 24 users found this helpful321

All this user's reviews

1

dahurtbiznessAug 26, 2023

WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED???? u had the perfect cast, 3 directors (Robert Rodriguez, frank miller & Quentin tarantino) all in one movie including the creator of sin city frank miller as the director for sin city 1. the original movie had so muchWHAT THE HELL HAPPENED???? u had the perfect cast, 3 directors (Robert Rodriguez, frank miller & Quentin tarantino) all in one movie including the creator of sin city frank miller as the director for sin city 1. the original movie had so much attention to detail and brought the comic series to life, page for page that's including "the recut & theatrical, extended and unrated versions. all that is has also not been brought back. this movie felt lazily put together in hopes to make profit banking of the success of the previous movie that they used as a driving force for this movie in hopes for this movie to sell.

the recastings:

Devon Aoki as Miho was replaced and it never was explain as of why when Aoki was literally perfect as deadly little Miho, Jamie Chung felt weird and off it just doesn't hit the same even with the music from the first music using her theme for the recast. it just didn't sit right with me and it was changes that it didn't even need to be made, y'all did it for the sake of doing it.

Clive Owen as Dwight was also perfect, from his Monologue, how he spoke, the tone of his voice his overall portrayal hit all of the right notes and make u invest in every scene that he's in. how u gonna replace him with Thanos (Josh Brolin) and think that nobody wasn't going to notice. LOL and it's messed up because Clive was already in a middle of another project and y'all could've delayed the movie bcuz he wanted to be in it, y'all just didn't wanted to wait for him. the sequel wasn't even in high demand bcuz everyone was just ok with only a stand alone movie. I can watch the first movie 20 times and it never gets old, every chronological order and recut order and it never gets old i always seem to find something new and interesting when i rewatch it. the first movie is literally a masterpiece to a comic book to feel like it was brought to life. but the problem lays with the director himself Robert Rodriguez bcuz he didn't understand the appeal and his core audience/fan base. he tried to pull a Vince McMahon but assuming he knew what the audience wants without understanding his audience. the crazy part is that Josh Brolin didn't even try to attempt to make it feel like it's the same character. I had to google to double check if he was even playing as the same character or a different character with the same name until u watch the scene when he runs into Rosario Dawson's Gail and tried to pass it off as we supposed to buy that this is the same dwight from the first movie, but it feels so forced and unnatural. Rosario Dawson and Josh Brolin has ZERO chemistry. so it's jarring it gets even worst when Brolin's Dwight gets shot in the eye by his ex Ava gets surgery then suddenly looks like how Dwight should've looked like since Brolin's introduction as Dwight. he went from have short to no hair to looking like Clive Owen's Dwight's hairstyle. like can u be more on the nose on why this recasting is terrible. the movie is getting a one star for me and it's luck to even get that and it's only bcuz they had the sense to bring back some of the original cast like Jamie Chung, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Jessica Alba & Powers Boothe. and also, bcuz the continued Nancy's story arc from the original movie. other than that, this movie felt more like a bad spin off rather than a true sequel. if it wasn't for these than this movie would've gotten a ZERO from me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews