A Few Words About A few words about... Sin City (1 Viewer)

[Michael Harris]

That is exactly why I liked it. That is what made it different from all the other so called adaptations.

Thanks RAH for you review. I'll wait a while for the SE.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Mr. Harris!

I am surprised by your taste in film....

...but perhaps I should not be. Sin City
won quite a bit of critic appraisal during its
theatrical run.

I'm still not sure how much I would enjoy this
film, but I am buying blindly anyhow.

Thanks for the overview.

 

[Robert Harris]

Ron,

Great to see you chiming in, as always.

Sin City is overly violent to be sure, and not to tender tastes, but this is "comic book" violence and over the top.

I'll watch many different films on DVD for which I might not ordinarily use my time going to a theatre.

Sin City is a technological stand-out, as was Paramount's World of Tomorrow. These films serve as superior examples of the precise controls available today to filmmakers like Rodriguez, shooting on high definition video on the back lot.

Make no mistake, at a reported 45 million dollar budget, Sin City is no digital "quota quickie."

What it represents is a full two hours of one possible direction for the future of our industry.

If Sin City were a mindless, bore, which it is not, I'd still be watching it for its style, its stark beauty and as a technological marvel, which rather than using the technology in an evolutionary fashion, takes its audience (some kicking and screaming) and drops us, front and center, into a digital ride, not unlike Tron.

RAH

 

[Tom Brennan]

Has it become a major accomplishment for a DVD to actually stay in sync, enough to base an entire recommendation off of something so trivial?

 

[Robert Harris]

Yes.

Mr. Brennan picked up on my slightly shadowed remark linking this with the discussion of West Side Story and its out of sync Tonight number, elsewhere on HTF.

West Side Story should have, and would have, been pulled and replaced by any of the other major distributors, but not apparently by M-G-M.

West Side Story won a number of Oscars in the 1961 season.

Among them, Cinematography, Directing, Music (scoring) and Sound.

Since any (or multiples) of the people awarded in these fields could have made a creative decision to have a muscial number out of sync, but did not, I don't know who should be most offended by M-G-M's shoddy treatment of this great film.

The individual doing QC work on this disc should no longer be working in the film industry. Would you want them overseeing the fate of your project?

RAH

 

[Maggi Magg]

Good point

Cheers
Maggi

 

[Daniel Lee]

Of course it's always possible that the QC individual did spot the problem and was over-ruled by other higher powers...

:frowning:

 

[Tom Brennan]

I just thought maybe standards had dropped so low that staying in sync was now a major accomplishment for a DVD.

I was not aware of a West Side Story issue though. I only have the first disc that MGM released in 1998 or 1999.

 

[clayton b]

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts on this release Mr Harris. I was so worried that it would look like crap due to this studio's history. This is one of my favourite releases of the last few years. Thanks for putting my mind at ease.

 

[Chuck Bogie]

You know, while I respect Mr. Harris greatly, and I am anticipating a movie night for friends with Sin City, we have to keep in mind that perfectly executed crap is still crap. Let's keep in mind that just because something has been polished to perfection, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's worthy of the effort. I mean, we've all got the disk we throw in when we have friends seeing our toys for the first time. How many of those disks are watchable for the whole film? For instance, there's Star Wars I - the pod race rocks. But then there's Jar-Jar...

If someone put all that work into a Pauley Shore DVD, would it elevate it to greatness? I doubt it.

 

[TravisR]

I'm guessing he liked the movie too. Even if he didn't, I did so hearing it's a great looking disc is great news.

 

[Adam_WM]

 

[JohnRice]

That is exactly what I was thinking when I read the comment about enhancement. Why would they enhance it? There should be no point on a digital movie. I think this might indicate that many of these online "experts" don't know what they are talking about.

 

[JohnRice]

What, exactly, are you saying? Are you just speculating, or are you saying Sin City is crap? Like I just said, I think most of RR's work has been crap, particularly the unrelenting pile called Once Upon a Time in Mexico, but I think this is a pretty decent flick, at the very least.

 

[Chuck Bogie]

Oh, no... I think that Sin City is a good flick. But I get the feeling that more than a few folks out there get _way_ too in to the technical stuff... I mean, are you going to pass on Casablanca because the soundtrack isn't DTS? I think there's some folks there who would. And I'll guess that a few of them may be Turnerites too... I do NOT wanna see Bogie with a tan...

Just because something is technically perfect doesn't mean it has soul.

 

[JohnRice]

OK, then maybe you should re-read your post because that sure isn't the impression you gave. I might respond by saying just because something is highly polished and great looking doesn't mean it is vacuous crap, though I have seen exactly that said about Far from Heaven, which hardly deserves it.

Yes, a lot of people get far too into the presentation of a film, particularly HTFers, but Robert Harris is certainly not one of them.

For me, that would usually be Titus, and yes, it not only looks great, it is a GREAT film.

 

[Chuck Bogie]

Well, there's good movies with so-so DVDs, and great DVDs of so-so movies...

I'll watch a bad DVD of a good movie, but I won't watch a good DVD of a bad movie.

 

[Robert Anthony]

I'll disagree with this as well. Sin City was BASED off traditionally shot noir films. The german expressionist angles and lighting styles played a HUGE role in the progression of "Film Noir" and as "Film Noir" played a big role in the style of Sin City. There's no reason to think that if Rodriguez used film, that the feel of the novel would have been lost.

 

[Thomas T]

re: "I'll watch a bad DVD of a good movie, but I won't watch a good DVD of a bad movie"

Bravo, Chuck! My sentiments exactly. I won't mention any titles because invariably someone will come to the defense of a stinker and no one wants their baby trashed but way too often I read swooning reviews of bilge by HTFers about how terrific a disc looks and sounds as if it comepensates for a preposterous, badly acted dumb movie.

Sorry but I'll take a scratchy, soft looking public domain title of a great film like Scarlet Street over a pristine state of the art pablum like Spiderman 2 in a micro second. Oops ..... didn't I say I wouldn't mention any titles?

 

[Mark VH]

Agreed wholeheartedly. Saying that the way Rodriguez shot his movie is the only way it could have captured the feel of the graphic novel is insane, and misses the entire point of what "adaptation" means.

A film is a film and a comic book is a comic book, just like entire books need to be condensed and cut in order to be transferred to the screen. In the same sense, I can't help but think about how "Sin City" might have been a better film if Rodriguez had elected to shoot on real sets using real locations, or if he had elected to just take one story from the graphic novels instead of three, fleshed it out and given it some depth. There's no saying that the film wouldn't have captured the "feel" of the graphic novel, and it might have worked better as a movie at the same time.

Rodriguez chose to shoot his movie his way, and that's fine. Despite my previous statements, I didn't hate it, and I admired its style. But style alone does not a great movie make. I hate to drag out a cliche, but there's such as thing as being too faithful to the source material and, for me, "Sin City" was a perfect example of this.