badly organised and blatant style over substance

Rating: 6/10 (5 June 2005)

SPOILERS Over the last few years a trend has developed where we are given films of extreme beauty with little else going for them. Films like "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" where new methods are tested and as a result the actual substance of the film is ignored. In "Sin City" the dialogue and the substance were actually written a long time before the film was actually made. Unfortunately though once again it feels like the director (in this case Robert Rodriguez) has spent more time worrying about the imagery and less time thinking about how the film should be structured.
As the films tagline reads "Walk down the right back alley in Sin City and you can find anything". In this world of violence and brutality, three men set out on personal missions to protect the women of their lives. There's Hartigan (Bruce Willis) who wants to protect his daughter figure, Marv (Mickey Rourke) who seeks revenge for a dead love and Dwight (Clive Owen) who wants to protect the women in his life from a menaced called Jackie Boy (Benicio Del Toro). Together these three men show us a world where meaning in life and violence are never far apart.
"Sin City" is beautiful. It is easily the most faithful comic adaptation ever and it feels unlikely the film will loose that title for a long time. Black and white throughout with the occasional powerful moment of colour, it really is an impressive piece of work.
The film is also incredibly violent. Whether it's someone getting a limb amputated or someone being beaten to death, very little of the film is not gruesome. There are no doubt people who will complain about this, but as so many others have pointed out, the film is advertised as violent and if you aren't going to like that, don't watch the film.
On the acting side of things, the film also possesses one or two outstanding performances. Benicio Del Toro as the destructive Jackie Boy is excellent for the brief time he is actually on screen. The same is true of Elijah Wood who is incredibly unnerving for the entire time he is present on screen. Ultimately though, one man deserves full praise for his performance in "Sin City" and that is Mickey Rourke.
Mickey Rourke has had an inconsistent film career to say the least. Never a particularly strong actor, "Sin City" could well rejuvenate his career in the same way "Pulp Fiction" brought John Travolta back from the film crypt. Put simply, Rourke is perfect. As the menacing Marv, we are shown a character who suddenly finds a purpose in life for the first time ever. Marv is portrayed as one of the nicer people in "Sin City", but that still doesn't stop him from attacking, brutalising and generally destroying people. Rourke's performance is perfect and it would not be a surprise if his role is not being thrown around again as a contender come Oscar Nomination Season next year.
Unsurprisingly for every Rourke moment, there always tends to be someone who ruins things. Strangely the man who puts in a weak performance is the one you least expect to. In "Sin City", Clive Owen plays knight in shining armour Dwight. Playing a rock hard American who stares a lot, Owen is suitably menacing enough to pull the role off. Sadly though, the one flaw with his credentials is that he seems to find it impossible to avoid switching between the fake American accent and his natural British. Putting good emotional charge into the character, Owen ruins the scene when half way through a speech his voice will randomly switch nationality. It's not always possible to put on a fake accent, but for the sake of himself and the film, Owen should have chosen one and stuck to it.
As was pointed out before, the key flaw with "Sin City" is that Rodriguez organisation just doesn't quite fit properly. The film consists of three stories starring Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke and Bruce Willis. Out of these, the weakest story by a mile is the one with Willis. Now if you want to watch a decent film, logically the smartest move is to put the Willis story first, and originally they do. Split between the beginning and the ending, the story of Hartigan and Nancy (Jessica Alba) is spread over an eight year period. Now the story was written in such a way, that there is no reason why it all couldn't have come first. The reason behind this is that the conclusion of Clive Owen's part really is powerful. You see this scene, you think "yeah that's amazing" and then rather than finishing, the film goes over to Bruce Willis. When organising the film's run, Rodriguez made a major mistake. Overall Willis's story is not that bad, but compared with the rest of the film it is weak, and it shouldn't have been placed where it was. Obviously Rodriguez was too concerned with his colours.
"Sin City" is a well made and beautifully shot film. With one or two amazing performances and three good stories, it could quite easily have been one of the best films of all time. Yes it is violent, but mostly the violence helps the story. Unfortunately though, like so many other films recently, style took hold as the organisation of the film by director Robert Rodriguez went wrong. All three stories are worthy of praise, but by putting the weakest one last, Rodriguez has managed to turn a potentially amazing film into a merely adequate one. Beautiful, but unfortunately mediocre and disappointing.