Worth going to hell for. Amen.

Rating: 10/10 (15 April 2005)

I will say this once, and preach it until the day that I die, but if Criterion does not pick up this title, I may  just maybe  loose faith in their choice of films. This was, hands down, one of the most stylish and innovative films to come out of Hollywood to date. The graphic mind of Frank Miller with the candy-violence ways of Rodriguez coupled together created an undeniable force of creativity and passion that continually lack in the over-budgeted Hollywood films. I have read several reviews that boast the cinematography of this film as being way before its time (thus the apparent lack of support at the box office), but while I did think the way that Rodriguez filmed this movie was outstanding, I thought that it was more than just a visual treat. Everyone in this film seemed to be giving more than what I bargained for. From the direction, to the actors, to even the darkened themes that resonated loudly throughout the film, Sin City was perfection to they eye, but also in every other critiquing category.
What captivated me more than the visual eye-candy was the overall story of Sin City. Rodriguez and Miller both chose to keep the original narrative from the graphic novels to help tell the story that they had filmed. Not only did it help us get from point "A" to point "B" of the story, but it also helped us learn about the characters without the indecent flashback or long speeches. I learned more about the inside of Marv's mind through the battles that he was having with himself than with any other technique that could have been used. I think that brings me to another reason this film worked on more levels than anticipated, because I knew the characters. This is a character driven story. While they to commit graphic scenes of violence, it is the characters that literally steal the show. I can only think of a handful of films (mostly Wes Anderson movies) where I felt like the characters were the central focus, not explosions or sex. While these things surrounded our characters, it was the characters (the strength of the actors) that kept my eyes on the screen.
Continuing with the story, one cannot help but be impressed with the consistency in Miller's stories. The overall themes of each of the stories, while told in different voices and situations were all the same. The theme of love, lust, and revenge seemed to follow all of our characters around the city and surprisingly, it worked. I was never more impressed to see the same themes reworked over and over. Love is huge in this film. Each character has a passion, or a love for someone else, which drives them to the brink of madness. With each character's love followed a moment of revenge. If you look at all three stories, the main narrators are fighting for someone that they love to bring justice to those that did this one person wrong. "Revenge is a dish best served cold," they say, but in the case of Miller's pen, he serves it hot and heavy. Finally, there is a moment of truth with each of the stories. I didn't realize this until I had spent several days thinking about this film, but in each of Miller's stories we are not shown the full truth. It is a one sided story where we see the action through the eyes of the main narrator. We are only shown one truth, instead of jumping back and forth between good and evil. I really liked this because it created a sense of distrust in Sin City. Were the guys that we were cheering for really the "good" in the equation, or were they just all elements that created the chaos known as Sin City? Marv's story in particular exemplifies this idea. His blurred vision of reality resonated through me as the film continued to the other stories, and made me question several of the "endings". Think about this when you see it again (and possibly again and again) because remember, the title of this film is Sin City, those that reside in it are not always the "good" in the "good vs. evil" equation.
Finally (and I know I have mentioned it already above, but I want to honestly put it aside from everything else), I would like to recognize the caliber of acting that came from our actors. Here we have the best in the industry proving that they can handle the pressures of a huge budget, yet also place 100% of their heart into a smaller scale. Their ability to create this noir-styled picture and stay with the style created back in the 40s was impressive. The 40s released some of my favorite films, and these actors paid a huge homage to them. Some will argue that the dialogue is choppy and humorously bad at times, but I say that you need to explore some of the 40s crime noir films and see that they are just building on an already beautiful structure. Everyone involved in this film was outstanding. I cannot think of one character that I disliked or thought could have done better. I think it is the fact that I have to give credit to Rodriguez for revitalizing the careers (and showing the world what amazing older talent we have) of Rutger Hauer, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Powers Boothe, and Michael Madsen. These guys proved that they are some of the heaviest hitters in Hollywood. Also, Sin City proved that Clive Owen will be in Hollywood for a very long time and will soon have every award imaginable. He is my new Hollywood God.
Overall, and if you couldn't tell already, I thought this was a perfect film. Criterion, this film is all yours.
Grade: ***** out of *****