If you were a fan of the Sin City books and you didn't love this movie, then you should just stop going to movies altogether

Rating: 9/10 (3 April 2005)

To say that Sin City is the most loyal adaptation of a comic ever is a bit of a misnomer, since "adaptation" isn't quite the word I'd use to describe what Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller were able to accomplish here. "Adaptation" suggests that they changed things from the comic in order to adapt it for the film. Instead, all they did was put clothes on a few of the characters, cut out the odd scene, and squished 3+ books together. Other than those small changes, Rodriguez basically just filmed the comics. He didn't just follow the plots, or the stories, or the characters, but also copied the dialogue word-for-word, and matched the shots panel-for-panel. Even if Miller wasn't present for all of shooting, he would have earned his co-director credit since his comics were the storyboards for the film. Rodriguez didn't decide where to put the camera, Miller did back in the 90's when he wrote and drew the books.
This is as loyal a re-telling of any previous format, be it comics, novels, musicals, or an old film, that you are ever going to see. Future films can only match what Sin City did here, not surpass. If you were a fan of the Sin City books and you didn't love this movie, then you should just stop going to movies altogether. Because there is obviously no pleasing you.
Visually, this film is a landmark accomplishment, and should contend with summer blockbusters like Episode III, War of the Worlds, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and Fantastic Four for visual effects Oscars. Some may argue that the film sacrifices substance for style, but to do so would miss the point. In Sin City, style IS the substance. Everything, from the use of black and white, to the hard-boiled dialogue, to the scantily-clad (and un-clad) "dames", to the violence and grit, is a nod to true film noir. The film is about the mood and feel as much as it is about the three stories it contains.
I was completely blown away by the movie, and had it concentrated more on the story than the style, I doubt I would have even been interested in seeing it at all. I'm not usually into ultra-graphic violence, but I was completely enthralled. The movie was harsh, grim, visceral, action-packed, sexy, and shocking. And I loved every second of it.
To be fair and balanced, this is a straight-up guy film. The wife HATED it (as I kinda figured she would). She thought it was visually interesting, but other than that, just a sick mess of violence, cheesy dialogue, and gratuitous nudity. Which is actually a fair assessment of the film. But she says it like it's a bad thing. Although, I will admit, that was pretty much my initial reaction when I read the original Sin City series (that makes up a third of the film) back in high school.
The only minor quibble I had with the film is that Bruce Willis doesn't quite fit the Hartigan character he was cast as. He does a fine job, but is unconvincing as a 60 year old with a bad heart, even less convincing later on as a 68 year old man. I think Clint Eastwood was always the inspiration for Hartigan in That Yellow Bastard, but there's no way he was going to be in this movie. Sin City actually follows Willis' career pattern of following a string of poorly-received action movies with a part in quirky movies by up-and-coming directors. He spends most of his time making himself culturally irrelevant, until a Quentin Tarantino (who directed a scene in Sin City with Clive Owen and Benicio del Toro from The Big Fat Kill), M. Night Shyamalan, or now Robert Rodriguez comes along and rescues Willis' career.
I give the movie 9 stars and want to see it again. And then many more times after that.