Too long, too shallow

Rating: 3/10 (21 July 2006)

I am a comic-book fan. I like especially the work of writer Alan Moore, and I think that many of his comics tell you something about life, human nature or society which is new or at least is viewed from an original standpoint. I like what Frank Miller did for the Batman series, but I read a couple of issues of "Sin City" a few years ago, and wasn't impressed. The dialogue and character narration tried to seem profound, just like good noir films or novels used to be, but I couldn't find any true deep meaning; just overly pretentious lines that went nowhere. Perhaps it's because I didn't get it, but it seemed all form and attitude over substance to me.
As for the movie: I agree with everybody in that it's a very faithful adaptation. And I'm not talking only about the impressive and innovative visuals. I'm talking about the shallow, pretentious voice-overs, which sounded even more shallow and pretentious as spoken by actors than read in a comic book. I liked parts of the film more than the comic, though. The fragment about Mickey Rourke's character was exciting, well acted and funny -which the comic book was not, at least as far as I remember. The story with Bruce Willis and Jessica Alba bored the hell out of me. All sense of wonder, awe or disgust that the first third of the movie inspired in me were long gone. Besides, the sentimental and overly serious tone of the final fragment was at odds with the cartoony, more humorous first part. Considering that all the male leads are supermen of sorts and ALL the females are incredibly attractive women who perform -and are victims of- violent acts, the film seems a bit like an adolescent's fantasy (or a dirty old man's!).
In other words, I think it would have been a shallow but none the less entertaining movie had it been shorter.