RetroReview: Sin City

Apparently the number one DVD in Canada right now is Sin City. I don't think that speaks so much to the strengths of Sin City, though, as it does to the weakness of all the subpar bullshit being tossed our way by the incompetents currently running Hollywood.

Sin City is a movie I wanted to love -- really wanted to love -- since I really do love dark, gritty films. Unfortunately, not this one. Nope.

There are interesting moments. Some scenes are very watchable and intriguing, but overall, the flick falls seriously flat for me.

The movie’s stylized from the start to the finish. Whether it’s the colourized black and white setting the pace for the retro-style visuals and comic-book feel, or it’s the overwritten dialogue, the movie evokes the gritty detective stories from the ‘40s and ‘50s.

But what do I mean by overwritten dialogue, since that’s the part that irks me the most? The movie’s jammed with unlikely voiceover, characters who speak in that melodramatic style of the ‘50s -- all the fucking time. There’s no break from the pattern, it’s just always there. But it falls apart for me at one point when Clive Owen’s onscreen, narrating his action ON camera, as he debates killing someone.

Dialogue should reflect character, but if they’re all talking in the same slick-dick manner, there is no character. They try to instill “character” by having the actors insert personalizations. Like Bruce Willis’ character narrates his portion of the film and every third line he calls himself “old man” when he’s trying to psyche himself up. I swear, “Old man” is used 30 or 40 times. That’s not character-driven dialogue -- and neither is anything else in the movie.

Just because it sounds good and has alliteration and snappy phrasing doesn’t mean it is good. It means it’s a gimmick.

And this movie is a perfect example of when directors cross the line from stylizing and land squarely in the realm of gimmicking.

Sin City ain’t style. It’s all gimmick. And it’s a tragedy, since I love half the cast and two of the directors -- Quentin Tarrantino and Robert Rodriguez.

As an artist, writer, whatever, you need to be consciously aware of the boundaries. You go one step too far, and you make a mockery of yourself. And a mockery of that thing you’ve lovingly tried to bring to life.

Like this movie. The first 15 minutes are crap. Then it improves a bit, but the ending leaves you flat as well. It’s as if it just suddenly ends. And I don’t need my stories all wrapped up with a pretty bow, since I love an unresolved plot as much as any writer would, but there are natural stepping-off points. There was a natural stepping-off point directly preceeding the last scene of the film, so why the fuck did they do what they do? I can’t figure it out.

Also, another problem is that of timeline. I love an inconsistent timeline like in Pulp Fiction. That movie is sheer genius. This movie attempts something similar, but it doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t add up. Not really. One could say, “Yes, X character dies here, but at this point, this character is doing X...” and possibly reach a timeline conclusion that makes passable sense, but it’s reaching. It’s really bloody reaching.

It’s a shame. As a viewer, you get the sense that this is the cinematic equivalent to guys trying to one-up each other with shock-jock antics. It’s too bad it’s such talented directors doing the one-upping.

Apparently, critics did like this. I can't figure that out. I'm wondering if they bought the flash and style, which really is visually stunning and is worth seeing just for that, or if they're simply comparing it against the crap that's coming out these days? See, I'm comparing it to actual good movies, but hey. Maybe I've got it all wrong. That's what I thought critics did. Hmm.

This could have been so damned much better. Too bad. It really is a sin.

A movie I'm dying to see, opens Wednesday, is the Constant Gardener. By the director of City of God, which is fucking brilliant and I intend to write a review of sometime, with a John LeCarre story, and Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Wiesz? Shut up! Brilliant combination! Unbeatable!