|
|
Posted by Gunther Gloop on 10/10/70 11:32
Smid wrote:
> POD {ҿ} wrote:
>> Why are people going nuts over this crud?
>>
>> People talking about it having a good DVD? FFS!
>>
>> It is dire, cliched, hammy, 10th rate film noir/pulp fiction rip off
>> of the most amature kind. This was National Lampoon does Mickey
>> Spillane, or it would have been if it didn't try to take itself so
>> seriously.
>>
>> If you thought this was good, you must have loves Phanton Menace
>> too, as that was also a mountain of CGI plastered over a script of
>> runny poo!
>>
>> Eye-candy for the spotty brain dead geek generation.
>
> Its pretty much exactly what was in the comic. So you can't blame the
> movie, blame the comic. The movie did its job perfectly and kind of
> innovatively....
>
> The comic is like a lot of Frank Miller stuff, completely over the
> top. His Robocop scripts were cut to ribbons to remove the violence.
> He wanted to do a noir in a series, and thats what he did. His usual
> stories are moralistic tales set in some extremely violent world...
> Which is exactly what Sin City was. It was never meant to be a 40's
> film noir and your mistaken for taking it for that...
>
It's not a "moralistic tale" though -thankfully.
I enjoyed a lot of Frank Miller's other comics, but never could get into Sin
City. You're right that it's a perfect comic-to-movie job.
People "defend" the movie because it achieves what it means to do... eg.
over-the-top violence without pandering to pc attitudes.
That to me is a worthy concept, but unfortunately (for me) it is not enough
in itself. I had no interest in the plot or any of the characters. If it
wasn't for Mickey Rourke I woulda bin outta there faster'n a Houdini Turkey
in a Christmas oven.
-Kevin.
--
Reply to: news@SPAMBEGONEgunthergloop.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|