--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Kevin Burton Smith <kvnsmith@...>
> > That's too bad. Personally
> > I found it one of the funnest, most innovative and visually boldest
> > movies of 2005.
> Funny? Most of the humour was of the eyeball-rolling type. I'm not
> even sure the humour was intentional, half the time.
"funnest" not funniest.
> The raves (not quite as widespread as you may imagine, by the way),
> were mostly (and justifiably) for the hi-tech visuals, cinematic
> silicone of the highest order, and not the storytelling.
Here's a small assortment (yes, I'm bored right now--I finished a
novel last week and am looking for any excuse not to start another one...)
From Peter Travers, Rolling Stones:
"Sin City is a hard, cold, relentless assault. It's also something
Hollywood seems to have given up on: a bold, uncompromised vision."
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times:
"It's a visualization of the pulp noir imagination, uncompromising and
extreme. Yes, and brilliant."
James Berardinelli, Reel Views:
"Sin City is the most visually inventive comic book adaptation to make
its way to a movie screen. While other directors have attempted to
remain faithful to the look and "feel" of their source material,
Robert Rodriguez has taken things a step further, by using Frank
Miller's graphic novels as storyboards and immersing the audience
neck-deep in the noir currents of Miller's den of iniquity. It's easy
to get lost in Sin City. There's something to appreciate around every
corner - the gritty characters, the uncompromising story, and, most of
all, visuals to astound and amaze. "Eye candy" doesn't even begin to
describe what Rodriguez has accomplished."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 27 Jul 2008 EDT