Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

2014
Directors: Robert Rodriguez/Frank Miller
Writer: Frank Miller

The first Sin City film came out in June 2005, nine years ago. I was only 12 years old then, and had just finished my first year of secondary school. Looking at it that way seems pretty shocking to me; those nine years have encapsulated most of the more important events in my life. And in film terms too, that’s bizarrely long. I’m not totally aware of why there was such a delay, if it was scripting troubles or problems with producers or funding? It seems likely this gap was a major reason why this film seems to be failing at the box office. Me, on the other hand, I couldn’t wait! I was a huge fan of the original, having first seen it around 2008 and several more times since then, most recently last week. Rumours had been bubbling for several years, and when a trailer finally appeared, it looked fantastic. This truly looked like something to be seen on the big screen (although my viewing was slightly let down by some poor projecting, which cut off the top and bottom of the frame marginally).

Similar to the first film, A Dame to Kill For is comprised of several loosely connected but generally separate stories, all involving the shady characters of the Sin City underworld. Based upon Frank Miller’s series of graphic novels, some these plots are related to the last film, while some are original material. Confusingly for me, some are prequels and others are sequels, so already unfortunately these intertwined stories feel less cohesive. Big players Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Jessica Alba and Rosario Dawson return for more; Josh Brolin replaces Clive Owen, and there are major new roles for Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Eva Green.

Also returning is the distinctive film noir hyperstyle, and the really gorgeous use of excessive high contrast black and white, with bursts of colour to add character – my favourite this time being the vivid green of Eva Green’s eyes. Neat little visual flourishes remain too, a particularly great one being when Gordon-Levitt’s Johnny, whilst losing at poker, sees himself shrunk to game size, stacks of chips around him, as he is sliced by razor-sharp cards. The consistency of style is reassuring and enjoyable, making it hard to believe it really has been nine years between films; although most of it is of course created on computers so it’s hardly difficult to recreate! 

The plotting is just as singularly driven, as characters pursue further revenge, profit or gain, and again, many encounter situations which turn out to be not what they seem. It’s pure pastiche, pure style, only lightly brushing over the themes of true film noir, such as urban decline, economic depression or entrapment. The biggest feature of A Dame to Kill For is corruption, and this gives a greater role to Powers Booth’s corrupt Senator Roarke, which is only a good thing as he is an electrifying screen presence. The simile-heavy dialogue and metaphors are back too, and just as enjoyably overblown and self-aware, although here sometimes pushed to the point of being overtly ridiculous.

A Dame to Kill For is a very entertaining voyage into the most disturbing of content turned pulp. Even the faces and the hushed gravelly voices of the actors feels just right. It’s just… something about this film didn’t feel as satisfying as the last time. A lot of reviews have pointed out how the sheer novelty and spectacle of the first film, once so distinct, has now become far more commonplace, which I suppose is partially true. But one of the reasons I was so looking forward to A Dame to Kill For was because it would be another chance to see this style done so beautifully.

Rather I feel the issues here lies with the scripting. The first film had a greater presence to it, a greater drive and purpose. Each of the three lead characters – Rourke’s anti-hero, Owen’s everyman, Willis’s tortured good guy – had a quest, a reason for doing what they were doing. Willis’s story of Hartigan looking out for Alba’s Nancy was especially effective. But this time, these stories and double crosses have less of a presence. Rourke’s Marv seems to exist purely to propagate violence for other characters’ needs. Gordon-Levitt’s Johnny’s attempt to best the corrupt senator at cards has far less of a powerful narrative force to it than that of Alba’s Nancy, who is being driven crazy by her desire for revenge. However, I found Alba less of an engaging screen presence than Willis was in the first film, with both pursuing similar aims. Finally, as much of a fan of Brolin as I am, I found his take on McCarthy far less charming than Owen’s, instead playing the character more as a bland thug repressing his personality in order to battle addictions which are mentioned only briefly. His story is dominated by Eva Green’s Ava – a charismatic and sultry take on the femme fatale, she’s definitely the best part of the film.

Overall, I found A Dame to Kill For far more rewarding than most critics, many of whom complained it was dull. Though the film shares many features directly with its predecessor, it doesn’t make it a mere carbon copy. However, this sequel is let down by poorer pacing and plotting; it feels less vital and urgent than the first time. Even though many stories end unhappily in Sin City, at least in the first film there was a sense of conclusion to them. This time however, many simply end without creating as great a sense of satisfaction. The visual fireworks are here, they’re simply less explosive.