This is the first of a new feature on the blog...Reviews of Film/t.v.
I am expecting all you budding journalists to get involved ...(remember universities/employers are even more interested in you if you can show that you have already started writing...use this blog as such an opportunity.)
SIN CITY(2005-Directed byFrank Miller,Robert Rodriguez)
Sin city may have been released 2 years ago, but it definitely hasn’t lost any of its relevance or impact in the time since, as I perceived a few weeks ago when I finally saw it for the first time. With the focus being primarily on style and looks you would expect there to be a lack of an engaging story, but the film holds together exceedingly well, which is quite astounding really when you consider it follows three different characters’ with only tenuous links to each other. Each of these three personas are well-developed and have much deeper personalities than you would expect from a gritty, 2-dimensional noir film, but there they are, in all their masculine muscle and scars. The film is narrated by each character in turn, allowing the audience to see the world from three different perspectives, forming a detailed picture of a city full of drugs, blood and corrupted men spitting on the little people.
The characters, though highly unrealistic and, in most cases, superhuman, are thoroughly believable at an emotional level due to their constant outpouring of thoughts and feelings. In fact, their unrealistic nature only makes the film better, as the fight scenes reveal when huge burley blokes swing from banisters and shatter doors with their chest... REVIEW CONTINUES IN COMMENTS SECTION.CLICK 'COMMENTS' TO READ ON...
David Ruddock Yr 12
1 comment:
Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke and Clive Owen supply these leading roles with their gravely voices and dark humoured take on death and disaster. Each is seeking to fulfil his own agenda, keeping the film fresh as it progresses whilst allowing the audience to empathise with all three. In regards to the visual aspect of Sin City, my first and foremost reaction was of the opinion that it reeked style: only a director with full confidence in his own abilities could pull off such a spectacular display of visual treats that leaves you dribbling as the intro credits appear. Making blood luminescent white is a stroke of genius, as the audience cannot avoid seeing it because it stands out like a severed thumb; you cannot help but stare as it stains the floor and leaves its mark on your mind.
I must state, however, that this is not the perfect film and it does have its flaws: with the fast-paced storylines chugging along without rests, several major characters are introduced with barely a mention of their name. Michael Clarke Duncan’s brass-eyed Manute was an intriguing personality, so to leave him after a few short scenes was very disappointing. Another negative point has to be the inter-weaving storyline because, whereas each plot could be completely separate or at least have tenuous ties, the connections are made to be deep and profound but they become confusing and are hard to follow. That said, however, the rest of the film carried the elusive ‘wow’ factor the whole way through, and with two sequels in the works it looks like the world of Sin City is going to get much more stylish.
Post a Comment