Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Comic book writer, Frank Miller, is...well...a strange case. He's basically one of those people that has had respect in his early career, but later got offensive to high levels. You can watch episodes of Linkara's "Atop The Forth Wall," and pretty much get a good idea of what kind of man Frank Miller is. That's not to say he's given out some good material; let's not forget, he WAS the guy that brought Batman back to his darker roots with "The Dark Knight Returns." Then there's the cult classic comic book, "Sin City."

For those who don't know, "Sin City" is a black & white comic that is a violent and gritty work of fiction; it uses colors for certain areas, but as a way of symbolism. Examples are red being power, blue as corruption, green is envy, and yellow as danger. When brought to the big screen, director Robert Rodriguez had Miller on board to make sure that every shot, pose, and effect was like it's predecessor, making it the first comic book movie LITERALLY brought to life. It's one of those examples of a shot-for-shot recreation done pretty damn well. The visual style is just breathtaking to look at, as it really manages to have both the look and feel of something new, and is a contender for Rodriguez's best film.

Talks of a sequel have been jumping around for a few years now, and it really has been raising speculation as to whether or not one was going to happen. When we did get a date for it, it ended up being swapped out for a different Rodriguez film, which either was a Grindhouse film or a shitty kids' film. It wasn't until after "Machete Kills," that we actually got an official release date for the sequel we've been waiting for: "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For."

Much like the last film, it tells at least three different stories throughout the course of the film: one story involving D'wight dealing with a girl from his past, a gambler with lucky hands who tangles with Senator Rourke, and Nancy and Marv going up against Rourke to take him out for good. While it may not seem like much, it's the characters that truly make this film a one of a kind, much like it's predecessor; to be honest, it rivals up there with the original, as well as the first GOOD Robert Rodriguez film since then.

The visuals are still a wonder to look at, and the camera angles are mesmerizing, to say the least. If there's one thing about the "Sin City" movies that they succeed completely at, it's the visual styles and color schemes, which I think they improved upon. And for a film like this, the 3D actually added to the experience of it, like adding secret sauce to your favorite burger. The action scenes are also fantastic to look at as well, with it being fast paced and pretty damn gory; I mean, it HAS "Kill" in the title, so why wouldn't it have violence?

The returning cast members from the first film, like Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Powers Boothe, Jessica Alba, Jamie King, and Rosario Dawson, all mange to do a pretty damn good job with what they're given, so no fault on their part; yes, I liked Jessica Alba in this film, don't go crazy. With the newest cast members on the other hand, there are only three that are majorly worth talking about. One is Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Johnny, the man with a lot of luck. Joe just seems to have this welcoming presence to him, that also gives you the feeling he's a daredevil; going up against the most powerful man in all of Sin City to prove he's better, just shows he's not afraid to let down a challenge, even if it means death. Gordon-Levitt still maintains to be one of my favorite actors, and this performance alone would be enough to prove why. Then we get Josh Brolin as D'wight, taking over the role that was originally played by Clive Owen; and while I enjoyed Clive Owen, Brolin just seemed more intimidating as D'wight. You can see the look in his eyes, that he's holding back, trying not to let his inner demons get the better of him. And lastly, we have Eva Green; oh my god, where do I begin with her? If you remember her role in "300: Rise of an Empire," try to imagine that only turned up to 11; sexy, manipulative, crazy, and simply hard to take your eyes off of. I do find it interesting, how in both Frank Miller movie sequels this year, she's pretty easygoing about performing full frontal. Maybe she just likes this type of character, who knows?

Now if I did have any complaints about the film, I'd have about two, but they're only nit-picks. One is the story in which the film is named after, "A Dame to Kill For," which features Brolin and Green's story, does tend to go on a bit too long; not that it was bad, I just felt like they should have cut to another story for a while, and then come back to finish it off. The other complaint I have is that the film just stops near the end of Nancy and Marv's story; again, it wasn't bad, it's just there wasn't quite enough weight for it to end like that. In fact, why didn't they just show that story as a break from D'wight's? Then end the film with D'wight's story, that would have been more fitting; but I digress.

Overall, "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For" is a film that's true to it's title; it's to kill for. If your a fan of the first film, don't miss your chance to check out this one. I'm a bit sad that the film is bombing as hard as it is, because it deserves a lot of love. Hell, go see it in 3D if you want; like I said, the 3D was great.

Rating: 9/10

Hercules

                Folks, do you want to know who my most hated director in Hollywood is? Is it Michael Bay? No, too easy. Is it Paul W.S. Anderson? He’s up there. What about Rob Zombie? The less said about him, the better. Oh wait, maybe it’s Uwe Boll! Too cliché. Tyler Perry? No, my most hated director is none other than Brett Ratner, better known as the guy who destroyed the “X-Men” franchise, and the dumbass who keeps giving Christ Tucker a career; words alone can’t describe how much I hate this prick. Not only can this guy hardly make a cohesive film, aside from “Red Dragon,” but he’s also earned the reputation for one of the most offensive scumbags that Hollywood has. So yeah, I really don’t like this guy. And wouldn’t you know it, he has a film about Hercules released in theaters right now…but let’s real quick talk about the OTHER Hercules film that came out back in January.

                “The Legend of Hercules” stars Kellen Lutz (who is a god-awful actor) as Hercules, the half-god son of Zeus, who is sent by his father and brother to battle an army, after they find out that he is in love with his brother’s fiancé. When sent to battle, he is ambushed and sold off to fight in battles for money, and now has to fight his way back home and regain his status…does half of this plot sound familiar? Yeah, that’s because this film is a complete rip-off of both “300” and “Gladiator.” If a film is going to be based on a character of Greek mythology, why not just adapt THAT?! But even if it did, this film is quite honestly the worst looking film I have ever seen. The production value is just absolute crap, and it makes the film look really cheap; hell, you can even tell that there’s a backdrop behind someone, and the costumes look like this was a high school production. With how this film is structured, you’d think this was made by the Asylum, and it somehow made it to theaters, but no; this was made by Summit Entertainment and directed by Renny Harlin, the guy who gave us “Die Hard 2,” “Cliffhanger,” and “Cutthroat Island.” And while they were all stupid films, Harlin has proved that he can make a film look SOMEWHAT appealing, but not this one. “The Legend of Hercules” looks like it was just shot on a budget of $1 million, but…do you want to know how much this film REALLY cost? $70 million dollars…Are you kidding me?!! You mean to tell me that a film like this cost $70 million to make?!! For god’s sake, this makes “Sharknado” look like an Oscar contender! “SHARKNADO” PEOPLE!!

                So yeah, that film was completely awful; so bad, I decided to give Brett Ratner’s version a chance, with the hope that it wouldn’t be like “The Legend,” which I noticed the film threw some punches at. And for one, it is WAY fucking better than that film; however, that’s not saying much, is it?

                After conquering the Twelve Labors, Hercules and his team are finally ready to find land of their own and retire from being mercenaries. It is then, that they are called for one last job by the princess and king of Thrace, to lead their army against Rhesus, the proclaimed tyrant, but Hercules believes there is much more to this than what he’s been told. Now, I’ve been told this film is also based on the graphic novel by Admira Wijaya and Steven Moore, but I haven’t read it, so I can only judge this film as a standalone film.

                The moments that seemed a bit out of place mostly revolved around Hercules having his colleagues help him keep his legend what it is: a legend. They even show that the monsters, like the Hydra, were really pirates building up a myth to terrorize others. That’s actually a clever idea, humanizing Hercules, to make it seem like it’s all an act, but then there are some head scratching moments that you have to ask, “Wait, then why does this…?” Moments like that seem to get to you when you think about it. I also didn’t find that much investment in his two of his colleagues:  Atalanta and Autolycus. They didn’t seem to have that much character, aside from the typical archetypes, which tend to make the film seem a bit predictable, especially Autolycus; I’m sure Rufus Sewell was doing his best with what he was given, but his Autolycus was nothing compared to Bruce Campbell’s (Hail to the king, baby!).

                The twists, that this film supposedly had with the villains, also seemed very contrived and lack motivation; don’t get me wrong, Joseph Finnes and John Hurt gave good performances, it’s just their characters didn’t work for me. I don’t know if that’s what it was like in the comic, or if it even was true in the mythology, but I felt like a re-write would have helped out a little bit. Then there’s that running gag with Amphiaraus, played by Ian McShane seeing his death approaching through visions, but never actually dies; the only time it was funny was during an escape scene, and was saved by Hercules.

                Now aside from the negativity, was there anything good in this film? Much to my surprise, there was. The production design and the action scenes are actually quite good; it has a gritty looking style to it, like something out of the 80’s. And for a film that’s PG-13, there’s definitely more gruesome stuff than you’d expect; heads on pikes, chariot decapitations, heads impaled with arrowheads with a punch, etc. Even with how bad films like “X-3” are, I will admit they're at least decent looking. I also did find a good mutual connection between Hercules and his nephew, Iolaus; there is a good relationship between the two, since Iolaus is the only blood family Hercules has left. I also liked how the princess’s son looked up to Hercules, like any modern day fan would; it is touching for what it is, and the kid wasn’t annoying, to say the least.

                I’ll also give props to Dwayne Johnson, since he does a good job at playing the son of Zeus himself. I mean, the main tropes needed for the character are there: strong, bulk, fight evil, and be kind-hearted. I actually did think his portrayal of Hercules was believable, and I wouldn’t mind him playing him one more time.

                Overall, while I do still hate Brett Ratner, I'll admit this was at least...passable. If you go into this film with the mindset that you’re just watching The Rock kick ass as Hercules, then you’ll get your money’s worth. But if you’re looking for true Hercules entertainment, watch “Hercules: The Legendary Journeys” produced by Sam Raimi and starring Kevin Sorbo. It's a great show, with Bruce Campbell as Autolycus, and it lead to “Xena: Warrior Princess.”

Rating: 5/10