Some of Sin City's most hard-boiled citizens cross paths with a few of its more reviled inhabitants.Some of Sin City's most hard-boiled citizens cross paths with a few of its more reviled inhabitants.Some of Sin City's most hard-boiled citizens cross paths with a few of its more reviled inhabitants.
- Awards
- 4 wins & 6 nominations
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaDuring the seven-year gap between the first Sin City (2005) and the beginning of principal photography on this film, Brittany Murphy and Michael Clarke Duncan both died, forcing Robert Rodriguez to re-cast their respective roles of Shellie and Manute (Dennis Haysbert). Due to Devon Aoki's pregnancy at the start of production, the character of Miho was also re-cast, with Jamie Chung replacing Aoki. Jeremy Piven also ended up replacing Michael Madsen as Bob.
- GoofsNancy states that in the first Sin City (2005), Hartigan killed himself by sticking a gun in his mouth and shooting. He actually shot himself in the forehead.
- Crazy creditsRobert Rodriguez's credit for cinematography and editing is displayed as "Shot and cut by Robert Rodriguez".
- ConnectionsEdited into Sin City: A Dame to Kill - All Green Screen High-Speed Version (2014)
Featured review
A Dame to Kill for is by no means a boring or bad film. It succeeds as a satisfying sequel to the far more novel and perhaps stronger Sin City... it is bloody, violent, beautifully made, with cool deep voices, nudity and clearly fitting into the film noir genre. Where it falls short is in the charactersationssliding a bit, the strength of two original stories, the change in actors and the gap between the first and second film. There is also a desperate need for more iconic moments which the Sin City comics and the film has plenty of, but they never really come in A Dame to Kill for.
The characters seems less edgy, less strong charactered and some despite being far more stereotypical carries less of a punch. Especially Marv and Dwight who are the central characters fall a bit short. With Dwight almost feeling detached from the story he is the centre character of. I never thought I would find myself ever thinking that Owen over Brolin. Rourke however seems to have lost some of his edge again, but still causes plenty of mayhem. The new original story lines is probably as good as the rest, but it feels like we never get a very satisfying end out the first one of it especially because it plays as probably the most straightforward story with less of the iconic art work or stunning scenes put in it, it relies on Gordon-Hevitt's abilities more than anything else. The second original story however fairs better mostly due to Alba's dancing and Rourke's brute. If one has not recently seen Sin City and goes to see this it can be a bit hard putting things into place in it's sequel... most people benefit from having seen Sin City recently in order to truly enjoy the film's anachronistic narrative.
It is an awesome film, I will not argue against that, and it does give people more of what they want from Sin City. And there is maybe couple of camels to swallow. But I think in time when seen in union with it's predecessor and sequel(s) it will come out stronger than it might appear now.
I saw the 3D version and surprisingly it actually works well for the film, although I am sure the film would be just as good in 2D alone. It is worth seeing in the cinema, it has the scale/action/importance and beauty to justify that. It will not be remembered for it's visuals as much as Sin City, but it will be recognised for how it fits into the Sin City style.
The characters seems less edgy, less strong charactered and some despite being far more stereotypical carries less of a punch. Especially Marv and Dwight who are the central characters fall a bit short. With Dwight almost feeling detached from the story he is the centre character of. I never thought I would find myself ever thinking that Owen over Brolin. Rourke however seems to have lost some of his edge again, but still causes plenty of mayhem. The new original story lines is probably as good as the rest, but it feels like we never get a very satisfying end out the first one of it especially because it plays as probably the most straightforward story with less of the iconic art work or stunning scenes put in it, it relies on Gordon-Hevitt's abilities more than anything else. The second original story however fairs better mostly due to Alba's dancing and Rourke's brute. If one has not recently seen Sin City and goes to see this it can be a bit hard putting things into place in it's sequel... most people benefit from having seen Sin City recently in order to truly enjoy the film's anachronistic narrative.
It is an awesome film, I will not argue against that, and it does give people more of what they want from Sin City. And there is maybe couple of camels to swallow. But I think in time when seen in union with it's predecessor and sequel(s) it will come out stronger than it might appear now.
I saw the 3D version and surprisingly it actually works well for the film, although I am sure the film would be just as good in 2D alone. It is worth seeing in the cinema, it has the scale/action/importance and beauty to justify that. It will not be remembered for it's visuals as much as Sin City, but it will be recognised for how it fits into the Sin City style.
- Frogfisher
- Aug 19, 2014
- Permalink
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Sin City 2
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $65,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $13,757,804
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $6,317,683
- Aug 24, 2014
- Gross worldwide
- $39,407,616
- Runtime1 hour 42 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content