MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

One more Sin City thought…

I was in the book store today and looked through the “Yellow Bastard” graphic novel in the Sin City series. Amazing… intense… and emotional.
It is almost image for image, word for word, the same as the movie. But Miller’s drawings say more.
I guess the answer, for me, is that there is something literal about film that isn’t about most fine art. The edges of the images speak volumes… the jagged nature of them…
Here is a page that is duplicated in the film. It is just so much more powerful on paper.
And here is this rather smart film-to-comic comparison by FilmRot’s Mediamelt.

Be Sociable, Share!

16 Responses to “One more Sin City thought…”

  1. bicycle bob says:

    obviously the books better than the movie. its the way it is. hopefully the movie can come close to it

  2. Man With No Name says:

    Having not seen Sin City, I’ll reserve judgment. I suspect I will like it though (I was one of the few who enjoyed Once Upon a Time in Mexico). That being said, what’s the point of doing a shot for shot recreation of the book? They are two different mediums. Films have the advantage of pulling us into the experience by incorporating music, speech, and motion. I hope none of these elements were sacrificed in order to achieve a visual match of something that already exists.

  3. don says:

    Again, great point David. Sure, it’s really neat to recreate an amazing comic book frame for frame onscreen but neat doesn’t equal good.

  4. Terence D says:

    I just don’t see it crossing over to the general public. It will take a lot to be more than a one week wonder.

  5. Mark says:

    It will make its money on week one. Anything less than a 40% drop off in week two has to be looked at as a success.

  6. don says:

    Uhh….the new blog is broken. I wrote what is credited to Man With No Name above, not the comment below that one…

  7. don says:

    Oh, wait. I’m a moron. I got it now….derrrrrrr. I think I need to go sit in a movie theater, vegging out and watching a 2 hour comic book movie ASAP!

  8. Man With No Name says:

    Don’t worry, don, I had the same thing happen to me. Just have to get used to name being below the message.

  9. bicycle bob says:

    the name below the message thing kinda weirds me out. forget my place when reading it

  10. Chester says:

    The name has always been below the message, even on the old site. What’s different now is the confusing new rule line between each name and each message. That line consistently gives the wrong impression that it’s a separator between comments. Dave, if you want to keep that line as a design element, you should at least put the posted names above it.

  11. Chester says:

    Back to “Sin City.” Every review I’ve seen has mentioned, the rampant violence and overall amorality of the film and its characters. With that as a given, I wonder if the death of the Pope, which is expected any second now, could noticeably affect box office receipts for this (or, for than matter, any other) film this weekend.

  12. Mark says:

    It was a pretty good movie. Good performances. Rourke was great. What has he been doing since the mid 90’s? People that see it know what they’re getting into. They just want a good story. No ones death is going to play a part in people seeing this. Only journalists and guys like Chet care.

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    Chester: The “All pope, all the time coverage” likely will transfix many of the faithful this weekend. (It’s worth remembering that Catholicism is, hands down, the biggest single religious denomination in the U.S.) On the other hand, many people just as likely will go out to the movies just to get away from such… well, I was going to say overkill, but God might punish me for that, so let’s just say, such ubiquitous coverage. I was 11 years old when JFK was killed, and I remember my aunt getting so fed up with the nonstop TV coverage that she decided to take me and my siblings out to see a movie. No kidding: On Nov. 22, 1963, I actually saw… “Dr. No.”

  14. Joe Fitz says:

    As a Catholic I am deeply saddened by it. Thank God its natural causes and not something else. He went peacefully.

  15. teambanzai says:

    Saw the film last night visually it was great. The one complaint I have was that the Clive Owen/Rosario Dawson sequence was weak compared to the other two. It could have easily been removed. The Mickey Roarke and Bruce Willis sequences fit together nicely.

  16. JoeLeydon says:

    I know, it’s only April. But here’s my nominee for Bullshit B.O. Story of the Year, direct from, and linked — surprise, surprise! — on the Drudge Report website:
    Moviegoers Living in ‘Sin City’
    by Brandon Gray
    April 3, 2005
    As news of Pope John Paul II’s death dominated the weekend, moviegoers appear to have vindicated recent accusations that America is plagued by what religious radicals call a death culture

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon