Change Your Image
FatChino
Reviews
Doom (2005)
Doom, Doom, Doom
Dear Doom game creators,
Andrzej Bartkowiak, director of US Marshalls, Lethal Weapon 4, Speed and Species here. Recently my thirteen year old son son has been playing more and more of your 'retro' first person shooter Doom. I've been discussing it with him and basically we both agree that it would be a great project for the future. We really think former WWE superstar The Rock would be perfect for the starring role. Basically we worked out a character that is muscular, tough, mean and without any other human emotions - that guy is gonna be in charge.
Anyway, we really like the possibilities presented by the violence of the game, the potential for dark corridors as well as the vagueness of the story of the game had at the time of making. So far my son has written an opening sequence. He wrote it after he watched Aliens, in about ten minutes!! I was so proud ... but that's another matter altogether.
I have some other ideas. We'll keep the idea of the evil corporation (audiences can't get enough of those evil corporations these days). There was something in the game about mutations too, right(?) those will go in too (hey if resident evil can mutations and evil corporations, we can too). Those weapons you had in the game were pretty impressive as well ... BFG ; Big F**king Gun haha ... me and my son had a good laugh about that. Well we'll keep all those too.
Other than that I haven't got an exact plan of the rest of the film. One thing's for sure though is that we'll get rid of that thing you guys had about hell in their. WHAT WERE YOU THINKING??? People want mutations and evil corporations on Mars, and maybe just maybe something about teleportation ... Hell is just to out there for a movie like this. This is about art, not game-play. Anyway we'll keep the die-hards off our backs by making the characters mention hell every few minutes ... ah well sort something better out.
I'll get the writers to mail you a copy when its done. Expect it within, say, the next few hours. Needless to say there'll be a sexy female scientist, plenty of cool mutation fx and of course a showpiece end battle with The Rock included.
Well all that's left to do is get your final approval, which I'm sure you'll agree to after reading the notes my son has prepared for you. Other than that all that's left is to get The Rock on board and everything's set.
Peace out, Your buddy, Andrzej Bartkowiak*
P.S. just had a flash of inspiration; it'll seal the deal for you; basically in the middle of the film we have say 10 minutes solid fighting by our hero ... and wait, wait ... get this, its from his perspective; those gamers will just go bananas for it ...
*This comment has nothing to do with Mr. Bartkowiak or any of his associates who I am sure would never sink to the levels of banality and childishness displayed above.
Friday the 13th (1980)
Signposts to the future of slasher-genre ... still pretty poor
We all learn from the works of others ... better yet the mistakes of others ... we look to take the best pieces from others' attempts; incorporate them into our own; cast off anything we think was a fault and end up with a product that builds upon yet betters the foundations left for us by those gone before us. I guess if this were the case, well, films would just keep getting better and better and better ... damn it, reviews would too! Logically taking the perspective that, given the number of sequels 'Friday The 13th' has spawned, this particular slasher must have an awful lot going for it I decided to spend an hour or so watching it. You can see the various slasher trade-marks (as they must surely actually become some day) that the 'ironic' efforts of the 90s ('Scream' & co) would so readily taunt in a decade or so ... oh look there's the naughty-sexually-active-teens getting just what they deserve, there's the oh-teen-number-1's-dying-no-he's-not-he's-just-joking, there's the local madman who might just turn out to be talking some sense and oh of course couldn't forget the classic ... you think it's all over ... but it's not ... I mean it is ... or is it? etc etc.
These were and are signposts through the slasher-genre; to be used again and again. Then in the 90s 'Scream' told us that was cool anymore; hell, it wasn't even scary anymore ... it was just too damn predictable. It was like the see-saw for that brief moment had reached a cynical, sarcastic equilibrium before being unbalanced again letting the old values creep back; this time more polished than ever.
And therein lie the faults of this film for me. It's a clichéd story line; FINE ... It uses the same old same old (probably not so much at the time but anyway) tried and tested, jump and scare 'em tactics; FINE. But the execution (no pun intended) just isn't what I'd expect from what really is a mammoth of a franchise on number of sequels alone. There is a lacking of a sense of tension that has to be crucial at the centre of a film like this. Cheap scares aplenty, but no sense of foreboding. Sure, horror should be notable for its production values and its inventiveness (which are sadly lacking in bundles too) but low budget horror (as this was evidently) can offer us and often does offer us great scares that come from that sense of tension.
Basically the story of the teens free to do what they want and thus falling victim to psychopathic who happens to be handy with various sharp objects has been polished up and done to death since. Without the high production values (see final fight with Jason's loving mother ... tisk tisk) and needed tension, this, for me served only to guide future tweaked versions of this for years to come before the 'ironic' 90s efforts 'showed us' how formulaic these (often enjoyable) films were, to set the process in motion again this time towards a more brutal, nasty end product that was evident in the 70s (see Wolf Creek, Haute Tension etc).
Before viewing I had in my mind that this was for some reason on a par with Carpenter's 'Halloween' among horror fans ... really all I can say is that 'it musta been the sequels!!'
Evil Dead II (1987)
The Sequel to the Ultimate Experience in Grueling Terror indeed
This is the type of film we really wish we made ourselves before some else thought of it. It's intelligent but not entirely complex ... entirely enjoyable yet a serious piece of film making ... everything adds up to cult status. It's the type of film your uninformed friends (or mine at least, I'm surely surrounded by fools) dismiss as trash without giving it a chance.
Raimi showed us the thrills, chills and blackly tinged laughs he could bring about in the first in the series on a virtually non-existent budget. Here with just that little bit more he retreads old ground but everything still works ... probably more effectively too! Seeing some of props used and slightly off production values (the 'muppet' headless girlfriend in the shed, the demon head stuck to camera attacking Ash towards the end, Ted Raimi's ripped old lady from hell suit and the quickest of glimpses of set floor boards during one stage of shooting) shows how Raimi was still constrained by budget issues.
Seriously though, who cares ... this film has 6 different colours of blood, some seriously funny slap-stick scenes (didn't think I'd say that anytime soon) and a chemistry between lead Campbell and director Raimi that let the jokes flow freely.
Campbell proves himself a master of face contortion, self-harm as well as flipping himself over! So many classic scenes in such a short space of time ... my favourite being when Jake is dragged into the cellar and a torment of pink blood comes pumping out. The camera work is as dynamic and as fast paced as in the first outing, the shot of ash standing by the remains of the bridge at the start of film standing out for its grandness among otherwise less cinematic shots.
The film leads on nicely to the 3rd installment in the series with one-handed Ash getting sucked into another dimension to face the undead in jolly olde England (or something like that). It really is no wonder that the in-store geeks/pop-culture snobs of High Fidelty described Evil Dead II as the greatest movie of all time.
'Groovey' indeed.
Raw Deal (1986)
So THIS is where McBane came from
I really don't have that much against the 80s. Hey I'm an '83 kid myself. That means I survived 7 years of the decade ... I wore a little mullet and a shell suit ... I'm sure of it ...
But this was the age of the action hero and McB ... sorry I mean Raw Deal is just one of those types of film. Basically it's a vehicle for Arnie to look big, muscular and pretty darn tough. Of course he does it really well ... filling out some rather ugly 80s-wear very nicely indeed. He even has a mandatory arming up scene in there (I really think he filmed just one of these for time-effectiveness and posted it in on the last day of shooting for all his shoot 'em ups).
I'd love to be able to say this a run of the mill all out action effort give it 6/10, lament about its lack of originality, point out its near cut and paste qualities and leave it at that, but damn, this is one confusing film.
One of strangest opening sequences I can recall sees Arnie chasing what appears to be a cop on a motorbike before setting him alight. To the viewers relief we discover that this near homicide was committed by Sheriff Arnie before the biker was indeed revealed as an impostor (phew). Arnie (who 's past as some sort of government agent is briefly touched upon) is basically hired by a director in the agency to go unofficially undercover and basically wreak vengeance upon mobsters who have killed the director's son.
The confusing part is how Arnie ends up in the fire fights he finds himself in and why seeing as he appears to be virtually invincible does he have to infiltrate the mob's ranks at all (the figures involved are all seemingly publicly known) before killing them. Thinking about it where does this small town all-American sheriff get all his guns for this rampage, and how does he rise up within the ranks of the mob so quickly ... I guess all this questions are things that will never be answered and really should never be asked.
In the end of course the director who kicked Arnie out of the agency in the first place turns out to be working for the mob; vindicating Arnie's tactics as he becomes number 86 of his victims. By this time I could almost hear the Simpsons McBane character explain why women always leave the toilet seat up or remark that he indeed does wear loafers!
Unfortunately the film can't even be relied on for classic one liners; the closest we get is after Arnie's wife throws a cake against the wall to which he replies
"NEVER DRINK AND BAKE..."
Go watch Total Recall, or Predator again instead!
War of the Worlds (2005)
Sorry Steve, Just Can't Let You Get Away With that Ending ...
This film seems to have everything going for it ... brilliant action sequences, unnervingly horrific scenes, a dab of political commentary and just a smidgen of character development ... make no mistake this is a Spielberg action/sci-fi effort not to be confused with 'serious-Steve' who made Schlinder's List and Saving Private Ryan ... then we come to the end of the film.
WHAT HAPPENED THERE!?! Fair enough this is Hollywood. Maybe everything has to be tied up nicely (perhaps to his credit Spielberg didn't go too over board and totally reunite his on-screen family of the times). Perhaps I would have felt let down with a totally downbeat ending that would have seemingly tied in with the grim tell of survival that had proceeded. The ending though just comes off as rushed, ill-conceived and a total let down. The original Wells' ending could have been handle much more positively ... the final 'battle' scene and subsequence Freeman (king of the v.o.) voice-over just leaves you wondering what really might have been.
What proceeds that though is great entertainment. Popcorn flies through the air, loved-ones cling to each other as Spielberg delivers a series of high-impact shocks and hands are held over eyes waiting for the next jolt ... OK well maybe not quite but this borders on horror at times ... honestly it does! The scene where Cruise ventures out into the newly harvested world of strange vein-like creations is awesome (in the non-surfer and totally intellectual way!) and brilliantly created.
All notions of horror aside this is an action flick dealing with the grim notion of survival at all costs. The first appearance of the 'tripods' is particularly impressive; buildings fall, the earth heaves and people ... well they basically fry! As the story progresses we see Cruise's (he may be a jerk, but he sure does Hollywood blockbuster well) dock worker, Ray, tries to build bridges with his estranged children (awwwee). Eventually we see Fanning's (a talent I'm sure well be hearing about for years and years to come) character become drawn to him, but Justin Chatwin's (just a tad annoying) Robbie relationship with his father is slightly confusing ... just when he seems to have made a connection he runs off to join the army! I guess these are minor details; the real drawing points of this film are Spileberg's use of SFX, the set-ups created for these action scenes and Ray's tale of his grim efforts to save himself and his children. These all hold up well to scrutiny ... but the ending, OH, the ending ...
McCinsey's Island (1998)
BBC + McCinsey's Island + TV licenses ... please explain
Who makes this stuff.
I watched this on BBC one tedious afternoon ... couldn't they just have showed us Titmarch repeats or something. So it's the Hulk none stop, no ads for what seems an eternity. OK so there's a big crazy world out there to explore, and there are even other channels, seems like hundreds of them these days. Obviously I didn't have to waste my precious hours on this inanity and then more time following it up with this effort to save you your hours; but note to BBC director general; McCinsey's Island into TV licenses of £150 or whatever it is, does not go! Going off at a bit of a tangent there but anyway ...
Seriously ... WHO MAKES THIS STUFF! Hulk Hogan ... I can only assume that the man has some kind of disorder that makes him literally need some kind of attention to survive ... he's wrestling at 53 for god sake!! Obviously the only attention McCinsey's Island will get the 'Hulkster' is, well, if it goes up there as one of the worst pieces of film of all time.
Plot: basically there is none ... everything's built around awfully carried out set pieces ... the most ridiculous one coming at the end where the main evil-doer chases our heroes along the shore, wait for it, on water skis, firing wildly at them before crashing. Hulk's stature and physique, his main 'attributes' as an actor; which I guess are supposed to offer the viewer something in the way of a substandard Arnie; cannot hold him up, given his monotone delivery and constant cardboard cutout appearance.
Anyway there's buried treasure, retired secret agents, treacherous damsels involved and an appearance by another wrestler (I think) for a show down with our favorite bandanna clad all action hero. It all pretty much passed me by. I kept watching it though ... sadly I fear just to able to say 'hey have you seen McCinsey's Island ... has to be the worst film I've ever seen'. That's just the petty type of person I am ... I advise you to avoid this piece of trash like the proverbial plague. I dunno; check out one of the Hulk's better efforts in the time you save yourself ... The Nanny ... now that was a film ...
WHO MAKES THIS STUFF EH?
Beverly Hills Cop II (1987)
Weak, Murphy sure has a big smile, but weak ... and this was the 80s!
The 80s seems to have specialised in this time of throw away entertainment. Sure it had its promising moments too; there was an Alien and the first Terminator in there, but this was the decade of the macho, gun-totting, mulleted male. The emphasise of style over content is here for all to see, with the excesses of the 80s for all to see (I'd like to say we have evolved since then but I am really not sure).
Eddie Murphy returns to Beverly Hills again, all smiles and one liners to help the ungrateful local cops out with the 'alphabet robberies' (ooowwwww scary). Shoot-outs, pretty pathetic high speed chases, and illogical trips to a strip joint and the Playboy Mansion follow. On the way we see plenty of the semi-nudity that the 80s seem to specialise in (sorry 80s), and the sickeningly smug Foley (Murphy), the 'psycho' gun-enthusiast Billy (Reinhold), and the hapless Taggart (Ashton) bungle their way to solving the case and saving the day.
Clichés seem to pop out at every turn. The idiotic and constantly angry chief of police, the wise-cracking cop who learned his trade 'on the street', the portrayal of a strong female character as 'that big bitch over there' and the solving of the case after finding a match book (surely that has been used in Scooby Doo before!). The ease with which Murphy's character is able to evade shipment out of the city and fool the local cops is infuriately stupid.
Two lines summed up the unforgivable nature of this film for me. After enduring the latest verbal assault from the local police chief Foley, making light of race relations states supposedly humorously "is it a black thing?". Later in the film after disposing of a key criminal who just happens to be a woman Taggart tuts "Women". Come I know i must be taking this film just a bit too seriously, but there can't be anyone out there who finds awful and insulting one liners like this funny, can there? Ultimately between the distractions of the odd breast and an appearance by Hugh Hefner, an engaging storyline fails to emerge and the viewer is left with the infamous theme tune stuck in his/her head.
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Whats your fix?
"If there's ever a TV junkie it's the old lady ..."
Aronofsky's harrowing tale (based on a novel by Hubert Selby Jr.) of four respective addicts walks a fine line between 'MTV movie' and progressive independent storytelling that uses technology to help it's cause. Ultimately its comes through unscathed, powerful and thought-provoking.
Hip-hop montages used during shots of drug taking/ t.v. watching (Sara's addiction) weave the two separate stories together as the four characters head towards their final demise. These and the various camera techniques used through the film really might have resulted in an ultra-stylized piece of work that was impossible to penetrate and appreciate the stories that were developing. However the balance is perfectly achieved and the camera work works to develop the characters, (the close-up of Marion leaving Big Tim's house and throwing up, as well as Sara stumbling down the street in a shot that would almost be more suited to a music video come to mind) as opposed to rendering them secondary to the various techniques on show.
The first time I watched this film was in the kitchen of my university halls. Gasps could be heard as the film entered its film grueling final sequence. Silence reigned supreme when it was over. It truly is a powerful film and hasn't lost its affect on me on subsequent further viewing. Ultimately though IT IS NOT A DRUG MOVIE. Its focus is on the characters and the battles they are having with their addictions ... whether that be dope, prescription drugs, television or the longing to be young, popular and happy and again.
The performances in the film are all that could asked for. Ellen Burstyn is a t.v. addict widow who gets a call telling her she will be appearing on her favourite show. Burstyn portrays Sara's descent to ultimate insanity, via prescription slimming drugs, brilliantly. Although much has been made about it, it has to be said that it is refreshing to see an older woman in a lead role and Burstyn handles the responsibility admirably; her performance the stand out in the film. Jared Leto plays Sara's hapless but well-meaning son Harry. The desperation of his situation comes through perfectly in his performance as he struggles to support his best friend Tyrone (Wayans) and his girlfriend Marion (Connelly); although I am not quite sure how he actually handles the scenes where he starts crying. Connelly has the same desperate cloud hanging over her character, as the bright but ultimately doomed drug addict designer. Wayans pulls out a great display and shows he can handle 'serious' film making as well as his Wayan's bro comedies.
Aronofosky has a create a truly mind blowing (really hate to use that phrase too!!) piece of art here; the joy of this film is the story that shines through the stylized exterior.
Rocky IV (1985)
Pretty Poor ... But worth a look ... really it is!
So this is how the Rocky story went on ... and on, and on, and seemingly on ...
Rocky's now best of chums with old enemy Apollo Creed; but wait what's that on the horizon of freedom; the grim specter of communism (boo hiss); and they have the technology; they've created some sort of killing machine in the shape of a boxer (Drago); Apollo's too cocky for his own good; he comes out to box dressed like Uncla Sam; oh look there's James Brown; Apollo's killed in the ring; Now Rocky's p**sed MONTAGE ... and we're off to Siberia!!! (Rocky's all heart you know; you can see it in the way he trains, helping out those poor Russians by pulling their ploughs; Drago by using some sorta boxing based technology, well, that's just cheating isn't it?!!?) Fight night; Rocky takes his usual pounding; but wait he's not going to give up; he's making a comeback of some kind; wow, the Russian crowd for some strange reason are backing Rocky (please explain why even when Creed was losing in the US they still backed him but here it is different); Rocky's beaten the Russian killer; Cue Rocky's victor speech ... "Can't we all get along guys? Please? Addrriiiaann." OK the storyline may not have changed much from the other Rocky's (Rocky=underdog; fights big monster; losing but comes back to win etc etc), I might not agree with the naive political outlook of the film and the film has possibly the worst montage sequence in any film I've watched (it just goes on and on), but this film really is great for sitting down to with some friends ... the cheese is present in massive amounts and although it is just that little bit cynical you just can't help but poke fun at it every 5 minutes as opposed to getting up and turn it off.
On a quizzical note I can't understand what Drago's character is supposed to be exactly. It seems like he is/should be set up as a pretty much 2d monster/ punch bag for the audience but I got a sense of vulnerability/ that he was merely being used by his trainers at the first press conference and at the very end. Trashy motivational music is amazing; in that it does its job ... its big, loud, (terrible) and makes you wanna go out and, well, kick some ass really (see Hearts On Fire, Sweetest Victory et al).
In all a weak rehash, definitely worth a look though if you have a streak of cynicism running through you (make sure whoever your watching it does too!) or maybe if you just want something 'up-lifting'.
Haute tension (2003)
Impressive French horror ... inventively brutal, or is that brutally inventive?
**CONTAINS MINOR SPOILERS** I had to go through 3 copies Aja's slasher before I found one that was truly watchable (damn dubbing!); but my God was it not worth it?!? This is a furiously brutal piece of work with a fantastically twisted heart. This is a film that really does deserve to be labeled brutal. It does NOT shy away showing us the extent of carnage left in the tale of stalk-and-slash told. Out is now the formulaic Craven-esquire comedy that dominated the 90s following Scream and the film really does bare its teeth in a blood soaked frenzy leaving the corpses of a young family in its wake within the first frantic half an hour or so. The killings impressive for there inventiveness (only the young son of Alex's family is spared a truly gruesome end ... although a shotgun blast to the head isn't totally without its savagery) Much credit is due to make up effects artist Giannetto De Rossi for helping to make this work convincing, as the effects have been produced professionally on a budget and under difficult conditions (scenes were performed in winter in the forest). Haute Tension successfully avoids the trap of being comically gory and saves the corn syrup and whatever else they put in that stuff for two wince-worthy scenes; one involving a chain saw being particularly memorable.
Anyhow, being a film of the stalk-and-slash natural, the creation tension really is the key. Aja piles this on to great effect. The story is constructed in two sections, divided by an almost (this must be stressed) lightly comedic killing allowing the audience just enough respite to continue towards the savage finale. The first section sees a lone gardener arrive Alex's (Maïwenn - a scream) parents house after Alex and her friend Marie (de France - just superb) make the journey there to study in the peace of the French countryside. The new comer quickly shatters the short lived peace and Alex is taken hostage by the efficient killer. The second half of the film sees Marie track down the killer to a forest still cast in the shadows of night.
Aja depicts his monstrous killer (the suitably sinister Philippe Nahon) as an almost Terminator-like character ... he moves slowly, confidently, in no rush to end his victims; the squeaking of his leather shoes and the rustle of his jump suit signally his arrival. Nonetheless this cold and calculated killer is not all that he seems to be and the twist at the end of the film will surly leave many dissatisfied. Perhaps the film tries and fails to be that little bit cleverer, in fact resulting in a story tainted by the angst of youth. Personally I feel the ending takes nothing away from the film as a whole and is a fittingly twisted ending to a frantic and well executed tale.
A must for horror fans ... modern horror that has learned from its predecessors and taken on its own quite impressive form.
Whose Line Is It Anyway? (1998)
Brilliant ... just hope it's not Drew Carey's line ...
I really struggle to think of a program that has the genuine hilarity that 'Whose Line ...' offers viewers. I was a big fan of the original British show and thankfully they've kept the core members together for this update (although I think I am actually watching reruns now). Colin and Ryan provide the main body of the brilliantly creative comedy, while Wayne Brady (whose own show had its moments too) chips in with musical relief as well as his own witty comedy moments.
Sadly Drew Carey is a big disappointment as the presenter. His jokes fall flat on their face much of the time and sadly he has to resort to poking fun at his quite obviously more comically talented colleagues (Colin often has to withstand much of the inane abuse). I enjoyed his sitcom for a couple of seasons but here he just comes off as out of his league. When in the final 'round' he has to join the contestants for the last game we see how out of depth he appears (in many episodes anyway).
Leaving this blip and the at times unnecessary guest appearances (Jerry Springer this means you!!) aside 'Whose Line ...' is as Southpark's Jimmy would say "an instant classic 'fellas'/ screamingly funny". Audience participation has left tears in my eyes (Wayne Brady's transformation into a geeky white guy), and the speed of thought that those involved demonstrate is remarkable.
This might be the type of program that your mother dismissed as stupid, but it is surely comedy at its spontaneous, free flowing best. Scrap your 'glamarous' presenter fellas and the reincarnation of this genius program would be truly fulfilled!
Sin City (2005)
Comic book adaptation come good
POTENTIAL VERY MINOR SPOILERS The first real comic book adaptation I had the privilege of viewing was the original brilliantly campy Batman ... Adam West with his lawful haircut wore underpants over his tights, zapped, biffed and socked his way out of being boiled alive in giant teacups and treated Robin like he was a little kid. And it really was fantastic!!! Those pows and thwacks may have been a tad crude, but added to those trips up Gotham's skyline and the ridiculous sets and eccentric villains Batman made for an entertaining 25-odd minutes of loose comic book adaptation.
But this is 2005. We've seen varying degrees of success in region of adapting comics since 1966. The earlier Batman's set the bar too high for more recent efforts to reach (eagerly awaiting Batman Begins); Dick Tracy definitely showed some promise and the recent Spiderman's and X-Men (to a lesser extent) movies showed what could really be done by combining modern day technology with genuinely interesting story telling.
First off and most obviously Sin City's striking and innovative use of colour and technology sets it apart from most other films you are likely to have the pleasure to see. In an interview I heard Clive Owen (and he himself knowingly admitted it clichéd) that this is something that is totally new; and the man is right. This film noirish effort is filmed in black and white ... there are no grey areas ... the spilling of scarlet blood or the flash of blue eyes is the closest you'll get to the relief of colour. The scene in which Bruce Willis' character is about to close in on Roark Jr. and he is standing by a massive farm door, particularly struck me, in that it look as if a frame from the comic had been drawn into the film. Another interesting touch is the use of silhouette frames at key points in the film.
Sadly I myself haven't yet read any of Frank Miller's Sin City comics but the inclusion of the author as a co-director (as well as reports I've heard) suggests the film is particularly loyal to the original story lines. Tarantino manages to muscle his way into Miller's vision and is a 'special guest' director for one scene.
The performances of those occupying the corrupt hell hole that this Basin City are very solid to say the least. Mickey Rourke is particularly forcefully as 'psychokiller' Marv, while Alba and Willis stand strong in their story about a weathered cop stabbed in the back for protecting an innocent young girl. Elijah Wood gives an unnerving and totally silent performance as the demented Kevin, a young cannibal. The violence although totally over the top (this is a comic book after all where men can take up to 5 shots and survive) is unrelentingly brutal; scenes involves the male genitalia are very gruesome and had me wincing for a minute. The film itself aside from its obvious quite brilliant and striking presentation is an unrelenting testosterone rush from start to finish. It runs like a film noir with the main characters narrating as woman with near perfect features seem to either end up dead or in the arms of some vengeful do-gooder (or longing for those arms). This is surely reflected in the female cast; as big a fan as I am of Brittany Murphy the prospect of playing a scantily clothed stripper or soon to be dead hooker may not have appealed A-list actresses. I think I must have been joined by have the cinema when a slow sweeping shot of Alba borough an unwitting smile to my face! Sin City is definitely an innovative piece of work from the visual artistic perspective; add to this some quite gripping story lines and you've got something that sees the progress of comic book adaptation in cinema take another step forward.