These comments by Mark and John leave me wondering if I understand the genre
at all.
Stephen
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 9:34 PM, <BaxDeal@aol.com> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 7/28/08 6:13:04 PM, DJ-Anonyme@webtv.net<DJ-Anonyme%40webtv.net>writes:
> >
> > And in that vein, I think Sin City was a whole lot of fun, just like the
> > books it was based on. In fact, I like it for exactly the same reason
> > Kevin discounts it. I like that it strips hardboiled/noir to its
> > essentials, reduces the genre to its essentials, just those essentials,
> > then pumps them up and plays with them, in the process telling us a
> > whole lot about those archetypes. But this is no Propped up morphology,
> > no dry dissertation. Most of all, the movie was just a whole lot of
> > fun.
> >
>
> Sin City's biggest problem is one of narrative pacing. as it's 3 stories
> patched together, by leading with its strongest tale, it's downhill from
> there
>
> and homage or not, keeping women's heads as trophies on your wall, and
> forcing them to watch while you eat their amputated hands is a pretty noir
> idea
>
> John Lau
>
> **************
> Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up
> for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
> (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 28 Jul 2008 EDT