<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Review:  Sin City</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moviegeekz.com/m/review_sin_city/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moviegeekz.com/m/review_sin_city/</link>
	<description>Geeking about movies since 2003.  Reviews, analysis, news and more!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:00:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://moviegeekz.com/m/review_sin_city/comment-page-1/#comment-81</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-81</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;The best thing about &lt;em&gt;Sin City&lt;/em&gt; for me was also the filmï¿½s only drawback: its fervent wish to bring Frank Millerï¿½s Sin-iverse to life onscreen. From camera angles, actor poses and movements and dialogue taken directly from the page, to Mickey Rourkeï¿½s transformation into Marv (screw CGI Hulks this time), the experience is virtually identical to that of reading the comic. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So, my question: why watch the film? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Seeing the movie seems to add little if youï¿½d read the comics (and I had), which is strangely enough why Iï¿½m actually applauding Rodriguez and Miller now. Youï¿½re damned if you do, damned if you donï¿½t when adapting popular comics (or graphic novels, for the ï¿½theyï¿½re not dolls, theyï¿½re action figuresï¿½ types out there); change things too much or even slightly, and youï¿½re pilloried by the Fanboy Nation for not being true the ï¿½the creatorï¿½s visionï¿½. Keep it faithful, and the inherent silliness so charming in comic-book design and execution gets you laughed at by arbiters of ï¿½real movie-makingï¿½.  Being damned either way seems to have worked in &lt;em&gt;Sin City&lt;/em&gt;, and isnï¿½t that an appropriate statement?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The best thing about <em>Sin City</em> for me was also the filmï¿½s only drawback: its fervent wish to bring Frank Millerï¿½s Sin-iverse to life onscreen. From camera angles, actor poses and movements and dialogue taken directly from the page, to Mickey Rourkeï¿½s transformation into Marv (screw CGI Hulks this time), the experience is virtually identical to that of reading the comic. <br />
<br />
So, my question: why watch the film? <br />
<br />
Seeing the movie seems to add little if youï¿½d read the comics (and I had), which is strangely enough why Iï¿½m actually applauding Rodriguez and Miller now. Youï¿½re damned if you do, damned if you donï¿½t when adapting popular comics (or graphic novels, for the ï¿½theyï¿½re not dolls, theyï¿½re action figuresï¿½ types out there); change things too much or even slightly, and youï¿½re pilloried by the Fanboy Nation for not being true the ï¿½the creatorï¿½s visionï¿½. Keep it faithful, and the inherent silliness so charming in comic-book design and execution gets you laughed at by arbiters of ï¿½real movie-makingï¿½.  Being damned either way seems to have worked in <em>Sin City</em>, and isnï¿½t that an appropriate statement?<br /></p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

