Oscar Quest Review: Sin City

A little history... A few years ago, the aforementioned Simon, God of Hairdos and I embarked on what we now call "Oscar Quest." The object of the Quest was to see as many nominated films as possible before that year's Oscar telecast, with the intent of looking incredibly smart at our annual Oscar Party. It's a year-long endeavor, which requires careful research of Oscar buzz and a few sacrifices on our part, such as having to endure "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron." We have succeeded at varying degrees, one year coming within five movies, give or take, of the grand goal. But in recent years, the price of movie tickets and planning for the Oscar Party has made Questing darn near impossible. This year, however, the Quest is back. So I present to you the first Oscar Quest movie review: Sin City.*

Prevailing logic would say "If you don't like comic books, you won't like 'Sin City.'" I'm going to modify that to "If you hate comic books, you're going to hate 'Sin City.'" I'm not a huge comic fan, but I appreciate the medium and I understood what the filmmakers were trying to do here. The movie is, in fact, a living comic book, taken directly from Frank Miller's graphic novels. During many of the voice-overs, I could almost envision the words on the screen in the familiar comic book type. All it was missing were those white bars separating panel from panel. Shot all in black and white with a few splashes of color, the visuals were stunning.

Cool effects, however, does not a movie make. (Are you listening, George Lucas?) The plot of 'Sin City' is not deep by any stretch of the imagination. It's not supposed to be. The three vignettes are tales of murder, revenge and other sorts of nastiness inflicted on the (mostly corrupt) denizens of Basin City. The violence level is extreme, but not in a cringe-worthy, nausea-inducing kind of way. Of the three, I was partial to the Bruce Willis story, but that could be because I'm kind of a fan of Bruno (who is aging nicely, I might add.) Mickey Rourke proves that he's still got the acting chops, and a surprising ability to enunciate. Elijah Wood and Alexis Bledel make an attempt to break type by engaging in conduct unbecoming a Hobbit and a Gilmore Girl, respectively. And Clive Owen makes a valient effort to live up to his hype, but only sort-of succeeds at it. (At least he had more energy and emotion in this than, say, "King Arthur." *shudder*) Overall, the three stories were engaging, but I thought that all of them lasted at least 20 minutes too long.

So what's the final score? Not the best movie I've ever seen, but enjoyable enough. I raise 3 1/2 glasses of Chateau Petrus to Sin City (out of a possible five.)

Oscar Chances: Visual effects and probably sound editing. While Robert Rodriguez is one of those "buzz" directors, his battle with DGA over giving Frank Miller a director's credit probably eliminates him from the Best Director competition. You could make a case for adapted screenplay, but since the dialogue is lifted directly from the graphic novel, there's really not much to "adapt." Probably no acting awards, although there's a slim chance for Mickey Rourke in the comeback category. Score, maybe, but it's only April and we haven't even reached "epic" season yet.

* Technically, the first Oscar Quest movie for this year is "Robots," but since I saw it a couple of weeks ago and can't remember a damn thing about it, I'm not going to give it a review. But expect it to show up in the Best Animated Feature category.