Smoreni Zmaj "A Dame to Kill For" is in every way a copy of "Sin City", just telling a different story. The same team is "behind the camera", and in front of it part of the actors from the first movie reprise their roles, enriched with some other big names, such as Joseph Gordon-Levitt, magnificent Eva Green, Ray Liotta i Christopher Meloni. The only disappointment is recasting of Dwight, although Josh Brolin did a very good job. I consider "Sin City" one of the greatest movies of all time, so it could be assumed that this is a ten too. But it doesn't work like that. A perfect ten, in addition to quality in all aspects, must have something of its own, characteristic, something that stands out from the mass, which will be remembered and that will resist tooth of time. This movie, however good, is a copy of the first one that does not bring anything new and, even if it does not fall into oblivion, it will be remembered as a copy. Extremely good, maybe even as good as the original, but still a copy. I think its bad ratings are not based on objective quality, but on the disappointment of the spectators who expected to be blown away in the way that the first film did. But the same people who was amazed by "Sin City" in 2005 can hardly be amazed ten years later by exactly the same things. If they came out in reverse order it is possible that the ratings would be reversed too. Personally, I think that the film is top-notch in every way, but the effect of "already seen" affects me too, so I have to distance it from the original.8,5/10

gavin6942 Like the first "Sin City" film, this one is made up of sub-stories that, in some way or another, tie in to the main plot.There seems to be a difference of opinion on whether this is a good film or not. The reviews are mixed, tilting negative, with many praising that same great look but saying the sequel is "dull". I can understand that, but I love that these characters are given more time to tell their stories and I hope a part three will happen (though that seems unlikely).If the film has any shortcoming, it is that certain aspects are both a sequel and a prequel to the original film. That tends to make the chronology a bit more complicated. Now, if there was a way to mix this film with the first, and straighten out the plot in some ways (though not all), maybe that would balance it out. Of course, because of Manute, that won't happen.

karen-821-938620 This isn't our usual cup of tea, but we were looking for a plotted movie in 3D. The 300 was a waste (in more ways than one ), but the cinematic style of this movie took great advantage of the effect. I see by the other reviews that the plot and characters aren't as good as the first, but if you don't know this, they are intriguing enough. The violence is mostly cartoonish, shading off into, I assume, intentionally funny.The three stories are all pretty clear conflicts of good versus evil, making the more over the top violence palatable. In fact, the plots are kinda sunny for noir. It takes a little while to figure out what's going on, but once you do, the plot is more amusing than tense. The movie could be called "A Good Dame is Hard to Find" and it keeps the theme going to the end...Well,now I have seen the first movie, and this is way better. The first one is a visual aid for people who like the comic. This is a real movie, with plot, character development and enough touches of wit and realism to appeal to a grown-up, especially one who grew up in one of America's real sin cities.

NathanMack I gave this film a 3/10 although I feel that is very generous and more of soft spot for the brilliant work done on the first film. This sequel lacks everything that made the first movie great.The Dwight character continues in this movie but this time portrayed by Josh Brolin rather than Clive Owen. Clive Owen was fantastic in the original but Brolin seems out of his depth in this one. Not the role for him. The Dwight character became awkward and almost seemed weak, seriously lacked the presence of Clive Owens "Dwight".Nancy and Marv return in a conjoined story line (Although Marv has his hands in all the story lines really). Marv was my favourite character in the original Sin City but in this sequel it is almost like he is used as comic relief. His one liners seem forced and contrived and his impact in this film is unmemorable (compared to the original)There is a new character in the sequel called Johnny (Played by Joseph Gordon-Levitts). His story line seems pointless and seems to be gap filler more than anything. A waste of talent for someone I was very excited to see in this film. The ending of his storyline was very stupid as well.One final downer was the cameo of Christopher Lloyd. Was so excited to see his name in the credits and was looking forward to his appearance all film. Unfortunately I blinked and nearly missed it. Another under-use of a brilliant actor. Was expecting much more from this as I believe I gave the original 9/10. We will always have the original I guess.