Review: Eight years too late, ‘A Dame to Kill For’ should still entice fans

2014-08-29-Sin-City-A-Dame-to-Kill-For-movie-posterNine years is a long time to wait for a second date, but that’s essentially what Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller, directors of 2005’s “Sin City,” asked us to do, with its long-awaited sequel finally hitting theaters last weekend.

“Sin City: A Dame to Kill For” has many of the same things which made people fans of the original, they simply don’t feel as fresh as they once did. More importantly, however, the long wait necessitated a significant amount of recasting, hurting the ability to connect the two films, which share quite a few characters. Finally, although “A Dame to Kill For” is labeled a sequel, all but one of its stories take place prior to the events of the first movie, taking away much of the tension when you know most of the main characters will live on in further adventures.

“Sin City: A Dame to Kill For,” is not a bad film in itself and should entertain fans of the original, but it arrives nearly a decade too late to capture the same level of excitement that “Sin City” did in 2005.

“Sin City: A Dame to Kill For” is essentially a very belated gift from Rodriguez and Miller to the fans of “Sin City.” Sure, it may not have aged as well as we would have liked, but even with its flaws, it is a worth a return visit if you liked the first date.

The film is rated R for strong brutal stylized violence throughout, sexual content, nudity and brief drug use.

(This is a shortened version of the full review available in our printed or e-edition papers.)

Subscribe to our e-Edition and read the rest of the story. Already a subscriber? Click here to sign in.