Please bring it so we'll finally get closer to SIn City 3 which is rumored to have the story hell and back in it.

i don't care if it starts in april or not as long as it gets made

Oh my fucken god make it or dont this is the new chinese democracy how long has this been in the works and gonna happen? Well I would like to see it but I aint holdin my breath till I see a trailer and release date.

The first one was one of the most boring and unoriginal movies I've ever seen in my life. I'm so sick of sequels to retarded movies.

WAT THE FUK!!! Jacues!!! Are you fucken stupid!!??? There was nothing boring about Sin City. It was one of the most "ORIGINAL" movies I've ever seen! Unoriginal? wat the fuck were you watching? How was it unoriginal. Explain yourself fool!!!

Cool, maybe!

Seriously Jacques. I haven't met anyone who disliked the movie let alone called it unoriginal. Now i am one for being able to state ur opinion, but in all honesty try to sound less asinine.

It's your standard, cliched man-must-revenge-his-dead-girlfriend movie without anything else whatsoever. The overdone noir elements have all been used before in other movies (like Blade Runner, for example)and the ending was just painfully cliche. (*Spoiler* Suicide, who would have guessed? Maybe someone who has seen more than two movies in their entire life.) The reason it was boring was because it was slow-paced and had action maybe every half an hour, with completely boring talking scenes in between. From there, the slapstick elements (talking head, etc.) has been done in so many movies (IT and The Taking are the two that come to mind) it was hard to even care. Sin City was one cliche after another, strung together with some neat looking cinematography. If you took that away, it would have been a standard, unoriginal carbon-copy crime drama. Also, people call it violent? What a joke. I didn't even see enough violence to give it anything but a PG-13 rating. If they make a sequel, it'll be just as painfully unoriginal and ridiculously boring as the first.

Wish they'd hurry up with this. I'd rather see Sin City 2 than the Spirit. The Spirit's not supposed to be like SC and I think that's cheating movie goers and comic fans.

JACQUES: The film was “slow paced”? Really? Well, the film isn’t “Punisher: War Zone” and it’s not supposed to be, instead it’s a love letter to pulp cinema. Hell, with Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino involved, you should know what to expect. Straight from the heart of Frank Miller, this movie seeps with the dark, illustrious tone and environment present in Miller’s graphic novels. Perhaps you just aren’t the target audience, as fans of the graphic novel seem to be very pleased (this is as “true to the source material” as one can get). The “boring talking scenes” in the film have become a staple of pulp cinema in the past few decades. Most movies deemed as “pulp” try to see just how stylish they can be both in front and behind the camera (hence, the strong noir design Miller placed upon the look of the comic and the thick language of the characters). Yes, dialog and illustrations are even lifted directly from pages of the graphic novel and placed into a cinematic format with “Sin City.” However, I’ve seen many of your comments on this website and I truly believe you abuse the word “cliché.” Based upon your logic, nothing can ever be satisfying because everything lifts elements from other films. I dare you to name one film that is completely original and doesn’t share multiple commonalities with any other film. I really can’t be done- even films like “The Holy Mountain” can’t pass this judgment. However, I digress, back to “Sin City.” “Sin Coty” is supposed to be a “crime-drama”- every story is riddled within the layers of an environment in which crime breeds, greed corrupts, and vigilantes die for “justice.” Sin City is actually rather violent. “Sin City” could simply not be bleaker. Throughout the film, there isn’t a glimmer of hope within the police system- politics and religion are both ruled by the criminal underworld. The city itself never even sees the light of day, and for good reason since it is the character that holds the film together. The city is dark, cold, brooding, and unforgiving (like seemingly ever character in the film). We see that every form of innocence in either taken, violated or threatened before the film reaches its conclusion. In this way, we see that every “light” and “peaceful” character in this environment is swallowed by this “dark” and “violent” city. From this we can see that “Sin City” even separates itself from common films like “Pulp Fiction”, because there really is hope from redemption and prosperity. If the film was shot is standard color, you can bet the MPAA would have slapped on an NC-17 rating and Rodriguez would have to appear before the appeals board to get the film re-evaluated. In terms of “violence”, there isn’t just on screen mutilations and murder- the thematic and adult content of the film deal with the most evil of sins (adultery, rape, etc). Your argument that it would be “PG-13” holds no logic whatsoever (maybe a few generations from now, when sex, violence, and sodomy dominate Saturday morning programming). In case your memory fails you, here’s some of the material in the film: an adult male attempts to molest a young girl, a man is almost drowned in his own urine, there is an extended explicit “straddling” sex scene between two characters in which breasts are exposed, the cannibal (Wood) is incapacitated, few alive to dogs (complete with sounds of ripping flesh) before he is fatally decapitated, a good portion of the film takes place at a strip-bar, there is a scene in which two naked lesbian woman make out, a lingering scene of a mans genitals being shot off, and off course, there’s a basement full of trophy heads of victimized prostitutes. < That really just skims the surface. Perhaps if a sequel is made, you should just steer clear of it, since you obviously are not the intended argument. Again, your opinion is your opinion, but I had to point out that your “reasoning” has very little logic to it all.

JACQUES: The film was “slow paced”? Really? Well, the film isn’t “Punisher: War Zone” and it’s not supposed to be, instead it’s a love letter to pulp cinema. Hell, with Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino involved, you should know what to expect. Straight from the heart of Frank Miller, this movie seeps with the dark, illustrious tone and environment present in Miller’s graphic novels. Perhaps you just aren’t the target audience, as fans of the graphic novel seem to be very pleased (this is as “true to the source material” as one can get). The “boring talking scenes” in the film have become a staple of pulp cinema in the past few decades. Most movies deemed as “pulp” try to see just how stylish they can be both in front and behind the camera (hence, the strong noir design Miller placed upon the look of the comic and the thick language of the characters). Yes, dialog and illustrations are even lifted directly from pages of the graphic novel and placed into a cinematic format with “Sin City.” However, I’ve seen many of your comments on this website and I truly believe you abuse the word “cliché.” Based upon your logic, nothing can ever be satisfying because everything lifts elements from other films. I dare you to name one film that is completely original and doesn’t share multiple commonalities with any other film. I really can’t be done- even films like “The Holy Mountain” can’t pass this judgment. However, I digress, back to “Sin City.” “Sin City” is supposed to be a “crime-drama”- every story is riddled within the layers of an environment in which crime breeds, greed corrupts, and vigilantes die for “justice.” Sin City is actually rather violent. “Sin City” could simply not be bleaker. Throughout the film, there isn’t a glimmer of hope within the police system- politics and religion are both ruled by the criminal underworld. The city itself never even sees the light of day, and for good reason since it is the character that holds the film together. The city is dark, cold, brooding, and unforgiving (like seemingly every character in the film). We see that every form of innocence in either taken, violated or threatened before the film reaches its conclusion. In this way, we see that every “light” and “peaceful” character in this environment is swallowed by this “dark” and “violent” city. From this we can see that “Sin City” even separates itself from common films like “Pulp Fiction”, because there really isn’t hope for redemption and prosperity. If the film was shot is standard color, you can bet the MPAA would have slapped on an NC-17 rating and Rodriguez would have to appear before the appeals board to get the film re-evaluated. In terms of “violence”, there isn’t just on screen mutilations and murder- the thematic and adult content of the film deal with the most evil of sins (adultery, rape, etc). Your argument that it would be “PG-13” holds no logic whatsoever (maybe a few generations from now, when sex, violence, and sodomy dominate Saturday morning programming). In case your memory fails you, here’s some of the material in the film: an adult male attempts to molest a young girl, a man is almost drowned in his own urine, there is an extended explicit “straddling” sex scene between two characters in which breasts are exposed, the cannibal (Wood) is incapacitated, fed alive to dogs (complete with sounds of ripping flesh) before he is fatally decapitated, a good portion of the film takes place at a strip-bar, there is a scene in which two naked lesbian woman make out, a lingering scene of a mans genitals being shot off, and off course, there’s a basement full of trophy heads of victimized prostitutes. < That really just skims the surface. Perhaps if a sequel is made, you should just steer clear of it, since you obviously are not the intended argument. Again, your opinion is your opinion, but I had to point out that your “reasoning” has very little logic to it all.

TheDeadMayTasteBad: Thank you for being level-headed and not just "YOU'RE STUPID, RETARD!" like most people here. However, when I say the film was cliche, I mean it was typical. Honestly, I've seen countless, and I mean COUNTLESS, films just like it. I understand nothing is wholesale original, but you misunderstand me when you think that's what I'm judging Sin City on. Put simply: It did NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING, that films haven't done before, other than the aesthetic. The plot was trite and predictable, lifted wholesale from other crime dramas. Nothing whatsoever even SLIGHTLY different from the norm. If you try to argue with that, it's you, not me, who lacks logic. That's what I mean. As for the "boring conversation scenes" I mentioned, that's exactly what I mean. Yes, I understand they're typical (there's that word again: typical) pulp language, but, really, it's not even done well. Comparing the talking scenes in Sin City to Pulp Fiction is just a joke. Why? Because Pulp Fiction actually took the genre talk and gave it originality, Sin City doesn't. Characters spout the same crap you've heard in every other movie ever made. As for the violence, I was being tongue-in-cheek with the PG-13 comment, but calling Sin City anything more than mildly violent is completely ridicules. Severed limbs. Attempted rape. Gunshots. Generic gore. Dude, there is worse stuff than that in the new James Bond movie (rated PG-13) and there is no more brutality than The Dark Knight (PG-13) and far less blood on-screen than, say, Cloverfeild (which had a girl explode with blood everywhere and got PG-13). Overall, there is nothing that even slightly sets Sin City apart from the generic mess the genre is. It's 100% unoriginal, and attempts nothing different AT ALL. That just made the movie a complete waste of my time. And, as for it being slow-paced and boring, let me just say this: the movie took 2 hours (roughly) to explain the one-dimensional, cliche plotline. That's slower than most DRAMAS I've watched. And this is advertised as non-stop, throat-grabbing action? A total joke.

Personally I thought the first movie was great and am dying to see a sequel.

I think my avatar makes it obvious just how much I loved the first movie. I actually squealed when I saw this news. However, it's not really horror, is it?

the first movie was great. can't wait for the second. but i'm worried about how badly he's about to rape "the spirit". darwin cooke is probably rolling over in his grave.

WILL YOU GUYS STFU with the messages that are are longer the actual article above

Holy Crap i agree with Kaname Tousen stop writing so much.