Talk:Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Comics: Films Bottom‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Bottom	This article has been rated as Bottom-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Comic book films work group.

Film: Comic book / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Comic book films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Ukraine?

Country: United States and Ukraine. Is this true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.218.96.244 (talk) 07:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Warning to Everyone

Once the film is actually released, a lot of the page is going to be deleted in order to more closely resemble the previous film's page. All of this gossip is getting the ax come next year. -- Nqnpipnr

I recommend moving it to an archive, instead, so as to preserve the information compiled esp. as regards preproduction development rumors versus realized production. ThuranX 16:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2007?

There's some buzz floating around that it might not be realeased until 2007 [1]. If you consider that Rodriguez is working on Grindhouse right now, will he be able to finish SC2 in time for an '06 release? And not to mention all this hooplah about Angelina Jolie playing Ava and being pregnent. [2] ONEder Boy 04:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the minute, even if he blazed straight into it after GH hits theaters, you're still looking at an early '08 release date, maybe late '07 if he really canes it. Over half of the actual shoot schedule for the first was post-production and visual fx, and they had at least 3 fx houses working it simultaneously.

Radical AdZ

Then when it is it going to be released? Headstrong 345 13:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345[reply]

End of SIn City 1/Start of Sin city 2

At the end of the Sin City (film) in the Epilogue, which is not featured in any comics, Becky is entering an elavator where The Salesman, who killed The Customer at the start of the film, he does the exact same to Becky offering her a cigarette. But then the Elavator closes and Sin City 2 could start with what happenned in the elavator straight after the Sin city Epilogue

Jolie

I changed part of the page because it said that Dawson had said that Jolie was playing Ava, whereas if you read the source she only says that the director was interested in her, and was delaying the movie to correspond with her pregnancy.

--Am I the only one who thinks Angelina Jolie would be much more suited to play Mariah in Hell and Back than Ava?

Release

The BBC website seems to have removed the September release date for Sin City 2. I went through all the months and it does not seem to be there at all. This seems to mean we have no release date reported for this movie anywhere, unless I'm missing something obvious. --DreamsReign 01:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for use

Ian Spelling (2007-02-23). "Miller: Sin 2 Is Ready To Go". Sci Fi Wire. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
Scott Collura (2007-02-25). "NYCC 07: Sin City 2 and 3 Update". IGN. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Citations for use. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 20:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Headlines. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Headlines. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miller on Sin City 2 and The Spirit

Story Will Focus More On Nancy Callahan (Jessica Alba's Character)

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/articles/2493.asp

Genre

There are no sources for genre, I had them removed. I don't think they should be applied for films that haven't been released yet. I don't necessarily disagree with them, but I do think they need to be cited before the film comes out, or at least kept simple and minimal. Currently there a descriptor of three genres in the lead, which needs to be simplified. Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a few days with no discussion so I will remove the information. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sin City: A Dame to DIE For?

Possibly being retitled to "Sin City: A Dame to Die For"

Sources: http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a529392/sin-city-sequel-retitled-a-dame-to-die-for.html http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3263474/afm-13-market-artwork-for-sin-city-a-dame-to-kill-for/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.17.75 (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Title change

The title was changed to 'Frank Miller's Sin City: A Dame to Kill for" - request to change the wiki article title? Source: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/02/25/sin-city-sequel-is-now-officially-frank-millers-sin-city-a-dame-to-kill-for Morganglick (talk) 20:52, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Green's Name Removed from "Newcomers to the series" list and the "Starring" List on the right side panel.

Is there a reason why her name should not be listed in these places? She is the title character of the film, after all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:81A1:EB00:1452:5195:6875:6CD5 (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

the original title of this movie is "Frank Miller's Sin City: A Dame to Kill for"

Djwarid (talk) 19:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- ferret (talk) 19:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Film's genre

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

As this film contains multiple narratives (like the previous film), this should be described as an anthology film in the opening paragraph. PatTheMoron (talk) 09:16, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 09:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Box office bomb?

The lead section states "The film opened to mixed critical reviews and debuted at #8 at the box office, making it a bomb". Does this make it a bomb? I see it hasn't performed well in the States and has just opened in the UK (I saw it last night - can I get my money back...). As it's only been out a short time, is it too soon to call it a bomb? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd wait a while. It's only been out for a short time. If it closes its run without breaking even then we can reconsider. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 17:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this in the press earlier, and it caught my attention, so I've got a few links for you. Variety explicitly called it a bomb and misfire. The Hollywood Reporter also called it a bomb. And the Los Angeles Times also said that it "utterly bombed". All that said, I think maybe it's a bit early. Reliable sources seem a bit quick to jump the gun, but there's a definitely consensus that it's a bomb. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:20, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They are just trying to get attention, this not a legitimate written news article. The encyclopedic definition of what a box office bomb is a film that is "highly unsuccessful or unprofitable during its theatrical run", and its run isn't over yet. Therefore it should not be listed as a bomb because some types of reporters like to try to entertain people by using hyperbole. Dream Focus 19:55, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would say to focus the language on its opening and perhaps avoid the slangish use of "bomb" here. That term is too easily thrown around, especially when films can gross more outside North America. I agree that it would be better to apply the term more in retrospect. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 20:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with all that its too early to tell. However, saying that the film severely underperformed in its debut is totally justified though. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 02:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit late to this but I hate the blop/bomb terminology even when it is entirely applicable. We should be focusing on facts rather than hyperbole. If something tanked and lost a lot of money, then it shouldn't be too difficult to pin down the projected loss and just report that. Betty Logan (talk) 09:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Sequel" etc.

I've seen a bit of debate over this in the article history, so this seems like a good place to start a discussion. I think the term "sequel" to describe this film is entirely inaccurate, as it takes place before, during, and after. I would suggest that we echo the wording found at 300: Rise of an Empire and just refer to the film as a "follow-up" to Sin City. Thoughts? Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 16:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. That makes sense. Dream Focus 01:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I also agree, that does make more sense. STATic message me! 18:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the change for now, noting that disagreements should be raised here. Thanks! Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 19:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non notable review

Anyone have an idea on how to deal with this IP that is trying to add a review to promote his website? Koala15 (talk) 00:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You could try reporting it for edit warring and/or requesting that the page be protected. ImprovingWiki (talk) 01:11, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i did. Thanks. Koala15 (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If they come back, then discuss the notability of said review here. I guess they're promoting their blog, or something similar. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 16:36, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Odd typo

"The movie received mixed reviews, with critics praising the acting, visuals and writing, but it lacks of updates and was a box office flop..."
"Lacks of updates"? I'd fix that if I knew what it meant. – AndyFielding (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]