Talk:Sin City (film)

References to use

 * Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.



WikiProject Comics B-Class Assessment required
This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've now done the assessment, the article still needs more references (there are some requests made on the article and other sources needed) so I've left it on C for now. (Emperor (talk) 13:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC))

C-Class rated for Comics Project
As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit WikiProject_Comics/Assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The Salesmen
Maybe at the end of the film the salesmen was going to offer becky to kill her before the others got to her? 202.169.181.208 (talk) 06:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Plot Summary
I've added this movie to my to do list of plot summaries to clean up, but I do like the way the summary is broken into subsections for this particular flick. Unless there are any objections, when I get to it, I'll keep that same basic structure. Millahnna (talk) 13:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I beat up the summary but my DVD ate it before I could finish re-watching the movie. So I did the best I could from memory on Yellow Bastard Part 2 and the Epilogue. I'll go back at those sections when I get a new copy this week, if no one beats me to it. I had to delete several explanatory sentences that relied on the DVD commentary exclusively; this makes me wonder if it wouldn't be appropriate to add some details in another section. I don't know if there's precedent for that with other films where the mechanics of the plot are explained similarly (Wikipedily speaking that is). I'm just throwing it out there for discussion. Millahnna (mouse) talk  19:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Sequel info removed?
Why was the information about Sin City 2 removed? The editor claims it was speculation, yet major people involved (Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller) have spoke of it's existence, if only potentially. It had citations for it's sources, and I don't see how it's not notable. Just because it's taking time doesn't mean it's not happening. - JasonTerminator 03:58 4 March 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonTerminator (talk • contribs) 11:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * If there's no reliable source saying that the film is being developed, it falls under WP:CRYSTAL. Also, any sources cited have to be reliable. That means that there needs to be an appropriate and notable source for the claims made. And still, many of the sources cited were clearly outdated on the subject. Friginator (talk) 16:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Per WP:CRYSTAL, it is possible to report verifiable discussion about such a topic. We should clean up the section to talk about what filmmakers have tried to do since the first film, but we can avoid wording that says there is a sequel in active development. We can't just remove the section as if nothing happened after the film was released. We should at least make the section look something similar to Shantaram (film). Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, but why are we keeping the rumors about the Weinstein Company losing the rights, if that rumor is disproved in the same section? Why are we listing rumors and speculation from years ago? It says in the section that "Production on the film has been delayed, mostly due to Rodriguez's involvement with a scheduled remake of Barbarella." That's from 2007. Why are we including it? There's absolutely no verifiable info indicating that a sequel is being developed at all. Most of the sources are from unreliable sites like MTV News or Bloody Disgusting. There's no relevant info as to the production of a sequel in the section at all. Friginator (talk) 18:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that all of it is valid to have. We may need to hack at it, but we shouldn't toss out the whole section. WP:CRYSTAL says, "It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced." We have the filmmakers talking about it, so we should be able to have at least a paragraph about what they intended. Let me see if I can clean up the section a little bit. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry I overwrote you, but I wanted to take a new approach to the sub-topic instead of just removing the passages. Let me know what you think. I figured that the October 2010 news would be the most pertinent. If nothing pans out, we can update accordingly. Wikipedia is dynamic, after all. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That sounds fine. The section looks a lot better now. Thanks. Friginator (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Plot summary length
The word count of the plot summary is currently 1,183, far above the 700 word maximum. This film is not so complex that it requires such a long summary. It needs to be pruned. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 23:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that. I've just watched this film, and I can't see anything which could be removed from the summary without harming the reader's understanding of the plot. MOS:film states that
 * Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range.

This seems to fall squarely within the exception, in that, like Pulp Fiction, it consists of a number of separate, interwoven story-lines. Havelock Jones (talk) 02:39, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Film classification?
I can't see where the film rating or classification is. I could read the plot to discover what it should be, but that would be a spoiler. Since we give sections on "Box office", "Reception", etc. I think the film classification should be equally as obvious. Aarghdvaark (talk) 10:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:FILM, we don't report that, as it would take up too much space to list every country's film classification. You can find that information on the IMDB or AllMovie.  In the the US, it was rated R. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Sin City (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090802132059/http://www.film-finder.com:80/Review.asp?ID=46173 to http://www.film-finder.com/Review.asp?ID=46173

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced information
Article has been tagged for needing sources long-term. Feel free to reinsert the below material with appropriate references. DonIago (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)