Sin City

Somewhat amazingly I’d never read any of Frank Miller’s Sin City comics. Well, maybe one issue many years ago but I certainly wasn’t familiar with them. Kinda odd really since he’s one of the main figures in American comics that pushed the envelope at a high profile during the 80s and 90s. But no, other than his Batman books (which are probably the only Batman books worth reading because they’re both not really about Batman and all about Batman) and the (under-appreciated) Ronin I haven’t read much of him.

But of course I know all about Frank Miller and what he’s done. I know how he took the flagging Daredevil comic (he’s a superhero but he’s blind!) and introduced influences from Japanese warrior manga like Lone Wolf and Cub bringing a dramatic dynamism to the somewhat staid 80′s superhero genre. I know how he tried to reduce everything down to it’s essence stripping away unnecessary details to emphasis the point of whatever he was doing, something every cartoonist should be doing. He’s someone who pushes the boundaries artistically, but also politically and socially, and who really understands where comics have come from and what they’re capable of. There was a joke around the late 80s that he was the only person in mainstream American comics doing anything interesting who wasn’t British, he was that good.

So not having read the source material yet being fully aware of where it was coming from I went to see Sin City today. An hour or so in I glanced across the packed cinema and the audience seemed to be stunned as if they were irresistibly drawn in to something they could not comprehend. What the hell was this thing?

I tell you what it wasn’t. It wasn’t a comic book movie in the generally accepted sense. Miller was channeling noir fiction with Sin City, from the high end Chandler and Hammett to the low-end schlocky pulps. The symbolism and archetypes he’s playing with are not what you’ll usually find in comics, which is why he makes interesting comics.

It’s worth bearing in mind that the most exciting thing about the comic book medium is that you can bring pretty much anything into it. The underlying grammar, while complex in execution, is simple and flexible enough for the artist to fly off in some utterly unique direction while still staying comprehendible. Of course most creators don’t bother with such hard work in the same way that most novelists don’t bother to write innovative literature, but when they do it’s really quite exciting because it happens on so many levels.

So what people watching Sin City are seeing is a film directly adapted from a comic that was unlike any other comic around at the time which sucked in noir fiction and cinema stripped down to it’s pure essence. Since noir is a relatively unexperienced genre these days, especially in such a pure form, it’s no wonder they’re baffled. But a straw poll of those who’ve seen it says they like it. A lot.

There’s another aspect to all this that I think might be relevant. Comics can be quite subversive and powerful when done properly. This might explain why so many mainstream comics are shite – if they weren’t then someone might notice again. A good comic book gets into your brain in a manner quite different to a novel or movie. It’s a very personal experience that involves a fair amount of work on the reader’s part making connections between those panels. The best example outside of comics is how a murder taking place off stage or out of shot is so much more chilling than one explicitly depicted. Comics use this technique on every page in a myriad of different directions not only between panels but within the artwork itself. The creator gives you a bunch of pictures and some words laid out in a way to guide you through but you fill in the gaps. Comics is all about the gaps. Look at Peanuts – it’s just perfectly constructed gaps.

A lot of this made it into Sin City, which might seem odd because it’s a very in your face movie, but that’s part of the power. I’m still not sure how they did it but that movie sucks you in, not through the flashy effects (which I stopped noticing about 10 minutes in) or the acting (admittedly not all the cast could carry the dialogue but those that did were mesmerising) or the plot. In fact all the obvious aspects of the film are pretty irrelevant, which really pisses off the critics because that’s all they can grasp hold of. It’s the gaps, those subtle tricks you don’t notice that burrow into your brain and make you part of the movie, not by dragging you violently by the lapels but by subconsciously involving you.

Given that Sin City is a film with no morally redeeming features it’s quite a trick to bring your audience in like that and like I say I’m really not sure how they did it, but I’m pretty sure it came from having Frank Miller on board. Give someone who really understands the subversive power of comics the tools and guidance to make a top quality movie and you know you’re going to be in trouble of the best kind.