ROTTEN TOMATOES: Dawson Spills The Beans: "Sin City 2" Waits For Jolie

Dawson Spills The Beans: "Sin City 2" Waits For Jolie

by RT Staff | March 15, 2006

We've all been salivating for "Sin City 2" to begin filming, already -- but according to Rosario Dawson, it's gonna have to wait until pregnant Angelina Jolie has her baby this summer.

Speaking to Sci Fi Wire, Dawson -- who, like many of the surviving cast members of "Sin City," is attached to come back in the sequel -- said that production was on hold while co-director Robert Rodriguez waits for his dream leading lady, Jolie. If you've got your eye on the tabs you know that Jolie is holed up in a Paris high-rise with her kids Zahara and Maddox, as well as soon-to-be baby daddy Brad Pitt (we've been poring over People magazine's in-depth analysis of the pair's non-matrimonial "mystery" rings; he's wearing a gold band on his right middle finger, while she's MOVED hers from right index finger to thumb!).

But back to "Sin City 2." The sequel will pick up with two more of Frank Miller's pulp-noir stories, "Lost, Lonely and Lethal" and "A Dame To Kill For," and has "Sin City" stars coming back, including Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke, Jessica Alba, Devon Aoki, Brittany Murphy, and Michael Clarke Duncan.

From Sci Fi Wire: ""The film's been kind of postponed because Robert has been interested in Angelina Jolie for the lead," Dawson said in an interview. "But she's very pregnant right now. So that's putting an understandable hold on the film." "

Fans are speculating that the "lead" role Rodriguez is holding for Jolie is none other than Dwight's old flame Ava (the Dame in "A Dame To Kill For"). Jolie's supposedly due this summer, so we may have to wait a bit longer to find out for sure.

From Wikipedia: "Ava Lord, the dame to kill for. An ex-lover of Dwight McCarthy who manipulates men through her good looks and her supposed innocence. An expert liar, she is considered a goddess by Manute and a manipulative witch by Dwight. She represents the classic femme fatale, acting as a foil to Dwight's typically hard-boiled but cool-headed anti-hero."

Related Items

Movie:
Celeb:	Devon Aoki
	Mickey Rourke
	Clive Owen
	Brad Pitt
	Robert Rodriguez
	Michael Clarke Duncan
	Angelina Jolie
	Brittany Murphy
	Rosario Dawson
	Jessica Alba

(1-20 of 25 posts) | Reply

Aftermath_1551 writes:
on Mar 15 2006 03:43 PM

[b]WOW[/b]
I can TOTALLY understand Rodriguez waiting for Angelina Jolie to star in this! OMG i cannot wait, i dont pay attention to those gossip mags, but if you think about it, she would be perfect in this movie! WOW i can see it now

ADMIT IT!

(Reply to this)

Forgotenhero writes:
on Mar 15 2006 04:01 PM

Ugh, i really hate Jolie..Im starting to not like where this is going, it seems like no other reason then to cram as many A list actors on screen as they can. Did i mention i really hate angelina jolie?

(Reply to this)

DR.OZ writes:
on Mar 15 2006 05:23 PM

[b]Loved the first one[/b]
Jolie is attractive but not the greatest actress in the world. I will see it.

(Reply to this)

Arrow-space writes:
on Mar 15 2006 05:40 PM

[b]Hmmm[/b]
I can see Jolie fitting the part, but in the book Ava showed a LOT of nudity, and I don't know if Jolie would be comfortable with that. I don't want them to change the role to have no nudity like they did for Alba. And no, it's not because I have some perverse desire to see Jolie nude, I just like when the movie is as faithful to the original books as possible.

(Reply to this)

Elixir writes:
on Mar 15 2006 05:55 PM

what do you mean you dont think she would be comfortable with that?

do you know who angelina jolie is?

(Reply to this)

scruffy_wallace writes:
on Mar 15 2006 06:01 PM

In reply to this comment (#832275)
First of all, yeah you probably do just want to see Jolie nude, and second, she has been in nude scenes twice before, most recently in taking lives.

(Reply to this)

Kaleli writes:
on Mar 15 2006 08:09 PM

Ok, but do we really want to see Jolie nude after having just had a kid?

(Reply to this)

PrecentorEpsilonXVI writes:
on Mar 15 2006 08:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#832278)
good point.

(Reply to this)

t-joint writes:
on Mar 15 2006 09:58 PM

"Lost, Lonely, And Lethal" is a one-shot anthology, so they must mean one of the stories from it. Probably "Blue Eyes", which will be a perfect precursor to Sin City 3. Ava and Delia in one flick. Dang! Femme fatale a-go-go!

Sharon Stone would have been my first pick for Ava, but Jolie is just fine. The funny thing about that is the more you don't like Jolie, the more Ava's character will work. The only problem is HDV and stretch marks just don't go well together.

(Reply to this)

hellhole writes:
on Mar 16 2006 01:13 AM

Shooting on digital video also means that stretch marks can easily be fudged out.

I like where this is going. And the return of Mickey Rourke is probably the most exciting thing about it.

(Reply to this)

Paul_Is_Drunk writes:
on Mar 16 2006 03:41 AM

It's Angelina Jolie. I'd watch her in a snuff film.

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Mar 16 2006 07:29 AM

The fact that Sin City 2 is being held up because Rodriguez feels that Jolie is vital for the part is definetely a good thing. My feeling is that this is going to even better than the first one.

(Reply to this)

mizzoucritic writes:
on Mar 16 2006 07:41 AM

I can't see Sin City 2 topping the first one for two reasons. 1) There's no way to personally get that strict novel-to-screen experience again like you did on the first one. If we see 2 and its stylized exactly the same, we're not going to be impressed like we were with first one. 2) Bruce Willis and Benicio Del Toro aren't there for the party. (Not huge fans, but their roles were great.)

However, my favorite character, Dwight, is back and for that reason alone, I'm going to be at the theatre on opening night.

But I'm keeping my expectations low.

(Reply to this)

jarek writes:
on Mar 16 2006 09:08 AM

One thing I'm not sure about is how they are going to make it reach feature running time again. A Dame To Kill For is one book, roughly the same length as The Big Fat Kill, which was only one of 3 stories in the first Sin City. There are tons of other shorter novels out there, and they could do Family Values with Marv i guess.... but that's always made me wonder about this project.

(Reply to this)

Fangmeier69 writes:
on Mar 16 2006 09:35 AM

[b]No Salma Hayek?[/b]
When the announcement of two back-to-back sequels was made, it was stated that Salma Hayek was playing Ava. Not my first choice, but now...did she drop out? Or was she dropped, when Jolie expressed interest in the role?
Sharon Stone as Ava? May be as Ava mother; she's getting on in years, heh..

(Reply to this)

Fargo writes:
on Mar 16 2006 11:27 AM

Oh man, I�m looking forward to this movie!!!!! Sin City was great, and I�m happy to Mickey Rourke will come back to next part.

(Reply to this)

zeromark16 writes:
on Mar 16 2006 11:47 AM

Ja bredgren

(Reply to this)

245_trioxin writes:
on Mar 16 2006 11:49 AM

it would be interesting seeing "lips" in a noir pic

totld

(Reply to this)

elziard writes:
on Mar 16 2006 01:21 PM

many comments to reply to:
1)nudity: yes, compromising ava like jessica abla did in SC1 would not be wise; though jolie is no stranger to nudity, they may be a bit more tasteful; like rasario's gail. damn was she hot!

2)stretch marks: lest we forget, angie is covered COVERED in tattoos (see the last vanity fair to see her newest ink). stretch marks are nothing after covering all that ink.

3)story/movie length: i really like the stories of sin city; but jam-packed into 2hrs+ is sensory overload. the middle story of SC1 bogged down the film pacing. it sagged in the middle not to say it was a bad story, but sensory overlad and crazy editing really tire the viewer.

4)A-listers and not greaty acting: //Jolie is attractive but not the greatest actress in the world. I will see it.// my response to this: michael madsen's delivery in the first 5mins of SC1; i got really scared with how bad he was in this. i think we can all agree the 'look' is more importantant in this series than the 'quality' (or lack there of). so jolie i think is tailor made for this role and her depth of acting will not be truly tested.

(Reply to this)

Arrow-space writes:
on Mar 16 2006 02:12 PM

I know she's no stranger to nudity, but I was referring to the effect that having a child would have on her.

(Reply to this)