StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Brightlyme i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Andy Casey This was worst film I have ever had the misfortune to sit through. It was painful to watch, the only thing that kept me watching this dreadful film was that it was so bad I felt I had a responsibility to warn the rest of the world not to waste a couple of hours of their lives watching it.There was no plot to speak of and any hints of a plot were so obvious that you work them out at least half an hour in advance. Every word in this film is a part of a line or a speech, there is no 'normal everyday talking' the script is rubbish! The direction was confusing in its absence and the editing seems to have been done ten minutes before the premier.Do not be fooled by the cast as they were also somehow fooled by the script.Worthy of the IMDb bottom 100, and in my opinion should be #1.

davideo-2 STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsRetired detective Eddie Burns (Ving Rhames) is called back in to action when his young sister Kassie (Kerry Washington) is abducted by a sinister criminal named Charlie Strom (Gary Oldman).She's found fairly swiftly though,returned in one piece despite having been subjected to an horrific rape ordeal.As Burns sets out to seek justice for his sister,it emerges Strom is as eager to set up a meeting with Burns as he is with him,as he has some business of his own with the detective,in the shape of an unsettled score.As I watched this dismal feature plod on,I was woken up to a fact I've chosen to overlook for a while now:Rhames really ain't that great an actor.In some of his other,more bearable features (in which he co-stars) his problems with delivery and tone are something I don't tend to notice,but when he's carrying the film,he ends up coming out in his true colours.As for Oldman,it's really a case of how the mighty have fallen,his once commanding presence in films of real vitality and inspiration now reduced to corny,hackneyed psycho turns such as his co starring role here.The plot is an uneven,patchy mess that dabbles in overtures of the ridiculous that by the time the laughably silly,clumsily self conscious ending has rolled by,have (ahem!) swallowed the film whole.*

underfire35 Now keep in mind, the only reason I undertook to see this film was because Gary Oldman was on the cover. If it had been anyone else (Richard Grieco, Michael Pare, Brian "The Boz" Bosworth, for example), I would not have even picked up the box. SIN looked liked a B-grade thriller, but Gary Oldman...The truth is is that SIN has a decent ambition, but very little ability to back it up. The film contains both an anti-hero and an anti-villain, creating an interesting ambiguity, but it simply throws it away.A retired cop (Ving Rhames), and his kid sister, are threatened by a shadowy vindictive drug/porn/gun dealer played by Gary Oldman. There is a graphic rape scene I wouldn't go into, and other lurid happenings that lead these two characters into a final showdown, which could have been interesting, but is instead a car chase. Rhames' former chief (Brian Cox) shows up randomly to offer sage advice, all to the backdrop of Michael Giacchino's derivative score (although it is good to see him breakout from the video game scene). So is this film worth seeing? Ving Rhames tries his best, but is better suited for films like PULP FICTION, he does not emote as a crippled retired cop with a haunted past. Kerry Washington, as the sister, has talent, but is given poorly written scenes that even seasoned veterans would have trouble with. However, Gary Oldman is quite good...Oldman is by far one of the best actors working today, and one must assume that, like the rest of us, he has mortgage. He still plays one-dimensional bad guys better than anyone (LEON, LOST IN SPACE, TRUE ROMANCE), and in SIN he does try. (Watch him work in a powerful showdown in a mirrored bedroom, or his oration on conscience.) Perhaps he read the script and thought there was potential, which there is, but the director, Michael Stevens, decides to play the movie slick, wasting time and talent. I just hope this does not signal a trend to Oldman's career. There has been a couple of Oldman straight-to-video releases of late (NOBODY'S BABY, INTERSTATE 60, TIPTOES) after a steady string of high-profile films during the 90's. If he keeps making films like this he could end up like Brian Cox, a good actor who shows up as a police official or someone's crazy dad in below average productions like SIN. That would be a shame.SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I will give SIN credit, I have not seen a movie that ends with the villain being engulfed into quicksand in years. As improbable as that sounds, the quicksand scene isn't that bad, thanks mostly due to Oldman's pride during this surreal finale. 4/10.

Comeuppance Reviews "Sin" is a uneven but entertaining revenge film. The plot: Ex-Cop Eddie Burns (Rhames) wants revenge for the rape of his sister. He encounters all sorts of seedy types when he realizes his old nemesis Charlie Strom (Oldman) was in on it. A cat and mouse game begins, and secrets are revealed, who will escape? There is one great scene with Gary Oldman and Ving Rhames where they talk about the nature of life and conscience. That scene is almost worth the price of the rental. Besides that scene, the whole movie is piled with clichés and underwritten characters. The movie wastes Gregg Henry and Brian Cox. The chase scene near the end looks like a car commercial. I give a a ** star ratingFor more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com