Advanced search  

News:

14/12/2021: Important: New rules are in place to prevent stalling of the Epic Board Battle, read them here!  The rules come into force today, so please post if you haven't already!

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Members: 35  •  Posts: 7882  •  Topics: 479  • 
Please welcome Fallen Templar, our newest member.

Author Topic: Silent Hill 2  (Read 2499 times)

Offline Soul Reaver

  • Immortal
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2172
    • To the Bitter End - Warcraft III Mod
Silent Hill 2
« on: December 13, 2010, 04:39:10 PM »
Ok, before we go on, let me get this out of the way: I liked the first Silent Hill film.  I feel it did a lot of things right, and the only reasons it gets flak is because (a) it has a different story from the games (which in my opinion isn't necessarily bad, because the way they handled the cult thing in the first Silent Hill game was bollocks) and (b) because most people seem too stupid to follow the plot.  Some of the acting was hokey (surprisingly not by the child actress!) and there was a largely redundant sideplot, but it nonetheless kept the most important things: relevant, personified psychological symbolism in Silent Hill, and an atmosphere of uncertainty and dread.  Much of it is morally ambiguous, which makes it even more interesting.

And so, on to the sequel.  I read the following page: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=71374.  And it made me angry.

Silent Hill: Revelation 3D.  The title already doesn't bode well... it has a colon in it, and 3D tacked onto the end.

But reading that review, what really got me was what the producers had to say:
"'Resident Evil: Afterlife 3D,' 'Paranormal Activity 2,' and 'Saw 3D' show that global audiences have a continued thirst for the horror action genre. 'Silent Hill,' like 'Resident Evil' before it, is a beloved videogame, now becomes a successful film franchise that both encompasses and transcends the game world."

Oh great.  Resident Evil: Afterlife 3D.  Notice how similar the structure of that title is to Silent Hill: Revelation 3D.  Also note that Resident Evil: Afterlife 3D has a rating of 6.1 on IMDB (but then the original Silent Hill has a rating of 6.5, so maybe I'll shut up about that).  For a fuller idea of how awful the Resident Evil movie is, see the following review, it sums it up best: http://www.somethingawful.com/d/current-movie-reviews/resident-evil-afterlife.php

So, Paranormal Activity 2, eh?  Well, that one is ok I guess, if you like that sort of thing (eg, low-budget horror where most of the horror is implied rather than seen).  Personally, films like this one don't appeal to me much - too much of nothing happening for too long, and a complete absence of plot.

And then Saw 3D.  Again, the SomethingAwful review isn't very kind to it (http://www.somethingawful.com/d/current-movie-reviews/saw-burke-hare.php) but the most telling thing is that's it's part of the Saw franchise.  Everything that's wrong with horror today is embodied by these films - it's gratuitous violence only for gratuitous volences' sake.  The first had the advantage of having at least almost believable plot, but it's pretty much become a farce since then that gets ever more stupid, unbelievable and over-the-top.

One thing that all three films have in common is an extremely flimsy or just very poorly-thought-out plot... which is a shame, since the plot in the first Silent Hill was one of the reasons I really liked it, but these producers don't seem to value that very much.

And then there's that comment they made... that what audiences want is a "horror action genre".   I don't know their definition of "horror action", but if it's anything like Resident Evil, it's not Silent Hill.  I've got this horrible feeling that the film is going to involve all kinds of jump-scares, disjointed shaky-cam scenes, and slow-motion shots of monsters being horribly destroyed with some sort of improvised weaponry.

Did you guys notice how in the first film, the protagonists almost never kill any of the monsters (or when they do, it's totally ineffectual in anything but the shortest term)?  Yeah, that's part of why it was good.  I have a feeling that's not what we're going to be getting in the sequel if the producers get their way.

And the plot of Silent Hill: Revelations seems to be based on Silent Hill 3, rather than Silent Hill 2, which is really odd considering how well they'd set up a Silent Hill 2-esque plot at the end of the first Silent Hill film.

I just hope the director, who has a real love of the material, can get his own way enough to make it good, rather than having the producers turn it into the giant turds that they so love to throw at the audience.

But for now, my expectations are about as low as you can imagine.  At least that means that if I do see it, I'm not going to be disappointed.

Offline Archdemon Stu

  • Veteran Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 427
Re: Silent Hill 2
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2010, 08:17:40 PM »
Oh boy, action horror.  It's what seems to happen to any horror movie sequel to come out.  It's hard to find the fine line between somebody who's completely helpless/mildly retarded, and kung-fu master with a hatchet tied to a sawed off shotgun.

I also thoroughly enjoyed Silent Hill.  It had gore, yes, but it wasn't relying on blood and guts alone to make it a horror film.  It was mostly psychological, and eerie.  They really brought the symbolic monsters to life.  Honestly, I don't know I've ever seen a more suspenseful and creepy scene than when the protagonist trying to get past the "nurses."

Resident Evil, however... I never liked any of the movies in that franchise, and I don't see the appeal.  While Resident Evil, as a game AND as a movie, has evolved to be more of an action horror, I do not want to see Silent Hill go down that route.  Resident Evil = not scary.  Silent Hill = I about crapped myself every time I heard a siren after that movie.

Switching teams between movies is rarely for the best.  Spiderman, for example.  The first movie was awesome, and Willem Dafoe was an amazing Green Goblin.  They took the originally cheesy plot of Spiderman and made me give a damn about it.  Those that followed became progressively worse.

Though, on the other hand, X-Men switched teams as well, and if you guys haven't seen the first movie in awhile... don't.  It's probably better in your memory.  The following sequels and the prequel, though they had their faults, improved exponentially.

I hope in this case, it's the latter of the two.