One of the best videogame based movies, but still....

Post by **SHACKled89451** » 16 Sep 2008

Music, atmosphere, and some pretty clever creature and set designs were the only thing that kept me from walking out of this one. and I'm a DIE HARD fan of SH.

Post by **leftshoe18** » 19 Sep 2008

this was a terrible movie. i'm so glad that my copy is going to be free (homecoming preorder)

Resident Evil (the first one) and Mortal Kombat (and the sequel) are much better video-game-based movies than this.

Heck, Super Mario Brothers might be better than this crap...

Post by **Phantom Allure** » 19 Sep 2008

leftshoe18 wrote:this was a terrible movie. i'm so glad that my copy is going to be free (homecoming preorder)

Resident Evil (the first one) and Mortal Kombat (and the sequel) are much better video-game-based movies than this.

Heck, Super Mario Brothers might be better than this crap...

Now, now... that's going a bit too far... when was the last time you actually saw those three movies to make that comparison?

Post by **SHACKled89451** » 19 Sep 2008

Phantom Allure wrote:
leftshoe18 wrote:this was a terrible movie. i'm so glad that my copy is going to be free (homecoming preorder)

Resident Evil (the first one) and Mortal Kombat (and the sequel) are much better video-game-based movies than this.

Heck, Super Mario Brothers might be better than this crap...
Now, now... that's going a bit too far... when was the last time you actually saw those three movies to make that comparison?

Have to second that, at least with MK 1, man that movie was sick! RE was pretty good. I had forgotten they even made a Super Mario movie, but I doubt it was any good. But any serious movie-goer has to admitt that this movie had some big problems... So much potential lost..

Should have hired william malone to direct! now he has the right stuff!

Post by **JKristine35** » 20 Sep 2008

I don't think anyone could have done what Gans did with SH. The only thing that fucked up the movie was Avery. At least he's too busy being in trouble for manslaughter to work on SH2.

TheRedOne · Post by **TheRedOne** » 20 Sep 2008

Avery?

Hm, name doesn't ring a bell...

Post by **DarkeningNightmare** » 21 Sep 2008

i think they tried to cram the silent hill realm into the real world. its a great movie but it would be better if they stuck more with the game's canon.

Post by **Fredrick2003** » 28 Sep 2008

I think the fact that it is one of the best video game based movies says alot about the state of video game based movies.

I did actually watch the Super Mario Brothers movie recently, it was on some free movie channel I get. Its so stupid I love it.

Website · Post by **Lauz41** » 08 Dec 2008

The only two video game based movies that I can remember seeing are Resident Evil 1, 2, 3 and Silent Hill, and my favourite was Silent Hill. I found the story more intriguing and enjoyed the characters a lot more.

I'm sure I've seen the SMB movie at some stage but I can't remember it. Wouldn't mind watching it again though

Post by **Fargo** » 19 Jan 2009

Well yeah, it was a good adaptation from the series although kinda appart from the original plot, but my biggest gripe with this is the inclusion of Pyramid Head... not that I don't like that character, much on the contrary, but originally in Silent Hill 2, he's a manifestation from James's subcounscious that represents his guilt for the horrible crime that he commited and his desire for punishment, his existence is well justified in the game, but NOT in the movie... but then again, the Pyramid Head that we see in the movie could probably be one of the genuine executioners from The Cult that actually did exist in the past... dunno

...

leftshoe18 wrote:Heck, Super Mario Brothers might be better than this crap...

Post by **Loveless_Dogg** » 21 Jan 2009

In all Honesty, I think that Silent Hill Homecoming should have been the movie. I mean because of the cinematic story elements and "buddy up" game play segments, It already feels like a movie inspired by a game much more than a game inspired by a movie inspired by a game.

I think if they had submitted this as the First Silent Hill Movie I would have been much more satisfied with what was made. I mean Despite the Movie elements in the game...I feel Like this is a better movie. I enjoyed the characters and overall story arc a whole lot more.

Post by **Holy One** » 26 Jan 2009

I would give this movie 3 or 3 1/2 stars out of five. It was nothing spectacular, and people who are unfamiliar with the series probably won't get it. But as Christophe Gans implied, that wasn't the point; the film was mostly a labor of love for the SH games and fanbase. That, IMO, is what separates Silent Hill from many other VG-based movies out there today--it wasn't a lazy and cynical money grab from the gaming audience. The director was actually familiar with and enjoyed the games, took the trouble to look for decent actors, and hired an excellent crew. Everybody seemed deeply committed to doing this the right way. The movie had its weaknesses--a somewhat convoluted story, a little too much music, going with the played out "evil child" trend in horror films--but it deserves points for effort. I liked it a lot, and it was nice to see that all the main characters were female. We sure don't see much of that in Hollywood.

der Morgenstern Czigany wrote:I actually liked that about the movie. It was inspired, so to speak, by the game and based off of it, but they didn't want to make a movie exactly like it. That way, it didn't feel to fans as if they were simply watching the game. I loved the movie.

Same here. I'm glad the crew exercised some creativity while taking pains to emulate the spirit of the series.

Post by **blank fairy** » 27 Jan 2009

Sullivan, Walter wrote:In all Honesty, I think that Silent Hill Homecoming should have been the movie. I mean because of the cinematic story elements and "buddy up" game play segments, It already feels like a movie inspired by a game much more than a game inspired by a movie inspired by a game.

I think that if they ever do end up making the promised second SH movie, it's going to be somewhat based on Homecoming. It's like it's practically begging.

Post by **DistantJ** » 26 Apr 2009

I don't think Silent Hill's deviation from the game's plot should be ANY indicator of how good a movie it is though.

Personally it's one of my favourite movies, video game based or not, and if they had just made a straight up exact copy of the game I don't think it'd have worked half as well and it'd have been quite dry too, plus I doubt it'd be up in my favourites... I mean I'd have grinned like a kid at Christmas while watching it but it wouldn't have lasted beyond that.

Allow me to repeat something I said in another topic...

The problem is, in any adaptation there are going to be people who love the original like a family member or something and are going to feel confused when things are different, but some things just work better different ways in different mediums.

In the "plot twist moments" of a 90 minute film I think it's much easier (and more enjoyable for the audience) to introduce a religious cult talking about 'god' and 'witches' than to try and explain the entire videogame mythos.

I think Rose was a good character and while Harry was great in the videogame, a mother looking for her daughter seems a little easier to relate to - not that it couldn't be done with a man, just that you can more quickly relate to her without them having to have taken a good 15 minutes at the start of the movie to establish a Daddy-daughter relationship (Else, could you imagine the difference - going from "I've lost my baby!" desperation to more of a "Oh shit, my wife is going to kill me if I don't find her"? Haha).

Finally, I always supported the decision to have Chris in the movie too, with the cutaways to him looking for Rose and then researching on Silent Hill - not only do I find this is a much better way for the history of Silent Hill to unfold than having Rose take breaks from her terrified journey to read newspapers and tourist information (remember what I said about different things working in different mediums?), but it also sheds light on the scale of the situation - in the games we've always played a character lost in Silent Hill, but in the movie we see how Silent Hill's influence stretches beyond that; to their families, the authorities, etc. even if indirectly.

I could go on all day about how great a movie it truly was, and just how well I think they took the story and adapted it into as perfect a movie as possible for a wide audience, but I'll sum it up by saying that sometimes changes are a good thing even if they can be upsetting at first. If we got the exact movie we wanted from Silent Hill, it could have been very dry and very difficult to follow.

Post by **Loveless_Dogg** » 26 Apr 2009

blank fairy wrote:
Sullivan, Walter wrote:In all Honesty, I think that Silent Hill Homecoming should have been the movie. I mean because of the cinematic story elements and "buddy up" game play segments, It already feels like a movie inspired by a game much more than a game inspired by a movie inspired by a game.
I think that if they ever do end up making the promised second SH movie, it's going to be somewhat based on Homecoming. It's like it's practically begging.

Probably, but in any case, they're in need to go back to the drawing board with this franchise.

Post by **DistantJ** » 26 Apr 2009

Loveless_Dogg wrote:they're in need to go back to the drawing board with this franchise.

Post by **Loveless_Dogg** » 26 Apr 2009

I was talking about the movie franchise.

Post by **DistantJ** » 27 Apr 2009

Really? I thought the movie was great at setting the scene, and a sequel could be perfect now that the canon is established.

Post by **Vixx** » 27 Apr 2009

JRamirez35 wrote:I don't think anyone could have done what Gans did with SH. The only thing that fucked up the movie was Avery. At least he's too busy being in trouble for manslaughter to work on SH2.

I regretfully agree. Even though I did enjoy the film, the script was pretty poor.

crucifix wrote:actually, gans stated that he didn't want to cast a man for the role of harry because he felt that a man running around being scared wasn't masculine.

That's not strictly what he said. In the interview on the SH Experience UMD, Gans states that it's because the protagonist seemed quite feminine - in both his actions and responses to what's happening to Cheryl and the world around him - and to cast a male seemed strange could potentially confuse the audience. As stated earlier in the thread, having a mother searching for her child was easier for an audience to relate to.

That's paraphrased (I don't care enough to listen to the interview again and write it down verbatim!) but that was the jist of it!

Personally, Gans' reasoning doesn't quite ring true for me. A man can be a man and still care that his only child has gone missing in a town full of fucked-up monsters. What's emasculating about that? NOTHING. (Stupid horror games/films and their ridiculous gender stereotyping /grumblegrumble)

Also - I HATED what happened to Cybil. WTF? Am possibly being too fangirlesque but seriously ... what happened in the game could've totally worked in the film, not to mention given the added diemension of Rose/Harry's dilemma about putting her out of her misery.

Finally ...

vavelva wrote:i was turned on by the preistess death for some reason, and later i found out why. apparently the ending with the barbed wire was inspired by an erotic anime that he was "Forced" to put into the movie. Nothing makes me more happy than sexy horror.

Ew. Sicko.

Post by **Loveless_Dogg** » 27 Apr 2009

DistantJ wrote:Really? I thought the movie was great at setting the scene, and a sequel could be perfect now that the canon is established.

Yeah but the cannon is fresh and built for the movies, not entirely the game. In moving it over to film they took the liberty of changing a few things that would have otherwise helped with the Psychological aspect of SH2 and so on. Unless they rethink their movie making strategy it's almost a different story that's going to confuse the movie audience even further.

Vixx wrote:
JRamirez35 wrote:I don't think anyone could have done what Gans did with SH. The only thing that fucked up the movie was Avery. At least he's too busy being in trouble for manslaughter to work on SH2.
I regretfully agree. Even though I did enjoy the film, the script was pretty poor.

Not me, the director had the right to change what doesn't work. Not to mention he did help even a little with the script writing process.

Vixx wrote:Personally, Gans' reasoning doesn't quite ring true for me. A man can be a man and still care that his only child has gone missing in a town full of fucked-up monsters. What's emasculating about that? NOTHING. (Stupid horror games/films and their ridiculous gender stereotyping /grumblegrumble)

That's one of the main reasons I didn't take to the whole gender swapping of the main character so well. Gans has gone on the record in describing his love for women, and to be honest it sounded very...well for lack of a better word...perverted. I'd say all of the female bits in the movie was just there as an excuse to satisfy his own "love" for women.....now that I think of it....there was a nudie shot in the movie too. :p lol