Dark Alessa not he devil, but....

Discuss the original 2006 movie.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Halcyon
Just Passing Through
Posts: 60
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Location: UK

Dark Alessa not he devil, but....

Post by Halcyon »

I believe that the official explanation (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the dark Alessa is merely the manifestation of Alessa's "bad side", and that's fair enough, but I find it somewhat personally unsatisfying, too cut-and-dry if you like.

When I watch the movie, what is impressed upon me is a sense that the dark Alessa is distinctly "other", especially the scene where she "arrives" at the burned Alessa's bedside, whether the filmmakers intended it or not it sure does look like an entity being summoned from beyond as opposed to from within.

That, in combination with the implication that Alessa's birth was unnatural (whether by a sort of virgin birth or by a father not of this world) generates the feeling, for me at least, that there are powers at play in the movie beyond the relatively mundane innate psychic (psionic/psychokinetic?) powers of Alessa. That perhaps there is more to the cult of the town than a bunch of dogmatic extremists, more reality to the mythology than is apparent from Rose's perspective.

Perhaps my imagination is simply being influenced too much by the games; the "many gods and angels" of SH3, but the whole " I have many names, right now I'm the dark part of Alessa", emphasis on the "right now" just smacks of divine intervention from where I'm sitting, an angel of retribution perhaps, or an Azrael figure.

Hopefully you've gathered from the above that I'm not saying my interpretation is better or more correct than what the writer and director have implied in interviews, that would be dumb, but I do believe that art-forms have room for more than one interpretation, I guess I'm saying please don't flame me for this thread, lol.

Any thoughts? :)
Here in the darkness I know myself...
User avatar
Alessandro
Cafe5to2 Waitress
Posts: 202
Joined: 22 Mar 2009

Post by Alessandro »

Funny that you mentioned her father...

I always thought it was something NOT human, since Dahlia stays so silent about it.

And while Dark Alessa is a manifestation, it really doesn't seem like it. like you said, it looks like an outer being of sorts. I know she isn't it just seems that way because of how the movie portrays her.


It would add more of an explanation as to why people hated Alessa other than "she's a bastard." I don't think the cult would go on burning bastards like that if it's such a special case, much less having a special place to do that.
User avatar
JKristine35
Subway Guard
Posts: 1684
Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Contact:

Post by JKristine35 »

Dark Alessa looks so much like the devil because she's meant to metaphorically represent the Christian devil, just as Sharon metaphorically represents God. Really, there's nothing in the film that can't be explained as Alessa being Dark Alessa and, had there been another interpretation of Dark Alessa, we'd have heard about it in interviews by now.
User avatar
AuraTwilight
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11390
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Location: I'm here, and waiting for you
Contact:

Post by AuraTwilight »

I believe that the official explanation (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the dark Alessa is merely the manifestation of Alessa's "bad side", and that's fair enough, but I find it somewhat personally unsatisfying, too cut-and-dry if you like.
And "LOL I'm the Devil and the cult was technically 100% right" isn't cut-and-dry?
When I watch the movie, what is impressed upon me is a sense that the dark Alessa is distinctly "other", especially the scene where she "arrives" at the burned Alessa's bedside, whether the filmmakers intended it or not it sure does look like an entity being summoned from beyond as opposed to from within.
and yet at the same time it perfectly resembles how people meet the Shadow Archetype in their dreams, according to Carl Jung.

That, in combination with the implication that Alessa's birth was unnatural (whether by a sort of virgin birth or by a father not of this world) generates the feeling, for me at least, that there are powers at play in the movie beyond the relatively mundane innate psychic (psionic/psychokinetic?) powers of Alessa. That perhaps there is more to the cult of the town than a bunch of dogmatic extremists, more reality to the mythology than is apparent from Rose's perspective.
There's no such implication of Alessa having an unnatural birth, only that Dahlia didn't want to talk about it. Children born out of wedlock is pretty common, and pretty commonly shameful.
Perhaps my imagination is simply being influenced too much by the games; the "many gods and angels" of SH3, but the whole " I have many names, right now I'm the dark part of Alessa", emphasis on the "right now" just smacks of divine intervention from where I'm sitting, an angel of retribution perhaps, or an Azrael figure.
And yet, she is also giving Rose "the truth." If she wasn't just Alessa's dark side, she wouldn't say so. She has many names because the cult demonizes her as the Devil and calls her the Reaper, and she's more than happy to fill the role. Speaking of the games, a lot of people will argue that the gods and angels of the main SH universe are just delusions, too.
It would add more of an explanation as to why people hated Alessa other than "she's a bastard." I don't think the cult would go on burning bastards like that if it's such a special case, much less having a special place to do that.
There's deleted scenes of Alessa using her psychokinetic powers on school field trips and stuff.
[quote="BlackFire2"]I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.[/quote]
User avatar
JKristine35
Subway Guard
Posts: 1684
Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Contact:

Post by JKristine35 »

If Dark Alessa was more than just the dark part of Alessa, Jodelle Ferland wouldn't only say "I also play Dark Alessa who is the bad part of Alessa..." when asked to explain her character. She'd add more.
User avatar
alone in the town
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11107
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Gender: Male
Location: In the anals of forum history
Contact:

Post by alone in the town »

She was what, ten? I may be underestimating her, but it's possible that she has not explored her own character with the same mechanical precision we are afforded.
Image
User avatar
JKristine35
Subway Guard
Posts: 1684
Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Contact:

Post by JKristine35 »

And yet, Gans talks about how how grown-up she was and how it was so easy to explain things to her. Why would he say that if he didn't explain to her the full truth about her character?
User avatar
rm2kking
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 1766
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Gender: Male
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Post by rm2kking »

Jung is a huge influence on Silent Hill. Many things in the series can be explained by his teachings, the Shadow archetype in particular. Thanks to Auratwilight for this illuminating (Oh the irony!) information! It really sheds light (Oh! I did it again!!) on many mysteries in Silent Hill.
User avatar
alone in the town
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11107
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Gender: Male
Location: In the anals of forum history
Contact:

Post by alone in the town »

JRamirez35 wrote:And yet, Gans talks about how how grown-up she was and how it was so easy to explain things to her. Why would he say that if he didn't explain to her the full truth about her character?
Dude, people say the same thing about kids all the time. If a two year-old makes it to the potty as opposed to peeing in his Underoos, he's a god damn rocket surgeon.

I'm quite sure Gans did not go so far as to explain Jungian psychology, in depth, to that child.
Image
User avatar
JKristine35
Subway Guard
Posts: 1684
Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Contact:

Post by JKristine35 »

I doubt Gans even knew anything about Jung, he was just expanding on what's in the game. Plus, I'm pretty sure Gans has stated he can't stand child actors, so a compliment like that from him is a big deal. And how can you possibly claim he didn't explain her characters to her, when nothing's she's said has ever differed from what he's said? They have both stated the character is the dark part of Alessa- clearly, he did explain it to her.
User avatar
alone in the town
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11107
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Gender: Male
Location: In the anals of forum history
Contact:

Post by alone in the town »

And how can you possibly claim he didn't explain her characters to her, when nothing's she's said has ever differed from what he's said?
I'm not sure how I can make that claim. Good thing I didn't, huh?
Image
User avatar
Halcyon
Just Passing Through
Posts: 60
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Location: UK

Post by Halcyon »

JRamirez35 wrote:It would add more of an explanation as to why people hated Alessa other than "she's a bastard." I don't think the cult would go on burning bastards like that if it's such a special case, much less having a special place to do that..
*puts on crazy theory hat*
Just letting my imagination run wild here, but maybe like I suggested in the OP there is more going on in the town and with the cult than meets the eye, perhaps these "witches" that keep popping up and being burned are the offspring of deities linked to the cult in some way. Or, perhaps similar to that film The Reaping, they're messengers (angels) of the Order's God, the final messenger - Alessa - being the Reaper, an angel of final judgement.
*takes of crazy theory hat*
JRamirez35 wrote:Dark Alessa looks so much like the devil because she's meant to metaphorically represent the Christian devil, just as Sharon metaphorically represents God.
It's funny you say that, because I don't see her as a Christian devil figure at all when I watch the film, more perhaps like the original Ha-Satan of Job etc as an agent of God. If anything, to me, she represents divine retribution, not evil so much.
JRamirez35 wrote:Really, there's nothing in the film that can't be explained as Alessa being Dark Alessa and, had there been another interpretation of Dark Alessa, we'd have heard about it in interviews by now.
I know, like I tried to explain (perhaps not all that well) in my OP, I'm not putting anything I'm saying forward as a viable alternative theory, just what I see when I watch the film. :) Plus, if everybody just nodded their heads at the official explanation and left it at that, the discussion might get a bit dull don't you reckon?
AuraTwilight wrote:And "LOL I'm the Devil and the cult was technically 100% right" isn't cut-and-dry?
God, no that would suck hard. :wink: Not really what I'm trying to say though.
AuraTwilight wrote:and yet at the same time it perfectly resembles how people meet the Shadow Archetype in their dreams, according to Carl Jung.
I'll take your word for that, Jung's a bit too theoretical for me.
AuraTwilight wrote: There's no such implication of Alessa having an unnatural birth, only that Dahlia didn't want to talk about it. Children born out of wedlock is pretty common, and pretty commonly shameful.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. Personally, I see an implication of unnatural involvment.
You gotta wonder, would the shame of having a bastard child really be worse than the daily torment Alessa and Dahlia suffered at the hands of the Order?
The reason I imagine she wouldn't want to give a name for the father was that it was the lesser of two evils, better have the Order shun/mock them than admit the father was something eldritch and risk being accused of consorting with "demons" and killed.
AuraTwilight wrote: And yet, she is also giving Rose "the truth." If she wasn't just Alessa's dark side, she wouldn't say so.
You say "just", she said "right now", implying (again, perhaps only to me) that she was something else prior and will be something else in the future.
AuraTwilight wrote:She has many names because the cult demonizes her as the Devil and calls her the Reaper, and she's more than happy to fill the role.
Eh, fair enough if that's all you see, I see the implication from the 'many names' reference that she is known by many people, many cultures. I mean, the Order have what, like 3 names for her? Your explanation doesn't satisfy for me, but like I say I'm not trying to suggest you're at all wrong or anything, I'm aware I'm not voicing the implied official version, just giving my own viewpoint.
AuraTwilight wrote:Speaking of the games, a lot of people will argue that the gods and angels of the main SH universe are just delusions, too.
I've read that, it's an interesting idea.
Here in the darkness I know myself...
User avatar
neonblack
Hope House Careworker
Posts: 648
Joined: 20 Jun 2009

Post by neonblack »

How is the dark aspect of Alessa supposed to represent the devil? And how, exactly, does she even look like the devil? Que? Especially with the contrast of Rose as god. That doesn't even make sense. I imagine you're basing this off of Jodelle saying "I always wanted to play the devil"

Gans, believe it or not, is actually a brilliant filmmaker; taking that in conjunction with the fact that he is a fan of the Silent Hill series, I am sure that he has considered the psychological and artistic influences on the details of Silent Hill, and given that she was probably 10 years old at the time, I'm pretty sure she wouldn't have grasped any details beyond demonizing traits, if Gans even bothered.

"I have many names" could mean anything. Given the situation, it is probably a reference to the Order, and in turn a reference to demons and "We are legion."
"Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man."
[size=84]The Gospel of Thomas, logion 7.[/size]
User avatar
JKristine35
Subway Guard
Posts: 1684
Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Houston, Tx.
Contact:

Post by JKristine35 »

According to Gans, Silent Hill is based on the belief that every person has the ability to become god and/or the devil. So yes, Dark Alessa is meant to represent the devil and Sharon is meant to represent God. And I'm not sure what you're talking about neonblack, Jodelle's never stated her character is anything but the dark side of the soul.
User avatar
neonblack
Hope House Careworker
Posts: 648
Joined: 20 Jun 2009

Post by neonblack »

I don't know what you're referencing. Is this on a commentary or something? Either way, I fail to see how dark Alessa is a representation of the devil. Would you care to explain?

In the 'making of' for the film, Jodelle states "I always wanted to play the devil." in reference to the dark Alessa character.
"Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man."
[size=84]The Gospel of Thomas, logion 7.[/size]
User avatar
AuraTwilight
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11390
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Location: I'm here, and waiting for you
Contact:

Post by AuraTwilight »

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. Personally, I see an implication of unnatural involvment.
Where?
You gotta wonder, would the shame of having a bastard child really be worse than the daily torment Alessa and Dahlia suffered at the hands of the Order?
The reason I imagine she wouldn't want to give a name for the father was that it was the lesser of two evils, better have the Order shun/mock them than admit the father was something eldritch and risk being accused of consorting with "demons" and killed.
You're not understanding the religious groupthink mindset here. Dahlia, under the more secular scenario, broke religious taboo, SOCIAL taboo, and slept with someone outside of marriage, someone who might not be part of their church. If there was a supernatural being at fault, she's pretty much free as those things usually involve rape, as opposed to spawning a child out of willful sin.

More like "Better the cult try and "purify" her daughter than both of them getting hung and burned for being sinful."
You say "just", she said "right now", implying (again, perhaps only to me) that she was something else prior and will be something else in the future.
The cult called her the Reaper and the Devil, and she played that role as part of Alessa's revenge fantasy. But when she gives Rose the truth, she calls herself Alessa's Dark Side. She can't be both, Alessa isn't God.
Eh, fair enough if that's all you see, I see the implication from the 'many names' reference that she is known by many people, many cultures. I mean, the Order have what, like 3 names for her?
We hear three names on camera, but it's implied to be so much more. Either way, Alessa is only like...a few decades old. Her dark side can't be a cthlonic being.

@NeonBlack: Dark Side = Devil = Dark Alessa. Good Side = God = Sharon. You're reading way too much into this.
[quote="BlackFire2"]I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.[/quote]
User avatar
Halcyon
Just Passing Through
Posts: 60
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Location: UK

Post by Halcyon »

AuraTwilight wrote: Where?
Well, like I already said the "if you'd just name a father" bit, everyone calling her a witch, her powers. To me, all imply an unusual conception and hence an unusual father, if there was a father at all.
AuraTwilight wrote: You're not understanding the religious groupthink mindset here. Dahlia, under the more secular scenario, broke religious taboo, SOCIAL taboo, and slept with someone outside of marriage, someone who might not be part of their church. If there was a supernatural being at fault, she's pretty much free as those things usually involve rape, as opposed to spawning a child out of willful sin.
I disagree. Adultery and fornication are social taboos so commonly committed in every society the world over, that even in the cult of Silent Hill Dahlia would most certainly not have been the first person to have committed them.
Admitting such would have got them shunned, perhaps punished but I doubt with death keeping in mind that the cult was living within a modern town, they simply would not have gotten away with burning everyone who sinned within their midst.
The way I see it, the reason they burned Alessa was to purify her, to rid her of whatever demon they imagined was causing her powers, she was a special case, a witch, not a sinner as such.
If Dahlia had admitted her daughter was the result of supernatural forces, I reckon both she and Alessa would have been burned for consorting with demons, as similar witch-hunting cults did in the real-world. Any interaction with demons would have meant death not a get-out-of-jail-free card because it wasn't consensual.
AuraTwilight wrote:More like "Better the cult try and "purify" her daughter than both of them getting hung and burned for being sinful."
Like I said, I don't think they burnt her just because Dahlia wouldn't name a father, but because they thought her a witch with regard to her powers.
AuraTwilight wrote: The cult called her the Reaper and the Devil, and she played that role as part of Alessa's revenge fantasy. But when she gives Rose the truth, she calls herself Alessa's Dark Side. She can't be both, Alessa isn't God.
I see the possibility that the Dark Alessa is an outside entity manifesting "right now" as the dark side of Alessa. And which in the past has manifested under many other guises, in many other cultures and under many names.
AuraTwilight wrote:We hear three names on camera, but it's implied to be so much more.
Where?
AuraTwilight wrote:Either way, Alessa is only like...a few decades old.
Her dark side can't be a cthlonic being.
Of course it can, in a movie where people can be sucked into an alternate dimension populated with acid spewing monsters and giant dudes with pointy helmets I think there might be room for an entity which takes material form via the dark side of the human psyche, especially when that human is already possessed of paranormal abilities.

No offence intended, but if I may ask; you seem reluctant to explore alternative interpretations. Is it just weariness of having to re-educate people who believe something to be the official explanation when it isn't (not something I'm doing in this thread) or is there another reason?
Here in the darkness I know myself...
User avatar
AuraTwilight
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11390
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Location: I'm here, and waiting for you
Contact:

Post by AuraTwilight »

Well, like I already said the "if you'd just name a father" bit, everyone calling her a witch, her powers. To me, all imply an unusual conception and hence an unusual father, if there was a father at all.
They're a dumbass cult. If she says "The devil raped me" or whatever, she'd probably get off scott free. She doesn't give a name because she sinned and had sex with some guy she didn't marry and who probably wasn't part of their church, so she stayed silent.
I disagree. Adultery and fornication are social taboos so commonly committed in every society the world over, that even in the cult of Silent Hill Dahlia would most certainly not have been the first person to have committed them.
Admitting such would have got them shunned, perhaps punished but I doubt with death keeping in mind that the cult was living within a modern town, they simply would not have gotten away with burning everyone who sinned within their midst.
The way I see it, the reason they burned Alessa was to purify her, to rid her of whatever demon they imagined was causing her powers, she was a special case, a witch, not a sinner as such.
If Dahlia had admitted her daughter was the result of supernatural forces, I reckon both she and Alessa would have been burned for consorting with demons, as similar witch-hunting cults did in the real-world. Any interaction with demons would have meant death not a get-out-of-jail-free card because it wasn't consensual.
And all of that can be applied to the "Born of of wedlock" theory. It seems the only reason you're really arguing for a supernatural father is because of Alessa's powers, correct? Except that humans with two human parents have psychic powers in the Silent Hill series. Demon parents aren't necessary.
I see the possibility that the Dark Alessa is an outside entity manifesting "right now" as the dark side of Alessa. And which in the past has manifested under many other guises, in many other cultures and under many names.
Either way, the Dark side of Alessa is her TRUE self. "Right now, I'm the Dark Side of Alessa" means that Right Now, while giving Rose the truth, she drops all guises, pretenses, masks, and acts, revealing her true nature and telling Rose what's really going on. She's just Alessa's dark side, and this is all to get revenge on people who really, really fucking deserve it.

(And if Alessa really is a supernatural being then you're pretty much saying by implication that the cult was doing the morally right thing by trying to burn her, and aren't responsible for her hell because she's demon-possessed and the fire ritual went awry.)
Where?
Christabella. "We call it all sorts of things, but the Demon is more horrible than anything we can call it."
Of course it can, in a movie where people can be sucked into an alternate dimension populated with acid spewing monsters and giant dudes with pointy helmets I think there might be room for an entity which takes material form via the dark side of the human psyche, especially when that human is already possessed of paranormal abilities.
That's a cop-out. It's fallacious to say that just because other crazy supernatural stuff happened, the rest of this stuff did. Especially given that this is pretty much taking from the first game, so the "soul split" thing is more likely than "horrible monster possessing Alessa for some reason and taking interest in this decades-long errand it gains nothing from unless it actually is Alessa's Dark Side."
No offence intended, but if I may ask; you seem reluctant to explore alternative interpretations. Is it just weariness of having to re-educate people who believe something to be the official explanation when it isn't (not something I'm doing in this thread) or is there another reason?
A number of reasons. First of all, if Dark Alessa is a demon or anything, it messes up her motive and skews her character, it makes the developers liars, it justifies the cult's actions and takes away the entire aesop of the movie, it makes Alessa out to be a completely unsympathetic villain, it makes Dahlia out to be some random bitch whore, instead of a relatively innocent mother who made a mistake, and it means by implication and precedent that Sharon is God Almighty.
[quote="BlackFire2"]I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.[/quote]
User avatar
Halcyon
Just Passing Through
Posts: 60
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Location: UK

Post by Halcyon »

AuraTwilight wrote: They're a dumbass cult. If she says "The devil raped me" or whatever, she'd probably get off scott free. She doesn't give a name because she sinned and had sex with some guy she didn't marry and who probably wasn't part of their church, so she stayed silent.
If you say so, I don't agree though.
AuraTwilight wrote: And all of that can be applied to the "Born of of wedlock" theory. It seems the only reason you're really arguing for a supernatural father is because of Alessa's powers, correct? Except that humans with two human parents have psychic powers in the Silent Hill series. Demon parents aren't necessary.
I'm not arguing for a supernatural father over a human father as such, I'm offering an alternate interpretation, I'm not saying I'm correct, I'm just saying what I see.
AuraTwilight wrote:Either way, the Dark side of Alessa is her TRUE self. "Right now, I'm the Dark Side of Alessa" means that Right Now, while giving Rose the truth, she drops all guises, pretenses, masks, and acts, revealing her true nature and telling Rose what's really going on. She's just Alessa's dark side, and this is all to get revenge on people who really, really fucking deserve it.
While I agree with what you say, I also think there might be more to it.
AuraTwilight wrote:(And if Alessa really is a supernatural being then you're pretty much saying by implication that the cult was doing the morally right thing by trying to burn her, and aren't responsible for her hell because she's demon-possessed and the fire ritual went awry.)
Not at all.
Satan was initially God's servant in Judaism, only later was the office of the Satan given a character and placed in opposition to God. Similarly, the Dark Alessa could be an Angel of Retribution, sent by God to exact Her revenge, the cult see her as evil, doesn't mean she is though.
AuraTwilight wrote:Christabella. "We call it all sorts of things, but the Demon is more horrible than anything we can call it."
Thank you.
AuraTwilight wrote: That's a cop-out. It's fallacious to say that just because other crazy supernatural stuff happened, the rest of this stuff did. Especially given that this is pretty much taking from the first game, so the "soul split" thing is more likely than "horrible monster possessing Alessa for some reason and taking interest in this decades-long errand it gains nothing from unless it actually is Alessa's Dark Side."
Divine retribution, it's really not that much of a stretch for the imagination.
AuraTwilight wrote:
A number of reasons. First of all, if Dark Alessa is a demon or anything, it messes up her motive and skews her character, it makes the developers liars, it justifies the cult's actions and takes away the entire aesop of the movie, it makes Alessa out to be a completely unsympathetic villain, it makes Dahlia out to be some random bitch whore, instead of a relatively innocent mother who made a mistake, and it means by implication and precedent that Sharon is God Almighty.
Thanks for answering that.

I think perhaps you've been misreading my posts, because I've never suggested any of that. What I am saying is that I see more to the movie than what you are arguing. I've never said that the Dark Alessa isn't the dark side of Alessa, I've never said that Sharon is God (not quite sure where that's come from actually), nor have I said that my interpretation is better than or even conflicts with what the film makers have said in interviews. I just see more, whether it was intentional or not.
Here in the darkness I know myself...
User avatar
AuraTwilight
Historical Society Historian
Posts: 11390
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Location: I'm here, and waiting for you
Contact:

Post by AuraTwilight »

I'm not arguing for a supernatural father over a human father as such, I'm offering an alternate interpretation, I'm not saying I'm correct, I'm just saying what I see.
Alright, fine, but be aware that it's not the correct interpretation, and it greatly skews a lot of themes and plot elements.
Not at all.
Satan was initially God's servant in Judaism, only later was the office of the Satan given a character and placed in opposition to God. Similarly, the Dark Alessa could be an Angel of Retribution, sent by God to exact Her revenge, the cult see her as evil, doesn't mean she is though.
Dark Side. Devil. Revenge. There's nothing Godly or morally right about what Dark Alessa is doing, and she has no pretense about it. She knows she's just indulging in selfish revenge and doesn't really give a fuck.
I think perhaps you've been misreading my posts, because I've never suggested any of that. What I am saying is that I see more to the movie than what you are arguing. I've never said that the Dark Alessa isn't the dark side of Alessa, I've never said that Sharon is God (not quite sure where that's come from actually), nor have I said that my interpretation is better than or even conflicts with what the film makers have said in interviews. I just see more, whether it was intentional or not.
What I said was all necessary implications that you can't avoid if Alessa had a supernatural father or if the Dark Alessa is a supernatural being. Either Alessa had a mortal father and the cult burned an innocent girl, or Alessa is hellspawn and the cult was totally in the moral right. You can't have it both ways.

As for Sharon being God, the developers said that Dark Alessa and Sharon symbolically represent everyone's potential to be God or the Devil. Guess who's who.
[quote="BlackFire2"]I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.[/quote]
Post Reply