Silent Hill

  • Thread starter Thread starter tha_con
  • 55 comments
  • 2,272 views
Anderton Prime
That makes absolutely no sense. What exactly did I not "understand?" The CG was crap, and saying that's how it is in the game is certainly no excuse.
Click to expand...

It looks exactly like its supposed too, unrealistic. It looks better in the movie than it does in the games. IMO it didnt look bad at all. All im trying to do is explain that the fog is supposed to be there and how could it look any better? Play the games and you'll see it looks better in the movie. But from reviews of people who played the games and understand the world most of them liked every bit of artistry in the atmosphere of the movie.

The average person wont care about the fog at all to say fog is supposed to appeal to everyone. How good is fog supposed to look :)
 
Anderton Prime
Well, you can't make a movie to appeal to only the people who have played the video game before. If you've got something that can be construed as poorly done, cheap CG, you can't explain it away by saying, "Play the game, you'll understand." That fog was crap, and if it was "explained" in the game as being like that "on purpose," it was probably just an excuse to cover up poor video game graphics quality.
Click to expand...
It sohuld have been explained in the film sure, just filling any plot hole or inaccuracy with "play the game" is a cop out to not have to explain it in the film and include it in the plot, but the fog was meant to be like that, they should have just said it should have in the movie as well, even just a character saying, "what strange fog" would at least tell you, the fog is meant to look strange if you haven't playeed the games.
 
I really want to see this film, yes Ive played the games, so I guess I wont be narked by the CG and SFX like alot of people seem to be. In the end if they made the film to appeal more to an un-educated audiance (not played the games) then the fans of the games would be upset and reall narked about how the film is like all other movies based off games, so they seem to have catered to the game fans more the movie fans, and to me that the correct way to go.

Imagine if Mario the movie was just like the games, it would be a quirky and stylish movie, but they made big mistakes and paid for it.
 
I personally thought the game was a bit cack, so i wasnt to bothered about seeing this till i saw the trailer. But am glad i did.

The first bit with the evil baby things was bloody creepy/freaky. I dont get scared easily, well i dont get scared. But that was a very good scene.

The "CG" fog was fine, was nothing wrong with it. I guess its down to a person's pickiness. I seem to be the only person that found the CG in King Kong bad (it was though).

As a game adaption it was very good, same style of horror, camera work, music (to my recolection). I love the horn noise when it goes "dark".

Good ending too, very un-hollywood, i like those endings.

Has nobody mentioned Sean Beans accent?? it was ridiculous!

7/10
 
If there is an extended DVD version then It will be the second DVD since Underwolrd2(not out yet) that I'll buy this year.
 
555 I totally agree about the effects on Kong, the blue screen in parts was pants especially the dino chase scene (people running from them in the cavern).

But I loved SH1 and 2 but didnt like the rest, and hearing that the music from the game has been kept is good, because I loved the soundtrack from the first game (even when out and bought it), if its the same stuff as in the trailer then im happy :)
 
The music was from all but the 4th I think. Silent Hill 3 wasnt bad from what I've read and 4 seems only enjoyed by those who havent played the others to compare it too. I Still want SH3. playing 2 for thre first time now and ther graphics are very good for a 2001 ps2 game thanks to the rarely seen dynamic shadows.
 
Thank you sprite!!!! i thought i was mad as knowbody else seemed to notice the terrible-ness of the gree/blue screen on Kong.

The soundtrack in the Silent Hill was great, none of this badly used Metal like in Resident Evil (even though i like that sort of music) (& Resident evil).
 
I saw it a few days ago, real good. :)👍

Best parts are (try not to spoil at all) the big dude with the big blade and when the horn alarms go off, evertime they did I was thinking "ohhhhh ****".
 
snoutromper
Anyone seen or have this: http://www.konami.com/silenthill/she/ ? It's a PSP "game" that has all sorts of stuff about Silent Hill, like the two comics that were made for it are all on there, all this backstory to the film, etc. or at least that's what the website says. I am a big Silent Hill fan, thinking about getting it. It has the soundtrack to the movie and music from the games on it too, I think. I was thinking about getting the two comics ("The Hunger" and "Dying Inside") but it looks like it'd be cheaper to get the PSP version.
Click to expand...

And it was, I picked this up on Tuesday, still haven't gotten through all of the material. If you're out for a deal on Silent Hill stuff this is where to turn (if you have a PSP), not the games. It's crazy - I haven't even seen the movie yet, but since I have the "experience" it's like having all the extras that will be on the DVD already. Lots of good interviews with both the game folk and the movie folk.
 
Anderton Prime
Well, you can't make a movie to appeal to only the people who have played the video game before. If you've got something that can be construed as poorly done, cheap CG, you can't explain it away by saying, "Play the game, you'll understand." That fog was crap, and if it was "explained" in the game as being like that "on purpose," it was probably just an excuse to cover up poor video game graphics quality.
Click to expand...

I can't agree with you one bit and I think you're being a silly critic, nothing more nothing less, you're just acting a part.

The CG in this movie was far beyond a GREAT deal of other films out today, and you want to nit pick because, well no reason at all you're just being stubborn.

As for the ash, I find it kind of hard to believe that the ash could build up on ghosts...hmm. So why that matters to you I don't know. Not to mention ash isn't falling during the entire movie, pretty much only a few scenes. Even then it was done well.


As for the fog, only some of it was done through CG, but it was also done through the aid of various lense filters as well. If you can name a film that has better artificial fog, please, do so now, otherwise pull your shoe off of your foot and put it in your mouth.
 
There not meant to be ghosts. If they were ghosts they wouldnt be able to touch you now would they.

And going back to the bad fog. Look at the film The Fog (the original) the fog itself in that looked terrible, it was just a bloke with a wind machine.
 
The remake of The Fog had better fog than Silent Hill. The Jeep Liberty that's been parked for who knows how long has almost no ash on it when they return to it at the end. If ash were falling continuously, the entire town would be under a fairly thick layer now don't you think? Unless the town magically "renews itself" every night, in which case again it was not explained and if it's in the game, that doesn't take the place of a valid explanation.

I can have my opinion, and it is that the movie was boring and somewhat directionless. It meandered, and the acting was only okay. I'm not being stubborn by continuing to think this movie was average at best.
 
There suppost to be a pegatory type place, i think the normal laws of physics dont exactly apply there.
 
Anderton Prime
The remake of The Fog had better fog than Silent Hill. The Jeep Liberty that's been parked for who knows how long has almost no ash on it when they return to it at the end. If ash were falling continuously, the entire town would be under a fairly thick layer now don't you think? Unless the town magically "renews itself" every night, in which case again it was not explained and if it's in the game, that doesn't take the place of a valid explanation.

I can have my opinion, and it is that the movie was boring and somewhat directionless. It meandered, and the acting was only okay. I'm not being stubborn by continuing to think this movie was average at best.
Click to expand...

Yea, because when we go to the movies we're all looking for minute realistic attention to detail. If you're going to complain about how ash doesn't collect, how about you complain about:

How King Kong could never be that big.
How Dinosaurs could never live in Jurrasic Park
How phony the CG in star wars is
etc
etc
etc

Again, you're only being an unenjoyable movie critic, just as all other critics are.

Also, to say the fog in the remake of "The Fog" was better is laughable in so many ways. Never again will I take your opinion seriously on this film after having read that comment, lol.
 
hey guys, here is a call sheet from the film, its only the front cover but I can scan the rest if someone needs it badly. :)

 
tha_con
Yea, because when we go to the movies we're all looking for minute realistic attention to detail. If you're going to complain about how ash doesn't collect, how about you complain about:

How King Kong could never be that big.
How Dinosaurs could never live in Jurrasic Park
How phony the CG in star wars is
etc
etc
etc
Click to expand...

No actually he makes alot of sense....the same things turn me away from a movie.
I could really care less about the dinosaurs in jurassic park being real or not, that's not the issue he was talking about..

or if king kong wasn't really that big...
It's the minute things that make the movie that much...well..stupid...

If in king kong someone fired a thompson for a good 5903820498032 rounds without reloading...
that's stupid..

and I think that's the REALISM he's looking for.

I try and explain the same thing to people who are like "you need to lose your grip on reality some times"....It's no so much that, as it is...there' just putting in just BS and plot holes because they couldn't think of anything, or didn't want to take the time to fix it.

Now I havn't gotten the liberty to see Silent hill yet, but if this ASH is falling out of the sky at a rate that would have a town covered within a couple of hours...yet there doesn't seem to be any residual ash...they could have atleast had the actors aknowledge it so it didn't leave you going "..well Where is all that ash going?"...Not many movies can pull off leaving you with a question, unless it's a series....If it does leave you with a question..then it wasn't a finished movie.
 
tha_con, I am getting the idea you really liked Silent Hill. And if you did, that's fine. So what does anything I have to say matter to you anyway? It's not like my opinion is going to change your opinion, is it? No, rather, I suspect you are being so very defensive because you are afraid I am going to dissuade others from giving Silent Hill a chance. If that's the case, I think you should pay special attention to the fact that the number of people who see and like Silent Hill will never affect your own opinion of the film.

Like the movies you want and hate the movies you want. And let others do the same.
 
I enjoyed it. Is it perfect? No. Far from it. But it's a far sight better than any other videogame adaptation on the market right now. However, don't get me wrong -- that is not this film's sole credit.

The film is faithful to the game. The atmosphere, the characters, the plot, the design -- it's all straight out of the game. Such is what makes this film enjoyable to me as a Silent Hill fan. But as an objective horror fan, I appreciate it, too. There hasn't been an American horror film like this since Jacob's Ladder (although, it's debatable that Silent Hill is an American film, or that Jacob's Ladder is horror, regardless of its horror elements).

This stands out from the abundance of "boo"-scare tripe that's been dominating the horror market for the past decade. I'm glad to see films like this and The Hills Have Eyes opening doors to a niche of horror that has been abandoned for a long time.
 
Talking about realism in a film that takes place in an entirely different "dimension" so to speak, where the population is ghosts, and the world is constantly switching between "light" and "dark" dimensions is rediculous. Ever think *maybe* the ash doesn't collect because the world is constantly changing from light and dark? where everything goes away then goes back?

Seriously, my little cousin, who is 13, understood this film. How nit picky can you be? If anything you ruined the film for yourself, not others.
 
There are films where everything gets explained and people moan that there not dumb and they should leave things to the imagination.

Then theres films that leave you with the ability to work things out for yourself, and people still moan!!

And as for the ash, pay attention man. They are in a different world/dimention, its like hell or pergatory. Normal laws of time/space/physics etc would not apply. Its a constantly changing environment.
 
tha_con
Seriously, my little cousin, who is 13, understood this film.
Click to expand...

I understood the film perfectly well thank-you.

tha_con
If anything you ruined the film for yourself, not others.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to ruin this film for others. You still aren't listening to what I'm saying. But that's okay, being Prime means being patient!

When you talk about the "realism" of a particular film, understand there are two types of realism. There is the realism of the concepts and ideas in the film (you could call this "believability"), and there is the literal realism of how "real" the special effects appear - and ultimately, how well they do their job of convincing the audience to lose their grip on reality for a couple of hours and believe in the film. You see, the latter is necessary for the former to be successfully pulled off.

When I knock the fog in Silent Hill for being incredibly artificial-looking, I am knocking the literal realism of the special effects, and because they failed at times in this movie, it made me hesitant to believe in the concepts and ideas of the movie (i.e. the supernatural elements suck as ghosts and demons and dead souls, etc.). Because of this hesitation - and it is slight for Silent Hill, I'll admit that - the movie doesn't pull off what it intends to quite so well. The same thing can be said about the rampaging dinosaurs scene in the remake of King Kong. It was somewhat poorly done CGI, and as a result no one I know who's seen the movie bought into that scene. Instead of being lost in the moment they pulled back. It would be an entirely different situation of people were to say, "Come on, dinosaurs alive on some uncharted island?" or "Yeah right, a 15-foot gorilla and a T-rex fighting." If that were the case, the audience would be attacking the first type of realism in a movie, namely the believability of the ideas and concepts being put forth in the film (such as dinosaurs and giant gorillas and oversized insects alive and thriving on a mysterious island). And then you would have a legitimate beef by countering with the observation that when watching a movie you are automatically expected tolet go of your beliefs and get lost in the magic right from the opening credits. But that's not the case, either with King Kong or with Silent Hill, and if you can't see where I'm coming from you're absolutely, hopelessly stubborn and I cannot teach you anything.
 
Well, whatever Prime said. Silent Hill is a good enough movie.

7/10
 
Prime has got it spot on 👍

For a film to be believable you need beleivable concepts and ideas, then for outlandish and unrealistic ideas to be set in a believable setting, you need decent "script for language" "cinematography for places" and "SFX for creatures and other objects" every one knows that silent hill isn't real, but is set in a real setting with outlandish deamons and ghosts, but fog and mist are real, they do exsist and for them to be used to good effect and to put across a point, they need to be done in a very real way, if they arnt then this could have a negative effect on viewing it as real and have a knock on effect to other more obscure happenings or things in the film.

I still havent seen it so I dont know what to think about it, but if the film is as good as the trailer suggests and what my hopes are for the film, then Im going to like it.
 
Saw this last night and it wasnt too bad. Not as good as I was hoping and quite slow moving at times. Some of the CG was pretty good but its not a movie I would watch again. I only played one of the games for about an hour but if I had played more of the games I am sure I would have appreciated the movie more. The end with the girl and the barbed wire everywhere was awesome.
 
I didn't like this that much. I loved the cast, I loved how the movie opened. After that though, conspiracy thing was ridiculous, and like CAMARO said, story got slow and I didn't really appreciate what was going on, probably because I never played the game.

Climax, ending, I hated both. I'd give it a "C-" for at least a good start and the cast.
 
Back