2004 Silent Hill Script

Post by **JKristine35** » 06 Sep 2009

The 2004 script has a small boatload of incoherent and hard to understand things. At least in the finalized version of the movie, everything is hinted at at some point. This doesn't even have that.

A) How is Sharon related to Alessa? There's not one single line or even a hint found anywhere in the script that explains it. Plus, Sharon is the biological child of Rose and Chris, so it can't even be theorized that she might be a manifestation of Alessa because it's simply stupid to believe that Alessa could impregnate a woman with a version of herself.

B) Why did Sharon's illness suddenly go away? The closest I can come to finding a theory for that (since they never explain how, or even if, she's related to Alessa) is that Christabella and the cultists were right and Alessa was possessed by Samael the whole time, and now he's moved into the body of Sharon (which would explain why Sharon is identical to Alessa, since she would have been born to be a vessel to the god). Doesn't that kind of turn the entire point of the movie upside down?

C) Chris states at the end that he and Rose want to have a second child. Um, didn't your first child almost die of an incurable disease that disappeared for some unexplained reason? And didn't the doctors specifically warn them that any other children they had might have the disease? So... they want to have a second one, so they can do it all over again? It makes no sense.

D) Sharon is described as being blonde, whereas Alessa has black hair and black eyes, according to the script. So Rose chased around a kid with black hair thinking she was her blonde-haired daughter?

Post by **Deadbolt** » 06 Sep 2009

A) How is Sharon related to Alessa? There's not one single line or even a hint found anywhere in the script that explains it. Plus, Sharon is the biological child of Rose and Chris, so it can't even be theorized that she might be a manifestation of Alessa because it's simply stupid to believe that Alessa could impregnate a woman with a version of herself.

Hannah did it in Silent Hill: The Arcade. Who says Alessa can't reincarnate part of her soul?

B) Why did Sharon's illness suddenly go away? The closest I can come to finding a theory for that (since they never explain how, or even if, she's related to Alessa) is that Christabella and the cultists were right and Alessa was possessed by Samael the whole time, and now he's moved into the body of Sharon (which would explain why Sharon is identical to Alessa, since she would have been born to be a vessel to the god). Doesn't that kind of turn the entire point of the movie upside down?

The illness, like the night terrors, were a device to draw in Rose. Now that the events are over, the Sharon/Alessa composite uses her psychic powers to cure herself.

C) Chris states at the end that he and Rose want to have a second child. Um, didn't your first child almost die of an incurable disease that disappeared for some unexplained reason? And didn't the doctors specifically warn them that any other children they had might have the disease? So... they want to have a second one, so they can do it all over again? It makes no sense.

Maybe they just think Gawd cured the whole family? Maybe when Rose was materialized back into the real world, Alessa took the gene out?

D) Sharon is described as being blonde, whereas Alessa has black hair and black eyes, according to the script. So Rose chased around a kid with black hair thinking she was her blonde-haired daughter?

Maybe it's hard to tell in the dark? Anyway, this is the only actual one of the four you listed I consider an actual issue.

Post by **JKristine35** » 06 Sep 2009

Hannah did it in Silent Hill: The Arcade. Who says Alessa can't reincarnate part of her soul?

Because they have to actually explain it and they didn't. In fact, it's not even hinted at. It's actually contradicted by the fact that Sharon has a different hair and eye color than Alessa. She can't be a reincarnation if she only sort of looks like Alessa.

The illness, like the night terrors, were a device to draw in Rose. Now that the events are over, the Sharon/Alessa composite uses her psychic powers to cure herself.

Where is the evidence of this? Causing nightmares and changing the body chemistry of someone who may not even be related to you are two entirely different things, and there is no proof anywhere that Alessa was the cause of the illness.

Maybe they just think Gawd cured the whole family? Maybe when Rose was materialized back into the real world, Alessa took the gene out?

Evidence that Alessa did that? And isn't it a little bit stupid to risk the life of another child for no reason?

Maybe it's hard to tell in the dark? Anyway, this is the only actual one of the four you listed I consider an actual issue.

She's chasing her in the fog world, not the dark world.

You claim the finalized storyline is just as incoherent as this, but it at least adds hints and clues that tell you what's going on. This one doesn't even hint at how Sharon is related to Alessa or what happened to her illness. It offers contradictory evidence, and I can guarantee people would be more confused by this story than the one we got.

Post by **crazyhorse** » 06 Sep 2009

The whole coal fire burning underneath the town stripped away a lot of the subjective mystery of the town . The fog and the town together create something alien and beyond our reality. When the movie attempts to explain things about the town and Alessa it holds the whole thing down with reality. What makes Silent Hill so frightening is the idea that the town has been touched by something we can not comprehend.

Post by **Deadbolt** » 06 Sep 2009

Uh...so? Either way there was a fire, and either way Alessa has supernatural powers. The coal fire that fucked shit up was more or less a cover up for what really happened.

Post by **JKristine35** » 06 Sep 2009

You mean in the final movie? The coal fire started when the coals trapped underneath the pit burned down through the floor of the church and lit up the mines beneath the town.

Post by **Deadbolt** » 06 Sep 2009

Because they have to actually explain it and they didn't. In fact, it's not even hinted at. It's actually contradicted by the fact that Sharon has a different hair and eye color than Alessa. She can't be a reincarnation if she only sort of looks like Alessa.

Yea, because every reincarnation has the exact same phenotype as the previous? The "aspect of Alessa" part is just taken for granted anyway, is it such a big deal?

Where is the evidence of this? Causing nightmares and changing the body chemistry of someone who may not even be related to you are two entirely different things, and there is no proof anywhere that Alessa was the cause of the illness.

Didn't say she caused the illness, but it wouldn't be difficult to birth Sharon to a couple that would give her that sort of condition. And curing diseases is probably a simple display of her psychic powers.

Evidence that Alessa did that? And isn't it a little bit stupid to risk the life of another child for no reason?

Rose was stupid enough to take her daughter to a faith healer. And it worked. Her license for common sense is justifiably out of the window by this point. And if Alessa didn't cure it, who did? Does the faith healer do genuine miracles and the story just never focused on that?

She's chasing her in the fog world, not the dark world.

Fair enough. Fog is obscuring too, but eh.

You claim the finalized storyline is just as incoherent as this, but it at least adds hints and clues that tell you what's going on. This one doesn't even hint at how Sharon is related to Alessa or what happened to her illness. It offers contradictory evidence, and I can guarantee people would be more confused by this story than the one we got.

I don't believe EITHER storyline is incoherent.

Though what contradictory evidence are you talking about?

Post by **JKristine35** » 07 Sep 2009

Yea, because every reincarnation has the exact same phenotype as the previous? The "aspect of Alessa" part is just taken for granted anyway, is it such a big deal?

It's only "taken for granted" by people who played the games. In this script, there is no evidence whatsoever of what Sharon is. There isn't even a hint. At least in the finalized version they added a line to explain her. You can't honestly believe that anyone would have understood that Sharon was an aspect of Alessa when no proof of it is given.

Didn't say she caused the illness, but it wouldn't be difficult to birth Sharon to a couple that would give her that sort of condition. And curing diseases is probably a simple display of her psychic powers.

Proof that Alessa has the power to do this? Evidence that she did, in fact, do this? There's no evidence. While what you're saying is probably true, they give no evidence of it, and would have left 99.9% of moviegoers confused.

Rose was stupid enough to take her daughter to a faith healer. And it worked. Her license for common sense is justifiably out of the window by this point. And if Alessa didn't cure it, who did? Does the faith healer do genuine miracles and the story just never focused on that?

It takes two people to make a baby, and it's made clear Chris is supposed to be a rational man.

Fair enough. Fog is obscuring too, but eh.

The Fog World has never been that obscure; not in the final movie or any of the games.

I don't believe EITHER storyline is incoherent.

A storyline that has major parts to it that it never explains or even hints at anywhere in the dialogue is incoherent. I'm certain that the only reason you recognize Sharon as an aspect of Alessa is because you saw the finalized version of the movie and played the games. Had you done neither, you'd be confused too. There is no evidence found anywhere in the script explaining Sharon, her illness, or how it went away. Concepts like Alessa impregnating some random woman with her incarnation are difficult and borderline silly- if they want anyone to actually believe that, they have to at least hint at it. But they don't. That makes the script incoherent and silly.

Post by **Deadbolt** » 07 Sep 2009

It's only "taken for granted" by people who played the games. In this script, there is no evidence whatsoever of what Sharon is. There isn't even a hint. At least in the finalized version they added a line to explain her. You can't honestly believe that anyone would have understood that Sharon was an aspect of Alessa when no proof of it is given.

Well, the cult speculates that she's a new vessel for Alessa, so there's that.

Proof that Alessa has the power to do this? Evidence that she did, in fact, do this? There's no evidence. While what you're saying is probably true, they give no evidence of it, and would have left 99.9% of moviegoers confused.

Most moviegoers probably would've figure "Oh, it was a miracle" and probably gone with Rose's viewpoint that she was in a Christian purgatorial scenario.

Besides, if Alessa can create a world and turn people into fucking monsters (as Anna implies), curing an illness should be simple.

It takes two people to make a baby, and it's made clear Chris is supposed to be a rational man.

Yea, and then their daughter was cured anyway. Even he's conceded that a miracle happened.

The Fog World has never been that obscure; not in the final movie or any of the games.

You're right, but without any screencaps based on this script, I'm not making any final judgements. Iffy, but the rest strikes me as pretty solid, so I'm being optimistic.

A storyline that has major parts to it that it never explains or even hints at anywhere in the dialogue is incoherent. I'm certain that the only reason you recognize Sharon as an aspect of Alessa is because you saw the finalized version of the movie and played the games. Had you done neither, you'd be confused too. There is no evidence found anywhere in the script explaining Sharon, her illness, or how it went away. Concepts like Alessa impregnating some random woman with her incarnation are difficult and borderline silly- if they want anyone to actually believe that, they have to at least hint at it. But they don't. That makes the script incoherent and silly.

Maybe so, but meh. I think I would've figured it out.

Post by **JKristine35** » 08 Sep 2009

Well, the cult speculates that she's a new vessel for Alessa, so there's that.

No, they say she's a vessel for Samael. It's the exact same thing said in the final version of the movie, only it's implied they're talking about "the demon", not Samael (same idea though).

Most moviegoers probably would've figure "Oh, it was a miracle" and probably gone with Rose's viewpoint that she was in a Christian purgatorial scenario.

And if that's not what the movie is about, doesn't that make the true meaning of the movie incoherent?

Besides, if Alessa can create a world and turn people into fucking monsters (as Anna implies), curing an illness should be simple.

While that's true, we're told that Alessa created the world and the monsters. We're never told, nor is it implied, that she cured the illness.

Yea, and then their daughter was cured anyway. Even he's conceded that a miracle happened.

So, he now thinks miracles are going to just rain down on them from everywhere?

You're right, but without any screencaps based on this script, I'm not making any final judgements. Iffy, but the rest strikes me as pretty solid, so I'm being optimistic.

If she can't see a main of jet black hair, then she can't see the kid.

Maybe so, but meh. I think I would've figured it out.

Then you would most likely be in the minority. The finalized version of the film either outright explained or at least hinted at everything in it, and yet people by and large still don't get it. Do you really think people would have understood this movie?

Post by **Deadbolt** » 08 Sep 2009

No, they say she's a vessel for Samael. It's the exact same thing said in the final version of the movie, only it's implied they're talking about "the demon", not Samael (same idea though).

They think Alessa's Samael.

And if that's not what the movie is about, doesn't that make the true meaning of the movie incoherent?

A non-Silent Hill fan wouldn't figure it out either way.

While that's true, we're told that Alessa created the world and the monsters. We're never told, nor is it implied, that she cured the illness.

Alessa outright states, though, that her body is dying, and the cult says "She needs a new vessel." I'm sure Alessa knew to fix up her new vessel so it didn't die a year later.

So, he now thinks miracles are going to just rain down on them from everywhere?

Or that the single miracle healed the whole family. I don't know, I'm not Christopher.

If she can't see a main of jet black hair, then she can't see the kid.

Yea, well, Rose was on her way to a faith healer, how smart can she be?

Post by **heavensnightsh** » 09 Sep 2009

JRamirez with another awesome post relating to the movie

Safe to say she probably knows everything about the movie lol Thanks for that link!

Post by **JKristine35** » 10 Sep 2009

They think Alessa's Samael.

No, they don't. They think that Alessa was born a nomal child, but was later possessed by Samael.

A non-Silent Hill fan wouldn't figure it out either way.

But there are non-Silent Hill fans who have figured out the final version of the movie, because it actually gives evidence of what it's talking about.

Alessa outright states, though, that her body is dying, and the cult says "She needs a new vessel." I'm sure Alessa knew to fix up her new vessel so it didn't die a year later.

Christabella said that, not Alessa. She also said that 'the new vessel' means that Samael (who is recognized as a different entity than Alessa) is going to possess Sharon. If you believe this, then you also believe Alessa really was possessed and the cultists were justified in her burning.

Or that the single miracle healed the whole family. I don't know, I'm not Christopher.

The whole point is that it's ridiculous for him to do that, and it just adds to the incoherence of the entire script.

Yea, well, Rose was on her way to a faith healer, how smart can she be?

Smart and able to see with 20/20 vision are two different things.

Post by **SilentOne** » 10 Sep 2009

Yea, well, Rose was on her way to a faith healer, how smart can she be?

Someone can be perfectly smart. But, consider her position- there is no cure for an almost uncannily rare disease that her daughter has; what harm is there in at least going to a faith healer? Yeah, she went through desperate measures to get her there (i.e. legally kidnapping Sharon), but she was a desperate mother with a child that could literally die at any moment.

k. Sorry. I just wanted to comment on this one. XD
Carry on.

Post by **Deadbolt** » 10 Sep 2009

No, they don't. They think that Alessa was born a nomal child, but was later possessed by Samael.

It's not really made clear one way or another. They throw around the term "Incarnation", so...

But there are non-Silent Hill fans who have figured out the final version of the movie, because it actually gives evidence of what it's talking about.

And then there's "lol so she made a pact with the debbil?"

Christabella said that, not Alessa. She also said that 'the new vessel' means that Samael (who is recognized as a different entity than Alessa) is going to possess Sharon. If you believe this, then you also believe Alessa really was possessed and the cultists were justified in her burning.

To be fair, Alessa did kinda actually possess Sharon. So liek lol.

The whole point is that it's ridiculous for him to do that, and it just adds to the incoherence of the entire script.

Christopher's a ridiculous character all around.

Post by **JKristine35** » 10 Sep 2009

It's not really made clear one way or another. They throw around the term "Incarnation", so...

Yes, it is. Christabella specifically tells Dahlia that Alessa is no longer her daughter. She wouldn't have said that if she believed Alessa was Samael.

And then there's "lol so she made a pact with the debbil?"

The finalized movie makes it quite clear what she is with "I'm the dark part of Alessa." It's not their fault that the character directly tells the audience what she is and people still don't get it.

To be fair, Alessa did kinda actually possess Sharon. So liek lol.

When was this? There's no evidence Alessa possessed Sharon in the 2004 script. In fact, it's written to look like Samael really was possessing Alessa, and that he then possessed Sharon.

Christopher's a ridiculous character all around.

Not in the finalized movie. He's a rational, wealthy man willing to do anything to find his wife- to an extent. I'd say he's pretty real life as he was written in the redraft.

Post by **Deadbolt** » 11 Sep 2009

Yes, it is. Christabella specifically tells Dahlia that Alessa is no longer her daughter. She wouldn't have said that if she believed Alessa was Samael.

If I wanted to be contrarian, I could pull a "lol she awakened to her true self."

When was this? There's no evidence Alessa possessed Sharon in the 2004 script. In fact, it's written to look like Samael really was possessing Alessa, and that he then possessed Sharon.

We quite clearly see the two merge, and then Sharon displays Alessa's attributes and implied abilities. I think you're being a bit biased here.

Not in the finalized movie. He's a rational, wealthy man willing to do anything to find his wife- to an extent. I'd say he's pretty real life as he was written in the redraft.

He was also kind of a dick. and his subplot was pretty unnecessary.

Post by **kideatsu** » 11 Sep 2009

I like the original script better than the outcome. Wish they would have stuck with that!

Post by **CodenameJ** » 11 Sep 2009

Overall, the film turned out better than that script. Nearly everything that was left out or changed would have been kind of ridiculous. An exception is the flashback sequence...anything, ANYTHING, would have been better than hearing Alessa's voiceover. That script's ending, though...completely generic. The film's ending is much better.

Regardless, neither one are very good.

Post by **JKristine35** » 13 Sep 2009

If I wanted to be contrarian, I could pull a "lol she awakened to her true self."

That doesn't make sense. If Christabella believed Alessa was always Samael, she would have just said it. But she didn't. She also specifically says that Samael wants to possess Sharon because it wants to "hide behind the face of a child". She makes no mention of believing Sharon literally is Samael, which means she believes Samael possesses previously innocent children.

We quite clearly see the two merge, and then Sharon displays Alessa's attributes and implied abilities. I think you're being a bit biased here.

You're calling me biased when you're saying things happened in the script that are never stated or hinted at?
Besides, there's a disturbing amount of evidence in the script that Alessa really is possessed by Samael, including the abnormal screams she emits on the playground and during the burning. In fact, I think that was what they originally wanted to show, but then cut that plot and made it all about Alessa.

He was also kind of a dick. and his subplot was pretty unnecessary.

He was trying to find his wife and the police weren't helping him, I'd say he has the right to be a dick.