Is it just me...

[Anonymous]

Or is no one else just a little disappointed or insulted that the writers basically ripped off the story of the first game, changed a couple of the characters, then tried to pass it off as a semi-original adaptation?? If I wanted to hear that story again, I would have just played the first game over again. They either should have A) stuck faithfully to the exact story of the first game or B) crafted a completely original (prequel or sequel) story in Silent Hill. Even though they had the rights to the story, the whole thing still felt like plagurism to me. I understand the nostalgia factor is important to the gaming audience, but at the same time don't cheat us with the same story we know and love rehashed and glittered up. All I'm saying is they could have graced us with an original Silent Hill story but chose to feed us a hacked version of the original.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Konami was very helpful with this movie so i dont get ur complaint with the "Ripped off" stuff.

[Anonymous]

Maybe ripped-off was the wrong terminology, but still, even if Konami was involved, I think it was poor of them to simply rehash the original story. They could have done better, giving us a truly original story with new characters and maybe even further insight into the town of Silent Hill and it's previous inhabitants.

[kisho]

Yeah, but if Gans wanted to use the base set up by the first game/movie as a foundation for what's going on in the town with the Second game/movie (as I believe he stated he was in an interview) then it only makes sense that he'd do what he did.

I guess he probably figured it'd be easier to portray a huge cult by having a huge cult, than by saying "There was a cult here. Now it's gone"





"Oh, except for her."

[Anonymous]

Maybe ripped-off was the wrong terminology, but still, even if Konami was involved, I think it was poor of them to simply rehash the original story. They could have done better, giving us a truly original story with new characters and maybe even further insight into the town of Silent Hill and it's previous inhabitants.

Remember they didnt just make the movie for us, but for public as well(which is all new to them). Why fix it if it aint broke?

[Anonymous]

Personally, I think Gans should have left the story as it was.

*SPOILERS*
Dahlia burning her daughter
The Cult not shown
Lisa playing a bigger role etc.


But, Gans changed it around for a reason I'm honestly not to happy about. He switched the cult with Dahlia I think to show social commentary about religious finatics and how harmful they can me.

But, the fact is, it's still a more than great movie, so I don't penalize it, even though I don't fully agree with Gans' decision.

[Taige]

I've never played the first game, so it was all new to me! I think it was good, even if they did rip the plot of the first game, because it sets the groundwork for a possibly radically different sequal.

And who's Lisa?

[Anonymous]

I've never played the first game, so it was all new to me! I think it was good, even if they did rip the plot of the first game, because it sets the groundwork for a possibly radically different sequal.

And who's Lisa?

I wouldn't dare ruin the first game for anyone. You gotta play it to believe it.

[Anonymous]

I replayed SH2 and SH4 last week. And watched the movie today. The plot didn't annoy me one bit. Perhaps this is because I haven't replayed SH1 in years and am not completely up to date on it.

[LaraeGunn]

The whole witch burning/fanaticism was a huge nod to Jennifer Carroll, who is part of the foundation to Silent Hill's history.

Jennifer's monument can be found in Silent Hill 2, by the way.