New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Discuss the latest about the second Silent Hill Movie

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
teosoleil
My Bestsellers Clerk
Posts: 406
Joined: 06 Nov 2011
Gender: Male

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by teosoleil »

Falconv1.0 wrote:You can rationalize the decisions made all you want the source material was still pretty much handled like fan fiction. You realize appealing to a niche group of fans pretty much never works out for this kind of stuff...right? The reason videogame movies are never received very well is because of how weighed down they are from the source compared to say, movie adaptations of books. A good example would be The Shining by Stanley Kubrick, which was pretty different from the book to the point where it made for a completely different experience. However, it made use of the interesting concepts from the book so it worked in that way.

The Silent Hill movies pretty much just go "oh Pyramid Head was cool so let's take him and have him show up acting like a fairly generic super monster with no real relevance to the plot". If they're going to use a character as iconic as Pyramid Head, why not actually make use of the traits he had in SH2? He wasn't just a bad guy and he most certainly was not replaceable. Which is the opposite of how he is treated in the film, he is nothing more than fanservice, aiming towards the lowest common denominator tbh.
Nothing more than fanservice? I don't think so. That view is bluntly ignoring all symbolism in the Silent Hill movie. Why else are the monsters there? Of course there is a use for ol' PH, maybe not the same as the games, but still there in a still major (though different) way. Keep in mind the money goes first, and including an "icon" is bound to attract more viewers and more cash.

What about the Shining? Did Silent Hill 2006 not make enough interesting uses out of the ideas of the original games? IMO it did, and a whole bunch more as well.
silenthillking
Just Passing Through
Posts: 87
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Gender: Trans male

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by silenthillking »

Anyone forgetting the Mandarin for silent hill 2 it was reused in silent hill 3 they redesigned
it a bit and called it Closer even the master reuse anyway lets celebrate two things.
New monsters and no Tom Hullet (i don't care if it's wrong he's wrong).

I hope there's more monsters we haven't seen it's nice to seen more to add to the collection
if you want something to dwell on think of this the creature designer from downpour making
the monsters for this movie wow that's a sad thing to think off.
User avatar
Skele
Subway Guard
Posts: 1558
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Location: VA

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by Skele »

I'm definitely seeing this on the 26th,just hope im not disappointed. I haven't been a huge fan of the trailers thus far, but i don't exactly hate them either. I know this is way off in the future, but i hope they end up re-releasing SH on Blu Ray when the 2nd film comes out on Blu Ray, as i never got to buy it.
User avatar
Patchwork_Heaven
Just Passing Through
Posts: 47
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Gender: Male
Location: the Megastructure

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by Patchwork_Heaven »

re-releasing SH on Blu Ray when the 2nd film comes out on Blu Ray, as i never got to buy it.
The first film is on Blu-Ray, but there has never been an extended edition, or special edition, like Gans promised long ago. The bastard.
chounokoe
Just Passing Through
Posts: 120
Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by chounokoe »

teosoleil wrote:Nothing more than fanservice? I don't think so. That view is bluntly ignoring all symbolism in the Silent Hill movie. Why else are the monsters there?[...]

What about the Shining? Did Silent Hill 2006 not make enough interesting uses out of the ideas of the original games? IMO it did, and a whole bunch more as well.
I think the point was, that the movie tried a little to hard to actually adhere to the games. It was stuck in the middle between being a tribute and something of it's very own and these points, which were partly only made very close to the actual production, the movie feels fanservicing in certain areas.

The problem is that much of the symbolism felt a little ham-handed. Gans apparently wanted the symbolism to be less obscure and hidden in textual references around the plot (e.g. Alessa's bug collection, the fairy tale in the school, etc.) yet some things still felt ill-fitted or a little forced.
The Armless Man (based on the Lying Figure) felt sketchy to me because Alessa's suffering was self-created compared to James experience with sickness. Pyramid Head kind of shared it's role with the Collin creature and kind of didn't because he still had elements of the first plot-draft in him. The nurses also felt weird, as Alessa never should have had that much contact with nurses anyway, except that one night experience where she was probably not even fully conscious.
The film worked in a way that as a fan, you automatically filled the gaps with your game knowledge, but thinking about it hard enough reveals that many things where a little forced.

Still, of course, the first movie succeeded as a video game adaptation, but the huge amount of fanservice made it end up a mediocre movie.
User avatar
Falconv1.0
Gravedigger
Posts: 491
Joined: 27 Sep 2009

Re: New TV Spot from ShockTillYouDrop

Post by Falconv1.0 »

chounokoe wrote:
teosoleil wrote:Nothing more than fanservice? I don't think so. That view is bluntly ignoring all symbolism in the Silent Hill movie. Why else are the monsters there?[...]

What about the Shining? Did Silent Hill 2006 not make enough interesting uses out of the ideas of the original games? IMO it did, and a whole bunch more as well.
I think the point was, that the movie tried a little to hard to actually adhere to the games. It was stuck in the middle between being a tribute and something of it's very own and these points, which were partly only made very close to the actual production, the movie feels fanservicing in certain areas.

The problem is that much of the symbolism felt a little ham-handed. Gans apparently wanted the symbolism to be less obscure and hidden in textual references around the plot (e.g. Alessa's bug collection, the fairy tale in the school, etc.) yet some things still felt ill-fitted or a little forced.
The Armless Man (based on the Lying Figure) felt sketchy to me because Alessa's suffering was self-created compared to James experience with sickness. Pyramid Head kind of shared it's role with the Collin creature and kind of didn't because he still had elements of the first plot-draft in him. The nurses also felt weird, as Alessa never should have had that much contact with nurses anyway, except that one night experience where she was probably not even fully conscious.
The film worked in a way that as a fan, you automatically filled the gaps with your game knowledge, but thinking about it hard enough reveals that many things where a little forced.

Still, of course, the first movie succeeded as a video game adaptation, but the huge amount of fanservice made it end up a mediocre movie.
This.

He didn't use the Armless Man/PH/Nurses because of some deep symbolism, he went through the art book or some shit for Silent Hill and was like "yep that'll do".

Also I have trouble caring about the symbolism when the thing felt like a rollercoaster ride through silent hill with pointless bits involving Sean Bean in between scenes involving Rose sprinting through the entire movie.

I dunno, it's weird. I really wanted to like it, a lot of shots in the film looked really cool to me but the odd pacing really killed it for me.
Your weaboo is showing
Post Reply