Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 22 Oct 2017




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 06 Nov 2011
Notes left: 401
DistantJ wrote:
Patman wrote:
I assumed the cenobite was really Heather' s perception of Claudia, that the medallion is just a tool to switch its user "perception filter" to the one born from his own mind (am I making any sense ?)

Absolutely you are. This is why Leonard says it unlocks the true nature of things, when he completes the seal he gains his sight and straight away sees Heather as a demon, and Heather hands it over to Claudia saying she wants to see the truth of her...

Silent Hill's monsters are the physical manifestation of the subconscious fears, desires and beliefs of, in some cases, Alessa, and in others, the person who has wound up in the town. We have known this about the series for years. So of course Claudia is able to jump around and stab people, and stand up to Alessa's protector. Didn't anybody else notice the missionary in Heather's nightmare? She's met with that particular image many times before she encountered Claudia.

I'm starting to wonder if Silent Hill fans are as smart and deep as they claim to be, the way this film's ideas have gone straight over their heads.


I still don't stand by the perception theory. If the Seal of Metatron enabled you to see everything as how you *think* it is in truth, why would Claudia be able to jump around and attack things if that's only how Heather sees her. Am I misinterpreting these theories? They do seem pretty confusing.

I'm not seeing a lot of the film's ideas going over people's heads (except on YouTube comments, of course), though I still think that trying to dig up nonexistent backstory on the Mannequin-Spider scene is just being merciful to the lack of the movie's depth in the first place. Can't think of anything anyone else wouldn't get atm, though.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]

Missing since: 31 Dec 2009
Notes left: 143
Last seen at: Lebanon, Pennsylvania
It's a lowest-common-denominator horror film. Nothing is flying over anybody's head, at least not on this forum. Why Distant J is resorting to insulting the intelligence of people who recognize the film is as deep as a puddle is anybody's guess.

_________________
How can I be lost if I've got nowhere to go?


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]

Missing since: 02 Apr 2012
Notes left: 35
teosoleil wrote:
DistantJ wrote:
Patman wrote:
I assumed the cenobite was really Heather' s perception of Claudia, that the medallion is just a tool to switch its user "perception filter" to the one born from his own mind (am I making any sense ?)

Absolutely you are. This is why Leonard says it unlocks the true nature of things, when he completes the seal he gains his sight and straight away sees Heather as a demon, and Heather hands it over to Claudia saying she wants to see the truth of her...

Silent Hill's monsters are the physical manifestation of the subconscious fears, desires and beliefs of, in some cases, Alessa, and in others, the person who has wound up in the town. We have known this about the series for years. So of course Claudia is able to jump around and stab people, and stand up to Alessa's protector. Didn't anybody else notice the missionary in Heather's nightmare? She's met with that particular image many times before she encountered Claudia.

I'm starting to wonder if Silent Hill fans are as smart and deep as they claim to be, the way this film's ideas have gone straight over their heads.


I still don't stand by the perception theory. If the Seal of Metatron enabled you to see everything as how you *think* it is in truth, why would Claudia be able to jump around and attack things if that's only how Heather sees her. Am I misinterpreting these theories? They do seem pretty confusing.


Also, Don't forget that when Claudia touched the Seal, all of the Order members freaked out and started to run away from her, so, it's safe to say that not only Heather saw her like that, but also other people like the Order members, so I think that she's actually the Missionary, and not how Heather sees her. Maybe the Seal made her manifest herself as Heather/Alessa's nightmare to others, since you can see something come out of Heather and into Claudia. I can't say what was it exactly, since I didn't see it, I'm just told that Heather morphed into something, and when Claudia touched the seal, she went normal again, and then something came out of her.


Last edited by Claudia_Wolf on 05 Nov 2012, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 06 Nov 2011
Notes left: 401
On a side note, I'm leaning on the theory to think that possessing the Seal of Metatron lets others see you how they metaphorically view you as; manifested into physical form. Not sure if anyone else has said this beforehand; my brain is confuzzled by the zigzaggy basics of the other theories.

Heather has met the Missionary before. Claudia has the power to transform into the Missionary monster. Heather does not know this. However, Heather sees similar qualities between the two, and thus she views Claudia much like how she views the Missionary: both harming her father (in the dream and seeing her father chained up by Claudia), and both destroying/harming people trying to help her (Douglas and Vincent).

Because Heather views Claudia as the Missionary monster in her head, Claudia transforms to Heather's eyes as what Heather sees her as: the Missionary . However, lo and behold, Claudia actually is the Missionary ; Heather's truthful perception of the real Claudia causes her to transform into the monster she really is.


Anyways, that's my long and personal view on it.

Or, more simply, maybe the Seal just tries to manifest people's souls into physical forms? Idk. I'm sure someone has said that before, but my thoughts on the matter have just been jumbled up.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
KoRn_Child wrote:
It's a lowest-common-denominator horror film. Nothing is flying over anybody's head, at least not on this forum. Why Distant J is resorting to insulting the intelligence of people who recognize the film is as deep as a puddle is anybody's guess.


Just because you dislike the film doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to analyze it. Bassett on multiple occasions demonstrated an understanding of the series and its use of symbolism; just because his product is more mainstream, or not to your tastes, or hell, mediocre (as I found the first film to be quite frankly) doesn't mean there is nothing in it worth analyzing.

Hell, the original games aren't always as deep as one may think; don't forget that the first two had bugs in it... specifically stated to symbolize a fear of bugs.

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 31 Aug 2010
Notes left: 467
Last seen at: Marioland
Claudia_Wolf wrote:
Also, Don't forget that when Claudia touched the Seal, all of the Order members freaked out and started to run away from her, so, it's safe to say that not only Heather saw her like that, but also other people like the Order members,

When Leonard changed Heather saw it too, apparently the medallion user is not the only one affected by the perspective switch.

Claudia_Wolf wrote:
so I think that she's actually the Missionary, and not how Heather sees her.

Tomato tomayto. What you perceive is your reality. Reality is just an electric signal interpreted by your brain, which is why I mentioned The Matrix earlier.

I just think of SH stories as subjective hallucinations flying all around rather than actual objective demon morphing. I' m not even sure there is such a thing as an objective reality in those stories.

teosoleil wrote:
On a side note, I'm leaning on the theory to think that possessing the Seal of Metatron lets others see you how they metaphorically view you as; manifested into physical form. Not sure if anyone else has said this beforehand; my brain is confuzzled by the zigzaggy basics of the other theories.


I was going for "the medallion makes everyone around see things as its user metaphorically sees them".

Sorry for being confuzzling, is that better ?


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
Silent Hill brings fears/negative thoughts to life. This is the very concept people use to back up their anger for the return of Pyramid Head to the series. The Seal of Metatron either A. gives physical form to people's 'true selves' or B. gives physical form to a person's perception. I was edging towards the latter due to the way Leonard attacked Heather when the seal was completed, but she doesn't 'change form' when he sees her so that throws a bit of a spanner into that, unless Alessa was what Leonard considers a demon, but that's probably overthinking it a little? I didn't notice Heather's face turn dark when the two of them were both holding the seal but if it did that's very cool.

Bassett knows that Silent Hill is about metaphor given physical form, he made this clear in his interviews, so I don't think I was wrong to have seen it as more than just some popcorn slasher movie. He just asks you to use your imagination rather than outright stating it. The spider mannequin for example didn't fit in with or behave like any of Heather or The Order's monsters, and it was attacking others before Heather came along, so it seemed pretty fair to assume it was Suki and her friends' monster.

KoRn_Child wrote:
It's a lowest-common-denominator horror film. Nothing is flying over anybody's head, at least not on this forum. Why Distant J is resorting to insulting the intelligence of people who recognize the film is as deep as a puddle is anybody's guess.

Oh so this is how it is, is it? Have you read or listened to a single Bassett interview? Seen any of his other films? Most of this stuff was completely intentional and he has as much as said so. In several interviews he says he has in his mind metaphorical reasons for every monster's appearance and what they represent. I'm insulting YOUR intelligence? What do you think it feels like to those of us who enjoyed it where everybody is screaming about how dumb it is and how you'd have to be an idiot and "turn your brain off" to enjoy it? Not entirely sure why you are using math to describe how low brow it is, by the way.

I'm starting to think you guys just don't like horror. Seriously. You played Silent Hill 2 and decided that somehow this series is some kind of psychodrama on the level of David Lynch or something. Like the scares and monsters are an afterthought. If I want a David Lynch film, I will watch a David Lynch film (in fact I have practically all of them on DVD). Silent Hill is Lovecraftian before it is Lynchian, in fact SH2 and Downpour are about the only ones which focus more on the intelligent psychodrama side, the rest are pretty much the same as the movies in most respects. Their storytelling is every bit as flawed.

You're seriously getting all up in my ass because I am analysing something which has the Silent Hill name on it? You people sound just as desperate when you try to claim that Henry in SH4 is a deep character or that foetus-puking and defeating Dark Alessa with a submachine gun would be more appropriate for this film.

These aren't theories I came up with weeks later. This is what was apparent to me while I was in that damn theatre, watching the film. It's not my problem if you turned your brain off expecting a Transformers movie.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Subway Guard
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 20 Jul 2004
Notes left: 1538
Last seen at: VA
^The Transformers movies (yes, even that shitty Transformers 2) are all better than Revelations.

I know you're a fan of MJB, but this movie is bad. I LOVE horror films, whether it's Session 9, Friday the 13th, any hack n slash, or even some of the very low budget Troma stuff.. But i just couldn't get into this film.

Also, i thought it was pretty obvious that Claudia was the Missionary. Once she was given the seal of metatron, it allowed everyone to see her for how she really was. I would've rather seen her eat a fetus like it was a delicious stromboli, however we can't always get what we want.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 31 Aug 2010
Notes left: 467
Last seen at: Marioland
DistantJ wrote:
I was edging towards the latter due to the way Leonard attacked Heather when the seal was completed, but she doesn't 'change form' when he sees her so that throws a bit of a spanner into that, unless Alessa was what Leonard considers a demon, but that's probably overthinking it a little?

Well I' m an atheist, I' m pretty sure there are zealots out there that would see me as a demon despite my complete lack of horns, tail and whatnot. I have no problem with Leonard equating Alessa with demon.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]

Missing since: 31 Dec 2009
Notes left: 143
Last seen at: Lebanon, Pennsylvania
DistantJ wrote:
It's not my problem if you turned your brain off expecting a Transformers movie.


It would have been better if I had gone in expecting a Transformers movie, because that's about the quality of what we got. Instead I went in with the expectation that I would be watching something intelligent, respectful of the source material, and competently directed and acted. What I ended up having to sit through was the equivalent of the first film's dreadful second half played on fast forward yet somehow stretched out for 90 minutes.

But hey, don't let me stop you from dreaming up subtext and hidden meanings in the film. Maybe once you're done you can work on projecting some deep and profound message onto Jason X for us.

_________________
How can I be lost if I've got nowhere to go?


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
KoRn_Child wrote:
But hey, don't let me stop you from dreaming up subtext and hidden meanings in the film. Maybe once you're done you can work on projecting some deep and profound message onto Jason X for us.


Regardless of if you found the movie to be bad, the fact is that the creator has stated he put symbolism and forethought into the film. He's demonstrated his understanding of the series on multiple occasions, and just because you dislike it doesn't mean there's nothing to analyze.

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 11 Sep 2011
Notes left: 293
Yuki wrote:
KoRn_Child wrote:
It's a lowest-common-denominator horror film. Nothing is flying over anybody's head, at least not on this forum. Why Distant J is resorting to insulting the intelligence of people who recognize the film is as deep as a puddle is anybody's guess.


Just because you dislike the film doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to analyze it. Bassett on multiple occasions demonstrated an understanding of the series and its use of symbolism; just because his product is more mainstream, or not to your tastes, or hell, mediocre (as I found the first film to be quite frankly) doesn't mean there is nothing in it worth analyzing.

The fact that he demonstrates an understanding of Silent Hill doesn't automatically make the product well thought out.

And I don't think they are saying it's not worthwhile to analyze it, I think they are saying it's not worthwhile to do so for the sake of making other people notice something that isn't there for them. I saw the same situation with Sucker Punch, a movie Zack Snyder put little thought into and yet intended for it to be deeper, causing his fans to insert a huge ton of symbolism into it and claiming anyone who thought otherwise didn't get it. It was the antithesis of what Lynch, and subsequently, his fans, did with Mulholland Dr.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
FrankRD wrote:
Yuki wrote:
KoRn_Child wrote:
It's a lowest-common-denominator horror film. Nothing is flying over anybody's head, at least not on this forum. Why Distant J is resorting to insulting the intelligence of people who recognize the film is as deep as a puddle is anybody's guess.


Just because you dislike the film doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to analyze it. Bassett on multiple occasions demonstrated an understanding of the series and its use of symbolism; just because his product is more mainstream, or not to your tastes, or hell, mediocre (as I found the first film to be quite frankly) doesn't mean there is nothing in it worth analyzing.

The fact that he demonstrates an understanding of Silent Hill doesn't automatically make the product well thought out.

And I don't think they are saying it's not worthwhile to analyze it, I think they are saying it's not worthwhile to do so for the sake of making other people notice something that isn't there for them.


By understanding, Bassett knows that the movie needs to be more than what's on the surface, and he's stated before that he did indeed put thought into it. Regardless of whether or not one enjoyed the film, that cannot be taken away from it; there can be more to analyze that's there purposefully, and hell, many people read into films what never was intended in the first place.

KoRn is certainly saying it's not worthwhile to analyze it. They're stating that anybody analyzing it is wrong because the film is as "deep as a puddle".

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
I'm starting to feel like some of you need to be hit over the head with symbolism to be able to see that it's there. If the movie made it blatant then it wouldn't be doing Silent Hill any justice. Downpour's weakest point was the way it's symbolism went 'hurr durr he was a prisoner, look, evil cop cars and prisoner monsters!'. Nobody looked at Silent Hill 2 and went "THIS THING CLEARLY REPRESENTS JAMES' DESIRE TO BE PUNISHED", it took a lot of thinking (or reading of the Silent Hill books and stuff, derp) on the second playthrough to understand what a lot of it meant and when you read further into the other games in the series a lot of it is as obscure as "this monster is a bug because Alessa liked bugs". I heard Bassett say in an interview that he had a psychological reason for every monster to be there and what it represents.

Yuki wrote:
KoRn_Child wrote:
But hey, don't let me stop you from dreaming up subtext and hidden meanings in the film. Maybe once you're done you can work on projecting some deep and profound message onto Jason X for us.


Regardless of if you found the movie to be bad, the fact is that the creator has stated he put symbolism and forethought into the film. He's demonstrated his understanding of the series on multiple occasions, and just because you dislike it doesn't mean there's nothing to analyze.

Exactly what I was trying to say. I found symbolism in there (without having to look very hard) and Bassett repeatedly stressed that he wrote and directed it with symbolism in interview after interview.

Sometimes I think Bassett understands Silent Hill better than a lot of US do. I mean look at the series as a whole. The 9 or so games. We put the whole series up against SH2, still, and still try and see everything the way James' story was told, but really, the vast majority of the series barely even touches SH2's territory. Monsters and events represent personal meanings to the protagonists, sure, but generally it's only SH2 and Downpour that fully take this approach to the storytelling. The rest are lovecraftian adventure horror, a scary Alice in Wonderland, which I'm sorry to say, comes off harder to take as seriously when you put it into another medium.

I know you guys want a deeply sad movie about a disturbed person wandering around in some fog on their own until they realise that they did something bad once, but that's been done before and done better.

FrankRD wrote:
I saw the same situation with Sucker Punch, a movie Zack Snyder put little thought into

FrankRD wrote:
It was the antithesis of what Lynch, and subsequently, his fans, did with Mulholland Dr.

Those are two movies I really really love and find a lot of meaning in. Sucker Punch maybe not so much meaning but there was some symbolism there and there was definitely effort in it. Mulholland Dr. is one of my all time favourites.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 11 Sep 2011
Notes left: 293
DistantJ wrote:
FrankRD wrote:
I saw the same situation with Sucker Punch, a movie Zack Snyder put little thought into

FrankRD wrote:
It was the antithesis of what Lynch, and subsequently, his fans, did with Mulholland Dr.
Those are two movies I really really love and find a lot of meaning in. Sucker Punch maybe not so much meaning but there was some symbolism there and there was definitely effort in it. Mulholland Dr. is one of my all time favourites.

Then we just see things differently, because I thought Sucker Punch was a pretty but shallow pseudo-psychological movie. See? That, I think, means there's more to this discussion than the one-sided view that is ''you don't see it, but I see it; and the creator thinks it should be seen, so who's right?'' You think people are being unfair to the film by dismissing most of the apparently intended depth to it, but you're being unfair to these people by assuming they're acting blind to them instead of recognizing that the product in itself might not be clear enough for everyone. There's also the fact that people didn't react as negatively to the first one, which means there's something different in the approach this film takes that ultimately affects the appreciation the public might be willing to give to it.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
FrankRD wrote:
DistantJ wrote:
FrankRD wrote:
I saw the same situation with Sucker Punch, a movie Zack Snyder put little thought into

FrankRD wrote:
It was the antithesis of what Lynch, and subsequently, his fans, did with Mulholland Dr.
Those are two movies I really really love and find a lot of meaning in. Sucker Punch maybe not so much meaning but there was some symbolism there and there was definitely effort in it. Mulholland Dr. is one of my all time favourites.

Then we just see things differently, because I thought Sucker Punch was a pretty but shallow pseudo-psychological movie. See? That, I think, means there's more to this discussion than the one-sided view that is ''you don't see it, but I see it; and the creator thinks it should be seen, so who's right?'' You think people are being unfair to the film by dismissing most of the apparently intended depth to it, but you're being unfair to these people by assuming they're acting blind to them instead of recognizing that the product in itself might not be clear enough for everyone. There's also the fact that people didn't react as negatively to the first one, which means there's something different in the approach this film takes that ultimately affects the appreciation the public might be willing to give to it.


Our problem isn't that the symbolism isn't clear to everyone; hell, I myself haven't even given a lot of thought to it yet because I'd like to see it a second time. Our problem is people immediately dismissing it as mindless fluff not worth analyzing and saying that we are stupid for attempting to do so.

I disagree with DistantJ that people who don't see much behind it are dumb, but I do think it's worth looking into it and trying to find something to appreciate in. Telling us to stop even trying because it's ~objectively shallow~ does nothing but invalidate our opinions, and if there's one thing this forum frowns upon, it's that (barring, of course, opinions based in falsities).

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Aug 2009
Notes left: 273
Last seen at: Iraq
I view it in a different way. Silent Hill is all about symbolisms and there's nothing more suitable for such concept like the truth. Portraying the truth about something in a symbolic way is a Silent Hill thing.

I think the Seal of Metatron merely shows what you are not what you look like. Neither Leonard nor Claudia are monsters, they're just dark and evil people and are nothing like the victims they make themselves look like so the Seal uncovered that part.

_________________
Twitter: @RinoTheBouncer | www.rinothebouncer.com | Instagram: @RinoTheBouncer


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 06 Nov 2011
Notes left: 401
RinoTheBouncer wrote:
I view it in a different way. Silent Hill is all about symbolisms and there's nothing more suitable for such concept like the truth. Portraying the truth about something in a symbolic way is a Silent Hill thing.

I think the Seal of Metatron merely shows what you are not what you look like. Neither Leonard nor Claudia are monsters, they're just dark and evil people and are nothing like the victims they make themselves look like so the Seal uncovered that part.


I'm beginning to lean onto this more. Of course, Claudia probably does have the ability to transform into a monster on her own will. I agree that the Seal of Metatron just shows who you are in a symbolic way, not that it changes anybody's perception of the holder of the Seal.

I just watched the movie again. During the scene where Heather hand's Claudia the Seal, her face turns half covered with shadow and half covered with light. So, to me, the Seal really is just a way of symbolically telling other people who you are inside.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
I never said anybody was dumb, sorry if it came across that way. I was just saying it's strange that nobody can see ANY symbolism in here.

I'm not trying to change anybody's mind, I just don't like the attitude that those of us who enjoyed it are dumbasses. If I've given the impression that I'm implying the same thing about the people who didn't then I apologise for that.

It's certainly not the smartest movie in the world, the dialogue is fitting for a halloween popcorn flick etc., but that's exactly how Silent Hill 3 was. There was symbolism in SH3 but a lot of the deep character study you read about is blatantly people who loved SH2 reading too far between the lines. I loved the way it built up from disturbing nightmares/visions to atmospheric wandering to big fireworks. I get it, some of you don't want fireworks, you want SH2-styled morbidity, but when this movie is setting things on fire and pitting giant monsters against one another, the game is setting things on fire and pitting a giant monster against a teenage girl with a machine gun.

I do have to say though, Silent Hill isn't ABOUT the symbolism. It's pretty much just us hardcores who get all obsessed with that. Most gamers play Silent Hill and go "man that is a freaky monster" and leave it there. The symbolism can be just as obscure in the games too. Things like "James found the nurses at the hospital sexy" or "Cheryl liked butterflies" aren't going to win awards for context.

FrankRD wrote:
DistantJ wrote:
FrankRD wrote:
I saw the same situation with Sucker Punch, a movie Zack Snyder put little thought into

FrankRD wrote:
It was the antithesis of what Lynch, and subsequently, his fans, did with Mulholland Dr.
Those are two movies I really really love and find a lot of meaning in. Sucker Punch maybe not so much meaning but there was some symbolism there and there was definitely effort in it. Mulholland Dr. is one of my all time favourites.

Then we just see things differently, because I thought Sucker Punch was a pretty but shallow pseudo-psychological movie. See? That, I think, means there's more to this discussion than the one-sided view that is ''you don't see it, but I see it; and the creator thinks it should be seen, so who's right?'' You think people are being unfair to the film by dismissing most of the apparently intended depth to it, but you're being unfair to these people by assuming they're acting blind to them instead of recognizing that the product in itself might not be clear enough for everyone. There's also the fact that people didn't react as negatively to the first one, which means there's something different in the approach this film takes that ultimately affects the appreciation the public might be willing to give to it.


Oh I recognise that it might not be clear, but these same people were complaining that Downpour's symbolism was too obvious. Genuinely though there are parts I felt were obvious, as obvious as you're going to get without giving Vincent even more silly 'here's me explaining everything' lines (seriously, I hated Vincent's dialogue, he was inches away from starting every line with "If you've just joined us..."). I mean stuff like a monster with a hole in its face showing its scrambled brains, in a mental asylum, we all know what that is supposed to mean. That alone shows that he understands the symbolism, and if that monster represents something the others must too. I don't think I am being very obscure at all when I see an all female, all thin, all attractive group of travellers being attacked by mannequins and plastic, and see meaning in it.

When the subjectivity of nightmares in Silent Hill is mentioned more than once, by more than one character, could you really say I'm overthinking things to say that a part of the film involving a monster and environment completely different to the rest, which has been attacking people nothing to do with the cult (when Alessa's darkness tends to spare Dahlia) long before Heather arrived, is somebody else's nightmare?

I found the Seal of Macguffintron, Vincent's dialogue and "Christopher my love" as cheesy as anybody else did, but then Silent Hill 3 was cheesy. I'm sorry but I can't take it seriously when people say they want a more subtle and mature movie in which a girl miscarries through her mouth and overcomes the dark part of her soul with a submachine gun.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Claudia's Nature... [Spoilers!]
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2868
Okay, I watched the movie on BR today, and the whole Claudia /Missionary thing makes a little more sense to me now. Vincent says something to the effect of "the Order members are projecting their souls into the world." Make of that what you will.

_________________
It's not that far.

Screenplay Archaeology Podcast - FRIDAY THE 13TH EPISODE IS UP!


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: