• 58 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

Awful. The acting is poor even from Sean Bean, the writing sucks, it's way too short and congested with useless story crap that misses the point of Silent Hill.

There's some decent monster design and a cool scene with a spider monster made of manequins. The 3D is also really good but useless.

Pyramid swords fights a monster which was retarded.

"Silent Hill: Revelation fundamentally misunderstands the appeal its source material." - Quote from a review not gonna bother trying to find again.

The ending would have been cool had the movie been decent but being such trash it came off as very bland.

That's my quick 2am sum up might add more and/or answer questions later.

#2 Edited by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

Knowing very little about film making, I can say in all seriousness, that if I had access to the resources used in this movie I could make a far superior Silent Hill adaptation than this mess.

Im not speaking out of me thinking I could do it just because, the movie just is that bad.

Actually fuck the resources I could do a better job with a small town and a fog machine.

What a god damn disappointment

#3 Posted by Barrock (3533 posts) -

Kinda saw that one coming sadly.

How are the comics?

#4 Posted by IBurningStar (2173 posts) -

I expected it to be the shittiest of the shit, so I'm not really surprised by any of this.

#5 Posted by EXTomar (4742 posts) -

That is okay since most game developers don't get Silent Hill either.

#6 Posted by GilbertMordinAndSullivan (442 posts) -

"It's awful and it's too short!"

Um. Wouldn't being short be a boon to an awful film? At least you got out of it sooner.

#7 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -
@GilbertMordinAndSullivan: 


It's too short to create any feeling of dread or anything close to Silent Hill. It's packed with so much useless crap that doesn't matter nor is really resolved in the end. 

It's slightly hard to explain. It's like if you had a giant bowl of ice cream and it would be free if you could finish it in a given time. The catch however is you're only allowed a tbsp every 30 minutes, and in between spoonfuls you have to watch a homeless dude sniff his balls.
#8 Edited by ripelivejam (3980 posts) -

kinda sad when even a short movie really drags.

i actually liked the first one (though there was way too big and awkward of an info-dump at the very end), but then again i've never played silent hill so i'm not one to talk...

curious if anyone else actually liked the 1st one

#9 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

Sorry it's a pain to respond to anyone directly on here ignore the Bold font
#10 Posted by Aetheldod (3586 posts) -

@ripelivejam: I did like it ... for what it was , a not so terrible videogame film , in other words watchable but not disscusion worthy.

#11 Posted by Draxyle (1855 posts) -

It seems like no one who owns or buys a license to Silent Hill seems to know or understand why Silent Hill was good. It boggles the mind how that keeps happening. Even running their ideas passed one or two fans would filter out quite a number of possible bad decisions.

#12 Posted by Brodehouse (9951 posts) -

Yeah I could kind of tell it was going in this direction from the trailer. Sad state of affairs.

#13 Posted by tourgen (4504 posts) -

@xaLieNxGrEyx: well that sucks. The trailer made it look like it at least had a bunch of cash thrown at it. Just not much talent I guess.

#14 Posted by Genkkaku (735 posts) -

Well that was expected.. I hope I don't end up watching this at the movies (which I have a tendency to do), I actually kind of enjoyed the first, except for all the Sean Bean stuff that was shoehorned in and the ending..

@Barrock said:

Kinda saw that one coming sadly.

How are the comics?

I'd like to know this as well, they are on sale on Comixology at the moment..

#15 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2391 posts) -

No shit.

#16 Posted by TooWalrus (13205 posts) -

Dude, Sean Bean's in it? Well now I'm absolutely going to see it. For the same reason I see every Resident Evil movie in theaters as it comes out...

#17 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

As said, it's pretty bad. But like the predecessor, great visuals/monster design, excellent atmosphere. I actually found it a bit better than the original, but I'm a blind Silent Hill fan that can forgive most things. But I could -not- forgive the "You can not defeat me" cheesy boss line near the beginning, and I could not forgive that pyramid head/monster battle. That scene was so jaw droppingly stupid.

#18 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1749 posts) -
@xaLieNxGrEyx said:

"Silent Hill: Revelation fundamentally misunderstands the appeal its source material." - Quote from a review not gonna bother trying to find again.


That's exactly the impression I got from the trailers. I love the first film, flaws and all, but I could tell this was going to be utter shit from the get go. The marketing is absolutely terrible, too. They put far too much emphasis on the fact that it's in 3D, more than most 3D movies do.
#19 Posted by Sackmanjones (4706 posts) -

Bummer, I actually thought other than the ending the first one was pretty decent. From the first trailer of this one though I know it was gonna be terrible.

#20 Posted by htr10 (334 posts) -

I thought the inventory management and checkpointing were really a step backward from the previous one.

#21 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4352 posts) -

Not surprised after seeing that shit trailer.

#22 Posted by frankfartmouth (1018 posts) -

Of course it is. And the long trek through the desert of shitty game adaptations continues. Maybe someday.

#23 Posted by Hunkulese (2728 posts) -

Here's something to remember for the future. If they feel the need to throw the 3D in the title the movie is going to be terrible.

#24 Posted by Omega (835 posts) -

I really only have one question. In the trailer it looked like Pyramid head was riding some sort of contraption. Can you give me some context? Because of all the stuff in the trailer that was the thing that confused me the most. Well that and the fact that Pyramid head is in it at all.

#25 Posted by CollegeGuyMike (389 posts) -

@Omega said:

I really only have one question. In the trailer it looked like Pyramid head was riding some sort of contraption. Can you give me some context? Because of all the stuff in the trailer that was the thing that confused me the most. Well that and the fact that Pyramid head is in it at all.

He's chained into some gear contraption, having to push the handles to make a carousel spin. They never really give it more context than that. Especially since you see him just walking around earlier in the film, so him suddenly being trapped is... yeah.

#26 Posted by dungbootle (2458 posts) -

All I know is Jon Snow AND Ned Stark are in this. How did they get away with that

Online
#27 Posted by awesomeusername (4187 posts) -

@xaLieNxGrEyx: You paid to watch the film. Therefore, I hate you. Now we'll get more of this shitty shit and I'm not even a Silent Hill fan! Anyone could tell it would be terrible by the trailer.

@TooWalrus: Don't you dare!

#28 Posted by gaminghooligan (1447 posts) -

totally agree OP, it was boring and the acting was melodramatic (even by horror movie standards), the characters were like cardboard standups, the CG on the monsters was bad (although I liked that they used the actual designs). It sucks because when people ask about a good video game movie, I usually suggest the first one (even though I don't think of it as a great movie). Although it may not adhere to the games much, the first movie at least tried to capture the appeal of the games a little bit, this one just felt like a B grade monster movie.

However, the friends I went with have never played the games actually liked it. So maybe I'm just looking for something in a Silent Hill movie that no one else wants, it's just that the first three games had a sense of place and that feeling of desperation that they just can't get right in the movies I guess.

#29 Edited by Lysergica33 (523 posts) -

The only western directors I could see doing a good job with Silent Hill are David Lynch and Daron Aronofsky. So I can't say this surprises me. The first one was trash too. I got given a copy of it on DVD by a friend, after he proclaimed it to be an excellent movie. I was skeptical, so he gives me this copy.. I watched it and was thoroughly disgusted. I dedicated the case to being used to snort things off, since snorting is a fucking filthy way of imbibing substances, and that film was fucking filthy, so it seemed like the greatest insult I could level at it.

Fuck the Silent Hill movies and fuck anyone who defends them.

But yeah. A Silent Hill movie could be incredible, so long as it was helmed by someone who actually understands surrealism and how to use symbolism, since that's all Silent Hill really is. Long walks through ominous fog with occasional contact with creatures and locations that represent aspects of the protagonists psyche. Having Pyramid Head and big titted zombie nurses in Silent Hill movies when the main character is not James Sunderland makes zero sense and says straight up that the crew behind the films have no interest in being respectful to the source material or even in making a film that is coherent or logical. Even though Silent Hill is very twisted and surreal there is an underlying logic to the madness. Simply making a foggy town and filling it with creatures from the games doesn't make something Silent Hill. Making a foggy town, filling it with creatures that REPRESENT something and adding a protagonist who is essentially undergoing a version of the archetypal hero's journey makes something Silent Hill. It's not a tough formula. Now someone PLEASE go and tell David Lynch to stop promoting his brand of coffee and to make a goddamn Silent Hill movie! PLEASE?!

#30 Posted by Ghost_Cat (1440 posts) -

I am constantly surprised that an IP with such potential is constantly wasted on ridiculously poor products like this film. The approach is somewhat restrictive because Silent Hill relies on methodical pacing and heavy atmosphere (instead of fast action and scares), but that also can create something deeper, different, and more rewarding. But no, companies continue to milk the franchise and dig it a deeper grave with constant crap.

#31 Posted by _Zombie_ (1462 posts) -

Shocker.

#32 Posted by MiniPato (2741 posts) -

I knew it wasn't going to be good when I found out it was going to be called "Revelations 3D."

#33 Posted by kindgineer (2730 posts) -

That sucks; I was actually surprised that I enjoyed the first one, so this comes off as a bummer. Oh well, RENTAL!

#34 Posted by gaminghooligan (1447 posts) -

@Lysergica33: I think Lynch could totally do Silent Hill right.

#35 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5266 posts) -

@awesomeusername said:

@xaLieNxGrEyx: You paid to watch the film. Therefore, I hate you. Now we'll get more of this shitty shit and I'm not even a Silent Hill fan! Anyone could tell it would be terrible by the trailer.

@TooWalrus: Don't you dare!

Given it's marketing campaign and the fact it doesn't show up on the top ten so far I doubt this movie is even gonna make it's money back in theaters.

#36 Posted by Solh0und (1775 posts) -

That's a shame because I thought that first one was decent.

#37 Posted by awesomeusername (4187 posts) -

@SethPhotopoulos said:

@awesomeusername said:

@xaLieNxGrEyx: You paid to watch the film. Therefore, I hate you. Now we'll get more of this shitty shit and I'm not even a Silent Hill fan! Anyone could tell it would be terrible by the trailer.

@TooWalrus: Don't you dare!

Given it's marketing campaign and the fact it doesn't show up on the top ten so far I doubt this movie is even gonna make it's money back in theaters.

Man I hope it doesn't. It's an asshole thing to say but terrible game movies need to be taught a lesson.

#38 Posted by Wraith1 (561 posts) -

I didn't even know there was a new Silent Hill film, not surprised it sucks

#39 Posted by The_Nubster (2151 posts) -

@Draxyle said:

It seems like no one who owns or buys a license to Silent Hill seems to know or understand why Silent Hill was good. It boggles the mind how that keeps happening. Even running their ideas passed one or two fans would filter out quite a number of possible bad decisions.

But Pyramid Head and tit-nurse-zombies! How could it be bad!

#40 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

I think this movie could have been good, if they just focused on a highschool girls mind. If, instead of pyramid head, they had the principal with a dick face or something really Freudian. Using the idea that its the manifestation of a highschool girls mind. That would have been cool, In fact it still would be cool.

#41 Posted by QuistisTrepe (628 posts) -

@Sackmanjones said:

Bummer, I actually thought other than the ending the first one was pretty decent. From the first trailer of this one though I know it was gonna be terrible.

I felt the same way. SH likely set the bar for all gaming-film adaptations. But at the same time, the first SH movie demonstrated why Hollywood needs to give it up. The mediums just don't seem to have any compatibility with one another.

I'll likely skip Revelations. And why not, I haven't even picked up a console SH game since SH4. (I'm not counting Origins)

#42 Posted by cannonballBAM (602 posts) -

@htr10 said:

I thought the inventory management and checkpointing were really a step backward from the previous one.

#43 Posted by SaturdayNightSpecials (2388 posts) -

But is it enjoyable in the same way the first one was? Probably not, judging from the trailers and the 3D, but I have to wonder because the first one wasn't strictly a good movie either.

Online
#44 Posted by Hailinel (24852 posts) -

I expected no less from a 3D sequel to a film that was middling at best.

Online
#45 Posted by inknail (155 posts) -

It's ok, I'm sure they'll make a big improvement when they decide on making a third film...

#46 Posted by Nightriff (5085 posts) -

@inknail: What does the bottom say on the poster? I can't read it. By the way, that is quite hilarious.

Can anyone confirm that Pyramid head is actually Heather's protector throughout the film? I read that and......that sounds terrible.

#47 Posted by Yummylee (21672 posts) -

@Nightriff said:

Can anyone confirm that Pyramid head is actually Heather's protector throughout the film? I read that and......that sounds terrible.

According to what I read on wikipedia, that appears to be the case.

Online
#48 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5266 posts) -

@QuistisTrepe said:

@Sackmanjones said:

Bummer, I actually thought other than the ending the first one was pretty decent. From the first trailer of this one though I know it was gonna be terrible.

I felt the same way. SH likely set the bar for all gaming-film adaptations. But at the same time, the first SH movie demonstrated why Hollywood needs to give it up. The mediums just don't seem to have any compatibility with one another.

I'll likely skip Revelations. And why not, I haven't even picked up a console SH game since SH4. (I'm not counting Origins)

I still believe that video games can be translated into films. It's just that no one has figured it out yet.

#49 Posted by Nightriff (5085 posts) -

@Yummylee said:

@Nightriff said:

Can anyone confirm that Pyramid head is actually Heather's protector throughout the film? I read that and......that sounds terrible.

According to what I read on wikipedia, that appears to be the case.

Playing through 2 for the first time and was reading up on the symbolism for him on the SH wiki and read that in the 2nd film he protectors her, if anything this just makes me depressed in that the first movie was so close to being good.

#50 Posted by ripelivejam (3980 posts) -

kinda weird how cinema easily translates to videogames but not the other way around

i mean if you took heavy rain and (minus what interactivity it has and branching story points) condensed it into a 2 to 2 1/2 hour movie it'd basically be as successful IMO

...not sure i want to open that can of worms though...