|
Post by dreggnog on Nov 11, 2010 21:28:08 GMT
Hmm that's interesting and answers my main question. So it's a combo of sequel to the first movie and movie of the third game. I'm not sure I like the sound of that, especially the fact that nothing from the first movie will be undone (why not i want to ask), however to me the first movie feels more like the third game thematically than the first, so perhaps it will work better for me, and I don't mind things from the third game being changed as much as from the first game, as I feel that SH3 is less canon and more open to interpretation and change than SH1, the series' original story. (goes to continue reading, somewhat interested now but still very very fearful)
Edit: I left a reply, number 40. Hopefully I'll get a solid answer ;D
|
|
|
Post by owlwaxer on Nov 12, 2010 0:35:08 GMT
Some of his replies on the blog are certainly quite relaxing. I've never seen anything by this guy before, though.
While it doesn't competely sound like it's a stand-alone story (if Heather is Alessa, surely there's some kind of tie-in to the first movie), I'm hoping that Rose's story is completely over.
The title does make me want to be sick, though.
|
|
|
Post by satyrcynic on Nov 13, 2010 22:36:00 GMT
LOVE: The answers on the wordpress. They make me happy inside. If they're completely honest, then this movie will be excellent canon to the extent of serving as an apologetic for SH1.
HATE: The subtitle. It's corny, discouraging, previously used within the genre, and just plain says nothing about the content.
DO NOT UNDERSTAND: People hating on the first movie. I thought it was excellent, atmospherically and in story. A bit of bad dialogue never ruined the early games, and doesn't in my opinion ruin the movie either. And there sure are a lot of people who think the story is acanonical or otherwise incompatible with the games. I've even heard the phrase "different universe" passed around. It all fits pretty nicely to me, excluding some dissonance between the ending and SH3, which I can easily imagine a few good workarounds for. I mean, let's be honest here; the games don't fit together neatly either. 2 is virtually incompatible with 1/3, SM changes up the story of 1, Origins makes no sense at all. I like to look at the story the same way I look at Nintendo stories like The Legend Of Zelda. Everything is canon, in a blurry, vague, complicated cyclical sort of way. And cyclical qualities are a big deal in SH fiction, so I see very litte reason to cliam fictional dissonance at all.
|
|
|
Post by dreggnog on Nov 14, 2010 9:45:16 GMT
^ I definently liked the dialouge a lot better in the early games than in the movie. If anything the game dialouge has gotten worse imo.
Trying to make 2 fit in with 1/3 in my mind is one of the joys of the series with me.
Also, Origins doesn't make sense because the connections between it and the first game don't always hold up well.
Overall, I like what you said, but I definently look at SH as being much more tightly woven together than Zelda. Each game in my mind should be canon unless specifically stated to be not canon or a new canon (like SM).
The movie has declared itself half sequel to the first movie and half SH3. Therefore I don't think it will be completely canon to the games or (hopefully) to the first movie.
|
|
|
Post by satyrcynic on Nov 14, 2010 19:21:04 GMT
Not to be argumentative or a dickwad, but I do feel that admitting there are issues in connecting 1/3, 2 and origins into a cohesive story and at the same time saying that the Silent Hill universe is cohesive and not iterated like Zelda is a bit of an oxymoron. Maybe there's something in the analysis that I'm missing. Don't get me wrong, I love the story. I feel like many of the greatest stories ever told have been retold and rewritten in many different ways, and getting to see all those variations and incarnations and just getting to wonder what really happened is almost more fun than actually knowing the "absolute truth". To me, anyway. I think you may be in a rare breed for liking the early game dialogue (we are including 1 in this statement?) As for the upcoming movie, they've been implying that they want to use it as glue to stick the first movie, the games and the new story together a little better. If they don't and just make a great non canonical film, I'll be thrilled. I was moderately thrilled by the first movie. But if they do actually make it all click story-wise, I will have a Heathergasm.
|
|
|
Post by dreggnog on Nov 15, 2010 10:41:26 GMT
^ Yep, including the first game, the dialouge of which I've liked better than every game so far except 2. Maybe it's just the nostalgia talking, but I really love the scenes involving Dr. Kaufman, Lisa explaining things, Dahlia and Cybil together in the boathouse (we so rarely get more than two characters together this was nice), and the ghost scene between Dahlia and Alessa at the end.
Maybe all of that is why I didn't appreciate the first Silent Hill movie as well as some. A lot of newbies to the series find the first game dated, or at least dated in the VA department, because they didn't play the first game first or for whatever reason not saying it's a bad thing, I'm glad that we have quite a few people who actually really love 4 and Homecoming.
Personally, the more connections to SH3 and the less connections to the first movie there are, the happier I'll be. I'd honestly rather they just ditch the first film, if I see another witch burning I'll walk right out.
|
|
|
Post by blacky on Nov 15, 2010 17:44:40 GMT
^ Yep, including the first game, the dialouge of which I've liked better than every game so far except 2. Maybe it's just the nostalgia talking, but I really love the scenes involving Dr. Kaufman, Lisa explaining things, Dahlia and Cybil together in the boathouse (we so rarely get more than two characters together this was nice), and the ghost scene between Dahlia and Alessa at the end. Whatcha talkin bout fool?
|
|
|
Post by satyrcynic on Nov 15, 2010 18:51:40 GMT
I reservedly agree with that. I might not walk out, but I will care a lot more about the connections to SH3 (which, incidentally is my favorite) than the first movie. However, if they can manage to smooth out the wrinkles in the first films story, I'll applaud that much more.
Blacky: Win. Karma given.
I will say that the writing in the first game is excellent. But the "voice actors" trample all over it. Am I the only person who still dies a little inside each time he hears "Radio? What's going on with that radio?"
|
|
|
Post by Lolli on Nov 16, 2010 15:19:45 GMT
At least it's not as laughable as Resident Evil, now that was an incredibly badly dubbed game.
Though I did send my brain into hibernation whenever Dahlia opened her mouth to speak, wittering on and on and on......
But I do think the film could have been written a little better. The scenes between Sean Bean and the detectives seemed like nothing but babble created to make the film last for over an hour, and I don't think any of the characters had that much personality either. Other than Alessa, they were all paper thin.
I am having a lot of reservations about the tie in. I'm doubting whether the film will make any sense at all, is Sean Bean's character going to have a name change? Will Rose dissappear or still be present? It all sounds a little too much to take onboard without confusing those unfamiliar with the games.
|
|
|
Post by blacky on Nov 16, 2010 19:30:18 GMT
The monotone acting always bugged me. it's passable for the most of the time but Cheryl and young Alessa creep me the hell out, they don't sound like little girls! They sound like someone trying to pass them off as little girls. And it doesn't help that they both wear clothes as if the 60s fashion revolution didn't happen, So they just look and sound like four foot women
Anyways I can't say I am surpised it's SH3 they wanted to adapt, sounds like an executive is bounding them to connect it to the last film, because if they really wanted to start a new, SH2 would of been more ideal, since that has it's own story and woulden't really of trampled over the previous one as much,
I for one actually would prefer they change bits up abit, because a complete translation of sh3 Woulden't work since the first game wasn't fully translated into the first film. For one thing Harry's death scene would just fall flat because we woulden't of gotten to know the movie harry before hand.
|
|
|
Post by Lolli on Nov 16, 2010 21:19:55 GMT
That's a good point Blacky. If Harry is a completely different bloke to Christopher (Who I never really cared for anyway) then it will have little effect on the audience when he dies. That's what they did with Lisa, they diluted her character until there was nothing left but an empty shell who I didn't give a damn about.
|
|
|
Post by dreggnog on Nov 16, 2010 22:31:05 GMT
It all sounds a little too much to take onboard without confusing those unfamiliar with the games. IMO, the people who haven't played the games SHOULD be confused when they watch the movie. I mean, playing through the first couple of games was a rather confusing experience oftentimes. The movie should be made for the fans of the games or not be made. If they wanna stop being confused they can go play the games and spend time on awesome forums like this one!
|
|
SHSP
Nurse
Posts: 103
|
Post by SHSP on Nov 16, 2010 23:11:32 GMT
I personally like the first SH movie, despite all its flaws. I loved the visuals and could never look away. However, it sometimes tried too hard to be just like the game (grab something inside the corpse's mouth, assuming an object found means "oh she must be there then!") but for that I give it credit.
The problem is that videogames and movies should be treated separately. I'm not saying forget about the spirit of the games but there needs to be changes made in order for it to function as a movie.
I was geniunely surprised when I showed my mom the first movie. She still talked about it days after (mostly concerning what the movie was about lol)!
I'm not sure where I'm going with this post, but I was just putting my two cents in.
|
|
|
Post by blacky on Nov 16, 2010 23:18:09 GMT
It all sounds a little too much to take onboard without confusing those unfamiliar with the games. IMO, the people who haven't played the games SHOULD be confused when they watch the movie. I mean, playing through the first couple of games was a rather confusing experience oftentimes. The movie should be made for the fans of the games or not be made. If they wanna stop being confused they can go play the games and spend time on awesome forums like this one! Well that's not going to sit well with the exucutives (I keep bringing this up because it is important to remember) they are not going to make a movie that costs goodness knows just for a small minority of gamers (and yes we are a minortiy compared to gamers as Resident evil and Halo) Besides I think it's unfair that only gamers could only enjoy a silent hill movie. I love the lord of the rings movie trilogy, but I don't like Tolkien's writting style (he prefers to put more effort into decribing scenary than develop Arwen's character) If they had just made the movies just to please the Tolkiens fans and had them like the books word for word (which is sheer insanity to begin with imo) then I'd be three movies shorter on my favorite film list and I would of missed out on three good adaptions
|
|
|
Post by dreggnog on Nov 17, 2010 4:47:32 GMT
Yeah, I knew that even though it was what I believed that what I posted was a little silly. I guess the difference between the LOTR movies and the Silent Hill movie is that ... I LIKED the LOTR movies. So I guess if I had enjoyed the first movie none of the issues in comparison with the games would have mattered, it's just that being a bit more similar to the first game in terms of characters and story development would have been the biggest step towards making me like the movie.
|
|