Return to Silent Hill

The performances too somehow emulates the game’s awkward, unnatural voice acting, a key contributor to both works’ uncanny dreamlike ambience. Rarely has a film better evoked a PlayStation 2 game.

Gans and co-writers Sandra Vo-Anh and Will Schneider clearly wanted to try and make a faithful translation of the second game in the series, but between unnecessary lore changes and a lack of thematic heft in some of its storytelling, the filmmaker's return to the franchise is a weird mix of exciting recreations, gorgeous visuals and disappointing execution.

Return to Silent Hill isn’t the worst entry in this video game movie series, but it fails to accomplish anything that the source material doesn’t do better.

The plot and character development remains early-2000s video game level, a fact made even more disappointing because Gans added so much more to the first film.

With bad direction, terrible acting, and a world that has no weight behind it (especially since most of it was clearly made in a computer), this isn’t the way to bring Silent Hill 2 to the big screen. This powerful survival horror story has been turned into an ugly, laughable adaptation that proves that maybe we should’ve never gone back to Silent Hill.

A nasty, claustrophobic display of creative ineptitude — one that’s packed with as many incomplete ideas as it is tired genre cliches — Return to Silent Hill squanders the rare opportunity to translate one of PlayStation’s most psychologically sophisticated worlds into valuable box office fuel.

Christophe Gans’s film does away with all the psychosexual nuance of Silent Hill 2.

i don't even read reviews anymore because when i see a score of less then 5 and then i go see the movie and it turns out to be really good like the movie Melania i just give all movies a 10 now because there is only gay bashers reviewing these now and not even worth looking at reviews anymore when people give a movie a 0 wich is impossible for any movie to be a 0... the movie has to be non existent to get a 0 and therefore has to at least get a 1 but i have only seen maybe one movie in my life that is so horrible that is deserves a 1

La pelicula en si no es mala, merece la pena, pero hay que aclarar que difiere de la historia original, el guion es superficial y apurado, la mayoria de las escenas no tienen el ritmo adecuado ni resultan creibles lo cual esta relacionado con que las situaciones se resuelven con cierta arbitrariedad y una insatisfactoria falta de logica. Ademas la ciudad esta aceptablemente recreada, pero tampoco se presenta con el tono detenido e imponente que permita transmitir la carga psicologica completa de esta saga. Dicho esto la trama transcurre con bastante fluidez y a pesar de ciertas lagunas tiene un hilo conductor bastante legible y una conclusion clara. Es bastante fiel a la ambientacion aunque como dije anteriormente no alcance la profundidad de la obra original. Se mantienen tematicas psicologicas y de crisis que son interesantes gracias a su tono surrealista, atrevido y provocador. Si quieres la adaptacion perfecta o una pelicula con un estandar muy elevado no lo verás aqui, se percibe falta de atencion a los detalles que distinguen a un buen montaje. No obstante es una pelicula disfrutable y se merece la oportunidad de verla con la mente abierta. Las actuaciones son muy decentes y representaciones de los seres de la saga se limitan a cumplir su funcion sin desencajar totalmente. Yo la recomendaria teniendo en cuenta estas advertencias.

Overall, the film is instructive and deep, but it's shot dryly, like a collection of pictures with the caption: "now deep", "now dramatic". But in the end the drama was filmed well. And it's unclear, with many unsaid things. A few details briefly, the problems, there are things left unsaid that I think the creators themselves understood, but the audience won't understand, like Mary's names on the tombstone—mistakes and traumas that James didn't fix, must name them. If he could at all, it is not even unsaid, but absolutely unknown. And the period of their relationship was short, they weren’t even married, etc. It is necessary to clearly and understandably present these moments, immerse the viewer in them, film them emotionally, and not just show them. Making a Hint is also a good way, but quite clear. What does mob such and such mean? Emotionally immersive enough, but not so much that the audience cries. Unsaid things are not directed, not written or shown like with a five-second caption or not shown at all. This is a problem with modern films, like the lack of musical accompaniment. Deepening with script, cameraman, sound. Games, by the way, have the same problem: you're running around in absolute silence, just like in real life (how long do you actually run around the city in real life?) :) [There's also a huge problem with primitive mechanics, which apparently got into the developers' heads through Silent Hill's otherworldly dimension, which has taken over games in the real world. Run for your lives if you can. (That's a joke)] Don't kill the characters; don't ruin people's moods. And then there is no desire to watch movies. Or they just continue to suffer because not watching is not an option for them. Film with soul, but don't hurt people's souls—they're two different things. And stop with the black bars. This review could easily be copied for any other modern film. At least there's no agenda or politics. Just common human things and normal, natural norms. What's important for a world where life is safe, pleasant, and healthy. And so that the majority can enjoy it, be reminded of something important, or learn something in a pleasant way. And even the minority, by the way.

The opening scene is really hard to watch, it doesn't feel like it could happen in any reality. I thought Silent Hill: Revelation (2012) was bad and this is basically the same level. It somewhat nails the tone of the game but fails to grasp the point. I think the writing is the biggest failing. It spells it out to you like you're dumb. I like the sound design and it's visually stunning in places. It's not a really bad film. There are some elements I liked. It's just a disappointment, it should have been so much better. It did make me want to play the game. I wanted to hate it but it wasn't the worst film I've ever seen, it is very flawed though.

Return to Silent Hill intenta capturar la esencia de uno de los videojuegos más icónicos del terror psicológico, pero se pierde en el camino. Aunque hay momentos visuales rescatables y ciertos guiños que los fans pueden reconocer, la narrativa carece de fuerza y coherencia. La historia avanza sin generar tensión real, dejando la sensación de que todo ocurre sin peso **** mayor problema es que toma como base Silent Hill 2, una obra profundamente compleja, y la reduce a una adaptación superficial. En lugar de construir una atmósfera inquietante, se apoya demasiado en referencias y estética, olvidando lo más importante: el impacto **** final, no da miedo… solo decepción.