Should I watch Silent Hill?

The long and short of it: Probably not
When was it made: 2006

Christophe Gans has the potential to be either a fantastic adapter of darker video games to film or the Uwe Boll of horror(and I really hope it turns out to be the first), but his first foray into the video game world, Silent Hill, catches the scenery but not the point. When I watch horror I want one of two things: to be genuinely scared or to receive a new insight into the human condition. Silent Hill delivers the first one for the first bit of the movie and acts like it covers the second during the end of the movie, but neither one really pans out.

Silent Hill is based on a game franchise that is still in existence, so chances are if you play video games you've heard at least the name, and as a gamer I know I try to catch video game movies so I can see how badly they flubbed up the interpretation. With a second movie in the pipeline, some people may be interested in catching up on the first movie or seeing why they're going ahead with a second: although the movie panned out critically it still did make a profit.

Now let me remind you that this is a horror film and while not a gorno it does involve it's fair share of violence and viscera (if you couldn't tell from the picture above). Also, even though I do complain that the movie wasn't very scary throughout, it does have its tense scenes and some rather disturbing visuals, so if you don't like scary movies than back away. They do (kind of?) deal with some religious issues, but I don't think it's a problem: they don't really deal with any real world religions and there are no qualms that it is the people involved and not religion itself that is shown as evil. So if you want a moderate scare and some very good scenery and shot set ups, than feel free to watch Silent Hill. But if you are looking for something absolutely terrifying or a movie up to your eyes with blood and tits, then move along, stranger.

Alright, you can probably guess I wasn't a big fan of the movie, but mostly because it felt like they walked to the precipice of making a great film, looked over the edge, had a picnic, and then went back to mediocre town for ice cream and post production. I'd like to discuss this movie in terms of my criteria for scary media: terror and insight. First, terror. For the first hour, the movie is genuinely terrifying. It uses a great sense of suspense and isolation to create an atmosphere both isolation and claustrophobia: no matter how big the town actually is, there was always a sense that you were alone in a cage. I love that every time the air-raid sirens sounded, I immediately felt scared. I knew that was the time of monsters, when no one was safe and anything could happen. And then they stopped. An hour in, they took what had been the most terrifying feature of the movie, the sense that at any time the world could be devoured by hell, and just stopped using it. Sure, they travel down into "hell" on the elevator, but even that world isn't as scary because you knew it was coming. You knew she was getting on in the real world and exiting in hell, but it was her choice. This is also the point when Rose meets other people and the movie becomes much more about her interactions with them then about her trying to figure out what's going on all by herself, proving that when isolation is a big theme, you don't put in a bunch of extra characters. Now secondly, we have the psychological aspect: what can I take away from this movie? Not a thing. Because this is a movie about monsters (who is the real monster, yadda yadda) the forms these monsters take is of vital importance, and they start out with the best monsters: the crying children monsters represent Rose's both her fear for her daughter and her projected feeling of isolation she knows Sharon must be feeling. And it goes downhill from there. Pyramid Head is here, probably the second best monster because he represents the most potent manifestation of the town's vengeance, but even then they don't use him well: in the final scene (where all the vengeance takes place, mind you) he doesn't even make an appearance. After that we have nurse monsters because, you know... nurses represent lost children and vengeance? All I'm saying is that instead of aping the video games, if they'd actually put a few seconds thought into it they could have created some very good and poignant monsters. Finally, I'd like to address the biggest disappointment, the final scene. I've already mentioned my dismay at the absence of Mr. Vengeance himself, but it goes so much further than that. I'll try to be spoiler free, but suffice it to say that there is a (ostensibly Christian) cult in the town that has pissed off the malevolent spirit (the nature of which is the big "surprise" that I'd figured out 2o minutes in) and at the end of the movie, the malevolent spirit arrives and enacts its Pyramid-Head-free vengeance. Two things: first of all, never base your movie climax on tentacle-rape hentai. Even before I knew it actually was I still felt kind of awkward during that scene. Secondly, you've already made it obvious this is a religious group, why'd you sissy out on the symbolism? When the spirit arrived Gans had an amazing opportunity to have it show up, arms out stretched, cross of living barbwire making it into a twisted version of Christ and the true being that these fallen souls worship. Instead the spirit sits with arms folded, seemingly contemptuous of the many ways this fell short of greatness.

Note: Excuse my rambling rant here, this is just a practice to get me back into the swing of things. Expect a new review on Saturday, hopefully more compressed and with less vitriole!