Has anyone on /tv/ seen Return to Silent Hill? Is it good? When does the review embargo lift?
It hasn't come out yet.
It was shit. I didn't see it.
>>217243708based
>>217243686>It hasn't come out yet.A bunch of people have seen it. Letterboxd has a lot of "Review after embargo" entries.
>>217243658Probably no way this is good considering it was shot in 2023 and "completed" in February last year but has sat on the shelf since then.
ill watch it but i doubt its gonna be good one of the thing that triggers me is them making laura look like a stereotypical "creepy" girl when she is supposed to look normal this alone tells me the vibe is going to be way off
>>217243658I saw it. I would say you should temper your expectations. Pros:A lot of the source material is adhered to. Particularly the general story beats and much of the character development seen in the game. You even get a redone score composed by the man himself, Akira Yamaoka. Cons: Everything else. The movie's visuals look rough. Like, fan film rough. It's kind of hard to get lost in the surrealism that the movie is trying to go for when it looks like you are watching live-action actors placed against the backdrop of, well, a video game. This isn't a major studio production, and clearly there were budgetary constraints. Speaking of which, the movie's pacing is incredibly rushed. To no one's surprise, it has a pretty short runtime, and you definitely feel that a lot of stuff has been cut out of this movie. I can't say for sure if it was cut out in scripting to mind the budget or if they did it in post to improve showtime frequency or to lower VFX costs. Either way, the movie feels incomplete. (1/2)
Eileen shaving
>>217244417There's other stuff to nitpick, of course. Like the fact that James doesn't look anything like he does in the original game. Which seems pretty superficial to even discuss, but James's design is very deliberate in the original Silent Hill 2. He's meant to look clean-cut and unassuming. You're not supposed to look at him and immediately know that there's something deeply wrong with him. The remake got this wrong too. As you uncover his story over the course of the game, you start to become aware of what is truly boiling underneath the surface of this person. His alcoholism, his depression, his involvement in the death of his wife. But for some reason, no one except Team Silent understands this. Hence, he looks disheveled, sleepless and two drinks away from cirrhosis. It fits the character once you're at the end of the story, but it's not supposed to fit him before you start peeling back these layers. If they really wanted to have their cake and eat it too, they could have done something interesting where he starts out looking fine and over the course of the story starts to unravel appearance-wise. Hell, that would actually make sense for a story like this which is heavily entrenched in the concept of the sort of dreamy and unreal scenarios that defy logic, such as in David Lynch's works. But all of that pales in comparison to probably my biggest problem with this movie. Which are the performances. Now, they're going to be plenty of people who are going to assume the performances in the movie are bad because of the game, since those performances are uncanny. This was NOT that. This is generic CW/SyFy level acting. Again, another problem that I also found with the remake game. You don't feel unnerved by watching this acting. You feel like laughing. And I am going to chalk this up to bad direction. I've seen Jeremy Irvine in other movies, and he's actually capable of good performances. Hell, Spielberg cast him for the lead role in Warhorse. (2/2)
>>217244102That's because they had trouble financing the CG setpieces. This was not a major Hollywood production
where's my FUCKING wife at?! This town is fucking insane!
>>217244445>This is generic CW/SyFy level actingso depressing how Silent Hill was straight kino, then the 2nd total trash, why even make a 3rd if you aren't going to redeem it saars?
>>217244102>>217244454I had heard the post-production only wrapped relatively recently. I also heard that most of the American distributors were nervous about the film because of the sex abuse stuff. Quirky chungus horror movies have a very "violence is good, sex/rape/etc. are bad" attitude. It's hard to sell plush toys of a rapist to a tiktok zoomer.
>>217244417>Either way, the movie feels incomplete.That could work in the film's favor. Jacob's Ladder had heaps of important scenes cut including the climax of the film, and basically nothing makes sense.It also tracks with the fact the original Silent Hill 2 doesn't actually have much of a plot, and most people who played it didn't understand it.
>>217244445>>217244574I want to point out anon is arguing that the Silent Hill 2 remake has this style of acting, but that game's acting is regarded as universally superior to the original game. The whole "the original SH2 is uncanny on purpose" thing isn't a widely shared opinion. Most people just think SH2's acting is terrible.
>>217244783Those people would be wrong. These are the same people that would say that Dennis Hopper's acting in Blue Velvet is bad. So I disregard those people's opinions.
>>217244445"He already looks fucked up" is basically The Shining complaint.What ending did they go with?
>>217244417Appreciate you sharing, anon.
>>217244517
>>217244445I will say in the remakes' defense that James starts out looking normal and gets progressively worse looking as the game goes on.
I kinda get Layers of Fear vibes from the film. Is that the case?
>>217244417>>217244445Is the CGI as terrible as shown in the trailer? Does it hold a candle to the first SH movie?
>>217244814I've never heard anyone say Hopper was bad in Blue Velvet. I'd laugh at someone if they told me that, what a bizarre opinion.
bump
