Reviews

People who play the game after seeing this movie will often exclaim, "Oh! That's just like in the movie!" But the game came first, and I hope that is a fact not forgotten in years to come. Because it is quite remarkable how much attention was paid to the detail in this translation of game-to-movie, and it is the best I've seen with no doubt about it. Being a big fan of the games (4 to date), I was delighted by the camera angles, sounds, colours and textures. It captured the mood of Silent Hill perfectly.

What about the story? The thing about Silent Hill is that not everything makes sense. That is certainly true for the games, and it's true for the movie. Even in this sense the movie is true to the game, and that's a plus in my book. The story of Silent Hill is always the same: someone got in accidentally, and just wants to get out. And as the viewer (or player of the game) that's all you hope for. It is not an adventure that you enjoy; it is a nightmare you want to escape from. And when it's over, you will remember it with respect but it will not necessarily be something you want to repeat.

It was well-cast. It didn't require big names, and I think Cameron Dias would have been wrong anyway. Apparently the director wanted her for the character of Rose. Sean Bean and Debra Unger add all the star quality that was needed. The child was sufficiently freaky, but she could have been better. Rose and the cop were hot, like they should have been.

As far as the similarity to the game goes, the story was altered while retaining some of the essential characters. If you've played the games, don't think you know how the movie will end. Our favourite monsters appear, including Pyramid Head and the freaky naked babies. Rose's phone crackles and hisses when danger is near. Top-down camera angles of Rose negotiating her way through an alleyway, with rusty fences on either side, add to the claustrophobia of the town. There is mist that restricts your view. A map of a building even appears, perfectly replicated from the game. If only Rose found it sooner, so she could have marked her progress with red crosses and squiggles on locked doors. She also has the essential flashlight. It's just obvious from the very beginning that the director has played the games, and it was a treat to watch it brought to life. A few things that were absent and are missed are the zombie dogs and the crowbar or plank with a nail stuck in it that Rose should have found lying on the road. She could have used this to beat a few dogs! Part of the fun of Silent Hill is having an idea of the monsters waiting for you, and having only a plank to fight them with! In one respect that movie differs substantially from the games, and that is the violence. In the games the violence has already happened, and the town looks like the aftermath of something awful. The movie, however, contains a few very graphic scenes - things I have never seen before and which really disturbed me. I was left shocked and unsettled, as most of this action takes place in the last 15 minutes which also includes a bit of an explanation of the story. So by the time the movie ends, your senses have been assaulted and there is much to take in and think about.

Playing the games before watching the movie won't help a great deal with your understanding of the plot. But it will certainly introduce you to how the Silent Hill world works. It requires you to think on a certain wavelength that differs from the normal way the world works. I have no idea how someone without this experience will find the movie, but fans of the game will love it. It is true to the mood and theme of the games, is thoroughly entertaining, and is beautifully shot. The revenge scene is deliciously satisfying, and the ending is frustratingly perfect.

Tim Burton's Willie Wonka was a typically fantastical treatment of an old favourite. Burton did not disappoint, and the movie had that Edward Scissorhands/Batman feel to it; bright colours and new and fewer songs. The kids were cast perfectly. The grandparents were fine, and as for Charlie's parents, what's Helena Bonham Carter doing in the film? It's a vacuous role for her, and she has Tech Support as a husband which distracted me somewhat.

The movie is great, but there is one obvious flaw. In the original, spies approach all the kids before they go into the factory, and offer the kids huge amounts of money if they betray Wonka's secrets to them. In the end, Wonka turns a mistake Charlie made against him and asks Charlie to leave the factory. Charlie has to make a decision, and he returns Wonka's Everlasting Gobstopper. Because of this virtuous act of Charlie, he demonstrates that he is worthy. The spy turns out to be fake, and it is reveled that it was all part of Wonka's plan.

I thought that Burton's movie was going in that direction. His Wonka seemed a little tipsy, and I thought it was part of a plan to make the spies think he was going crazy. That would explain why he kept emphasising how the waterfall churns the chocolate; like he wanted the rotten apples to tell the spies that. But in the end, Wonka really was crazy. He has to go to therapy to understand Charlie's virtuosity. What does Charlie do to earn the factory? Apart from not abandoning his family (a virtue demonstrated by the original Charlie), nothing. He's just the last one left of the bunch. The original was a lesson in good deeds and integrity. Burton's was an opportunity to use special effects not available before, and to give Depp another nice character to play. That is a pity. Burton is capable of delivering a strong message through strange characters. Just look at Edward Scissorhands.

It's almost irresistible to deduce that the three principal characters and the director were the first people to cast their votes for this movie, giving it a 10. Surely nobody else would even consider giving it more than 1. It is absolutely dreadful. It looks like a home video, shot without a filter. The acting is the horror part of the movie itself. Movies like these should not be released at all. I felt duped, and couldn't bring myself to watch it through. I did skip to the end, though, just to see the fantastic twist that couldn't. Seriously, it's really terrible. (SPOILER ALERT!!! AS IF IT MATTERS!) It's almost entirely shot in a house, and there's one scene where Abbey, now possessed by a dead granny, is talking to the ghost of the granny in herself. She 'sees' the granny sitting in a chair, and starts talking to her. But since she's really talking to herself this entails her addressing the chair, then walking to it, sitting down, and talking back to herself at the other end of the room. Then she gets up, walks back to the other side of the room and assumes her Abbey character. It's comical. But it's also not really comical. And this particular scene is shot in broad daylight with birds chirping happily outside. There's no tension or horror element at all. I wish I could more strongly express my disgust for this title, but I can't. Give it a skip.