[url]http://movies.ign.com/articles/113/1132309p1.html[/url]
[QUOTE=jo]
We've got brand new information on the upcoming second film in the Silent Hill series, titled Silent Hill: Revelation 3D.
Bloody Disgusting is reporting that the horror flick -- which will be in 3D obviously -- will be helmed and written by Michael J. Bassett. His previous credits include Solomon Kane, Deathwatch and Wilderness. He's also plugged in to direct The Unblinking Eye, which is in pre-production at the moment.
Silent Hill: Revelation 3D will feature a cast of familiar faces from the videogame franchise, with Heather Mason depicted as the lead character. Heather was, of course, Silent Hill 3's protagonist, as her and her father have been on the lamb for many years. As her 18th birthday approaches and her father disappears, things become a little clearer for Heather, as her life's dark origins are coming to the forefront.
It's an interesting decision to skip Silent Hill 2's plot for the second motion picture, but one that we ultimately applaud; some things are better left untouched, and this way it will not convolute the film series' lineage.
This move certainly complements Konami's actions with the Silent Hill videogame franchise, which has been outsourced and batted around with small gaming studies such as Double Helix, who were in charge of the mediocre Silent Hill: Homecoming, and most recently by handing Silent Hill 8 off to Vatra, a gaming studio with one Xbox Live Arcade title under their belt to comprise their entire resume. Ouch. Our fingers are crossed that Bassett can get the job done.
Stay tuned to IGN Movies for all things Silent Hill!
][/QUOTE]
I liked SH3 the 2nd most so this is great news for me and if they do a good job on 3D I will see it 3D though how will it be scary I dont know
Greatly enjoyed the first movie.
Unsure of how good a sequel could be though, I hope to God that this doesn't become the new Resident Evil.
Oh God No.
I like the choice of director. I haven't seen Solomon Kane, but I have seen Deathwatch and I thought it was great. I've heard somewhat mixed things about Kane though, but I'll still check this out when it comes out.
Damn, I still haven't played the games or seen the movie.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;25838059]why was pyramid head in the first movie
why[/QUOTE]
He's Silent Hills mascot. Like Space Marines and 40k, he's not necessary for it to be good but they get thrown in because they can.
Well I am looking forward to it. I really enjoyed the first film. I wish they wouldn't put 3D in the title though, can't a movie be 3D without declaring it as such in the name?
I haven't play any Silent Hill game but I've seen the movie.
I never saw the movie though I've played the games. I've heard that the movie plot didn't really make sense and had no connection to the games whatsoever anyways, is that true?
Anyways I really hope they manage to get the depth and emotions into the film that the games had. All of the games have been perfectly executed when it comes to story... or should I say backstory?
The film was loosely based on the plot of the first game. Child goes missing in spooky town, parent goes looking. Other than that, the setting and some monsters are really the only connection.
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;25838986]Well I am looking forward to it. I really enjoyed the first film. I wish they wouldn't put 3D in the title though, can't a movie be 3D without declaring it as such in the name?[/QUOTE]
It's not called Silent Hill: Revelation 3D. The op i guess just put it there to tell people it's in 3D.
EDIT: oh that article calls it that. Well every other article I've seen says otherwise so I'm going with that.
I never played the games myself except for Silent Hill 3 for a little bit at my friend's but I just liked the insanely creepy atmosphere of the film.
Yeah 3 was the first one I played. Picked up 2 few years back to see how it was since everyone said it was the best of the series. Both were very awesome. Also played a few minutes of The Room, seemed fun.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;25838059]why was pyramid head in the first movie
why[/QUOTE]
Fan service alone.
[QUOTE=doom65;25836927]It's an interesting decision to skip Silent Hill 2's plot for the second motion picture, but one that we ultimately applaud;[B] some things are better left untouched[/B][/QUOTE]
[I]Finally[/I] someone has realized this.
I liked the director of the first movie, hopefully this movie is better than the first.
Also fuck 3D.
3D = no view.
[QUOTE=GodKing;25844263]3D = no view.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it will be bad in 3-D, we don't know if it's gonna be good or not yet, like Jackass 3 was surprisivly good in 3-D.
huh, unnecessary sequel....whats going on with that unnecessary sequel?.
This will be terrible. Just like the first one.
Im not sure how this will be the first film was good and the games are, lets hope 3D doesnt mess it up
[QUOTE=RichyZ;25838059]why was pyramid head in the first movie
why[/QUOTE]because, like the RE films, it's sort of a mix up for cinematic and theatrical reasons. The first movie sort of butchered the games' stories, but was still a great adaptation, perhaps the only good videogame movie to date.
For whatever reason, they absolutely had to have pyramid head there - probably because without him the film wouldn't have really had an antagonist, which, for many, a film needs. Films cannot be as immersive as the games to the point where the world/environment is the enemy. It might seem strange, you may not agree with that, but it's so.
I loved the way they skipped the storyline from SH2, a bit too depressing for audiences perhaps.
[QUOTE=Mabus;25849890]I loved the way they skipped the storyline from SH2, a bit too depressing for audiences perhaps.[/QUOTE]
SH2 has a damn good story though.
[QUOTE=TheUnDeadGod;25849798]Im not sure how this will be the first film was good and the games are, lets hope 3D doesnt mess it up[/QUOTE]
I dont fully understand what people have against 3d, but 3d doesn't ruin a move, it's just a feature. It's intended to add to the film, not make it. Now, there are some movies that either rely on 3d to be entertaining (cough avatar), and some with crappy 3d added last minute to sell the crappy movie (clash of the titans), but that doesn't mean 3d is explicitly a bad thing.
It's like people hate it because it's popular and different, I would understand if it gave them headaches, but some just despise it regardless.
To reiterate, 3d is just an added effect, not a reason to see a film.
[editline]4th November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mabus;25849890]I loved the way they skipped the storyline from SH2, a bit too depressing for audiences perhaps.[/QUOTE]
Well they already used pyramid head
[QUOTE=Devil Traitor;25848968]I wouldn't say it will be bad in 3-D, we don't know if it's gonna be good or not yet, like Jackass 3 was surprisivly good in 3-D.[/QUOTE]
I don't care about 3D, hurts my eyes, stupid gimmick.
I'll just wait 'til it's out on DVD and view it normally.
again "gimmick"
you have a choice, see it in 3D or see it in 2D, where is it a gimmick? sure some theaters might charge more for 3D but that's really just because they can, it's not like the studios themselves ask them to do that, and I'm sure they get the same cut out of 3D ticket sales as they do 2D ticket sales. so where exactly is it a gimmick? maybe if that was your only option, but it isn't, so you might as well call Imax a gimmick, too.
[QUOTE=M_B;25849939]I dont fully understand what people have against 3d, but 3d doesn't ruin a move, it's just a feature. It's intended to add to the film, not make it. Now, there are some movies that either rely on 3d to be entertaining (cough avatar), and some with crappy 3d added last minute to sell the crappy movie (clash of the titans), but that doesn't mean 3d is explicitly a bad thing.
It's like people hate it because it's popular and different, I would understand if it gave them headaches, but some just despise it regardless.
[/QUOTE]
3D i agree doesnt make a film bad, its just i feel ill everytime i watch one, so what im saying is if im going to see it in 3D i hope its worth being ill for!
i think if it really makes you ill then you shouldn't masochistically subject yourself to that. instead consider seeing your doctor and/or optometrist, or try ginger tablets while watching.
[editline]4th November 2010[/editline]
because, as i mentioned, you don't have to see it in 3D
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.