I wrestled with whether or not I should post this, for worry of my taste in films falling into question (most people don't like videogame movies, and understandably so), but I ultimately figured what the hell? We're all entitled to our opinions, there's no accounting for taste, blah blah blah. I'm among friends here anyway, so if you guys don't like it I can respect that. Anyway, the news was too exciting for me to ignore. Let me get to the point.

The official Silent Hill trailer is now available over at Yahoo Movies: http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/silenthill.html

This is what I've spent the past five years trying to do (though not with so many actors, not feature length, and not directly related to the source material); this game, and the hope of creating a short film in the same vein, are the reason I picked up a camera in the first place, the reason I ultimately found this place, and all of you. And only now have I found the motivation to finish my damned script--what with the official film being released in April, I'd like to get this done with and released beforehand.

The history of projects like this has not been a good one. Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Super Mario Brothers, none of them have been much good (though I did fancy Tomb Raider and Resident Evil). I've always believed, though, that the material was not the problem. If anything, they've strayed too far from the games they claim to represent, and the people who played and loved the games hate the films more than any critic possibly could (you think Ebert & Roeper hated Doom, talk to somebody who's been playing the games since their initial release). This trailer, in addition to the snippets of footage on the website, give me hope that a good game based movie, if not a great one, is possible. It doesn't hurt to have Christophe Gans and Roger Avary at the helm, either.

I get the feeling most people don't like this sort of thing in their movies ("It's not scary, it's boring/stupid!"), and even most videogame fanatics dislike the series in its original medium, but I felt as such a huge fan it was my duty to inform the board of this trailer. Somebody might like it, after all.

'cept Josh Bass, of course. ;)

I'm glad you posted that Robert, like you silent hill is a film i've been waiting a long time for someone to make. And strangely enough like you I have a feature lenghth project being scripted at the moment that has aspects that I have taken from the game.

From the trailer the film looks like its gonna be really good. Being a big fan of the game i was glad to see a small clip at the end of the trailer of the character "pyramid head".

Anyway thanks for the link.

Andy.

I've been waiting for this movie since I first saw it on imdb a while back

Trailer looks good... Thanks Robert

Being a big fan of the game i was glad to see a small clip at the end of the trailer of the character "pyramid head".

You and me both, buddy; I swear, though the first game in the series is far and away my favorite (I mean, it defined the series, after all...the other games seem to be missing something, though I can't pinpoint what), and I do love the giant moth, I must admit that Pyramid Head is the single best enemy I've ever encountered, and the creepiest character in any film, novel, or game I've ever known. I hear tell the guy's nearly nine feet tall in this movie, once the entire costume and helmet are taken into account.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must go work on my script. I've waffled long enough, and I won't let the movie beat me to release, dammit!

I think its great that you shared this trailer and your thoughts. I saw the teaser over at sony pictures site a while ago. I like the stylization of the teaser a bit more actually but thats just me. It still has a nice errie style.

I'm glad that sony is doing this, even the movies that aren't great that they have done based on comics still are realitively good movies. A lot of the game based movies stray to far from the game or the game is difficult to put into the story line of a movie.

House of the dead (game) had a really simple story but the movie just botched that up with trying to create a prequel. Doom visually looked good, action felt rushed and it just wasn't what many expected (Come on, how hard is it to play the game and just copy it, its all their, that could have been the movie).

Silent Hill seems to have the errie-ness (am i making up words again?) down according to the trailers, but I'm hoping that they don't go to mainstream on us. It seemed to have some visual elements similar to Saw and Hostel.

House of the dead (game) had a really simple story but the movie just botched that up with trying to create a prequel.

Not to mention it was somehow given to Uwe Boll, the man with the Tidy Bowl touch; how he gets funding for his films, or the likes of Ben Kingsley to star, is beyond me. As if videogame movies didn't have enough of a stigma attached to them, he's gotta go and add clumsy, unnecessary sex and friggin' robots to Alone in the Dark (the early twentieth century, H.P. Lovecraft inspired adventure/horror game). Unbelievable.

It seemed to have some visual elements similar to Saw and Hostel.

Not to mention Jacob's Ladder, as the game did, also drawing from Stephen King's "The Mist", and Dean Koontz's "Phantoms". Game number three in the series even included at least one reference to "Session 9" (the shot with the wheelchair in the hallway, where the light's falling on it from a corridor off to one side). Lots and lots of little nods and homages--and outright name dropping--in the games, hopefully the movie will have more of that for those of us with way too much time on our hands.

Uwe Boll got funding and such through a loop hole in the German gov that was recently corrected. So hopefully we'll see less of him in the future unless he actually decides to clean up his act.

Yeah, I heard that as well (though it always struck me as a bit urban legendy), but it seems unlikely to affect his films, as explained in this article on game news site Shacknews: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/39376/

Seems there are plenty of other loopholes for the guy to take advantage of. I've been thinking this whole situation would make for a perfect parody of The Producers, no? "Under the right German tax loophole, a producer could make more with a flop than with a hit!"

That trailer gave me a reason to be proud to live in West Virginia.

That's all I have to say.

That trailer gave me a reason to be proud to live in West Virginia.

That's all I have to say.

Hear hear.

It kinda wants to make you wonder out to those creepy abandoned parts outside of town (or in some cases in town).

You guys actually have those kind of ghost towns out there?. Man I could have a field day with my camera in places like that, You don't get many ghost towns in scotland apart from the dodgy parts of Glasgow where you do get the occasional zombie with a buckfast bottle and they aren't so much fun to film...always tryin to steel your kit!

Andy.

Hear hear.

It kinda wants to make you wonder out to those creepy abandoned parts outside of town (or in some cases in town).

Yeah, there's some freaky abandoned places in WV.

In the fall at around 4am, the city I live in looks just like something from Silent Hill.

Kinda creepy.

I've never seen any zombies, but a lot of scary hillbillies. Very...scary... ;)

Yeah, there's some freaky abandoned places in WV.

In the fall at around 4am, the city I live in looks just like something from Silent Hill.

Kinda creepy.

I've never seen any zombies, but a lot of scary hillbillies. Very...scary... ;)


They might as well be zombies, especially after all bars close.

I've never seen any zombies...

As well you shouldn't, seeing as there are no zombies in Silent Hill; a zombie is, in the classic--and as far as I know, only--definition, an undead human. Sometimes you can extend this to animals, as well, but it's mostly people we're talking about. The creatures inhabiting Silent Hill are humanoid at best, but are hardly normal, everyday people who have risen from the grave to eat brains. They are, depending on which theory you subscribe to (I've forgotten what the official word from the developers is), either simple demons straight from the great down-under, or figments of the characters' imaginations, custom formed for each individual who visits the town, and based on their own personal fears, meant to torment them in some way. Neither of those counts as "zombie" by my reckoning.

Nothing personal, of course, I'm just anal about my Silent Hill. ;)

And by the by, I must unfortunately report that the movie, like so many others these days, was shot entirely in Canada (the towns of Brampton, Brantford, Hamilton, and Toronto, Ontario to be exact). Miserable cheapskates, I say.

And by the by, I must unfortunately report that the movie, like so many others these days, was shot entirely in Canada (the towns of Brampton, Brantford, Hamilton, and Toronto, Ontario to be exact). Miserable cheapskates, I say.

I realize this is a really sensitive topic to American film workers so I've edited my initial response. Just keep in mind that this board has quite a few people who work in film who are based in other countries, including Canada.

As well you shouldn't, seeing as there are no zombies in Silent Hill; a zombie is, in the classic--and as far as I know, only--definition, an undead human. Sometimes you can extend this to animals, as well, but it's mostly people we're talking about. The creatures inhabiting Silent Hill are humanoid at best, but are hardly normal, everyday people who have risen from the grave to eat brains. They are, depending on which theory you subscribe to (I've forgotten what the official word from the developers is), either simple demons straight from the great down-under, or figments of the characters' imaginations, custom formed for each individual who visits the town, and based on their own personal fears, meant to torment them in some way. Neither of those counts as "zombie" by my reckoning.

Nothing personal, of course, I'm just anal about my Silent Hill. ;)

I know. We were on the subject of where we lived and Andy mentioned zombies in his neck of the woods. I was simply replying saying I never see zombies in my area and to poke some fun at hillbillies. No need to be anal ;)

Just keep in mind that this board has quite a few people who work in film who are based in other countries, including Canada.

Oh, I do realize that, and I should explain myself, it's hardly a diatribe against Canadians, or any other country for that matter.

It's not that Canadians do worse work than we do, or any other such nonsense. If I were Canadian, and the work were there, I'd take the opportunity just like you guys. I cannot, should not, and do not blame you for doing so.

The problem I have (and I recognize I haven't got such enormous perspective on this topic, but bear with me) is with those who make the bottom-line money decisions; the bean counters, if you will. To shoot a film in, say, Toronto that takes place in New York just because you want to spend less, and not because you really need to, is despicable to me. You can afford to pay New York workers, then in my mind you owe it to them to do so. My complaint's not about Canada, it's about moving around from place to place just to save money. Yeah, I can accept that in many instances the exchange rate and tax incentives allow a better film to be made, but to suggest that this is their primary motivation in most situations? That work (film for one, but also tech support, manufacturing, etc.) is being sent to other countries because the companies truly care about the people who work there, and want to bolster their economies? I can't even begin to believe that's true.

I'd say the same no matter what country I lived in: worry about your own people first. It would strike me that in this country, and yours as well (along with a host of others), it's even worse: as large, powerful nations, we're in a position to help the less fortunate, but who helps us? There are only so many Japanese car companies out there, and they can't employ ALL of us.

Bottom line: if our businesses don't help us first and foremost, who will?


Addendum: Oh, crap, I just saw something ELSE that came out wrong when I typed it: Keith, the comment about "miserable cheapskates" was in reference to what I speak of in this post, but when I said that the shooting in Canada was "unfortunate", I was talking about James and Travis having said they were from West Virginia. Not that there's anything wrong with THAT, mind you, I just meant to point out that while the film is set there, it wasn't filmed there (perhaps they didn't know, I figured)...I wasn't implying that Canada is a bad place to shoot stuff.

I was simply replying saying I never see zombies in my area and to poke some fun at hillbillies. No need to be anal ;)

Ah, I see, my mistake. Poking fun at hillbillies is fine by me, go right ahead!

Travis is right man I only ment the drunks you see wandering the streets which every major city has, We know that they are not zombies in silent hill just havin some fun.

My personal opinion is that there is far too much stress in the film industry .... presure from the studio the deadline falling behind effects not what you wanted etc. Fun in this game is a big thing for me even at the highest level if it ever comes to that. But if it doesn't i'll still love folks films who do make it.

Relax and you'll make better films is what I say


Andy

I'm trying my best to be the same way; there's too much stress in life, period, and I'm doing what I can to just relax and enjoy myself. My comments so far, both the zombie thing and the Canada remarks, were made in passing more as simple opinions, not angry hate-filled rants. I'm not looking to stir things up, or get stressed out about this stuff, only to offer my thoughts. It's just that tact is not one of my strong points. :)

. I'm among friends here . ;)

Your right man, we are all Friends... meaning we all know a simple thing to the common eye is a whole lotta orginizasion skill and team work. .I learned you have to trust your peers and any experience weather it be good or bad its somethin you didn't know before

Friendship is productive

Andy

Robert, I must have missed your response in the thread churn so let me start off by saying that I wasn't winding up to jump on you or be ultra defensive about the Canadian film industry. I do understand your point of view. Of course it would be ideal that a film production is shot on the location it is fictionally set in. Until we see the film we won't know how much of a success that decision is.

Many other factors could have led the production to be located somewhere else including the dollar (which incidentally has been creeping up so in five years that may not be a factor). Professionalism of the crews. Local regulations. Availability of locations. Scheduling. A tax regime.

I had this same discussion over the film "Cold Mountain", the civil war film which was shot mostly in Eastern Europe. Mingella said two of his reasons for shooting in Europe were that the existing historical locations were either too park-like or had been deforested. A second reason was that the extras in Hungary (or wherever that was) resembled more closely the half-starved, unhealthy specimens of human beings who would have been closer to the civil war recruits in history.

California and Hollywood backlots have served to stand in for Egypt, Ancient Rome, the plains of Mongolia, the South Pacific, outer space and yes, even Canada. For reasons of economy or convenience, Hollywood has chosen in the past to make the world into its backlot, with varying success. Now the world is its backlot.

Let's face another fact. Talent is international. Where are you going to draw the line? All American crew including the writer, director and stars? Of course in the golden age of Hollywood much of the talent came from other countries, from England, Canada, Germany. And being a foreigner has never been an obstacle to getting work in Hollywood when the talent and contacts count. Is the actress in "Silent Hill" herself a Virginian? Why not? In "Cold Mountain" was Renee Zelwegger a genuine hillbilly? No, of course not. Did the writer and production designer actually experience the civil war? No. Another example. Zhang Yimou's "Hero". Starring Chinese actors, funded by Hong Kong, France and Japan, with an Australian cinematographer with costume design by a Japanese. Yimou could afford the best and he got the best.

American films have benefited from foreign financing, not to mention how many studios are actually partly or wholly owned by international funds. American films have benefited most obviously in foreign distribution. Somehow it's okay for us to line up and watch a Hollywood film, contributing to the California economy, but not help make them.

Let me speak even more frankly. If you were to draw a line there, what about here. Why should we in DVInfo.net be giving free advice to people in other countries who could end up taking work away from us? Every tip you give in this forum is just an advantage foreigners could use on you, isn't that so?

Yeah, I can understand--and get behind--all of the points you make, 'specially that last one. My worry is, I must learn to accept, one of principle and ideal, not of real world and practicality. There are many other factors at play that I had never even considered, and perhaps I was just approaching things from the wrong angle. I still think that one should endeavor to do things the way I described them; J.K. Rowling wanted only British actors to play the parts in the Harry Potter films, and I can see where she's coming from. Some were upset at the thought of Americans playing lead roles in the Lord of the Rings, and I don't completely disagree. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out, but I'd think the least you could do is try.

And I can't help shake the feeling that it's not usually about using the best talent or the most available/appropriate locations, but instead simply to save money. Yes, talent is international, and yes, the global economy is helped by trade in these ways, I only fear that "global economy" is a buzzword (or buzzphrase, more correctly) tossed around by those in charge as a convenient excuse for shaving a few more bucks off the budget. I'm not a "save money for saving money's sake" kinda guy, and I don't particularly appreciate those who are, especially when people's jobs (any people's jobs) are directly affected by their decisions.

I can uderstand your point about the money thing Robert but you have to remember (correct me if my hollywood history is off) that in the 70's hollywood fell apart and alot of the major studios were being bought over by large beverage companies and other companies who have nothing to do with making films. This ment you have a bunch of suits in it for the money and doing their risk vs cost benefit analysis on everything, they had no knowlage or love for the art of filmmaking .

I was watching the special features on the Alien resurection dvd and Jean-Pierre Jeunet was saying sometimes you have to protect the studios from themselves . They were telling him not to build certain sets because of budgetry reasons but he had them built behind their backs anyway because they don't have the vision or imagination.

I'm no expert on the hollywood machine but from what i can gather from watching documentaries and dvd special features it seems the relationship between the filmmakers and the executives is shaky at best but they know that without one the other is nothing and the filmmakers end up dancing to the studios tune because ultimately they are stumping up the cash. The studios are just loansharks ready to break your legs if you mess it up!.

Robert, in the ideal world there would be no barriers to employment, no duties, no work visas. We could work wherever and cross borders to work on projects we want to work on and pay taxes in the locations we work in. Producers would employ the best available at the time. To me, if you have global capital freedom (i.e. studios can decide to shoot anywhere they want) there should also be free movement of labour. Then we could get beyond what is really a false conflict that pits us against each other.

I really don't think you and I disagree at this point; everything you've said so far makes sense, and I want you to know that I can see what you mean, and that I'm not looking to bash "foreigners" because "dey tuk ar jerbs!"

All I'm saying is that if there IS free movement of labor, it should be based on who the people are, what kind of work they do, and what they have to offer your production, not how much they charge, and what it does to your profits.

They should be choosing people from Canada, America, Australia, or anywhere else based on the people, not what the people charge.