The second Silent Hill movie is primarily based on the third game, and because I'm a raging game fanboy I'm going to tell you way more than you care to know about how the two match up. You may know from my other review that my introduction to Silent Hill came with the first movie, so I came into it without any knowledge of the series. Now that I've played all the games more times than I should be admitting here the changes made to the characters bother me, but overall I still love that first movie.

 

I had high expectations for this sequel, called "Revelation" and sometimes labeled "Silent Hill 3D." I had hoped they would continue with the same feel of the first one but with a focus on bringing the movie's story and the one from the games closer together. I was excited to see most of the notable characters from game 3 appearing on screen with a plot following the same lines. Unfortunately, it doesn't work.

 

Heather (who was formerly Sharon AKA Cheryl in the game and is the good side of Alessa – confused yet?) has been on the run along with her father, now going by the name Harry Mason to be more in keeping with the games, for most of her life. She doesn't know much about why they run or what happened to her in Silent Hill all those years ago. Claudia, the new leader of the cult behind what happened to Alessa, needs Heather back in Silent Hill in order to hatch a devious plan to gain power so she abducts Harry to use as a lure. Heather begins to uncover the truth of who she is as she sets out to bravely save her father.

 

The casting gave me confidence in the film. Sean Bean as Harry Mason? I'll take that. Carrie Anne Moss as Claudia seemed like a solid choice. How about Malcolm McDowell as Leonard Wolf? Martin Donovan looks enough like Douglas (the P.I. from game 3) that all I needed was a glimpse of him in the movie trailer to know exactly who he was.

 

While I had hoped to see Jodelle Ferland back in the role she played so well years ago, Adelaide Clemens looks the part of Heather much more than the typical game to film translation. I thought she would be the big make-or-break point of the movie. I was wrong.

 

So here we have solid actors who match up to what I had hoped for as far as the look and feel of the game characters. We have a story that, while not the exact plot of the game, is relatively close and brings the discrepancies of the first movie into tighter continuity with the game. Sounds like we're on track for something all Silent Hill fans should love with perhaps enough for other horror fans to enjoy as well. Except that when the elements are all put together they fall apart into a mess.

 

Some of my issues have to do with personal preferences about which not everyone will care. I get that. Still, the drastic change in the character of Vincent and his supplanting of Douglas for most of the plot bothered me a lot. The Douglas of the game is not a romantic interest of Heather's, but otherwise is the partner that Vincent is in the movie. Vincent, meanwhile is considerably redefined while still retaining hints of what his original character was. While the redefined Vincent has a few key plot interactions that are positive I greatly dislike Douglas having such a small part in the story especially after seeing what Martin does with the character.

 

Even if I otheriwse loved the movie the character swap would bother me. However, it's not the most glaring problem. Most of the trouble comes from poorly scripted dialogue, weak scene setup, and choppy editing. Here's an example. Harry has a moment with Rose, his wife – a necessary scene to explain how we got from the end of the first movie to the events in this second one. I liked Radha Mitchell, and she's playing against Bean who is an accomplished actor. It should be a strong and emotional scene. Yet it feels out of place and shoehorned in.

 

Most of the scares rely too heavily on sudden, loud noises. In an interesting contrast, I just recently examined the jump scares in "Sinister," released a couple of weeks before "Silent Hill 2," which I found to effective. The concept is the same here – make an unexpected loud noise to make the audience jump. But while "Sinister" actually made me jump a couple of times, "Silent Hill" left me saying, "OK, that was unnecessarily loud." The scares here are almost completely ineffectual.

 

Weak jump scares are one thing, but atmosphere is what I consider to be more important. One reason I like the Silent Hill games so much is because of their unsettling atmosphere as if the town itself is trying to drive you mad even when it's not sending inhuman creatures to decorate the town with your inner organs. The movie is so worried about overly explaining every plot point and throwing one gruesome scene after another at us that it fails to ever establish a proper Silent Hill atmosphere. It never adequately conveys the isolation or despair (or any other powerful emotion, for that matter) that is a basic tenant of any good Silent Hill story.

 

When the movie does slow down from the frantic pace of the rapid-fire plot points it doesn't make enough use of them. Take the mannequin monster scene for an example. This is a creature designed especially for this movie though it appears to be based on a couple of existing creature designs. It turns people into mannequins then uses their body parts as a part of itself. In and of itself this is probably the best scene of horror in the entire movie. It's creepy and unsettling. I like the design of the monster and the intensity of its hunting of Heather.

 

The problem is that it has squat to do with the plot. It's an isolated scene. Heather goes into its lair, the creature is revealed and gives chase, Heather escapes, but as far as the rest of the movie is concerned this is a completely inconsequential event.

 

Speaking of Heather escaping, there is very little of her standing her ground to fight. In the game she must face off against all these creatures. It would be up to her to defeat rather than just escape the mannequin monster. In the movie I think she uses the gun against exactly one creature. The instance in which this works best is during the battle with Leonard. He is the one game monster conflict that feels the most like an adequate adaptation. I like his look and what Heather does to overcome the situation with him.

 

Heather does act heroically against a horde of nurses as well, but the events of the scene make very little sense and are more about having an excuse to have a horde of demon nurses attack. The nurses themselves are in keeping with those of the game, it's just that the scene doesn't do them justice.

 

Pyramid Head has become the face of Silent Hill... um... so to speak seeing as how he has no actual face. While he was not in games one or three upon which the movies are based he is an iconic part of both movies. This bothers a lot of fans who think that he should belong solely in the reality of James Sunderland (the protagonist of the second game which introduced Pyramid Head). The game designers have had other ideas and have brought him into additional stories to make him a part of the larger Silent Hill universe whether those fans of game 2 like it or not.

 

"Revelation" makes a rather large change to the nature of Pyramid Head combining his role with that of Valtiel from the game (in the movie Valtiel is referenced but not used like he is in the game). I thought I was going to hate this change, I'm sure many purists will, but I actually found his usage fitting considering what he does and who Heather really is. My only complaint about him is that when we see him go ballistic with that giant sword of his the choreography is focused on creating a big action scene rather than making his actions feel natural.

 

Like the first movie this one gets most if not all of its soundtrack from music composed for the games. This in itself is a positive since the game music is an experience all its own, but I can't help feeling like it was edited in such a way as to use as many tunes as possible rather than creating repeating themes. The music can jump out too much and become distracting while having too little continuity from scene to scene. I thought the mixing in the first movie was far better. Even so, I do appreciate the attempt to use the game music in the movie. I'm not aware of any other screen adaptation that does this.

 

There are other differences I could criticize such as the look and usage of the missionary monster, the nature of the final monster battle, and the under-usage of Claudia. There are other things that are positive like the dark carnival and several nods to game icons like Robbie the rabbit. I think by now I've given you enough comparisons to figure out if there's going to be enough continuity to please or bother you.

 

If there's one thing fans should enjoy here it's the cameos that nod heavily to games like "Origins" and "Downpour." It serves as a reminder that there are other Silent Hill stories besides that of the Mason family. It's too bad we don't get a glimpse of James Sunderland.

 

One last element that begs for discussion is the nature of the psychological element. A large part of what makes the games a powerful draw is the ambiguity mixed with layers of meaning. What do the various creatures represent? What is really going on in Silent Hill? Different fans have different ideas. The movie over explains too much without conveying the idea that there is a deeper explanation below the surface. It doesn't foster enough discussion about what various elements mean which steals a lot of its power.

 

There is a scene after the credits. It's short and not terribly impressive, but if you like seeing those make sure you stick around.