Silent Hill/Monsters: Difference between revisions
From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
→Film adaptation
*>BobtheVila |
*>BobtheVila |
||
| Line 255: | Line 255: | ||
Several creatures from the first four installments made a big screen appearance in the ''Silent Hill'' film adaptation. All of the creatures, with the exception of one, are present in the previous games. Upon being asked on the interpretation of the monsters and whether the film will answer this, [[Film director|director]] [[Christophe Gans]] stated that the most basic explanation was of course that they are victims of Alessa, people in hell as if. The movie's plot already signifies this as her vengeance upon the town's people for being burnt as a witch, this entity being the “Dark” Alessa. It can be noted that there are several uses of the The Ring's concepts and ideas, such as child drawings now linking to things in the town or the lack of the original story on The God. Oppositely, Sharon is any innocent portion of Alessa left, being the "Light" or "Positive” Alessa. A "making of" also states that the monsters were originally humans. | Several creatures from the first four installments made a big screen appearance in the ''Silent Hill'' film adaptation. All of the creatures, with the exception of one, are present in the previous games. Upon being asked on the interpretation of the monsters and whether the film will answer this, [[Film director|director]] [[Christophe Gans]] stated that the most basic explanation was of course that they are victims of Alessa, people in hell as if. The movie's plot already signifies this as her vengeance upon the town's people for being burnt as a witch, this entity being the “Dark” Alessa. It can be noted that there are several uses of the The Ring's concepts and ideas, such as child drawings now linking to things in the town or the lack of the original story on The God. Oppositely, Sharon is any innocent portion of Alessa left, being the "Light" or "Positive” Alessa. A "making of" also states that the monsters were originally humans. | ||
In the same interview, given near the release of the film and after the "making of" was complete, Gans also stated that they could be put as hallucinations from the protagonists, coming from one’s own psyche.<ref name="preserve">[http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/silenthill/productiondiary/archives/2006/04/on_interpreting.php Christophe Gans' Production Diary] (Fourth Q&A: "On Interpreting Silent Hill's Monsters and Preserving the Atmospheric Quality of the Game", published Friday, [[April 18]], [[2006]].)</ref> While it's similar in nature to the game's "materialization of delusions", a hallucination implies a simpler internal phenomenon of anyone | In the same interview, given near the release of the film and after the "making of" was complete, Gans also stated that they could be put as hallucinations from the protagonists, coming from one’s own psyche.<ref name="preserve">[http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/silenthill/productiondiary/archives/2006/04/on_interpreting.php Christophe Gans' Production Diary] (Fourth Q&A: "On Interpreting Silent Hill's Monsters and Preserving the Atmospheric Quality of the Game", published Friday, [[April 18]], [[2006]].)</ref> While it's similar in nature to the game's "materialization of delusions", a hallucination implies a simpler internal phenomenon of anyone. This is most likely referring to the dangerous fumes emitting around the town that leads one to argue about whether it’s real or not. However, it's obvious that this was not dominant in the movie’s filming stage. The film's content features anybody seeing the same proposed hallucinations and being affected by them equally. The surprise ending also changes the idea of it being Rose's own singular hallucination as well, thus leading back to the original nature and story of the film's monsters. | ||
