Obviously the critical reception had little impact, therefore, I don't think you can legitimately call it disasterous ;) Some calamity would have had to befall the film for it to be really disasterous.

I'm looking forward to an extended DVD release ...

This was easily the best game-to-movie I've ever seen.

Enemies, locations, characters, gameplay, hell even sound effects and background music remained faithful to the game. The plot had to change a bit, of course, but the atmosphere of the Silent Hill games was pervasive throughout.

The critical reception didn't impact the film because the film wasn't screened for critics. Which in and of itself says "this film sucks", but it does manage to help a film make money on it's opening weekend.

I liked it. It was better then House of the Dead

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f216/macuseros9/smile.gif

I agree with Jayntampa, disasterous would have been a better word. Then again I think Joystiqs take on the movie is a bit harsh. Is not going to be the next Lord of the Rings. It was a good movie that all fans of the games will love, and non fans found it entretaining. We must remember that critics are forced to watch Uwa Ball movies and thus they are brain damaged to the core when it comes to video game movies.

Im can't wait for the dvd!

ps: I recomend playing Silent Hill for a bit, and you'll see how much attention to detail the movie had. It's defenatelly great!

If you want a real critical sampling go to Rottentomatoes, not at that pathetic metareview Joystiq scrounged up. At 31 percent, the movie was obviously recieved badly, but that's still higher than the normal horror movie. So 'disastrous' would not be the term use, only 'overwhelmingly average' as the overall average score from 36 reviews is 4.9/10.

Personally I liked the movie. You just have to go with it and as long as you can stay awake during the boring bits (in which there are many) and gaping plot holes you'll be rewarded with some seriously messed up imagery. And wasn't that why you went to see a movie based on Silent Hill?

I honestly don't know why you guys trashed it so much. I loved the movie. Best video game based movie ever.

This film cost $50 mil to make and I would *guess* another $20 mil or so to market it. It will take about $140 mil gross to break even. The film is projected to make $60 million total. Figure DVD will add another $60 mil and things aren't looking good because you know there isn't going to be any TV network money...

"Obviously the critical reception had little impact,"

It debuted with $20 million over the weekend. That's not really anything to get excited over these days.

It'll probably be below $10 million next weekend. It'll be lucky to break even before it hits DVD.

Don't underestimate the impact of critics. Not only do they influence people who actually watch/read them, but they also affect how a film is marketed (i.e. an ad that says "two BIG thumbs up!" is a lot more effective than an ad with nothing). And then of course there are all those people who, like me, basically form their ideas of what they're gonna do that weekend on the train on the way to work as they read the Daily News. And you want to know the two reporters for that paper that I know by name? Jack Mathews and Jami Bernard - not coincidentally their two main film critics.

I'm not saying I wouldn't go see Silent Hill without good reviews. But I am saying I am not expecting much, knowing that it wasn't even screened for them. And the public at large does care less about films that they don't see getting good reviews, especially if it doesn't have an obvious pedigree behind it (big-name stars or directors, a big-name franchise, or whatever).

umm ... cable sales, plus pay for view hotel ... and foreign market box office, including Japan & France where it will probably do very well. It will make nearly as much internationally as it does in the US.

Consider Resident Evil as a precedent -- $40 million US + $62 million international = Successful Film -- source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=residentevil.htm -- and, Silent Hill is a lot better than RE.

So, it cost $70 to make and market, where does the $140 million to break even come from?!?

Critics have very little impact except in the way of independent films. Go to Rotten Tomatoes and see how many very successful films scored under 40% -- Scary Movie 4, for one ... drubbed by critics, and it's already made over $67 million.

"So, it cost $70 to make and market, where does the $140 million to break even come from?!?"

The movie company only get 55% of the money. The rest goes to the theatres. Comparing to the worldwide gross of Resident Evil is not really that good considering RE the game series is much more of an international success than Silent Hill.

Huh? Silent Hill is massive in other countries -- bigger than in the U.S. ... definitely true in Japan.

Not only that, theaters only get 10%-20% of ticket revenue -- which changes by week of the movies release - not 50%.

In my opinion, game-to-movie films don't really go the extra mile for me (Super Mario Bros. movie anyone?). I'd much more prefer comics-to-movie films (Spider-man, Batman, Superman, etc.) But the only game that I can see doing good in theaters is probably a Metroid movie, but it would have to make a new story for non-gamers (like explain Samus's past). Yeah I can see that doing well.

"Huh? Silent Hill is massive in other countries -- bigger than in the U.S. ... definitely true in Japan.

Not only that, theaters only get 10%-20% of ticket revenue -- which changes by week of the movies release - not 50%."

Well if you're just going to spout BS now I'm not even going to bother. It's 45% and you can find the proof yourself on the web at sites like box office mojo, etc. This will be my last comment on this topic as I'm not in the mood to argue with 13 year olds whos dad owns all movie theatres and whos mom created Silent Hill.

Yes, because name calling and spouting statistics with no support is so grown up.

Here is my support: Although this has begun to change, particularly for the larger chains, the industry standard has long been that the ratio for the first weekend is called the 90/10 ratio. Ninety percent of each ticket goes to the studio and 10 percent to the theater owner. The longer the movie stays in the theater, the more money the theater owner can make off each ticket.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0325/p12s01-almo.htm

Here's another article proving you're wrong Bloo. Theaters make money from concessions and the contracts that come with it.

http://money.cnn.com/2002/03/08/smbusiness/q_movies/

So before insulting other people, make sure you're not a retard yourself.

"Yes, because name calling and spouting statistics with no support is so grown up. "

Why... I called you a name? I just referenced your age. call me a 32 year old all you want. I won't be hurt. Statistics with no support? Did I not mention box office mojo? Here... www.boxofficemojo.com. You won't find a more comprehensive site of box office analysis. Now go here... http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/
and go to the bottom of the page where you will find "On average, studios earn approximately 55 percent of the final gross"

"So before insulting other people, make sure you're not a retard yourself"

I didn't insult anyone or call them a retard like you did. Again, this is why I don't like arguing with kids. I'll also add that Resident Evil is one of the largest selling franchises for games in the world. The Silent Hill series has sold much much less. Check out NPD for yourself.

By the way...
Worldwide RE sales: 30 million
Worldwide SH sales: 4 million
Slight difference eh?

If you would have read the artical that this story links to you would have found:

""Silent Hill" was released by TriStar Pictures, a Sony Corp. unit specializing in low-budget films. It paid $14 million for the right to distribute the film throughout the Americas, and will break even in the mid-$20 million range, said Rory Bruer, Sony's president of domestic theatrical distribution."



Also, i was reading reviews from metacritic and some of their complaints like sean beans role was pointless and the film was to long, would be mute points if the original script had been used... (from wikipedia trivia)
* n the original script, there were only female characters. After submitting a new script, the script was returned to Gans with a memo saying "there are no men!". When Sean Bean was added to the cast the script was approved.
* Nearly all of the creatures that appear in the film are actors covered in latex and makeup, rather than the computer-generated beings that many contemporary films use. The actors playing the monsters are professional dancers, and their movements were performed live, with some filmed backwards in order to give a strange and disturbing effect.
* Silent Hill uses little computer-generated imagery, with the most notable exceptions being the fog that drenches the town and the insects that surround the Red Pyramid. Some of the creatures have been touched-up with CGI in post-production, but, for the most part, what is seen on film existed physically.
* Screenwriter Roger Avary has said in interviews that as a boy his father, who is a mining engineer, used to tell him stories about the ghost town Centralia, Pennsylvania, where coal deposits from the local mine caught fire and caused toxic gasses to force the inhabitants to evacuate forever. Avary, it seems, was fascinated since childhood by the idea that fires underneath the town would be burning for a hundred years and the story of Centralia was used as the basis for the township of Silent Hill.
* Parts of Silent Hill were shot in downtown Brantford, Ontario.
* Although the film is supposed to be occuring in West Virginia, during two different occasions, (both while at the gas station in the town of Brahams), you can clearly see the price of the gasoline listed for sale per liter, not the US standard of per gallon



I Personally think that a lot of movie reviewers just jumped on the bandwagon of bashing video game movies, so that when one DECENT (not great, but decent) video game adaption does finally come along they wouldnt know it if it bit them in the ***...


but anyways, it was ok, I LIKED that it was long! I feel more like i got my money's worth even though i went to a matinee... ( i didnt even realize it till the end anyway, some movies i just feel jipped cause they were short)

I havent played the games, but i have seen others play bits of the game, And being a gamer myself I could tell what parts were lifted from the games and what wasnt, the latter being the parts that brought the movie down. I chuckled to myself while imagining how the movie would be as a video game when it came to the movie props... (using lighter, loosing lighter, later finding keys on desk to unlock drawer with flashlite, batteries go dead, finding weapon, loosing weapon... etc... Also i loved the scenes where she is first attacked, that ive read were taken scene from scene from the game, I could just tell that the camera angles and atmasphere down to the way the water on the ground in hte hallways looked were direct from the games.

But the people I was with were like "I dont get it" These were the same (non-gamers) people i went and saw "Saw 2" with. And of course with that movie there was a 10 minute recap of what exactly went down, and while watching that im like "OK WE GET THE FUCING POINT, GET ON WITH THE MOVIE ALLREADY!"
In silent hill the movie they dont spoon feed you the answeres, you have to imagine them yourself.

I think this is one of the biggest differences between good games and hollywood, games are smarter. Blockbuster hollywood movies represent the dumming down of America...

Another aspect of the movie taht some casual horror film fans may notice is that the female lead character isnt the dummy that does stupid stuff that you yell at them notto do, it definately doesnt follow traditional roles. She was a strong character compared to other genre films. I Liked that to!

My Girlfriend thought the best part were the Quote: "HOT nurse zombies"

Quit writing long comments!!!
Some of us are only 13 and can't read.
That means you glitched. Please, keep it to the point.I liked it or I didn't like it will suffice. Me, I've pretty much been hungry since lunch. But I wasn't hungry when I was born. Actually I don't know if I was hungry or not when I was born. I can't really remember anything until about 4 years into my life. I think somebody dropped me on my head. But I remember not being hungry at around 5. Isn't that weird though? I'm hungry now but I wasn't before.Maybe I should go eat something. Like my medication.

Oh yeah, I haven't seen silent hill and I don't plan to because ! (exclamation mark)

One line at the bottom of the page, all but hidden, isn't really 'proof.' Plus, you already proved you are a liar, coming back to comment some more even though you vehemnetly stated : "This will be my last comment on this topic as I'm not in the mood to argue with 13 year olds whos dad owns all movie theatres and whos mom created Silent Hill."

So, why should we listen to a 32 year old man who can't come up with a witty comment (ier. attempot at the end there) AND is a liar? Plus, calling someone a 13 year old without actually knowing how old they are is an insult in my books, so don't come here saying "I didn't insult anyone."

Saying that somebody is 13 is a complete insult. He is saying that they are immature. It was totally meant to be insulting though, ironically, in a very immature way.

lol Yep, he called me 13 ... I'm 35 -- with a master's in communication, and I've worked programming films. So, I have a little background. ;)

All I was trying to say was that the movie would end up profitable. I dunno why it bothered him so much.

the ppl that probably didnt like this movie are probably the type that get bored very easily
becuz i noticed that most of the movie was just story telling from previous events

While it was visually stunning, the dialogue was so f'ing bad that I kept getting pulled out of the experience to find myself in a dark theater with a bunch of snickers echoing through the crowd every time the actors tried to be serious - especially whenever Rose spoke or Officer Bennet (Cybil) spoke...actually nearly EVERY time Rose spoke. It's one thing to have broken dialogue in a game to help narrate the interactive experience. It simply doesn't translate to film.

I love the Silent Hill series, but I'm not stupid enough to fanboy up on this film. As much as the RE films were panned by many critics, they were still much better "video game movies" than this piece of schlock. The fact that Uwe Boll had nothing to do with this movie shocks me to the core. I swear I felt him lurking in the shadows somewhere, eyes alight with the gleeful thought of broken plotlines and campy dialogue attempting to be dramatic and profound.

I've played through each game multiple times, and can assure you that most of the film was spent with me staring amazed at the screen intermingled with looking over at my fellow saying "Woah."

Needless to say, I really liked it. It was paced like a game for gamers to enjoy.