I may be in the minority, but I really enjoyed 2006’s Silent Hill movie directed by Christophe Gans. I do not think it was good, but it struck a good balance between the game’s concept and an original story, making it unique and enjoyable in a campy way.
So, leave it to say, I was eager to see how Return to Silent Hill would tackle the story of Silent Hill 2 and whether it could capture the essence of what is arguably one of the best horror games ever released. It was a tall order, one Return to Silent Hill could not live up to, but it is still a wild ride and worth it just to experience the insanity.
As I mentioned, Return to Silent Hill loosely follows the story of Silent Hill 2, with James Sunderland (Jeremy Irvine) struggling after the death of the love of his life, Mary Crane (Hannah Emily Anderson) and in his grief makes the decision to return to Silent Hill after he gets a mysterious letter from his now dead partner amist drinking himself into oblivion. Since we all know nothing is ever simple when it comes to the small Pacific Northwest town, things only get more strange once James sets foot in the town, in all its hellish glory.
On its face, Return to Silent Hill has all the elements of the core story; the only issue is that it does so in a story that never seems to find its footing, so much so that some of the scenes make almost no sense without the context of the game. There are so many ideas that could have been interesting and concepts that feel ripped right from scenes in the game, yet nothing seems to fit together in a way that makes any sense, and at times seems to defy the logic the film itself establishes.
The monsters, I will have to admit, sometimes look pretty darn good. There are some scenes that give a good sense of what these creatures are, without making them feel too much like a CGI creature out of space and time. The Lying Figure/Armless Man creature seen in the early segments of the movie looks genuinely creepy, with its spewing acid building tension. I even like how they used a smaller character to show just how corrosive it was, in all its brutal glory, far more than I was expecting this film to do, honestly.
Return to Silent Hill manages to feature almost all the monsters from the game, including the Mannequin, Creeper, Abstract Daddy, Bubble Head Nurse, and even the infamous Pyramid Head, though to varying degrees of believability and fidelity. So much so that I want to say Christophe Gans has a real love for this franchise and seems to want to bring it to life. The only issue is I do not know if he fully understands the story, or if he just does not think it is possible to capture it on the silver screen.
After watching the film and making notes, I kept feeling Return to Silent Hill feels like a fever dream cosplaying as Silent Hill. It has all the basic concepts in place and captures the core story, but beneath the surface is something that makes no sense and completely misses the essence of what these games are about. If this were a random horror film about loss, I could see it working in an avant-garde sort of way.
Return to Silent Hill is taking its characters through cool-looking scenes that tackle memory, loss, and trauma. The only issue is that Silent Hill 2 has a reason for the many concepts it brings to the player, and they all make sense in the world it exists in. Taking them all out of context, injecting new cult concepts, and even new reasons for Mary’s death mean many of the ideas presented in Silent Hill 2 no longer make sense when presented in a movie with a different core focus.
“I kept feeling Return to Silent Hill feels like a fever dream cosplaying as Silent Hill.”
The characters of Eddie Dombrowski (Pearse Egan), Laura (Evie Templeton), and Angela (also Hannah Emily Anderson, for some reason) are vital to Silent Hill 2‘s emotional weight and to James coming to terms with the hell he has created for himself. In Return to Silent Hill, they all make appearances, but have none of the emotional arcs or even complete stories. Eddie is in a handful of scenes, then just runs off.
Laura is just a catalyst for action and shows none of the emotional core that we saw in the game or the remake, and Angela felt the worst done by. Only giving a taste of her story and somehow linking it back to Mary, taking away that character’s agency and leaving her to stand on her own. It was such a baffling choice that it really struck me as objectively bad, especially given the game’s high value among horror fans.
What makes it all worse is how it all looks. There are some striking shots in Return to Silent Hill; the only problem is that you need to sit through a lot of ugly CGI messes to get to them. The 2006 Silent Hill struck a good balance between physical sets and CGI, capturing the eerie town in a way that felt fresh, unique, and striking. That is not true here; some of the scenes feel like bad green-screen work you might see from very determined YouTube creators.
It lacks the tangible effect that makes this world feel real, and often just seems like live-action characters walking around an oddly rendered, rusty-looking video game in cosplay. That is not always the case, and as I said, Christophe Gans did capture some unique and horrifying visuals, but as a whole, this is an ugly film that needed someone to say, “Maybe this should be practical,” and bring some life to the overall production.
I was excited walking into the film, but it sadly couldn’t live up to the expectations. Return to Silent Hill fundamentally does not understand what the source material is about and tries to craft a story around that misconception. There are some unique ideas brought to the screen, but when they are not grounded in a story that makes sense, they all fall flat.
This is by no means the worst video game adaptation to reach the screen, but it is one that wastes one of the best stories in video games and builds an incoherent mess in the process. It is well worth seeing if you enjoy horror, just don’t walk in expecting to see Silent Hill 2 brought to life, you will be disappointed.
