Return to Silent Hill made me wish I were in Silent Hill instead 

Do you ever wonder what would be in your own personal Silent Hill? We know from the first three games that town reflects the fears of one of its denizens. In the original Silent Hill, it was what scares a child; in the sequel, it reflected James Sunderland’s guilt; and in the third game, it was the predatory horrors teenage girls face in their lives.

But what about my own personal Silent Hill? What do I fear? Squids would be there, of course. The Sonic the Hedgehog drowning theme would be playing a lot. I’d probably be forced to play Baby Steps for more than five seconds. And the final boss area would be a movie theater showing Return to Silent Hill, a movie so bad that it fits perfectly in the horrible town of its source material. 

The Escapist recaps

• Return to Silent Hill is a live-action, very loose adaptation of Silent Hill 2. 
• The film expands upon certain aspects of the source material, which practically ignores huge chunks, especially Eddie. 
• Return to Silent Hill is directed by Christophe Gans, the director of the original Silent Hill film from 2006.
• Despite the shared production crew, Return to Silent Hill isn’t connected to the other films beyond the setting. 

Welcome to (a) Silent Hill

Return to Silent Hill is a very loose adaptation of Silent Hill 2. The fundamental premise is still there. The movie follows James Sunderland, a painter who has fallen into alcoholism. One day, James receives a letter from his wife, Mary, asking him to meet her in Silent Hill, the town where they once lived. 

James heads to the town of Silent Hill, but unlike the game, Return to Silent Hill features numerous flashbacks of James and Mary’s life together, adding a ton of content and backstory not in the original game. 

The new content is, for the most part, unnecessary and bad. I can see why it was needed, though, and it’s part of the reason why many video games are hard to adapt. The original Silent Hill 2 is mostly just James exploring the town and fighting monsters, with dialogue confined to short cutscenes or expository descriptions. 

That doesn’t work in a movie. You can’t pad out a runtime with James chugging medicine and whacking monsters with a pole to make sure they’re dead. As such, Return to Silent Hill had to add a lot of content. The most egregious of these is James’ psychiatrist, who calls him several times throughout the film, seemingly for no reason other than to shovel in some dialogue. It reminded me a lot of how Sean Bean was clumsily inserted into the original Silent Hill movie. 

The other significant shift from game to movie is the scale and approach to horror. We now have a lot more bombastic scenes, including hordes of monsters and cheap jump scares, none of which feel earned. 

The end product is a mishmash of ideas, told strangely. While the movie certainly looks the part at times, it’s in no way an adequate adaptation of the source material. 

Return to Silent Hill is a laughably bad movie, as in, I burst out laughing several times when I wasn’t supposed to. If you’re a fan of the source material, stay as far away from this movie as possible, as it will kill what little hope you may have had for the franchise that was kindled by the excellent Silent Hill 2 remake and Silent Hill f. In fact, just play the remake and enjoy that. 

From here on out, we’ll talk story spoilers!!! This is your last chance to turn away.

Return to Silent Hill is a scattershot adaptation 

A lot of the new content feels more in line with the original Silent Hill, as Mary is connected to the cult that operates in the town, right down to the strange drugs. These scenes add little, save to pad out the film and dilute the relationship between her and James. 

See, Mary is now the child of the former leader of the cult, and they’ve been poisoning her for years. Angela from Silent Hill 2 has now been rolled into Mary, while Eddie appears in the film for only a single scene before vanishing. Laura, meanwhile, appears way more and is used as a vessel for cheap scares. 

The real change from the source material comes from James himself, who looks more like Mark from The Room than the original character. We now have a protagonist who is far more sullen and prone to outbursts, likely to liven up the film. I can see why James was made more dynamic (this is a film, after all), but his responses to outlandish situations become comedic rather than sincere. 

There are pieces of the original Silent Hill 2 here, and I can understand why some changes were made, but they weren’t done well. The new content, especially regarding Mary, feels like filler and detracts from the game’s beauty and sadness.

At least Return to Silent Hill made me laugh

Return to Silent Hill opens with James Sunderland driving a sports car while smoking a joint. In that moment, I realized that this film was going to be a bad adaptation of Silent Hill 2, but an excellent adaptation of the old PSM PlayStation Magazine cover, where James Sunderland is jacked and sporting a gun. This is Action Sunderland, not the weakling who cries over his wife. 

And then there’s the final scene, which starts faithfully to the game, and goes in such a hilarious direction that I burst out laughing in the cinema. I won’t spoil it, but you can’t write comedy as good as this! Unfortunately, this is a horror movie, not There’s Something About Mary. 

I should clarify that my complaints with the film are aimed squarely at the script. The actors do a fine job with the material, and there’s some excellent cinematography and effects. That’s enough for a lot of shlocky horror movies, but Silent Hill deserves so much more, especially Silent Hill 2, and this film is just another black stain on a franchise that keeps getting pulled back into its darkest days. 

Ask The Escapist