Reviews

... and this is one of those times. I should think "I Am Legend" holds itself up pretty well given the genre that it was working in. This judgment is made in comparison to various other zombie flicks of its kind, and I found it to be more engaging and almost unique. I reckon one could never get away from the stereotypical scenario of "genetic mutation breeds zombies who later decide to take over the world". But the focus on the human emotions/psychology in this one is refreshing and that is a pulling factor in my opinion.

For that alone, the movie deserves extra points. This is by no means Oscar winning material, but like I mentioned, it does well in the genre that it represents.

Will Smith should be proud of himself. If not for him, the movie wouldn't have been believable nor would I enjoy myself as much as I did with this one. For that alone, I shall give it 8 stars.

Horror? Try psychological triller and you might be closer to understanding why is it that I found Silent Hill such an amazing piece of work.

With that in mind, the reason why Silent Hill worked for me was because it had a story to tell. Granted some of us are already familiar with the storyline and are frustrated with the pace of the film. Others may gripe at how much of a disappointment the movie was because of the lack of certain monsters, the lack of development in the characters they liked best, the lack of answers to puzzling questions, the fact that the storyline was too convoluted and confusing et cetera et cetera.

Yet, the heart of the film lies mainly on one simple idea - Silent Hill is first and foremost, a physical manifestation of a child's mind that is shattered, tainted and shackled by an abuse so terrible that one is unable to articulate it into words. (Ever wondered why Silent Hill is called "Silent" Hill in the first place? If you think along the lines of language being an ineffective medium in the expression of "truth", *cha-ching*! You're right!)

In this light, I cannot understand why so many people had a problem with the pacing of the movie because in the first place, such apparent "meandering" is necessary to the entire film. And why not? The inability for any one character to get to the heart of the problem is prevalent during the entire narrative framework of the film *No one* character dared to talk about it and those who sought the truth are met with an air of secrecy. The "truth" therefore, is oppressed by a *complete breakdown of words* and all that is left is to "show" and let the people "experience" what had happened themselves. (Such is the path that Rose must take because she "chose" to seek out the truth surrounding her daughter's psychological problem and since language fails in Silent Hill can the "truth" cannot be communicated through "words" it must be "shown".)

The same rule applies to Christopher. He tried to uncover the "truth" but was thwarted by people who are reluctant to talk about the town. Everyone who had prior knowledge of the town was unable or unwilling to describe what happened because they 1) are suppressing their guilt 2) are afraid of opening up a can of worms that is best left forgotten. Even Rose and Cybil are faced with a group of people who were so adamant into seeing things in their point of view that they have "blinded" themselves to the atrocity of what has taken place in Silent Hill. (Notice how most of the monsters i.e. Nurses, Pyramid Head, Janitor, are in a state of blindness? Coincidence? I think not.)

And still at the heart of all THAT, a child's horrifying story is desperately waiting to be told. The meanderings are not meant to be a flaw in the plot, in my opinion, but an attempt to show how the outside world tried to suppress and confine the deepest desire of a little girl - the desire for "truth" to be known. Therefore the "truth" cannot be "told" because words will ultimately fail in Silent Hill. It must be "shown". That was why Rose had to go through all the various stages of her journey to seek out the "truth". That was why it was crucial the narrative had to be mapped out thus and it reached its summit in the dramatic finale where the fanatics were reluctant to accept the "spoken truth" but was forced to accept it nevertheless through a physical manifestation of "truth" - the manifestation of their past deeds.

Hence in my opinion, this film isn't about monsters, busty characters, bloodshed, storyline or whatever it is that one normally looks out for in a film of this genre. This film is about a little girl's story that is struggling to surface in a world dominated by a viciousness she could not comprehend but fall victim to nevertheless. Think about it. To be thoroughly abused in a world that you never fit in and cannot comprehend. And later to want to seek vengeance for the wrongs that had been done to you but are unable to articulate it into words because there is no one out there who understands or listens to you. The intense hatred due to the complete lack of control that one is forced into, the desire to achieve "satisfaction" at any cost and the obsession with "vengence" - now that's a scary thought for a little girl of 10 to have, wouldn't you say?

So was it good? Heck yeah. And I'm going for another round of this when my next paycheque comes in.

I'm a huge fan of movies depicting strong women. Not just any kind of strong women, mind you, but the kind who is unafraid to stand up for themselves and for others who would not or could not do the same.

This movie is inspirational for that alone. The strength of character Charlize incorporated into every scene was completely astounding. The storyline itself is moving. While I have certain issues with the way it ends, I think it does little to tarnish this spectacular piece of work.

Also, Sean Bean has an American accent in this one. It's odd to hear him speaking the way he does, but our Sheffield boy pulled it off rather well - as usual.

My favourite quote by Kyle/Bean? "It's a big one" Oh yeah, baby. :)

This was surprisingly good. I'm not that much a fan of the Romance genre, if truth be told, but I'll make an exception for this one. The film is carefully crafted. Every emotion, every dialogue enhanced the overall tone of the film, slowly but surely escalating in its momentum up to its tragic climax.

Sophie Marceau was brilliant. As was Sean Bean. I wasn't quite sure if they would be able to possess the kind of chemistry needed to pull this off, if truth be told, considering how they (in my opinion) seem to be of different temperament artistically (Sophie being more sensitive as seen in Braveheart and Marquis, while Bean is more explosive). Nevertheless, it worked out fine although, ironically, their relationship seem to be more believable whenever they fell out of odds with each other. :)

I didn't have high expectations when I watched the movie on the DVD recently. Cars. Women. Sex. Drugs. Biological Warfare. We've heard them all and they have manifested in one way or another in all those typical (and mediocre) James Bond films.

Vin Diesel was a disappointment. True, he may have done all of the stunts himself, but it takes more than a nerve of steel to impress me. You would, of course, need real acting talent which Mr. Diesel sadly lacks in. It is a shame. With that body and shiny head, it should have taken my attention away from his severe lack in acting capability. It should have. But it didn't.

Marton Csokas on the other hand, is the saving grace of this otherwise terrible film. A buff body and a handsome face does not an actor make (Mr. Diesel, are you listening?) but in Csokas's case he's got it all, making a convincing and three dimensional portrayal of Yorgi, the villain we all love to hate... and he certainly adds to the "yum" factor to the movie as well.

In conclusion, watch the movie. But don't expect too much from it. If like me, you wonder what the heck you were doing watching something like this, just look out for Yorgi/Marton and all will be well I promise.

PS: Speaking of which, why wasn't he featured in the DVD???