Search Results

I dare hope that Vincent will remain just as ambiguous as in the game : in the nurses scene Heather obviously doesn' t trust him much. The thing is, in the games when we meet a character he just throws a few cryptic one-liners then goes away. The rest of the plot is conveyed through files and memos. I don' t know about you but I don' t think "Files and memos : the movie" is something I' d like to watch.

As for PH I can' t help wondering why those who bitch about it seem to have a blind spot for the other whored-out/out of place monsters. Nurses anyone ? They' d win the whored-out monster award hands down. The first movie had monsters from SH2 (not just PH), apparently so does this movie (the Lying Figure, the Scarlet-manequin-thingy), so seriously, why does PH get all the hate ? This PH is Alessa' s perception of PH, just like she has her own nurses version (those don' t burp, that' s a plus). And btw, Axis, Hayabusa, I' m curious, from a plot perspective did you like Shattered Memories and all the departures it took from the original ?

To illustrate what I said before :

[video=youtube;UMyp6fRRwr0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMyp6fRRwr0&feature=player_embedded[/video]

"And, well here it is… almost. The day the first official trailer for Silent Hill 2 is going to be released. It’s been a long time coming and I know a lot of you feel there should have been material out there months ago. But this is how Open Road have chosen to run their marketing and I respect that. I’ve only just seen a finished version myself and I’m really excited to finally get something out there for you all to dissect and analyse. And I’m not under any illusions as to how forensic you’re all going to be. But just to warn you now – I’m not going to be answering any questions about the content or story points; you’ll have to see the finished film for how it all slots together.

The whole trailer creation process has been very interesting to me; and, in truth, I’ve only been peripherally involved. Of course, I’m sent works in progress so I’m not completely in the dark about what’s coming down the pike and I’ve offered a few thoughts and ideas along the way. Sometimes they use them, sometimes they don’t. What’s been really educational is how the trailer is tested and refined to focus on engaging audiences who really don’t know much about Silent Hill at all. Things that I thought worked fine, didn’t go down too well and elements I didn’t much care for really helped overall understanding or engagement. It’s maybe not the way I’d do it but I’m fascinated by this part of the process. And then there are the MPAA rules for a green-band trailer which are just amazingly strict. I understood that we couldn’t show anything very strong here because the trailer is supposed to be for all audiences but they’re really cautious even with the most (in my opinion) inoffensive imagery. Anything aggressive, threatening, scary or just plain freaky is looked at very closely and the poor folks at Open Road have to negotiate for every moment. It’s a truly laborious process and I’m amazed anything worthwhile gets through. In the next few weeks there’ll be an international trailer made which I don’t think will stick to the MPAA rule"

Source : http://michaeljbassett.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/27th-july-update-trailer-day/

Personally I don' t expect to be scared anyway : I need to be thrown into the horror myself, as a player, and avoid a game over screen, otherwise I' m just an unconcerned spectator.

Lol, draw me like one of your French cows. ^^
A few people try to conceal hemp or funny mushrooms in random fields, maybe those cows just found something they weren' t supposed to.

...
Did you just realize this movie was a direct sequel to the first one ? The movies don' t share the game canon, and the first one established PH as a central piece in Sharon' s ... err ... delusion. Besides, in SH2 PH was indeed James' own manifestation but ... when I dream of birds they are my own manifestation, but that doesn' t make every bird in the world, real or dreamed, my own manifestation. There are clues in the series that point out to the possibility that neither Maria nor PH were invented from scratch by James, they may very well be an alternate version of persons/paintings he saw in the past.

Personally I was fine with Gans' explanation of what PH represents in his movie (Sharon' s perception of masculinity), so I' m not surprised to see him again in this movie nor to see Vincent turned into a potential love interest. However I' m a little confused to see PH acting like Valtiel in this trailer. I sense a "Valtiel is actually a helmet-less PH" reveal scene coming.

I think MJB explained that the producers aimed all the marketing campaign at Mr. average guy : they assume the fans who liked the first film are already sold on this one (they' re probably right) so they' d rather try to sell it as the 2012 Halloween 3D horror movie to, you know, non-nerds. Here' s hopping the movie isn' t as "in your face" as its marketing make it out to be, I' d like it to be a little subtle.

Unless you first prove that your religion is legit you might as well quote the terminator.

There' s been overwhelming evidence that the Earth is round, most of it invalidating the flat Earth hypothesis, so right now round Earth is the "official" theory. If his stance is to deny their validity then he' s basically advocating a massive, international hoax, flawlessly and systematically executed over several centuries. Needless to say this strikes me as hard to swallow, which brings Russell's teapot to mind.

Basically you don' t have to prove him that the Earth is round, the burden of proof lies on him. Him asking you to prove that Earth is round is the same as him asking you to prove that you didn' t kill the Batman yesterday. Would you even bother defending yourself against such an absurd claim ? I suppose not. Well you don' t need to answer his flat Earth claim either, he' s the one supposed to build his case. I mean, if he' s so sure that he could build a better case for the flat Earth hypothesis then how come the scientific community isn' t bowing at him in awe right now, making it the new accepted theory ? Let me guess, they' re all part of the Round Earth Millenarian Conspiracy or something ...

So far this year I spent all my summer weekends at my family' s country house, it' s a one hour drive away from the city I live in.
Yup, life is hard.

Spoiler

Since you guys seem to love animals here' s my sister' s dog and a few of her local pals :

Spoiler

Same here, I skip a lot of those posts too. I commented about it in the style survey.

I barely called anyone on it, after all it' s their choice, not mine. On the other hand maybe those who use those tiny fonts and funky colors don' t necessarily realize that they' re highly impractical for some users ? It' s a good idea to say it out loud, just in case they didn' t realize it. As far as I' m concerned what they make of it is up to them.

That' s funny, here in France what' s considered "right" is prison, and a "humane" execution (if there is such a thing) is what would arguably feel good.

^ This, so much. You chose a crappy font color but what you say makes up for it.

How do you assess which is which ? Because, as for any guilt claim, the burden of proof is on you.

You were baned.

Well sure, but the minute you claim to have witnessed a ghost or a god those things cease to be metaphysical : if they can interact with reality in measurable ways then their existence is very much testable. In my experience when people speak about ghosts, gods and whatnot they rarely have purely metaphysical concepts in mind.

I might or might not agree with that depending on your definition of faith/atheism. To me faith is the excuse people give when they can' t back up their beliefs/behavior logically, so someone who absolutely denies gods/ghosts/whatever' s existence without backing up his claim (a hard atheist) would indeed be appealing to faith.

My own atheism stems from a practical approach rather than faith : things that are defined as metaphysical-transcendental-whatever are untestable, so I have absolutely no way to tell them apart from things that just don' t exist. Now here are my three options :

- Treat them both the same way until they can be backed up by evidence (reject both, do not let them have any influence on my decision making process).

- Believe them all until they are proven to be false. That includes the claim that you' re actually the care bear made of jelly who killed my dragon two centuries ago, which is but a drop in an infinite sea of unbacked/moronic claims. It is an impractical choice since it is the one that would lead me to believe in an infinity of false things, which would severely impede my decision making process.

- Cherry-pick which claims I do or don' t want to believe in, which is inconsistent and would make my decision making process just as inconsistent. I can think of a few motives for a person to do that anyway, but personally I can' t think of a good one and don' t see the appeal.

Well, MJ basset also wrote :

MJ Basset said there' d be some news at comic con, which as I understand it began today :

Source : http://michaeljbassett.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/comic-con-schedule/

Edit : oh, here it is :

[video=youtube;Zh9LaO4aDyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh9LaO4aDyo[/video]

The burden of proof lies on anyone making an extraordinary claim, sure (and the more extraordinary his claim is the more extraordinary his proofs need to be), however an absence of proof isn' t proof that the claim is wrong. Logically an absence of proof should lead you to reject a claim, not to refute it. It' s like in a tribunal : if there isn' t any proof that the accused is guilty then the jury' s position will be "not guilty", not "innocent".