I noticed in your analysis you say there are many things that indirectly degrade women. I both agree and disagree. Yes the main antagonists causing problems are women but then again the heroic protagonists that are determined to make the wrong things right are also women. In this way women are portrayed in full circle. Some are good. Some are evil. None are perfect. Rose and Cybil were not to blame for anything really. One was merely concerned for her daughter and through bringing Sharon to Silent Hill Alessa was able to find peace and get her revenge. Cybil tagged along out of concern for both Rose and Sharon. She was not at fault for any wrong doings in the movie at all and yet Gans chose to make her a matyr. Personally I did not think the scene had to be so dang graphic though.

If anything I felt as if the movie was more chauvanist versus men. The husband of Rose is oblivous and merely stumbles around. Pyramid head is likely the coolest male lead and yet when you think about it despite the scary head gear and sword he has a glistening well toned physique. He’s there for both the violence appeal and sex appeal making him more or less a homicidal Chip N Dale dancer. In SH 2 he has meaning and represents Jame’s sexaul frustration and desire to punish himself for killing his wife. Yet in the SH movie Pyramid head is just tantalizing eye candy. Poor guy might as well be a man whore. He’s there to jack up the ratings and sate the fans, nothing more.

On top of all that “Harry” is turned into a woman as Gans gives a weak hypothesis that fathers cannot bond as deep with their children as mothers can. That very statement lights up with sexism against men in my opinion.

The movie has some how made everyone forget that the town was not abandoned and was not covered in ash. This movie, in my opinion, is the biggest example of why movies shouldn’t me made from a game. At least not by someone who isn’t a true fan of the game and have at least done their full research. At least Silent Hill 5 is still under Konami’s supervision and will be perfectly “true to the basics”. Also I’d like to add that 4 was not originally supposed to be a silent hill game but at the last minute they decided to make it so and changed some of the story, brought in some old fav creatures, and added parts to tie into the town. I still think it was a great addition even tho it was not actually in silent hill. The feel and style was still true to the game.

But I say you you, those who disagree with the writer:it doesn’t really matter if you agree with her or not. Her conclusions are her own…many people who are not femenists will watch this movie and have their own conclusions, and many people that are will want this movie and have their own conclusions…conclusions that might not match Andrea’s.

But in the end, that’s not the important part. Andrea’s post ends with an important point:the biggest problem is not talking about these things indigenous in culture and pop culture. To shine a light about them. To talk about the things that trouble people, instead of ignoring them, or saying they aren’t important. The feelings and thoughts of all rational and reasonable people have value, and should be heard, and talked about.

I’ve been recently reading a lot of different femenist writings. I don’t agree with all of them, but the important thing is that I’m learning how other people see things, how they see things I don’t. And I’m talking with people about these things I learn, and striving, through learning and talking, to be a better person.

There is no one right answer. But an answer that one comes to without thinking and talking and more thinking is likely only one that prepetuates the problem. And there *is* a problem in our culture.

It’s important to say that out loud.

“The knowledge that women are the ones who screwed up is mitigated by the fact that the women are the only ones who hold the power on both sides of this conflict. The men are bystanders, henchmen, side-characters, love interests, and exposition vehicles. Analyzing this story inside the setting and according to the rules of the setting I don’t see it as damaging to women. Its not a slasher flick, a horrible graphic death is not a punishment for character traits but the unfortunate lot of anyone who gets trapped in the “mists” level of reality in Silent Hill.”

Your review seems focused on the women being the main characters and portrayed poorly. I disagree and point out the cop as the “role-model” woman protagonist that set an example of what a “good mother” should have been like. Sure her death was gruesome, and I didn’t want her to die, but that’s sort of the point of the genre of movie this was, and anyone should have known that when electing to see it. If we felt nothing for the character, it wouldn’t have mattered if she lived or died (similar to the girl who got her skinned ripped off).

Oh, and when iw atched this film, it didn’t matter to me that all the main characters were female or not. I didn’t really notice. I think you focus too much on gender in your analysis.

Also, I agree that they were already dead. And her choice on helping the child’s darkside was one where you didn’t know what the right choice was. That was great. Her reasons were “satisfaction and revenge” and she got just that. If she had returned happily with her husband, then it wouldn’t make sence. Instead it feels like she was left in limbo, possibly choosing the wrong choice.

Men were never persecuted as witches

Actually, this is false. While in most of Europe and the USA women were persecuted more, in Iceland men were. The form of killing was, I believe, hanging. Men were also persecuted in other places, but it is true that outside of Iceland women bore the brunt of the abuse, and it is undeniable that both the persecution of women as witches and their death via fire are the common mythological images people still hold to, even though the historical events were often quite different. I personally think including men in a “persecute the witches” trope, as well as including non-standard imagery associate with such, would add a lot.

I hope this won’t be seen as derailing.

“If it was one thing that this movie sent home, it was that all the bad things that happened in Silent Hill were the fault of women.”

What’s your point? The majority of the characters in Silent Hill were female. The fact that all the bad stuff was the fault of women was purely incidental as far as I’m concerned; a side effect of having so many female characters. I might be inclined to agree if all the villainous roles were filled by women, but we have Cybil and Rose, neither of whom are really “spotless” but are still good, well-rounded characters. Besides, spotless characters run the risk of being superficial, two-dimensional or even Mary-Sue-like, and that’s far more damaging from a feminist outlook. Women aren’t perfect, and they shouldn’t be portrayed as perfect to suit a feminist agenda.

Your argument concerning the witchcraft theme confused me somewhat. You’re saying that because witchcraft was a fundamental theme, all of the female characters are now suddenly merely stock characters whose only purpose is to die as witches? Come on. In a cult obsessed with burning “witches”, of course gender is going to play an important part. That’s not misogynistic, that’s realistic. Men were never persecuted as witches — to change this in the interest of avoiding gender as a pivotal issue would be historically inaccurate and just plain wrong.

I also feel it’s a bit of a stretch to say that Cybil is motherly or maternal. Yes, the motherhood theme is fairly obvious, but to put all of the characters under an umbrella of “mother” seems wrong. I honestly couldn’t think of a woman less maternal than Cybil — rescuing a boy who had been chucked down a mine shaft doesn’t make her a mother, it makes her human. In saying that he wanted to portray good and bad mothers in his film, I don’t think Gans meant for us to slot ALL of the female characters into those categories.

Coming back to the theme of motherhood, I couldn’t agree more on the Harry/Rose point. I don’t like this idea that mothers bond more strongly with their children. I find it to be incorrect and offensive. But I’m willing to forgive Gans for it, since I don’t get that impression from the characters; Rose wasn’t written exclusively as a mother. Her adopted daughter might have been the reason she went to Silent Hill to begin with, but she’s far from a two-dimensional wife-and-mother character and for that I applaud Gans. Bottom line, a filmmaker refreshingly succeeds in presenting characters that are female, rather than female characters. I believe in the feminist movement and have ideals that are grounded in feminism, but I also believe in picking my battles and it is for that reason I don’t view everything through a feminist lens. But that’s just me.