Matt Damon’s contention than in the brand-new cinematic world dominated by Netflix you have to repeat the plot four or five times would have come in exceedingly handy here where storyline and characters are so diffuse a wisp of smoke contains more substance. I saw this on a double-bill with Mercy (2026) so now can claim to have watched the direst double-bill of my movie-watching life, a pair of movies that are so bad they have not the slightest chance of redemption via falling into the So-Bad-It’s-Good category.
I am certainly cautious by now whenever I see a director proclaimed as “visionary” especially as about the only original element of this picture is the title, which has discarded the normal sequel numbered designation (ie. Silent Hill 2 or Silent Hill II depending on your pomposity) in favor of “Return to” which hasn’t been used for decades since Return to Oz (1985) and Return to the Blue Lagoon (1991), neither of them raising expectation that using the “Return to” notion would augur well.
I should perhaps point out that this sequel claims not to be an actual sequel but a “Hillverse” option, taking place in the world of the original Silent Hill (2006) and its sequel Silent Hill: Revelation (2012). And the new movie owes a great deal to the video games developed by Konami, which turns out not be a person but a company. Bear in mind that the game was described as a “survival scenario” wherein the hero has to survive all sorts of monsters without, I would guess, being armed with the kind of weaponry that makes survival a tad easier for video game characters.
So, onto the mess. I’ll try and unravel it for you but mostly the plot is incomprehensible. Alcoholic mentally-ill artist James Sunderland (Jeremy Irvine) is separated from his wife Mary whom he met in a town called Silent Hill. Years later after receiving a letter from Mary he returns to the town to discover it’s covered in fog and ash. (The ash, I did note, was about the only decent visual in the picture).
The town is empty, inhabited only by strange skeletal armless creatures and moths of all shapes and sizes including gigantic. These moths, I should add, are pretty dumb. Shut the door on them and they stay out, apparently incapable of crawling through the myriad tiny spaces in any building which are invisible to the human eye but which (as we all know) seem to pose to no barrier to insects.
James turns detective and discovers his wife was part of a cult and recalls that the couple split after she was forced by her father to take part in a ritual. Then it turns out his wife is actually dead and it’s all in his mind that she’s still alive.
This is all just a nightmare, and not just for James, I should add, but for the audience. Flinging all sorts of monsters and strange visuals at an audience isn’t going to keep them entranced. Anybody who can remotely be able to run down a long burning passage indicates to an audience that this can’t possibly be real, especially as the flames are not accompanied by smoke.
So our mentally ill hero has not just revived his wife but made up the various other female characters that appear including a giant moth version of Mary. Luckily, the nightmare triggers further memory and James remembers that, in fact, he killed his wife in some kind of mercy killing because she was so ill after being drugged by the cult. Luckily, too, moth Mary appears so James can apologize for killing her. So it all ends well. He’s not a murderer or mercy killer after all.
There’s a Sliding Doors twist at the end which is as barmy as the rest of the movie.
Director Christophe Gans (Beauty and the Beast, 2014) is mostly to blame.
I know we’ve a long way to go into the 2026 cinematic year, but, goodness, what an awful way to start it off, two prime duds, one of which has been given the full marketing treatment, though admittedly Return to Silent Hill kind of sneaked out.
Just plain awful.
The Magnificent 60s 