I don't really see how they could continue the same storyline, considering the fact that (SPOILER)everybody died in Saw 4.
I don't really see how they could continue the same storyline, considering the fact that (SPOILER)everybody died in Saw 4.
I know that it's not exactly the newest thing to hit the horror/psychological thriller genre, but Saw presented some of the older ideas about that genre in a new light. Plus, as I said, it brought the idea of gore to a whole new level. Except it wasn't pointless. At least in the first film it wasn't. In Saw, all the violence and gore that was witnessed directly added to the storyline and the development of the characters, whereas in previous gory films, it might have been just for the sake of being gory. Sure there was some necessary gore, but Saw was one of the few films I have seen where pretty much all of the gore was directly related to the plot. Because everything that they had to do to themselves was a perfect irony of what they've done either to themselves or other people in the past. It was poetic in that sense, and added an edge to the film that I definitely liked.Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
The intelligence of what? 'Cause I think a small colony of tapeworms could come up with something smarter than Saw.
Nutcases going out teaching people "justice" or to appreciate life or whatever is not new. Neither is it big, clever, or valid.
Well put, Aralith.
I do think the Saw movies are smart, if you look past the gore. There's not really much gore either imo. I for one did not see the ending of Saw 1 and Saw 2 coming. Very clever thought out, and I do like my horrors clever.
Not gonna defend Saw 3, though. Too much focus on gore and not a very good ending.
I could have weaved a less trite tale when I was 11 years old. In fact I'm fairly sure I did.
Random acts of horrendously violent vigilantism are still not clever, original, or valid. Jigsaw is a childish and petty person (people), pretty much the same as Paul in the first movie, except you know, Paul wasn't a murdering lunatic.
The fear of some lunatic who will "punish" me for some imagined or petty transgression is not a difficult thing to elicit. Therefore I cannot see anything of note in doing as much; no matter how much you may read into the gore all I see is a teenage masturbatory exercise in being as unpleasant as possible, which had a plot added for the purpose of trying to hide this.
You're right, random horrendously violent vigilantism is not clever, but I didn't see any of that in Saw, though. Seriously, what's the worst gore in Saw 1? We don't see Gordon Sawing off his foot, we don't see the guy in the dark cellar die, and when there's gore in a scene most we see is blur, and fast clips. The goriest thing I saw in Saw 1 was Amanda holding some intestines, and if that's too much then CSI is too much. But yeah, if you're referring to stuff that happened that we didn't see, then I would say Saw 1 is still a piece of cake compared to many action/thriller/horror movies made in modern age. Blood Diamonds, to pick one out of the blue.
I agree Jigsaw is a childish and petty person, that's really a part of the movies. If he wasn't, then there would be no Saw.
However, the gore is not what I like about Saw. I'd like it more if it had less gore. Some stuff is just better left out in the movie. I actually like Saw 1 and 2 for the same reason I like Lost. It's clever. I found the part where we find out Zep was not the murderer but yet another victim to be a very clever part, I did not see it coming, and very few people did. and then the guy on the floor coming back to life. Or the ending of Saw 2 where Daniel was locked up in the safe all along, and all the monitors being tapes and not live. Jiggy told Matthews his son would turn up in a safe place if he would just be patient. He gave a big clue, without making it obvious. Clever, imo. If you wrote something like this at the age of 11 I'd buy it, honey. :mog:
I could see your point if you were talking about Saw 3, though.
eeew !
after that brain surgery in the 3rd part I have a doubt that I would not continue watching the coming 4th & 5th ones.
I loved Saw II
I hate Saw III
PS3 owner, but not played RPG yet (teh) :sweatdrop
Yeah, ugh. That was so unnecessary. I did not need to see that.
Rocky XXXVIII wasn'tRocky Balboa was awesome, go die in a ditch
there was a picture here
Jigsaw's Dead, End of series for me
Have you missed my entire point? The violence and gore was not random, but rather well thought out and purposely executed in an excercise in irony. An irony which I thought was performed intelligently, poetically, and nearly perfectly.
Petty? Um... last I checked, trying to slit one's own wrists (whether for attention or with the intent of suicide) is not petty. Now, it is rather petty for someone to think that they are above all this and try to teach them lessons through gore and violence. Yes, that is petty, and I'm not denying it. Jigsaw was a petty person, but... that was kind of what he was supposed to be. He thought that just because he had cancer and had lived throught trying to commit suicide that he was somehow superior to all these people. It was one of his many flaws.The fear of some lunatic who will "punish" me for some imagined or petty transgression is not a difficult thing to elicit.
It's what made him such a great character. As much as he knew that his actions would hurt and kill people, he really believed that he was doing it for a good cause. It made him a very believable villain, because he didn't think that what he was doing was evil, which is what evil people in real life think (Hitler comes to mind). This made Jigsaw a much more real person to me, making him someone that I cared about. And, as I mentioned before, the minute that I care about a character (whether that care manifests in fondness or hatred) I can get drawn into what their doing and why they're doing it and believe it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
