|
Directed by: James Wan Starring: Cary Elwes, Danny Glover, Monica Potter Definitely the most hosed-up film I've ever seen. I can't go on with the cliché and say that I've seen a lot of hosed-up films but let's just say that it shook up most of the audience that I saw it with and that my legs are still sort of shaking (I'm a wuss okay?). Also, if you didn't know, this movie was originally NC-17 before it got bumped down to an R rating. Basically, the movie is about two men (Elwes, Leigh Whannell) who wake up in a large room, both are on opposite sides and chained to a pipe. As we learn, a serial killer of sorts named the Jigsaw killer has put them there. The killer gives Dr. Gordon (Elwes) a choice. Either the doctor finds a way to kill Adam (Whannell) before 6:00 or else the doctor's family (who is tied up back home) will be killed. Along the way, two detectives (Glover, Ken Leung) try to capture the killer. Saying anything else will probably be considered spoilers. Most of the movie is just the two men trying to recollect what had happened to get them there. As the movie progresses through, more secrets and plot twists are unveiled. This technique isn't really anything new but the originality of the storyline/premise itself is twisted enough that it overcomes the lack of originality in the way it is told. The only truly negative aspect I can think of is the acting. So atrocious. It actually manages to ruin a few key moments. HIRE SOME BETTER ACTORS, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE. I can't think of a movie that has shaken me up this much since Requiem for a Dream. At least for that movie, it was fairly predictable but I never knew what to expect for this. Obviously, this movie is NOT good for first-dates (the reason I'm saying this is that I saw it with a friend of mine who was going out on her first date with another guy...not a good idea; in fact, not a good date movie at all unless your significant other likes this kind of film) or for people who aren't used to blood and such, etc. Enough of the warnings. You get the point. RATING: 4.5 PROS: The storyline and the premise, the blood and gore (if you're the type that likes it) CONS: The acting, the blood and gore (if you normally can't handle these bloodfests), the inconsistencies in the story ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387564/ Squall91 fucked around with this message at Oct 2, 2004 around 16:47 |
| # ? Sep 25, 2004 09:03 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 20:30 |
|
|
quote:Definitely the most hosed-up film I've ever seen. It's made it into my top 5, thats for sure!
|
| # ? Oct 1, 2004 22:32 |
|
|
I went to see it last night and was amazed. This has to be one of the best films I've ever seen and I would reccomend anybody who likes horror with some twists in it to go now! 5
|
| # ? Oct 2, 2004 14:56 |
|
|
Amazing movie, it really did scare me but I am easily scared 4.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 2, 2004 17:39 |
|
|
I thought this movie was terrible. The acting was horrific, I thought you were supposed to care about these characters? The plot twists were predictable and ultimately anticlimatic. The film came off as a badly edited combination of Cube and Se7en but at the same time never surpassing either. Is Danny Glover really hard up for cash nowadays? His performance could have been done by anyone. The antagonist in the movie looked like the Emperor from Star Wars at one point which was quite amusing. I did quite like the scream over the end credits but everything else about this movie sucked. My advice: do not saw this. 1/5
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2004 01:32 |
|
|
Just back from this film, loved it. I loved the ingenious methods the antagonist used to perplex his victims especially that one with the chick in that funky head gear. The movie did make jump, which is generally quite a difficult thing for a film to make me do. Some of the acting was under-par though, especially from the doctor. Asides from that it was a good film with a valid message. 4/5
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2004 21:47 |
|
|
My review from Sundance in 2004. =============== SAW Directed by: James Wan Starring: Cary Elwes, Leigh Wannell, Danny Glover Rating: 5/5 What could make you prove your desire to live more than someone requiring that you kill in order to survive? Many people trudge through life, never taking the time to appreciate the blessings and the opportunity to grow and learn and love and just be alive. However, the apathy with which the minutes tick by is quickly torn down when the possibility of death manifests itself right in front of you. As in "SAW", people are given the opportunity to survive by fighting and possibly killing for the opportunity to return to their own lives. No million dollar rewards, no grand prize, nothing more than a quick return to the life already yours. What would you give to simply not die when giving nothing would certainly kill you? Adam (Leigh Wannell) suddenly regains consciousness in a murky bathtub in a pitch black industrial shower room, flopping out of the tub to discover he is chained to a large set of pipes in the corner of the room. Across the room is Dr. Gordon (Cary Elwes) who is also chained to a pipe. In the center of the room is the body of a man whose shot himself in the head with the gun in one hand, and is holding a voice recorder in the other hand. Both men find tapes for the recorder on their person, and Adam manages to retrieve the voice recorder with his shirt. The game is simple: Adam must escape the room with his life, and he will live. Dr. Gordon, however, must kill Adam by 6:00am, 8 hours from now, if he wishes his wife and daughter to live, as well as himself. The two men begin working with relatively no clues to figure out the game they are a part of, and following the clues, Adam finds a pair of hacksaws in a black garbage bag. The solution to their problem becomes apparent: the chains are too thick to cut through with the hacksaws, the person who's put them there means for them to cut through their own legs. Dr. Gordon has the first suspicion of who is playing this dangerous game with them. He was interrogated in relation to a serial killer the police and media nicknamed "the jigsaw killer," due to the fact that he cuts a jigsaw piece of flesh from all his victims. The other victims, he placed in similarly deadly situations with the instructions on how to escape, testing their resolve to survive. Of the several deaths so far, only one person survived: a woman who was forced to cut through a man's stomach and find a key to a headgear that gave her 60 seconds to unlock it before a mechanism would tear her mouth apart "like a reverse bear trap." Through a tangled web of connection, Dr. Gordon discovers that Adam was not randomly selected to accompany Dr. Gordon in the shower room. Adam admits that he has seen Dr. Gordon before, in that he was being paid to follow Dr. Gordon and take pictures of his daily routines. Also playing in, police officer Tapp (Danny Glover) lost his partner recently to the jigsaw killer, and has ever since dwelled on Dr. Gordon's involvement, going so far as to observe the doctor's house. The closer they come to answers, the more confused they get until Dr. Gordon's dedication to his family pushes him to the limit. However, nothing is as it seems, and questions that nobody asked become the epicenter of the final moments of the film. James Wan has crafted an intelligent and suspenseful film for his freshman offering. More graphic and visionary than many other suspense thrillers with a twist, "SAW" calls into question the limits of the living by putting people to the test. Nearly all angles are addressed by the jigsaw killer, leaving the audience to ask "What If?" along with Dr. Gordon and Adam. The security of our lives often goes unquestioned, and many believe that thinking otherwise is morbid. However, the jigsaw killer has every intention of seeing his game played completely through, in his own sick way inspiring the walking dead to wake up and live once again. Of course, the most frightening aspect of the story isn't that the terror is hidden, contrived or escapable. The terror lies in the fact that, on the very surface of the struggle to survive the jigsaw killer's game, everything truly is what it seems. 5/5
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2004 16:42 |
|
|
I went to the cinema to watch this evening, and came back thinking if was definately one of the best films of the last few years. I went in expecting it to be the usual run of the mill 'find a killer' thriller affair, but was very suprised when it turned out to be totally hosed up and so much better than I was anticipating. SEE SAW LOL 4.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 7, 2004 00:02 |
|
|
Just got back from watching this tonight. Personally, I thought it pissed on Se7en, and has the added advantage of not having a retarded numeral in the title. It basically boils down to an anthology of horror vignettes, linked by a framing tale. Set piece scenes, like the photographer in his apartment in the dark, the various murders and so forth, are all filmed with real aplomb. Yes, some of the acting is woeful - the cinema was full of giggling when the doctor gets all over-earnest at the end, and Danny Glover was his usual plodding self - but not to an extent that ruins the film. It reminded me more of recent Japanese horror output (Ringu, Audition, The Eye) than typical Hollywood. In fact, ignoring the obvious influence of Se7en the Hollywood film it most brought to mind was Panic Room for some reason. (Well, Panic Room -> bathroom, it's not a huge flight of imagination I suppose.) One thing I didn't really understand was why the Hell the killer liked to leave bits of jigsaws on people. All the way through I was expecting that to be expanded on in some way. Oh well. That aside, voted a resounding 5.
|
| # ? Oct 9, 2004 00:02 |
|
|
Everyone is going to compare this movie to Seven. They're both about serial killers teaching people lessons. All the murders occur as their own little events. The aethetics of the two movies are very similiar. Both are dirty. Almost every scene takes place in some nasty basement or low-rent apartment. Despite this, Saw comes off as an amateur's "cover" of Seven. As already noted, the acting is pretty bad in some spots. Connection with the characters leaves a lot to be desired. The whole idea is that these people don't appreciate the lives they have. The Jigsaw killer puts them into situations where they're forced to save their own lives by escaping the traps he sets for them. The killer's motive is pretty thin. They do explain why he's doing this, it just doesn't feel very legitimate. Why does he care how they feel about life? In Seven, the killer was trying to send a message to society, not the victims. It is never really revealed why Saw's psychopath is so murderously concerned with these specific people. It seems like there might have been more footage they cut out to save time which might have helped root the plot more effectively. The cinematography, overall, was pretty good. There was some interesting camera work and transitions between scenes. A bit of the Jacob's Ladder shakey-vision shows up briefly and the female survivor's zoom around the chair 10 times shot were both rather annoying, but that's personal preference. Saw is still a good movie. The suspense is very solid and the story is probably more tricky than you realize as you're watching it. I would reccomend seeing this. 3/5 DefMech fucked around with this message at Oct 18, 2004 around 20:30 |
| # ? Oct 10, 2004 00:08 |
|
|
This movie wants to be the sequel to Se7en so bad, it could almost call itself 8ight. This movie has absolutely terrible acting from it's two leads. This movie uses some very contrived and some very arbitrary excuses to move the (occasionally spotty) plot along. That's the bad news. But despite all this, it's a good movie. It succeeds in what it sets out to do. gently caress you up. The basic premise is sick, some of the ideas the writers came up with are horrifying, the visuals are spot on, the movie wrenches your gut around more than it does your mind, at least for the first half, where the aim of the game seems more to be about building up just how weird the "killer" is. The second half is more about the main characters, how they came to be in their current situation, and what to do about it. A lot of this is told in flashbacks and recollection, but for the most part, chronology isn't an issue, it doesn't dick around trying to confuse you. For a movie that wants to gently caress with you, they get extra marks for not taking that cheap route. But what's it all about? Well, if you want a movie that's heavy on explanation, spelling out every little plot point that comes along, then you'll probably want to skip this, it throws quite a few curveballs completely out of nowhere. The ending somewhat ties up the story, but leaves the greater picture completely untouched, and answers none of your biggest questions. While the end result isn't as bad as a movie like Bonecollector, it's still easy to figure who the killer is before even the half-way point. It's the old "shine a spotlight on a pointless bit-character for a few seconds because he's going to be real important later on" routine! Well... in a way. The movie has plenty of surprises up it's sleeve. (spoilers discuss the nature of the ending, but not the content) So on the whole, it's a great movie. Sometimes genuinely shocking, with a few wild twists that not even Mistress Cleo could see coming, the movie is engrossing right through to the end credits, and for my money, the best of it's kind since Seven. And I like that. 4.5/5 Scar Trek fucked around with this message at Oct 11, 2004 around 01:23 |
| # ? Oct 10, 2004 16:31 |
|
|
I don't think that Saw is trying to be like Se7en, as much as it is trying to outshine Se7en. Unfortunately, it fails miserably on both counts. As others have said, the biggest problem with this movie is the acting. Specifically, the over-acting. The problem was not so much with the new/unknown actors as it was with Cary Elwes and Danny Glover. Cary Elwes only seemed to have 3 settings: analytical mode (no emotion what so ever), blind rage, and hysterics. The changes between these emotions were sudden with no build up at all, almost like turning on a switch. Seeing Danny Glover in this movie was just sad. He had, at best, a bit part. He was on the screen for maybe 20-30 minutes. I gotta wonder if he did not do this film as a favor for someone, because I seriously doubt he is getting paid much for this movie. The other problem I had with Saw was the gaping plot holes. I don't want to go into the details on any of them, as they will give away too much plot, but anyone who has seen the movie probably knows what I am referring to. The best thing about this movie was the games that the Jigsaw forced his victims to play. They were unique, effective, and very creative. I just hope that the trailers do not give them all away, as some of them are better left as a surprise. The games are the part of the movie that fucks with your head the most. While there were some good parts to this movie, overall I was disappointed. 2/5 Arakeen fucked around with this message at Oct 10, 2004 around 22:12 |
| # ? Oct 10, 2004 20:45 |
|
|
Despite seeing allot of movies at the cinema, I never really watch the trailers. I'll always turn up 20 minutes late with is about the time of the cycle at my local cinema, so I rarely see what's coming up and what exactly it's about. I tend to avoid all film spoilers and even any general plot information for a film before I go to see it, and I was glad I did this with 'SAW'. I knew it was a horror, and that some guys are chained up. That's it (I actually assumed they are chained together, I was wrong). The film starts in darkness the audience struggling to make out shapes of 'light black' against 'dark black'. Soon after a light comes on, we are just as blinded as the 2 people we see on screen. These two people don't know each other, and are chained to pipes in an old, unkempt bathroom. There is a dead body on the floor, dead from a hole in the head the poor bastard gave himself. The body has a gun in one hand and a small tape recorder in the other. What do you do? The room felt like it was lifted straight of an old Point and Click adventure, and the two men have to work together to find out how to get out of this room. The film uses the situation between the two men to introduce a series of flashbacks, slowly piecing together the tale of a serial killer that puts his victims in dark and challenging situations which they must overcome to survive. As film nerds on here, most of us have seen our fair share of gore. It's easy for most of us to say "Yeah, it's not even that violent, you should see "xxxx" (No, not XXX - I wouldn't wish that on anyone). But, for people just wanted to see a general release horror film it's quite intense. The way some of the flashbacks are filmed really feel like they are putting pressure on the front of your head. With each diabolical situation you sit and cringe, not because of the blood and guts, but because you can't help but think "What the gently caress would do?!?!". 'SAW' is great at making those pillow at the ready moments, half the audience I was with had coats, hats, hoodies all pulled close ready to protect their eyes from the screen. I can't remember seeing an screening so effective, maybe '28 Days Later'. The plot goes through it's semi-predictable twists and turns, sometimes giving you dead ends and sometimes leaving you saying "ahhhhhh". Although unoriginal and cliched at times (Hmmm, what can we use that is scary and anonymous but the audience can start to associate with the killer ?....gently caress YEAH - A CHILD'S PUPPET!). I'm really trying not to recap on what was said above, but the acting is awful. Cary Elwes doesn't come across as the seasoned actor he is and Leigh Whannell is going to have to work loving hard to shake off the dire performance he put in, I certainly would not consider casting him for anything. Comparisons to 'Se7en' can be drawn, but this will happen to any dark serial killer movie. Some loose ends are left hanging, and I hope they don't try and turn it into a sequel - but overall a nice change of pace from what's been at the multiplex recently. 3.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 11, 2004 08:52 |
|
|
This film has both very good aspects yet really quite bad ones. Yes, the acting isn't first-rate - but this is pretty easily overlooked due to the way in which the scenes between the two leads are filmed in quite a clear cut way with an almost comic book style boisterousness. The devices used to advance the plot are rather arbitrary but it didn't distract me from being intriguied by the clear chain of events that the killer had plotted out for his victims. The way in which Saw is filmed allows the audience to experience the torment of the victims and the twisted psyche of the killer very effectively. The mystique of the Jigsaw killer and the imagery thats used in the scenes that show him going about his business is genuinely chilling and adds to some great suspense moments. At the climax of the film I found thad I'd become strangely allured by the killers style and the intricate web that he'd woven for his prey, this was definately intentional on the directors part and a nice touch. The explicit moments don't dissapoint either. Despite its flaws Saw is a awesome experience. Definately unmissable! 4.75
|
| # ? Oct 11, 2004 18:52 |
|
|
A very tense, visceral, surprising, hosed up film that kept me guessing (and cringing at some of the nastier moments) to the end. 4/5
|
| # ? Oct 12, 2004 22:14 |
|
|
While this movie borrowed a lot of cinematography and atmosphere from other recent horror movies, I felt it still stood on it's two feet quite well. I was too engrossed in what was happening to worry about the camera job, really. It's very tense and nerve-wracking. Most of what I would say has already been said previously in this thread, so I'll just say that I was severely disappointed with the ending. Not necessarily the twist, but the ending itself. Still, I've got to give it a solid 4/5 because it's got a great concept and follows through better than most horror films.
|
| # ? Oct 13, 2004 02:33 |
|
|
This movie is what "Seven" would have been if it had been written and performed by middle schoolers. All of the interesting moments relate to the specifics of the Jigsaw Killer's various traps. But once you get beyond the nuts and bolts of those elements, there isn't much left. Unlike "Seven," which used the "gimmick" murders as a device to propell the rest of the story revolving around fleshed-out, interesting characters, "Saw" exists in a world populated entirely by two-dimensional characters. No one's psychology or motivation is given more than the briefest consideration. The "surprises" are either so obvious that you see them coming half an hour away or so random that you really can't do anything but shrug and move on. Visually, it's pretty interesting. The style borrows a great deal from elsewhere and plays not unlike a 90 minute Nine Inch Nails video. The constant jump cuts and rapid, frenetic camera movements can get distracting at times, but overall they work fairly well. In the end, this film is really only "disturbing" if the gore bothers you. It's low on actual suspense, light on believable plot and sympathetic characters - two elements which are NECESSARY for the creation of a TRULY disturbing film. Pro: Visually interesting, creative death traps. Con: HORRIBLE acting, nearly non-existent character development, predictable. 2.5/5 - Not terrible, not good.
|
| # ? Oct 13, 2004 22:44 |
|
|
This is easily one of the better serial killer/mindfuck movies I have ever seen. As already mentioned numerous times, this movie follows the same type of course that "Seven" does. A seriel killer uses various types of "games" in order to get the victims to be thankful for what they are given in life. The plot is not relatively new, but the execution is what makes this film exceptional. I have to give thanks to the writers of this film for being so creative. The various methods of execution, so to speak, are pretty imaginative. As others have also said, there are more than quite a few twists in the plot. Some of them are quite predictable, others aren't. I have to wonder if other critics even watched the film until the very end, as the final moments take a twist that comes from out of nowhere. Not to say it's bad, of course. The ending makes the movie worth it alone. Everything is shot in a very gritty style, adding to the dark and grubby tone of the movie. Every shot seems to be very dismal and dank. Some of the scenes are downright creepy when combined with eerie sound effects and whatnot. While merely a setpiece for the movie, Jigsaw's puppet would give little kids nightmares for years. The acting is somewhat lacking, but I did not think it was absolutely horrible. Danny Glover's role is not as large as I would have liked, but I thought the two leading roles did an ample job. After all, the movie isn't supposed to focus on Oscar-winning performances; it's supposed to mess with your head. I saw this movie on a downloaded bootleg, and I will definitely be paying the $7 to see it in the theaters at the end of the month. This is one flick that has well earned my money, and I certainly see it being "that creepy serial killer movie" that people will continue to watch in years to come. Final Verdict: 5.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 15, 2004 08:09 |
|
|
I look around and I don't see enough hate for this truely terrible rip-offish plane crash of a film. Honestly, did they jot this movie premise down in 5 minutes on the back of an envelope? Hey let's steal the concept of se7en, steal the lighting of a David Fincher film, think up some bad-rear end deaths (wow, having to kill someone to save your own life, woweee that makes me think!) Add a lot of whining, crying for usually no conceivable reason other than to try and make the viewer say "ooooh, isn't it powerful?!". Not to mention the plotholes and abysmal acting which you'll see for yourself if someone injects poison into you and makes you go to the movies to watch this or they won't give you the antidote. Ah hum. Don't listen to the hype, "original film-making" needs to be left to 1996 if this is what constitutes it. 1/5.5 Only because it didn't do me any physical harm. Man out of Time fucked around with this message at Oct 17, 2004 around 18:47 |
| # ? Oct 17, 2004 18:43 |
|
|
I kind of liked this when I walked out of the theater, but the more I think about it, the more I hate it. The "twists" were predictable and completely lame. The acting was easily the worst I've ever seen outside of porno. It was a complete se7en ripoff, but without the good acting and filmmaking. It does an adequate job of giving you the chills, but unlike good thrillers, the fear did not linger beyond the closing credits. 1/5
|
| # ? Oct 17, 2004 21:57 |
|
|
removed
exponentory fucked around with this message at Dec 9, 2011 around 06:39 |
| # ? Oct 18, 2004 02:11 |
|
|
1/5 Stupid, stupid, stupid. We're not just asked to suspend out disbelief, but exile it never to be seen again. Cops who don't call for backup when they have obviously stumbled into a dangerous situation. Women who've spent hours tied up/kidnapped who don't immediately shoot their captor when given the opportunity. This type of rank stupidity pervades this movie. An ending that reads as though the twist was the first part the writer came up with, and constructed a movie simply to support the twist at the end. I hated the irrational, unbelievable characters so much I began to root for their demise. Danny Glover does his typical, laughable role as Generic-rear end-Cop #1. I don't mind graphic violence when it serves to advance the plot (see Kill Bill) but this was just a stupid excuse for a special effects crew to get some work and a writer to masturbate his juvenile ideas of suspense onto a page. The ending was stupid and unrealistic. If anybody could believe that Elwes' character really was a doctor after that, I pity their ignorance.
|
| # ? Oct 18, 2004 05:02 |
|
|
I don't understand the hype of this film. I was really expecting alot more then what was given. The ending was really dumb too. Lots of loopholes and amazing physics When you get hit by a shotgun you're dead. Overall not worth it, you're better off going to block buster and renting Se7en, or whatever else is on their halloween rack. One more thing...The real jigsaw guy... come on people, I think they would have noticed a body breathing in the room.. 2/5, and the 2 is only for the helemt scene.
|
| # ? Oct 18, 2004 05:24 |
|
|
This movie seriously disappointed me, because I'd heard great things about it before seeing it. The premise sounded interesting, and I was willing to overlook the less than stellar acting, but the plot holes really annoyed me. For example, what exactly made Danny Glover obsessed with Cary Elwes? It seemed pretty clear that he had nothing to do with the jigsaw murders. Since he hired Adam to follow him, he would've known that the worst he was doing was cheating on his wife. Since it was Danny Glover that hired Adam, how did Monica Potter know that Adam would lie to him? And what were the lies that he would supposedly tell? What was the purpose of the dead guy in the middle of the floor between Cary Elwes and Adam? I realize he was supposed to be the killer, but what purpose did he serve other than that? His being dead had nothing to do with the plot. And how did Adam know the wall would glow in the dark? Edited for clarity: It's a stretch to think he'd get "turn out the lights to see a glow in the dark X" from the message on the photo. 1.5/5, because the more I think about this movie the more it pisses me off. lamb fucked around with this message at Oct 26, 2004 around 14:07 |
| # ? Oct 18, 2004 15:02 |
|
|
I found Saw to be refreshing in the sense that it relied a little more on messing with your head and freaking you out somewhat rather than having a loud noise followed by someone jumping infront of the camera on an unsuspecting Jennifer Love-Hewitt making everyone in the cinema leap out of their seats due to burst ear drums. I found it tense, very tense. There were more than enough moments where my fists were clenched and toes curled. Two disappointments, firstly, I personally cannot stand Gary Elwes. I don't know if this means he's an awful actor, or he's capable of successfuly portraying a character that just makes me cringe, thus doing his job much better than I do mine. I think Liar Liar made me hate him that little bit more. Secondly, Danny Glover. Don't get me wrong, as Murtaugh in Lethal Weapon I liked him. In Switchback he played a decent part (overshadowed by Dennis Quad, however in my opinion). But generally, he can't act. Those personal problems aside, I loved the film and found myself recommending it to almost everyone I came across for the following week, which is a rarity for myself since I'm not a huge fan of the horror genre 4.5/5 Pro's - Tense, mindfuck, plenty of originality Con's - Casting, scared me...
|
| # ? Oct 19, 2004 01:20 |
|
|
I just saw it and loved every last second of it. This thing really pulls you in right from the start and it gives a great feeling of dread that is extremely uncommon nowadays. It was nice to finally see a genuine scary flic. The gore isn't nearly as bad as people are making it out to be. I mean, sure, you see corpses, one in a pool of blood, some shots of intestines, but it's not like it's on screen for an extended period of time. So, in all, I give it a 5.5 out of 5 because I found this film imcredible. Finally, some films of 2004 are getting good! First Team America and now this. I can't wait to see what the rest of the year holds in store for us. 5.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 19, 2004 21:54 |
|
|
I tasted a bit of Se7en and Silent Hill in this movie. A few plot holes and character flaws exist, but the movie does do an excellent job of making you THINK you know what's going on up until the credits roll. This was one of those movies I thought I had figured out and was going to be pissed at because I thought the movie was too obvious but then you realize that the movie is a step ahead of you. It's worth watching all the way through. 4.8/5.0
|
| # ? Oct 21, 2004 04:04 |
|
|
Pros - Had me saying  the entire time. The torture methods were downright brutal  and I pray nothing like that ever happens to anyone, even my enemies. Its a twisted movie that has an awesome ending (no spoilers). It also reminded me of one of those old school point-and-click adventure games, or like a Silent Hill.Cons - The sub par acting and under usage of Danny Glover lowers it a tad. The plot is told sort of confusingly once the flashbacks occur. 4/5 stars Must see for Holloween weekend.
|
| # ? Oct 23, 2004 02:55 |
|
|
Some of the ideas presented are fairly original, but the implementation leaves a lot to be desired. The acting is loving horrendous, and the story line fairly generic. As for it being "hosed up" as some reviewers have noted - try watching "Cannibal Holocaust" you pussies. The gore is limited, and not very explicit when it does appear. Not particularly satisfying if you're a gore fan. 2/5
|
| # ? Oct 23, 2004 19:55 |
|
|
POOP OUT A NICKEL YOU BUTT BOTTLE.
Somebody fucked around with this message at Oct 24, 2004 around 05:12 |
| # ? Oct 23, 2004 21:59 |
|
|
I enjoyed the movie on the basis that it was a decent suspense/gore flick, but that's about all. I have, unfortunately, yet to see Se7en, but I felt it was like a failed combination of Cube and the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre with a dash of Law & Order. The sensical plot and passable acting were either left on the cutting room floor or were low on the priority list. And it wasn't even as "hosed-up" as it's supposed to be (at least not enough to really affect me). PROS: Promising premise, creative and interresting methods of torture and murder, unoriginal but quality camera work and cinematography. CONS: Crappy acting, crappy plot and development, crappy ending. 3/5 Edit: I realized halfway through that the doctor guy was in the Princess Bride and it made me that much more disappointed.
|
| # ? Oct 24, 2004 04:54 |
|
|
From what I've read in this thread, a lot of what people "didn't get" about the movie was in plain sight. Examples: "How did Adam know the wall would glow" Well, remember the picture he found in the Doctor's wallet? How it said "sometimes you see better with your eyes closed...eh, get it? "What was the significance of the body?" remember in the VERY BEGINNING OF THE MOVIE when the tapes say "when you have that much poison in your body, you have to shoot yourself" or something like that? Yeah, that was the reason given. Anyway, I thought this movie was amazingly good. One of the best made-for-Halloween movies ever. Remember, thats clearly what it is. Since, y'know, its coming out on Halloween and all. It was made for Halloween. It wasn't supposed to be brilliantly innovative, and y'know what? most movies aren't, and don't have to be. The acting wasn't OMG WORST EVER but it could've been less one-linerish, although I imagine the one-liners were in there more to relieve the tension. Now, the plot, I thought was insanely good. I didn't think it was at all a rip-off of Se7en, since there was a more random selection of people, and in Se7en, the people were all dead, in this, they weren't, they were actually given a chance to learn what they did wrong. I'd say 5/5
|
| # ? Oct 24, 2004 16:18 |
|
|
Just because the majority of movies that are coming out nowadays are really bad, doesn't give anyone an excuse to release a movie that they know is bad.I wasn't too disappointed in the movie because people don't really know how to make good movies these days anyway and making a good horror movie is even harder.it has the usual characteristics of a horror movie, "don't do that! what are you, stupid?! He's gonna kill you! HE'S RIGHT BEHIND THE GOD drat DOOR!!!", but saw did have a little bit better of a storyline, well, the idea behind the the murders was good, but the usual movie gently caress-ups kept the movie on a "run of the mill" track. I think the people that are rating this as a bad movie are covering most of the bad parts pretty well, so I am going to add one I thought was just kind of funny: in the beginning of the movie adam is trying to reach the tape player but can't, Gordon suggests using his shirt to drag it to him, but at the end of the movie Gordon doesn't think of using his shirt to get the ringing cell phone. < I know that this is knit picking, but I want to add to it because apparently most people haven't been exposed to good movies. This one is a horrible movie and no one realizes that. 2/5
|
| # ? Oct 26, 2004 06:35 |
|
|
.
Blockhead fucked around with this message at Jun 4, 2012 around 03:48 |
| # ? Oct 27, 2004 05:24 |
|
|
Many of the scenes felt set up and predictable. Little of the story was believeable, due to the actions characters took, not the situations they were put in. I was a big fan of Se7en, and from the start, it looked like this movie had the same feel. However, this is one of those movies where you are forced to cringe every so often because the main characters make moronic decisions that would never happen in real life (like failing to shoot their enemy). It's that sort of predictable plot that adds nothing to the movie, except a longer running time. The premise of the movie didn't deserve the bad script. 3/5
|
| # ? Oct 27, 2004 14:18 |
|
|
I'm going to have to disagree with the majority here and say it wasn't that great a movie. Why not? Well I felt like it was very frustrating... On the one hand there is some brilliant stuff: The underlying concept, a lot of the cinematography, good sound design, the creepiness, the mood, etc... The problem is that there's about ten percent of utter bullshit: A few hammy lines, a tiny bit of bad acting, some plot cliches, the worst suspense car-driving sequence I've ever seen, and a mile-a-minute way of trying to explain plot twists that feels forced and redundant. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely worth seeing. But there are some pretty big failures in the writing and the directing that really worry/annoy me: When Lawrence shouts "God drat you!" it's a total William Shatner moment. Also, when Danny Glover and Tap (was that his name?) are racing to the bathroom place, that is the dumbest loving 'car chase' in history. Also, lots of "oh poo poo! revelation!" moments just show redundant footage quick-cut together like the "oh poo poo! revelation!" part of Fight Club. Only it's really annoying. 3/5
|
| # ? Oct 30, 2004 04:38 |
|
|
I saw it tonight and I have never been so disturbed in my life. I couldn't take it after they were showing the other victims (the guy in the barbed-wire, the guy in the room with numbers on the wall) and then the girl with the loving bear-trap on her head. Uuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhh.......... I felt like I was going to puke after all that poo poo. I could feel myself go all pale and poo poo. I was thinking of leaving, but I stayed. Overall, I am glad that I did. Somebody fucked around with this message at Nov 9, 2004 around 22:59 |
| # ? Oct 30, 2004 07:15 |
|
|
I felt the plot was well told, but the acting was terrible. 80% of Glover's lines were laughable. I found myself cracking up throughout the movie at points that were not supposed to be funny. 2.5/5 I had a hell of a time watching this movie, but would not call it good cinema.
|
| # ? Oct 30, 2004 07:48 |
|
|
Just returned from a midnight showing. I do not believe this film deserves any of the hype it's received; I was expecting a thriller, this is a cut-and-dried horror film. The dialogue is predictable and boring; the characters are railroaded along the plot - they don't make good decisions, they don't make bad decisions, they just jerk along like marionettes held by the scriptwriter. Cary Elwes is the most watchable part of the film. I enjoyed his last scene in the movie. I don't think his performance is enough to redeem the film. Danny Glover's character is shallow, and is as dynamic as a lightswitch being flipped: two states, no transition. It's not a part I envy him. The sound work was terrible. We are subjected to speed-up, backwards-masked noise every time the characters listen to and rewind a tape or video cassette. There's intruding voiceovers when the characters read letters from the villian. I don't want to play the "I wasn't scared by this movie, I'm so hardcore" versus "I was totally ready to pee all over the guy in front of me" game. Honestly, I was too busy being pissed off at the film's shortcomings to get emotionally involved. If you are intrigued by this movie's premise, I recommend you watch Seven instead. Even if you've already seen it. 2/5
|
| # ? Oct 30, 2004 08:05 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 20:30 |
|
|
I felt at times Saw tried to do a bit too much. I also will have to agree that the acting was just terrible at times and a lot of the events/psychological reactions of the people were a bit hard to accept. With that said, I still enjoyed the movie. The movie successfully fostered a sense of suspense in the audience and the story,despite forcing you to often suspend disbelief, managed to be entertaining. 3.5/5
|
| # ? Oct 30, 2004 09:33 |
|
