Saw

[MechDeus]

What more could've been added to make this good?

Atmosphere and the removal of everything added which kept taking away from said atmosphere. The best part of the movie was the first 10-odd minutes when they focused solely on the two guys in the room and you had no clue what was going on. It didn't need a fancy plot, it didn't need the end twist, all it needed to do was focus on the room and to stop leaving it and watching all the other characters and all of that nonsense. Just work on creating the tension and mood inside the room, all of that behind-the-scenes info could've been told by the characters to each other in the room and it would've worked a lot better. Maybe have newspaper clippings put up by the killer about himself to fuck with them or something like that, the killer could've been the orderly and if the surroundings and execution had been excellent then I doubt any of us would've cared that there was no sudden plot twist.

All the good parts were the two guys in the room trying to figure out what to do and what was going on, everything else sucked.

This was a movie designed to be about messing with people mentally that totally forgot what it was doing that and instead got caught up continuously backing up over itself to unfold a plot in a way that completely destroyed any buildup. That's why it had so much wasted potential: because it took something really cool and decided it'd rather tell everything in clunky, typical Hollywood fashion.

[sethsez]

What more could've been added to make this good?

Nothing needed to be added. Stuff needed to be taken away. The movie was crammed full of way too much crap and had no focus.

Acting was there,

No. NO. A thousand times no.

the environment was sufficiently creepy,

Agreed, it was creepy. When it wasn't being shot like a goddamn music video, complete with shitty music.

cool idea fro a serial killer who also had some slick death traps,

I think we all agree it's a nifty idea, but a movie needs more than an idea. That idea actually needs to be well-executed.

come-on the plot wasnt that bad - if there were no twists at all and the killer WAS the orderly than you all would've been bitching your minds out.

I would have been perfectly happy with a lack of twists if it meant that, in return, we got to get some more psychological horror from the guys in the room. I mean, that's a pretty fucked up situation to be in... why take us out of it repeatedly with flashbacks and cuts to other areas?

Hell, as the movie rolled into the endgame that was going to be my only complaint that we knew so early when we really didnt. In that Ebert review that was posted earlier seemed liked the fat-ass didnt even watch the whole movie, the way he commented on that aspect.

My problem with the ending is that it comes out of nowhere and doesn't make any sense if you think about it for more than a couple seconds. Fight Club's twist makes sense because it's supported by the rest of the movie and exists for a purpose beyond surprising the audience. The same could be said for the twist at the end of The Ring. In Saw, however, the twist makes no sense if you think about all the logistics and leaps of faith the killer needed to overcome to get everything to fit together properly (this is one genius killer for him to know where everyone will be and what everyone will do, right down to the second), and there's no real purpose for the ending beyond... well, it's a twist ending.

[fiend_of_rejections]

Sethsez pretty much got it on the nose. If you accept the movie for what it is, it's an okay movie. If you try to apply logic and explain alot of unanswered things, then the movie is garbage.
The acting and the editing was terrible. The unrated music video was the best part of the DVD .

[Dolemite]

You're being too nice. I saw this movie again the other day and I stand by my opinion that it's a nifty idea with an absolutely embarassing execution and a third act that insults everyone's intelligence for the sake of a lame plot twist.

This pretty much sums up the movie perfectly.

Oh, and I got the CDs today.

Cool. Enjoy, my brutha.

Okay the only other point that I agree on, that I think Dolemite mentioned were the zippy camera movements (like when the girl had the reverse bear-trap on)

Yup. No scene in a horror movie can possibly be scary with MTV-style camera tricks. That whole bear-trap scene was ruined with the goofy NIN video pan around her with the music blaring.

Saw had all the potential in the world. It looked so cool I thought there was no way they could fuck it up. sadly, I was wrong.

People just have no idea how to make a horror movie nowadays. No idea how to generate atmosphere. The closest a movie's come lately is The Grudge, because the director realizes that you don't have to speed up the story/action/camerawork, you need to slow it down. Slowly build tension and introduce your characters. The Grudge wasn't perfect in this regard, but it was a step in the right direction.

I re-watched John Carpenter's The Thing for like the millionth time the other day and I'm still amazed by how great it is. No matrix camera bullshit. No cuts every half-second. No strobe lights. No twists for the sake of having twists. Just nice, slow, long camera pans, a creepy atmosphere, a genuine sense of dread, and very real scares. I love introducing that movie to people who've never seen it, especially when they're talking about how horror movies nowadays suck.

I'm sure a sophisticated horror fan like sethsez has seen it...have you, Jetman?

[Jetman]

Atmosphere and the removal of everything added which kept taking away from said atmosphere. The best part of the movie was the first 10-odd minutes when they focused solely on the two guys in the room and you had no clue what was going on. It didn't need a fancy plot, it didn't need the end twist, all it needed to do was focus on the room and to stop leaving it and watching all the other characters and all of that nonsense. Just work on creating the tension and mood inside the room, all of that behind-the-scenes info could've been told by the characters to each other in the room and it would've worked a lot better.

I would have been perfectly happy with a lack of twists if it meant that, in return, we got to get some more psychological horror from the guys in the room. I mean, that's a pretty fucked up situation to be in... why take us out of it repeatedly with flashbacks and cuts to other areas?

I honestly think that the writers could have gone either way for this movie. They could have just focused soley on the bathroom/sewer and the two victims in it,and it may have been a good all be it slightly different take on the movie.But seriously,if they'd have gone that route this movie would've had a cheap 'Open Water', 'Blair Witch' feel to it. I think we needed to see the back story,the other murders, Danny Glover going after this guy to get a scope, on how serious and fucked Adam and the doctor's situation was.Without seeing how they were captured, or what came before,(and even the why's as to them being captured) this thing would've had no substance IMO. I mean its a movie. If the producers have money to spend to show us backstory, let them show it. I'd much rather see how the Doctors family was captured,etc.,etc. and how the orderly botched said capture than to just be told or have to assume how it happened.Yeah, the cutting back and forth threw me off a bit too, but it's was a worthy trade-off to tell the whole story.Without that backstory this whole movie could have ended up being some fraternity prank or had some ridiculous twist at the end like that, but we know otherwise because of the other shit we saw.

Maybe have newspaper clippings put up by the killer about himself to fuck with them or something like that, the killer could've been the orderly and if the surroundings and execution had been excellent then I doubt any of us would've cared that there was no sudden plot twist.

Well, like I said, I was prepared for it to be that way as I just figured that this movie was trying to focus more on the victims and their situation than on the killer.He's the orderly? Okay, whatever. Kind of lame that we know that this early but.....wait, what the fuck he's not? <<<< and that right there made the serial killer more interesting because he wasnt quite as dumb or careless as we'd thought up to that point - which to me makes a better movie.

This was a movie designed to be about messing with people mentally that totally forgot what it was doing that and instead got caught up continuously backing up over itself to unfold a plot in a way that completely destroyed any buildup.

I thought the mental torture aspect was still there. The two victims were still on edge.They were still watching the clock. Their lives were still in danger. We just got to see what lead up to that and what was going on around during that.Like I said I think the movie could've been made either way, and could've been good either way.

No. NO. A thousand times no.

<throws hands up> TomAto. tOm@to. potAto. pOt@to.

Agreed, it was creepy. When it wasn't being shot like a goddamn music video, complete with shitty music.

Come on, Seth. Like 2 scenes had the music video effect. The bear trap scene and the barb wire scene. 2 small scenes do not a movie ruin.And the music was hard....kore.I guess it would' have been more creepier with Sade belting out some melodies in the background?

I think we all agree it's a nifty idea, but a movie needs more than an idea. That idea actually needs to be well-executed.

Like how? A group of teens walks into a house of a serial killer full of deathtraps? Over abusing the idea would have made it stale if thats what you mean.

there's no real purpose for the ending beyond... well, it's a twist ending.

Yeah, and that was the purpose. The twist is what makes a movie more entertaining. I agree in that it was a bit of a logic leap for obvious reasons, but I guarantee no one saw it coming. That's what makes it fun.

I'm sure a sophisticated horror fan like sethsez has seen it...have you, Jetman?

You know it,man.Great movie, indeed.

I think every movie has to walk on its own two feet, and garner originality of its own.I mean its great to look back on classics like those and realize what made them great, but those same formulas may not work for every horror flick out there.

[Mman]

dude, thats way too much quoting. Your post is unreadable.

[Jetman]

dude, thats way too much quoting. Your post is unreadable.

Yeah, it was a pain in the cock typing it out so you damn well better read it

[sethsez]

If the producers have money to spend to show us backstory, let them show it.

Michael Bay and Paul W. S. Anderson live and die by this. After all, screw flow or the concept of building tension, let's show everything in as straightfoward a manner as possible. That's certainly how every classic piece of horror fiction ever made has been done!

Oh, wait...

<throws hands up> TomAto. tOm@to. potAto. pOt@to.

No. The acting was just plain bad. I'll concede on the matter of taste, but not here. There's a reason that Elwes' acting in the last act of the movie has been the butt of many jokes, from many sources. It's just not good, in any way.

Of course, that's because those weren't meant to be in the final film. They're rehersal shots that the director was forced to use since he was running out of time and funds. Which makes it understandable, if not excusable.

the music was hard....kore.I guess it would' have been more creepier with Sade belting out some melodies in the background?

No, it would have been more effective with music designed to enhance the atmosphere. Somehow, some way, Psycho managed to get by without shitty licensed music.

Like how? A group of teens walks into a house of a serial killer full of deathtraps? Over abusing the idea would have made it stale if thats what you mean.

No, by taking the same basic plot, but with better acting and editing, and with less plot points that insult the audience's intelligence.

And with the elimination of all the annoying "oh wait, I just remembered..." moments.

Yeah, and that was the purpose. The twist is what makes a movie more entertaining. I agree in that it was a bit of a logic leap for obvious reasons, but I guarantee no one saw it coming. That's what makes it fun.

A twist can make a movie fun. However, a twist doesn't make a movie fun just on its own virtue. Explosions can be fun in a movie too, but not when they come out of nowhere for no apparant reason. Then it's just stupid. And yes, I expect a bit more out of my entertainment than pandering plotlines that assume I'm too brainless to figure out that the big twist makes no sense.

I think every movie has to walk on its own two feet, and garner originality of its own.I mean its great to look back on classics like those and realize what made them great, but those same formulas may not work for every horror flick out there.

I agree, the same formulas don't work everywhere. Which is why it's annoying that this movie relied so heavily on cliches and typical Hollywood editing, which dragged down an otherwise interesting concept.

[Rumpy]

dude, thats way too much quoting. Your post is unreadable.

I'd say the opposite, actually using the quote feature made it easy to read.

The idea of having the movie just take place in the "cell" is a dangerous one. That would take an incredible scriptwriter to make it not boring. Is it possible? Sure, but it's out of reach for the guys that wrote this. And is anyone really confused by how the movie took you out of the room? I thought it flowed well in that regard, I was never lost. I'd totally agree with the "wait, I remember now" vice. That was pretty retarded. The lack of gore was a real downer and the ending just bothered me, it was too much of a jump to be believable. Those are the two fundamental changes I would make (and not using reherasal footage would help too).

[Jetman]

Michael Bay and Paul W. S. Anderson live and die by this. After all, screw flow or the concept of building tension, let's show everything in as straightfoward a manner as possible. That's certainly how every classic piece of horror fiction ever made has been done!

Oh, wait...

Yeah, and directors like Anderson feel that you can just throw money at a movie and it will magically be good. I get what you're trying to say here, but I dont feel that the funds were just thrown around aimlessly and unneeded in Saw. What was there wasnt exorbitant, it was used to help the story along.

No.The acting was just plain bad. I'll concede on the matter of taste, but not here. There's a reason that Elwes' acting in the last act of the movie has been the butt of many jokes, from many sources. It's just not good, in any way.

I guess this is all going to depend on who you ask. I've seen better and Ive seen worse acting.I'm assuming your sources were pompous cocks like Ebert and Roger?

No, it would have been more effective with music designed to enhance the atmosphere. Somehow, some way, Psycho managed to get by without shitty licensed music.

Well, you know what, I honestly wasnt paying THAT close attention to the music. The theme of the movie had already sucked me in, and I dont remember being totally displaced or put off by what was there music wise, but I'd have to go back,watch again, and pay closer attention to it.

No, by taking the same basic plot, but with better acting and editing, and with less plot points that insult the audience's intelligence.
And with the elimination of all the annoying "oh wait, I just remembered..." moments.

Once again, matter of taste with the acting, and the scene editing. Good point on the "oh, I just remembered, thing". I forgot about that, and yeah it did kind of blow, and seemed like a convenient excuse to plug in some more origin. But, that and the end scene were the only wiggy plot points and to me, they just didnt kill this movie.

A twist can make a movie fun. However, a twist doesn't make a movie fun just on its own virtue. Explosions can be fun in a movie too, but not when they come out of nowhere for no apparant reason. Then it's just stupid. And yes, I expect a bit more out of my entertainment than pandering plotlines that assume I'm too brainless to figure out that the big twist makes no sense.

Whaaaa.. explosions are always fun Seth...really . A matter of fact if an explosion ripped up the frat house down the road from me I would burst into giddy laughter.And as long as a twist is even slightly believeable it is valid.Even if it may be a bit of a far fetch.Would it be hard for the killer to pull of what he did - Hell, yeah. Impossible? Not entirely.

I'd say the opposite, actually using the quote feature made it easy to read.

The idea of having the movie just take place in the "cell" is a dangerous one. That would take an incredible scriptwriter to make it not boring. Is it possible? Sure, but it's out of reach for the guys that wrote this. And is anyone really confused by how the movie took you out of the room? I thought it flowed well in that regard, I was never lost. I'd totally agree with the "wait, I remember now" vice. That was pretty retarded.

Thanks Rumpy,and yeah, I totally agree with you here.I just didnt think it was hard to follow once you knew what was going down.