Saw

[Calfborg]

I saw it last week. I give it a B-. The acting isn't too great, particularly on Cary Elwes' part. It was almost hard not to laugh at some of the expressions on his ghostly face in the last few scenes. The premise is loosely a Seven rip off with the whole moral killer idea. Some of the editing was pretty bad with some camerawork that really kills the suspenseful effect, but not entirely. The last 15-20 minutes were quite suspenseful. Once piece of it actually made me get all tense and stuff. The worst part about it is probably the attempts to make people say, "Ooooh, yuck, that's so disturbing," regarding the 'history' of the killer by showing his former torture-type situations. Those sequences were only made worse with that typical 100mph editing style when something is intended to intense. The movie is pretty much by the book, but there is a good twist at the end that I wasn't entirely expecting. I really liked that puppet the killer used to communicate to his victims, although it spoke with that damn cliche 'scary' voice. Now, not regarding the movie itself, the Twisted Pictures logo animation was cool. The new LGF logo for Lion's Gate Films always makes me think of The Punisher since it was like the first movie to have that new logo. One good reason to see this movie is that you get the see the preview to the new Rob Zombie movie, The Devil's Rejects. It stars Sid Haig and Baby & Otis from House of 1000 Corpses which kicks ass so hard. Anyway, Saw is decently entertaining regardless of the Hollywood horror flick elements.

[Eric Y.]

blah blah blah Cary Elwes blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

ok you convinced me, i need to see this

[HeuristicsInc]

Cary Elwes and the other guy from the movie were on the Lovelines radio show the other day touting it, and they were damn funny. But I don't expect we'll get the same impression from the movie
-bill

[erik]

Anyway, Saw is decently entertaining regardless of the Hollywood horror flick elements.

I was very excited to see this movie, the trailer (and the ad campaign in general) are very well done. The premise is a good one that could have been spun into a really great movie.

Saw however, is not a great movie. The whole time watching it, I was reminded of some of the classic "B movie" action and horror films from the 80's, like Reanimator and Terminator. Had Saw come about 20 years ago, it would have fit right in, and I might be more forgiving. Back then, you could make a B-movie full of a flimsy plot, unnecessary strings that swell and glide over the whole film, characters that are all in some way stolen from dimestore detective pulp fiction, and actors who chew scenery and get hired through some sort of nepotism. Saw is very much a B-movie.

There are good things about Saw, like the general premise, as I said before. And the shots (and general pacing) of the movie work well. The scenes designed to freak out or to gross out do the job well.

The things that kill Saw are that it tries for too much. Cary Elwes delivers quite possibly, the worst performance that I have ever managed to catch in the theater. Every line delivered with such unnecessary emotion, every muscle of his face involved in some sort of acting decision (like lip-pursing and a slight nod to let the audience know, that yes, he is formulating a plan). It's only made worse by the fact that the guy playing opposite him for the majority of the movie seems pretty decent. Perhaps they thought they needed someone with some name recognition to really sell the film, maybe they were right, but he still sucked royally.

The plot is unnecessarily complex. The great thing about a movie like Terminator is that while the premise is not exactly simple, its complexity is not unnecessary. But in Saw, we get stuff like:




---SPOILERS---

having Cary Elwes's character know about the guy pulling their strings because he was a suspect in an earlier case. It made it less scary that someone that one of them knew was fucking with them, instead of just generic unknown psychopath. And the scene in the policestation where he gets to listen in on a surviving victim's testimony? That makes no logical sense, and is an unnecessary complication. They could have had one of the characters know about the mastermind from a newspaper article or something. Also, the whole thing about the mastermind being some sort of Philanthropist of Morality is stupid, because the photographer guy doesn't seem to be doing anything particularly bad in his life.


---END



The last 20 minutes would be unbearable if they weren't so damn funny. It's like the writers got stoned, thought up as many possible endings as they could and wrote them all into the script because they never thought that they all would be used. The rest of the film moves at one pace, and then for the last 20 minutes, it's like watching your roommate rushing because he overslept for a job interview because they were out celebrating the night before: insanely running around, trying to get stuff done that would have been more sensible to have laid out the night before. Each of the intersecting "storylines" was just laugh-inducing, especially when Danny Glover is chasing someone and yells out one of the best lines I've ever heard. In the last few scenes, Elwes's acting goes from regular bad to "show this in acting class as a warning" bad. It's like watching a high school play with Captain Kirk trying to do Shakespeare without understanding any of the words. It's just ridiculously overdone, it kills the end of the movie. The "a-ha" moment at the end was truly unexpected, but it shows up at the end of the pothead scriptwriter rollercoaster ride and right after Elwes's PSA for the importance of acting lessons, and its effect was diminished severely.

If they got rid of Elwes and tightened up the script, this movie could have been alot better. I give it an F for having so much wrong and not enough right.

[jb]

Bad acting is very often the director's fault. Either too much direction or not enough. You know Elwes *can* do a good job, in the right hands, because he's done so several times in previous work.

And since it all comes together in the editing, you can lay the pacing flaws on the director's doorstep too.

I haven't seen the flick, probably won't at this point.

[Adam!]

I've been excited about this movie, just because the soundtrack was done by Charlie Clouser, aka my favorite musician ever. I assumed the movie was going to be a pile of suck; how is the score?

[erik]

I can't really recall the score's quality as music in its own right, I just seem to remember there being too much music in the film, and that kind of soured me on it. Like anytime there could have been music filling up the space, there was.

[j$]

You know Elwes *can* do a good job, in the right hands, because he's done so several times in previous work.

I thought about this, and I'm probably blanking, but apart from 'The Princess Bride' what else has he done that's noticeably good? I mean he's not bad in other things (like that FBI tv show) but good?

Still I would forgive him a hundred bad performances for the one he gives in Princess Bride.

j$

[Eric Y.]

men in tights?

[Calfborg]

I can't really recall the score's quality as music in its own right, I just seem to remember there being too much music in the film, and that kind of soured me on it. Like anytime there could have been music filling up the space, there was.

The only music I can remember is some lousy industrial noisy shit. It's basically what's expected of this type of film. It sounded pretty cheap, particularly when the two detectives were chasing the killer.

[jute gyte]

this is kind of reinforcing my expectations for the film, which i have not seen and probably will not see. what ever happened to the texas chainsaw massacre 'conscious attack on the audience's sensibilities' style of horror direction? that's what a film like this needs.

[Adam!]

It sounded pretty cheap, particularly when the two detectives were chasing the killer.

That's sad. That's really sad. I couldn't find the interview again, but the first thing I read about the soundtrack was that the director had recruited Charlie Clouser because he really liked a song he had done, and that song happens to be my favorite song, period. Meh, I'll still check it out.

[Freudian Slip]

men in tights?

Ah yes. "Princess Bride" (one of my all time favorites) and "Men in Tights" (Damn and I love the theme song.)
Not really sure I'd want to see this movie though.
Everything I've read on it so far makes me think it's going to wind up to nbe a huge steaming pile of suckage.
(Course that doesn't necessarily mean I won't go see it anyway.)

[j$]

men in tights?

Ah yes. "Princess Bride" (one of my all time favorites) and "Men in Tights" (Damn and I love the theme song.)
Not really sure I'd want to see this movie though.
Everything I've read on it so far makes me think it's going to wind up to nbe a huge steaming pile of suckage.
(Course that doesn't necessarily mean I won't go see it anyway.)

It is. Suckage, that is. Barely needs confirming! Did Mel Brooks get killed and replaced with an unfunny look-a-like sometime around the time of 'History of the World pt 1'? I smell a conspiracy ...

[Eric Y.]

johnny i think you are confused. this:

Not really sure I'd want to see this movie though.
Everything I've read on it so far makes me think it's going to wind up to nbe a huge steaming pile of suckage.

came immediately after F.S. said she likes both the princess bride AND men in tights. by "this movie" i am pretty sure she meant the one this thread is discussing (saw). however, by your mel brooks comment it seems you are misconstruing the "steaming pile of suckage" as a reference to robin hood and agreeing with that.

i mean.. i could be wrong, but according to IMDB, mel brooks didn't have anything to do with saw. however, i did stumble across this on IMDB, which is overwhelmingly good news...

[j$]

You're right - i assumed FS to be speaking of Men in Tights. Mainly because the film she chose to highligh in the quotation that prefaced her post 'Men in Tights', not 'Saw'.

But anyway my talk of Mel Brooks is clearly in relation to my own comments on 'Men in Tights'. So there is no need to be confused. Mel Brooks directs 'Saw' might be midly amusing.

[Adam!]

An idea so wacky it just might work

Now I hope Saw ends with the two main characters running through the MGM back lot and into a showing of Saw, ala Blazing Saddles.