Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:41 pm
by GORDON
I forgot to mention that I saw this last week.
Welp... it's a Saw movie, both in the gory self mutilation, and taking pains to ensure everything ties in with events/characters in the previous movie.... which is getting a little confusing when in this scene we see a guy who appeared in the first movie for 14 seconds, and in the next scene, "Oh, that chick was in the... 3rd movie?"
Anyway, we get a lot more insight into Jigsaw's "make people appreciate their life" motivations. It's very sad when really pushed him over the cliff.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:45 am
by Paul
I read the spoiler for it yesterday.
The spoiler was poorly written and confusing, but I got the gist of it.
I liked the links to the other movies.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:39 am
by Malcolm
The only thing remotely cool about the "Saw" franchise is that Tobin Bell (Jigsaw) donated some of his blood for an advertising campaign for one of the flicks.
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:18 am
by Leisher
By now you know what this series is all about. If you don't, skip this movie. You need to have seen the previous three to have a clue about what's going on. Even if you have seen the previous three, it'd have better have been recently or you won't be able to tell who's who due to the gritty film style and the way some of the actors look alike or have changed appearance between films.
The story this time finds a SWAT detective being forced into a "game" based on his obsession to saving a missing fellow officer from a previous Saw. That specific plot thread resolves itself rather interestingly despite a poor setup, but the rest of the film is pretty much ass.
In terms of the overall theme of the series, this is probably the worst one yet.
3 out of 10.
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 2:26 am
by Malcolm
Yeah. Calculating the worst of the "Saw" franchise is akin to determining the method by which one would prefer to die. It's a painful process.
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 12:38 am
by Leisher
Welp... it's a Saw movie, both in the gory self mutilation, and taking pains to ensure everything ties in with events/characters in the previous movie.... which is getting a little confusing when in this scene we see a guy who appeared in the first movie for 14 seconds, and in the next scene, "Oh, that chick was in the... 3rd movie?"
Re-watched this and I agree. II through V are basically one long film.
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 11:38 am
by Malcolm
III & IV are supposed to happen simultaneously, if I remember.