Saw 2- Page 2

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:06am

That was enough to make it the WORST picture of the year, for me.

Here's my take on it: The first time I saw it, I was deeply disappointed in the twist, and saw it as a cheat. When I saw it on DVD, I liked it a lot more because...

(SPOILERS)

Technically, a plot hole is a gap in the logic that the movie has established. Right from the beginning, we know which character (Marie) is telling the story. It is her interpretation of what happened, plain and simple. She truly believed that a maniac killed Alex's family, and that she was trying to protect her. Furthermore, there were a couple of blatant clues within the first ten minutes. ("Someone was chasing me... and it was me.")

I've read about stuff like this happening (very rarely, mind you), but the movie made much more sense when I realized that the nature of the twist is buried so deeply in the human psyche, that it's hard to argue against it. The more I examined that notion, the more the "plot holes" began to explain themselves. In fact, I thought it strengthened the movie as a whole. For me, at least. I saw it, moreso than anything else, as a movie about dangers of obsession. I can see, though, why the twist would bug you. It bugged me to, at first.

The same thing goes, more or less, for Identity.

All the people you listed were fine - but better than average? I don't know...

That is true, BUT there are a number of performances that I'd consider award-worthy. You've seen May, right?

PS - I hated Secret Window, as well. THAT was a cheat. Updated On: 10/29/05 at 12:06 AM

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:09am

I enjoyed Identity.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:10am

So did I.

[TheHumanTorch]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:19am

broadway.... i feel the same way about Secret window.....Johnny Depp was so good in it, but could they have come up with a little more original ending?

[aspiringguy715]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:22am

Just got back from 'Saw II.'

Overall, the shock value and psychological teasing are weak after seeing the first movie. You've been accustomed to the whole concept, so they use an alternate method: gore. And lots of it. The story wasn't as strong as the first, and the loose ends are lengthy. The acting, at its best, was very boring. The twists were, in my opinion, predictable. There were maybe two twists that really made me think "Whoa!" I really hope they don't continue the series. In my opinion, they should have ended it with the first movie.

If you're a fan of the first, see it solely for the few interesting scenarios/plot twists.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:37am

Torch-

Depp was BRILLIANT as Mort, but the movie really detracted from his character work. Oddly enough, the ending was exactly what I hoped it wouldn't be. A lot of people blamed Stephen King for that stupid twist, but here's the real twist: He didn't write that ending. The screenwriter did.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:41am

Why don't you think the ending of Identity made sense?

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 12:44am

Me?

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 1:01am

It didn't make sense to me either. I don't know - it's not that it didn't make sense, it was just prepostrous and terrible.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 1:33am

It just has so many implausibilities that it doesn't make sense that the kid would kill everyone, or even be capable of it. Of course, it's a horror movie so a certain suspension of belief is expected, but seeing as Timmy isn't supposed to have any supernatural qualities, how was he able to shove a baseball bat down someone's throat AND telepathically control the limo to hit his mother AND wire a car to explode? So this is explained away as being the death of multiple personalities of one person (the convict) - and only Timmy and Amanda Peet's character's peresonalities remain. Then then Amanda gets friendly with a garden rake, and Timmy's personality is the only one left. But a) Why did Timmy's win over the others?; b) Why don't whores get a second chance?; c) If we're killing whores, why did everyone else die too? (And what was Timmy's motivation, in particular?)

It jsut seemed like such a thin thread tying everyone together (the same birthday?) and unlike The Sixth Sense, where upon second viewing, you can understand that Bruce Willis's character is actually dead and no one can see him except for Haley Joel, there aren't any clever hints in Identity that lead you to think this is a case of multiple personalities battling each other out, until it's spoonfed to you at the end.

Just IMHO, of course.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 1:43am

There were many clues in Identity, you just have to look for them.

a) Why did Timmy's win over the others?

We're not speaking of a physical being, so why couldn't Timmy be the last one left? Part of the twist was that Timmy was the maniac identity all along.

b) Why don't whores get a second chance?

Malcolm Rivers's mother was, allegedly, a prostitute. When he was a child, she left him alone at a motel while she philandered with someone. He held a grudge against her ever since. In fact, all of the identites are, in one way or another, an extension of Malcolm's personality.

c) If we're killing whores, why did everyone else die too?

It was part of the doctor's treatment to get all of Malcolm's "personalities" into one place, and them dispose of them, one by one (and that is where the murder-mystery part of the story comes in). Updated On: 10/29/05 at 01:43 AM

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 1:51am

Okay, I can buy part a). Maybe part b)'s motivation, but regarding part c), then how did the doctor get all of the personalities to come together? And why would they start killing each other off if the killer's motivation was driven by a grudge against neglectful sluts?

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:02am

Bear with me...

The doctor recognized that there was a killer personality inside of Malcolm. He knew that Malcolm, himself, wasn't guilty of the murders commited, which is why he lobbied against his patient's death sentence.

The personality of 'Timmy', one assumes, is an angry, vengeful version of Malcolm at the age of 10. As I said before, all of the personalities are an extension of Malcolm. Using psychotherapy (they never get into detail about what methods the doc actually used), he allows Malcolm to put all of his personalities into a familiar setting (a motel, where Malcolm was abandoned as a child), in an attempt to uncover and destroy the 'killer' personality. By the end, it is assumed that all of the extra personalities (except for Paris) are dead. However, Timmy wasn't dead. He kills Paris, leaving him the only personality left in Malcolm's body. Did any of that make sense?

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:20am

Yup, that makes sense. So at the end of the movie, Malcolm's going to have one helluva case of arrested development! So is the idea that the 'killer' personality would naturally kill off all the other personalities if put in one common setting? And if that was the case, is this something just intrinsic in 'Timmy' to kill people, or what would drive him to kill all the others? (For example, the actress and who else was there...the 'convict' and the dad? But I guess with the dad you could argue it was technically Clea Duvall who accidentally killed him, but it was provoked by the kid standing there.)

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:20am

So nice, so nice, I said it twice!

Updated On: 10/29/05 at 02:20 AM

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:41am

So is the idea that the 'killer' personality would naturally kill off all the other personalities if put in one common setting?

Exactly. The notion was to put all of the identites in one location, and the 'killer' would eventually reveal himself. Near the end, it was believed that the fake detective (Ray Liotta) was the 'killer'. When Ed (John Cusack) shot him, it was assumed that the murdering personality was exorcised. This turns out to be incorrect.

And if that was the case, is this something just intrinsic in 'Timmy' to kill people, or what would drive him to kill all the others?

In cases of multiple personalities, the seperate identities build over time. I think it is safe to say that these personalities have been developing inside of Malcolm for a while. At first, they were just names. Then, they grew into real people with pasts, families, etc. I'm guessing that the 'Timmy' personality is Malcolm, at the age when his mother abandoned him. Over the years, 'Timmy' grew more and more angry, until he snapped, forcing Malcolm to kill several people. Since 'Timmy' only has one line, I can't tell if it's instinct or revenge, or both (as I said before, all of the personalities are a piece of Malcolm's mind). 'Timmy' wants complete control of Malcolm's body. In the end, he succeeds. Updated On: 10/29/05 at 02:41 AM

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:54am

Hmm...I'm trying to remember the beginning of the movie (or, was it the middle, when the killer & Alfred Molina's storyline is introduced...) - wasn't the guy on deathrow for killing several people at a motel? So did he really do this, and then he's revisiting the motel in his mind to kill off the other personalities? My memory's shady of that part.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:01am

The Doctor/Malcolm storyline is introduced early on (the judge, the doctor, and the prosecution have a couple of scenes in the beginning), but we don't actually meet Malcolm until the middle.

Malcolm is on death row for murdering several women at an apartment complex. The method that the doctor verbally introduces to Malcolm allows him to gather all of his personalities at a place of importance (preferably, the place where Malcolm's trauma began), and "fold" them until Malcolm is the only one left. Updated On: 10/29/05 at 03:01 AM

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:17am

The shrink was trying to get Malcolm off of death row, right? What was it supposed to serve to get only Malcolm left? So they can kill him in good conscience? I don't recall.

Anyway, I'll rewatch the movie some time soon and we can continue the discussion. I liked most of it up until the ending. I still think it was the suddenness of the ending and the lack of clues leading up to it (I suppose our only real hint was that Timmy had been a mute since a "traumatic" event in the past). I would agree that 'Timmy' is Malcolm, age 10, but if that was the case, wouldn't 'Timmy' just kill Amanda Peet - the prostitute? Unless he became a jaded misogynist that quickly. But then why kill all the other personalities? Is it Malcolm's adult rage coupled with Timmy's young mentality?

Updated On: 10/29/05 at 03:17 AM

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:22am

The doctor felt that Malcolm belonged in an institution, as it was not him (so to speak) that commited the murders.

I'll send you a PM in a couple of minutes.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:29am

Sorry about the threadjack guys.


/end


Watching Saw I in the background right now. Even though Cary Elwes is a laughably bad actor here and there are a few gaping plotholes, Michael Emerson still creeps the hell out of me and I get so caught up in the circumstances of these characters (gal with the beartrap mouth! fat guy running through electric wires! skinny guy in the flammable room!) that it just cracks my SH*T up.


ETA: Someone can put a spoiler warning in here or PM me, but does Cary Elwes, his bathroom buddy (totally blanking on name here) or Michael Emerson make a re-appearance?

Updated On: 10/29/05 at 03:29 AM

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:33am

Sorry about the threadjack guys.

Same here.

Posted: 10/29/05 at 10:38am

it was a nice threadjack i must admit...Identity was one of my favorite thrillers with a twist. It makes you think and I like that!

[meagan9848]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 11:53am

I hadn't seen Saw until last night. We watched the first one, then went to see the second one. The ending of the first completely blew me away. Since I had JUST watched the first (we're talking credits roll, we leave to drive to the movie theater) I found myself trying to relate the first and the second too closely. I was trying to guess so much, but once again then end had my saying WTF?

I loved it though.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 1:56pm

I dunno, folks. I liked the first one better back when it was SEVEN. The only good performance was Shawnee Smith's as the hooker in the helmet (you might remember her as the machine gun-wielding cheerleader in the fun remake of THE BLOB). Cheeeeeeap direction....I dunno, I just dunno. The whole horror film genre seems to be going around in circles. Maybe it's time for them to stop making them for five years or so.