Saw 2- Page 3

[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.

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:05pm

I mean the guy who writes these movies is like 28 years old...i think he is doing really well so far

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 2:32pm

Shawnee Smith was okay, but something really bugged me about her performance: She's supposed to be crying, but there are no tears. At all.

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

bway86...are u talking about in saw 1?

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 3:42pm

Yeah, the original. Watch the scene where she's talking to Danny Glover. She's supposed to be crying, but all she's doing is snifflng and making faces.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/29/05 at 11:56pm

I knew. She has a MUCH bigger part in this one.

[JayKid]

Posted: 10/30/05 at 12:41am

Whoever made the Seven comment, I don't know if Seven was much better, but I see the obvious connection.

Th first and second movies both have GREAT twists at the end, and ones I felt were hard to predict. The acting was a BIT better in this one, and the whole movie was like damn that looks like Mark Wahlberg, and my dad afterwards told me it was his brother. Makes sense... I thought he did a decent job. As did the rest... better than the first (although not great by any means actingwise).

Now, I don't see why people think the first was so much better than this one? I consider them on an equal level really. Both good endings, second one had a bit better acting and a better story too.

I don't know, I just don't think the first one deserves anymore praise than this one. I thought they did a good job...

HOWEVER, they overdid the gore a bit, honestly, I was getting sick at times. It was really crazy. I mean, it is well done and did it's job at making me like, wtf... wow, i don't want to see this, but it was just nuts. My little brothers friend (3 years younger than me) wanted to throw up and was getting really sick.

Even from the first scene it was like... damn.

So I thought it was good, just so ****ed up and so shocking at times. Ending was good, as was the one in the first movie and I definetly think it should be seen, especially if you enjoyed the first movie.

I give it the same rating as the first, both were equally creepy, ****ed up movies with some gross **** and leaving me with a wow, what did I just effin watch look on my face.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/30/05 at 12:46am

Whoever made the Seven comment, I don't know if Seven was much better, but I see the obvious connection.

Hmm... Not only do I think that Se7en is one of the great modern thrillers, but I think it's ten times as creepy and smart as Saw.

[JayKid]

Posted: 10/30/05 at 1:03am

Didn't say it wasn't, but don't know how much better it was than the saw movies. Both Saw movies had better endings IMO... but Seven was great, but it wasn't much better, if better - I might put them on equal levels. Acting in Seven was better though.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/30/05 at 1:27am

Acting in Seven was better though.

As was the script and direction, imho.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 12:24pm

Finally got around to watching the movie today and so I sought out this thread as I didn't want to read it until I'd seen it. I don't want to jack the thread again but I do want to say that Identity and High Tension are both hateful movies with rubbish "get out clause" twists. High Tension's twist is especially problematic as it's blindingly obvious very very quickly what's going on. Anyhoo.....

Saw I was much villified for it's appalling acting. Fine, but remove the bad performances and I think there's a lot to admire about it in terms of horror movies. It's inventive, for one thing and there are several edge of the seat sequences (Leigh Whanell searching his apartment using his camera, the hiding in the closet sequence and so on) and it has the bleakest, nastiest, most downbeat ending since Kevin Spacey told Brad Pitt to become wrath. The stark reality of that ending was underlined in the sequel, just in case we missed that.

So on to the sequel. They obviously felt the need to up the stakes and go all out with the gore. Sadly, for the most part, they did so at the expense of suspense and disquiet. There were some truly unsettling sequences (the opening, the pit of syringes) but the outcome of most character's fate was sadly predictable. And some of their motivations seemed to come out of nowhere. And other characters were annoying, the main culprit being Donnie Wahlberg's police detective. Which isn't good when you're supposed to be caring about his and his son's fate.

Was it inventive? Yes, but it reminded me of that line in Silence Of The Lambs about the random pattern seeming desperately random. It was all a little too much. It seemed desperate. And the bleak ending was clever and sure explained the lack of tears from Shawnee Smith. But on the whole there was just something I couldn't take to in the film and I don't know what it was.

[BrendanStryker]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 12:28pm

I don't feel it could overcome the bad acting or the bad ending. But, especially, the bad acting. Perhaps the worst I've ever seen in a "legitimate" film.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 12:37pm

Bad ending? Seriously? The ending of Saw I is, in my opinion, genius (for a horror movie). And some of the footage at the end is rehearsal footage as they ran out of money.

[BrendanStryker]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 12:42pm

I'm talking about the twist.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 12:51pm

So am I. I think it's brilliant.