Saw (2004)

Not so original...

It is not exactly true that James Wan et Leigh Whannell have written Saw. They should have mention that they "borrowed" a lot from The Abominable Dr. Phibes (1971) written by James Whiton et William Goldstein. You will find less blood in the Phibes movies, but a lot more humour (with Robert "the avengers" Fuest as the director, and Vincent Price as the sadistic killer).
Fans of Saw, if you want to know the real origin of this story, watch "The Abominable Dr. Phibes" (1971) and Dr. Phibes Rises Again! (1972). August 2, 2008

How much blood would you shed to stay alive?

Heck yeah! Finally, a mainstream horror movie that's not afraid to be gritty. No campy, PG-13 family-friendly crap. No teenagers running around having sex and then getting hacked by a lumbering serial killer. Just 2 men locked in a dirty bathroom, cryptic clues left by a deranged killer, and a puppet.

The beauty of this movie is in its simplicity. The entire film was shot in one building with an extremely low budget. The two main characters, a photographer named Adam and a surgeon named Lawrence, wake up one day to find themselves locked in a grimy bathroom, chained to pipes on opposite sides of the room. In between them, there is a dead body with a gun in one hand, a tape recorder in the other, and his brains blown out and pooling on the floor. From then on, the two men must work together to solve the puzzle the killer, Jigsaw, has left them, and get out of their situation alive.

Jigsaw is a serial killer who uses "traps" to test his victims. His basic M.O. is that he puts them in situations, often with medieval-like torture devices, that will either kill them horribly, or leave them alive with permanent psychological and/or physical damage. Most of the time, these traps relate in some way to the person's lifestyle. Jigsaw's goal is to teach people to be grateful to be alive.

There are many misconceptions people have about this movie. First of all, it's not THAT gory. Yes, there is blood aplenty, and the traps Jigsaw sets for his victims(including a web of barbed wire a man must plow through, and a device hooked into a woman's jaw that could potentially permanently rip her mouth open) are just sick. But most of the horror comes with the THOUGHT of how painful the traps are, and not necessarily what is shown on screen. The majority of the gorehounds I know say that this movie is pretty tame.
Second of all, "Saw" is NOT torture porn. "Hostel" is torture porn. "Touristas" is torture porn. "Saw", however, is not. You know why? The fact of the matter is...THERE IS NO PORN IN THIS MOVIE. Not even a boob or a buttcrack. THERE IS NO NUDITY. And heck, there isn't really any "torture" either...not really.

However, I'm not gonna lie and say this movie is flawless. This has a lot to do with the director's lack of money, but that doesn't account for everything. In fact, I can see why some people really don't like this movie.
There are a ton of plot holes and unanswered questions. There are quite a few hammy one-liners("This is the most fun I've had without lubricant!"), and the acting in some places is hilariously abysmal(Like when Adam pretends to die). I understand how these could get in the way of enjoying the movie, but for me, they weren't that big of a deal.

All in all, this is one creepy and fascinating movie. The most enjoyable aspect of it is discovering more and more facts about the two main characters as the movie progresses, and discovering the connection they have while watching them learn to cope and work with each other. While not perfect, it's certainly entertaining and worthwhile.
June 28, 2008

'induced nausea' as an artform! inspired brilliance!

From an admittedly gruesome but purely artistic viewpoint, this first Saw movie is the only 5 star and by far the best film of the series. Sure, the premise is a bit far-fetched and unlikely, but a good movie can ask you to believe the unbelievable, if it's well made. If movies did nothing more than reflect our everyday mundane lives, there would be no reason to escape to the theater to bury ourselves in fantasy. But if that fantasy just so happens to include a little carnage and gratuitous violence to the point of inducing just the tiniest bit of innocent nausea, then grab a barf bag, smile and enjoy it! I'm exaggerating now. I'll spare the synopsis I'm sure you've seen about the two men chained to filthy bathroom pipes with a violent suicide victim between them. Instead, I'll focus on what makes this a brilliant movie. There is an actual premise to this movie, and an actual psychology as well. It's difficult to imagine the main antagonist in this work, Jigsaw, could have the financial or mental (or any other necessary) resources to pull off the stunts in this movie. But to imagine a nearly surrealistic vengeance in such an unlikely form of vigilanteism still holds a fascination for the average viewer with a typically human blood lust. What Jigsaw does to his victims is a vengeance that we all wish at some point that we could take....and as Jigsaw says, "I never kill people, I merely gives them the means by which they either kill themselves or survive." Of course, you should never try any of these stunts at home, kids...but there is a brutal realism, in the human emotions displayed by Jigsaw, and his victims. His dream of 'helping people to appreciate the life that they too often take for granted' is taken too far to the extreme in this movie, and people should never go this far in real life, but in the fantasy of cinema, the sense of victimization of everyone involved is truly felt by the audience, even while watching someone inadvertantly slicing themselves open or hacking off a limb. There is gruesome violence here. There are blatant real emotions, self-preservation and testing of the human spirit in the extreme. As always, this first movie opens and explains a premise, and all subsequent sequels destroy the beauty and carnage of the original...because with the explanations out of the way, parts 2-4 can focus on more special effects, violence and even less plausable violence scenarios. This movie stands alone as a work of art...violent, bloody, grotesque art...but art none the less! Parts 2-4 are good movies and a fun viewing experience, but this first movie keeps the human traps simple, more believable and less complex...leaving the complexities in the thin, flimsy study and testing of the fragile human spirit. Sure, you can break a person emotionally, but if someone's going to kill him or hack off a limb, it's better to let him do it to himself! This is a great movie! An inspired, gruesome work of grotesque art! Make a point to see it, but not if you have to chop off an arm or something! June 20, 2008

great movie

This was a great performence, shocking, thrilling, touture, enjoyment i really enjoyed it. I liked all the saws but part3 was not that good but theothers were, so this was a great movie. May 1, 2008

orignal was much better....

I saw this in distribution. I actually had to turn my head at certain points. This, along with Trent Reznor's soundtrack made for a great splatter flick. I thought the uncut version could only be better.....WRONG. It is not nearly as tense and nerve-racking as the theater version. Plus, they have replaced Reznor's soundtrack with something else. In this case, the orginal was much better. Be warned! March 12, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...