« Previous Entry | Main Page | Next Entry »
October 26, 2007
A Saw Point
I just sat through eight straight hours of SAW movies on the big screen. The first three are still a blast, though I find part two holds up the least well, as it’s narratively unbalanced – all the SAW movies have a split storyline that alternates between the primary trap/victims, and whatever Jigsaw’s doing, and in part 2, the primary trap victims simply aren’t anywhere near as interesting as Tobin Bell’s head-games with Donnie Wahlberg, whereas parts 1 and 3 strike a good medium.
And then there’s part 4. I’m gonna try to be non-spoilery about it, but if you’re a fan of the series who wants to go in cold, here’s all you need to know: parts of it are good, and the rest really feels like cynical photocopying. Fans should see it just for the Tobin Bell scenes, but non-fans are going to be totally confused and won’t care enough to pay the plot the attention it sorta deserves in order to be comprehensible.
It didn’t seem like too bad an idea in SAW 2 for Jigsaw (Bell) to be succeeded by Amanda (Shawnee Smith); but both of them were killed off in part 3, and it’s surely not too great a spoiler to say that someone ends up being a successor in 4. Unfortunately, none of the new cast members or returning minor players now in major roles are anywhere near as interesting as Bell, Smith, Michael Emerson in part one, or even Bahar Soomekh in part 3. Lyriq Bent, in his third go-round as SWAT officer Rigg, isn’t bad, but the rest of part 4’s cast are a bunch of generic actors who really don’t have much character.
As for the story, it’s starting to get ridiculous. Wow, Jigsaw had yet another accomplice who has never been mentioned up until just now? Whoopee. And the script seems so calculated, like some executive sat down and said, “Hey, you know that brain surgery bit in 3? Let’s do better, and have a full-on autopsy! You know how we always confuse people at the end with storylines that seem to be happening concurrently but really aren’t? Let’s do that with three different strands this time instead of two! And hey, how about we explain every minor detail we didn’t get to before, like why there’s a pig mask, and why Jigsaw got the way he is, because the cancer/car crash thing just wasn’t clear enough.”
That said, the Jigsaw flashbacks, which could have been insufferable, and actually aren’t that interesting in terms of information given, are made compelling by Bell, who, despite what the marketing people seem to think, is the main reason the sequels have been so appealing. His serious Method acting really pays off here, keeping the character consistent even as the movies overload on suddenly discovered new plot points.
You can tell there’s a lack of real thought here from the first trap, in which a man with his eyes sewn shut is chained to a man with his mouth sewn shut. Eventually, we learn the identity of the latter, but not the former; nor do we learn why this trap is appropriate “ironic punishment” for them. Worse, while in the trap, they fight each other with edged weapons; how about busting open the stitches so you can communicate, guys?
The main storyline, in which Rigg is put through some of Jigsaw’s post-mortem tests in order to mold him into a new apprentice, has potential at first, but things culminate in utter incoherence, as you try to figure out which of the new characters you don’t care about is operating in which time-frame. Director Darren Lynn Bousman, who made this movie primarily as an obligation so that Lionsgate would fund his horror-rock-opera REPO, really seems to be going through the motions – this being his third without respite, it’s easy to understand how he may have burned out. If the franchise is to continue, it needs an influx of new blood in front of and behind the camera. Jigsaw’s story is fine as is, and needs no more explaining. His new successor is lame. Get some good new actors, and branch things off in a new direction.
Oh, and for the fanboys who wonder – Dr. Gordon (Cary Elwes) does not appear in part 4. Angus Macfadyen does, but the storyline involving his character’s daughter is only hinted at, never followed up on.
SAW fans – you will want to see this, even though parts will disappoint. Non-fans – you’re not gonna get it. Watch the first three instead.
Posted by LYT at October 26, 2007 2:32 AM [Message Board]
Comments
Wouldn't be surprising if you did miss something... the filmmakers deliberately tried hard to confuse.
But after reading some other discussion about it, here's your answer -- the autopsy scene is chronologically the last scene in the movie. Everything else happens before, and they go overboard mixing up the timelines as a way to "trick" the audience, which end sup being too annoying to follow.
Posted by: LYT at October 26, 2007 4:10 PM
ok i just saw the movie i am beyond confused... my main concern is how they got jigsaw's body from the room where the FBI agent is locked in at the end... and does this mean the FBI agent is there at the end of 3 but you don't see him? and when they find Kerry's body is 3 taking place?? HELP! EXPLAIN!
Posted by: confused at October 27, 2007 1:00 AM
I'll give it a shot, "confused." Maybe I'll even end up figuring this stuff out myself.
my main concern is how they got jigsaw's body from the room where the FBI agent is locked in at the end.
Presumably Hoffman made a call. He would be the only person left that knew.
and does this mean the FBI agent is there at the end of 3 but you don't see him?
I don't think so. We can probably assume either that Hoffman killed him, or that he'll be in a trap somewhere next movie.
and when they find Kerry's body is 3 taking place??
yes. Most of the movie takes place during the events of part 3, I believe. The autopsy is the last thing to happen, chronologically.
Posted by: LYT at October 27, 2007 2:14 AM
I saw the movie last night, it was pretty good especially if you watched the first 3 and remember them well. I was kinda disappointed that Dr Gordon didn't show up in the film and I thought that was him torwards the end when that guy was limping but it turned up not to be. And another thing what was up with Jigsaw and his wife why did they split. So officer Riggs do you think he dies or what. I mean he can get out of that place. Will there be a Saw 5?
Posted by: Shayla at October 29, 2007 5:18 AM
I just saw the movie last night and it was the best one yet. Yes, there are a lot of confusing parts but you are obvioulsy going to find out in Saw 5. And if you didn't watch the other 3 Saw movies, I hate to say it but your not going to understand it.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 4, 2007 7:06 AM
You're a fucking idiot
Learn how to review movies
If you're not smart enough to follow
Don't be a fan
And sure as hell don't pretend,
To know what you are talking about.
Maybe you should think about watching it again
And understanding before writing about it :) ok?
Posted by: :) at November 5, 2007 8:08 AM
ur gay
Posted by: dsf at November 5, 2007 6:01 PM
Dude this was obviously the best one yet. Of course it's confusing. That makes up Saw 5 and I can't wait to see it. And if u didnt watch the other 3 saws ur not gonna get it.
Posted by: Mack at November 5, 2007 6:05 PM
dude, I love the hell out of the saw movies, but I agree that, in a series of movies with terrible acting, this one was almost unwatchable due to the lack of charisma from anyone in it (aside from bell of course). the traps were not nearly as well thought out or even as interesting to look at. these were simply death machines. only one really embraced the theme of what made saw so interesting: "how much would you bleed to stay alive" the others are part of a newer,less interesting concept of "how unlucky will you be to be strapped into something that will kill you unless someone saves you". Jiggsaw was a great vilian because he never murdered, he "depises murderers" and yet only a a few people had any choice in the matter to save themselves. just seems they focused too much on what made the character, and didnt focus on what he's already been set up to be
Posted by: Patrick at November 9, 2007 11:42 AM
Ive seen Saw 4 and i have to say i agree with ur review completely :) the worst part is that amanda is only featured a tiny bit because i think she is the best character in the series. Do u think there's any chance she's still alive? I was really confused by the storyline and i agree that jigsaw was heavily over-explained lol BRING BACK AMANDA!
Posted by: Sam at November 13, 2007 1:15 PM
Yea I have to agree.. Saw 4 was completely repetitive and confusing...the new actors were bland on screen..there were a couple of interesting methods of torture but the end scene was too played out for me..Saw 4 could've been improved if old saw actors were brought back and a different ending was used..just because Saw (the first one), ended with Jigsaw actually being in the room and walking out while saying "Game Over" and bringing an end to the fucking best horror movie ever..didn't mean the producers were allowed to get lazy and make completely incomprehensible movie endings after that...
Posted by: raneem at November 15, 2007 11:57 PM
I agree with your review. I liked 1 and 3, 2 was pretty good, but 4 is lame. It was way too jam-packed with like 80 storylines. The torture wasn't as clever. It was too rushed. It was confusing and it really felt like filler or that the story was just being pushed along. There were also way too many flashbacks and crap. I'd give it a D.
Posted by: Navid E. at November 17, 2007 11:49 PM
Yer 1 was the best, from there things just starting getting sloppy, I mean come on, Amanda died, pretty obvious, but I could understand her path to evil. I dont understand why there are 2 scenes where FBI agents do not call for back-up across the series - WTF, i never understood that part.
Bringing Hoffman into the story with no explanation as to WHY he became the new apprentice/jigsaw really pisses me off - what was his fucking motive for becoming the new jigsaw? This movie by far takes the whole 'predicting the future' too far.... And lastly Saw 5 will be an extension of 4 and show some flashbacks from the series and probably reintroduce gordon as the ultimate jigsaw and make people think "whoa awesome" but yeah I think they are just tarnishing the saw name now with too many twists, they had it won with saw 1 but they just slowly went off the rails.
But yeah Hoffman was working with Amanda so that means this movie was probably concurrent or in a similar time frame as 3 was taking place due to the guy looking for his daughter and Hoffman sending letters.
Posted by: Bryan at December 27, 2007 11:37 AM
Yer 1 was the best, from there things just starting getting sloppy, I mean come on, Amanda died, pretty obvious, but I could understand her path to evil. I dont understand why there are 2 scenes where FBI agents do not call for back-up across the series - WTF, i never understood that part.
Bringing Hoffman into the story with no explanation as to WHY he became the new apprentice/jigsaw really pisses me off - what was his fucking motive for becoming the new jigsaw? This movie by far takes the whole 'predicting the future' too far.... And lastly Saw 5 will be an extension of 4 and show some flashbacks from the series and probably reintroduce gordon as the ultimate jigsaw and make people think "whoa awesome" but yeah I think they are just tarnishing the saw name now with too many twists, they had it won with saw 1 but they just slowly went off the rails.
But yeah Hoffman was working with Amanda so that means this movie was probably concurrent or in a similar time frame as 3 was taking place due to the guy looking for his daughter and Hoffman sending letters.
Posted by: Bryan at December 27, 2007 11:37 AM