Saw the first 15 minutes of Saw

[Muzikman]

I just bought and watched it tonight. Good moive, but I too was expecting a lot more because of this movie. There were a few blunders and times where I found myself going "I would have just...".

I did like it, the twist wasn't bad, and if they should make a 2nd one as the end just left ya hanging. If they do make a second one, it better start right where the first one left off.

[Gtask8]

Hmmmmm.... Rated "R". In other words...not for 14 year old boys with no money.

[fullxcollapse17]

I thought it was a great movie. Its about time they came out with a horror film that was actually somewhat scary. Lately they have all been PG-13 and they havent been all that great. For instance, anyone see "Boogeyman?" that movie was terrible!

[Thordic]

Ok.... I just watched it tonight.

After reading this thread, I was totally expecting some gore, and overall scariness. Their was none of that. This movie, flat out sucked. That doctor guy should have been replaced by Will Farrel (they even look alike) that way when I'm laughing, it's because it's supposed to be funny.

It didn't even show the guys nub... What a total letdown. I don't think that their was a single truely scary part in the movie.

Man... Time to go watch Event Horizon.

Its a thriller, not a gore-fest horror movie, idiot. Also, it was shot on a ridiculously low budget, and I've heard the majority of the movie was shot in one take. Considering the technical and monetary limitations put on the cast and crew, I'd say the end result is pretty damned good.

[matt-o]

Extremely morbid, graphic movie. Not the usual "horror" flick, not by a long shot.

This was the first film that actually "scared" me since I first watched the old Carpenter films.

any connection with the name?

also they messed so many things up in that movie, anyone notice that when he opens the taperecorder in the beggining there isnt already a tape in it, or that when he opens the revolver at the end there isnt a spend bullet in it already? and what did zap ever do to deserve that? and how did that guy take a shotgun round to the back and not die, and why werent his clothes messed up in the least after he took said shotgun round to the back? and how did the bad guy hit the button to the tazer without moving his hands? and how did he expect the guy to kill his cellmate with the poisoned blood if it wasnt really poisoned blood? and why didnt the guy just cut off his foot, get the revolver, load it, shoot off the lock to the other guy's foot, then find another way out of the room? or cut through the weak, rusty pipes that held them to the walls? and instead of cutting of his own foot why didnt he take his own advice and use his shirt to get the revolver? the list goes on and on, i made better stuff in video production class.

i do have to say i laughed my butt off right in the middle of the theatre when he started cutting his foot off, my date was cringing too which made it even funnier

[SAW]

No, my name originated back in late '01. That's a whole other story in itself.

[AGDlover]

i want to see that movie sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo bad!!!!!!

[Muzikman]

any connection with the name?

also they messed so many things up in that movie, anyone notice that when he opens the taperecorder in the beggining there isnt already a tape in it, or that when he opens the revolver at the end there isnt a spend bullet in it already? and what did zap ever do to deserve that? and how did that guy take a shotgun round to the back and not die, and why werent his clothes messed up in the least after he took said shotgun round to the back? and how did the bad guy hit the button to the tazer without moving his hands? and how did he expect the guy to kill his cellmate with the poisoned blood if it wasnt really poisoned blood? and why didnt the guy just cut off his foot, get the revolver, load it, shoot off the lock to the other guy's foot, then find another way out of the room? or cut through the weak, rusty pipes that held them to the walls? and instead of cutting of his own foot why didnt he take his own advice and use his shirt to get the revolver? the list goes on and on, i made better stuff in video production class.

i do have to say i laughed my butt off right in the middle of the theatre when he started cutting his foot off, my date was cringing too which made it even funnier

Alot of what you said are the "I would have just..." comments I made.

The biggst blunder is the fact that he breaks the saw at the beginning and throws it at the mirror. Then in a much later scene as he is laying on the floor, there is a perfectly good saw next to his head.

A) Since the dead guy was not really dead, there did not have to be a tape in the recorder (same with the bullet).

B) I too would have cut the pipe and not the foot/chains.

C) The poison blood did confuse me.

D) I think he was probably wearing a bullet proof vest when he got shot with the shotgun.

I could go on and on...but again, I did like the movie.

[matt-o]

but he "thought out every possible detail". and that gay velvet cape would have still been ripped to shreds even if he was wearing a bulletproof vest

[-=Squid=-]

Its a thriller, not a gore-fest horror movie, idiot. Also, it was shot on a ridiculously low budget, and I've heard the majority of the movie was shot in one take. Considering the technical and monetary limitations put on the cast and crew, I'd say the end result is pretty damned good.

Ok, "idiot," I watched the movie basing my initial perception on what was posted in this thread.

According to this thread, it was a gory, scary *** movie. It was neither. There was zero gore, and it was not scary in the slightest. You know what else was shot on a low budget? The Passion... Now that was a gory movie.

Seriously. The movie sucked.

What happened to "done with AO," anyways?

[matt-o]

you know what else was done on a low budget? clerks the funniest movie ever. saw sucked

[-=Squid=-]

you know what else was done on a low budget? clerks the funniest movie ever. saw sucked

Agreed.

[BlackWeenie]

Alot of what you said are the "I would have just..." comments I made.

The biggst blunder is the fact that he breaks the saw at the beginning and throws it at the mirror. Then in a much later scene as he is laying on the floor, there is a perfectly good saw next to his head.

A) Since the dead guy was not really dead, there did not have to be a tape in the recorder (same with the bullet).

B) I too would have cut the pipe and not the foot/chains.

C) The poison blood did confuse me.

D) I think he was probably wearing a bullet proof vest when he got shot with the shotgun.

I could go on and on...but again, I did like the movie.

C) this was not the killer's blood. the pool of blood would have grown if he was bleeding, which he wasnt. so perhaps before he put those two guys in the room, he poured poisoned blood on the floor, and then layed down in it?

about the tazer thing. you dont have to move your entire body to press a button on a remote... it would be easily attainable to press a button thats in the palm of your hand without showing much movement.

[StuDawggie]

Also, it was shot on a ridiculously low budget, and I've heard the majority of the movie was shot in one take. Considering the technical and monetary limitations put on the cast and crew, I'd say the end result is pretty damned good.

Don't forget about the time constraints as well. The whole film was done in 18 days. The only other film that has been done even close to that little of time was Natural Born Killers, and if I'm not mistaken, that took 25 days to film. But getting back to the point, a small budget, with somewhat big names, a lot of make up/effects, and 18 days of filming, to end up with a movie like this is pretty impresive.

[-=Squid=-]

Don't forget about the time constraints as well. The whole film was done in 18 days. The only other film that has been done even close to that little of time was Natural Born Killers, and if I'm not mistaken, that took 25 days to film. But getting back to the point, a small budget, with somewhat big names, a lot of make up/effects, and 18 days of filming, to end up with a movie like this is pretty impresive.

... 18 days of filming? Good lord, that's impressive.