Saw 2 - Can you go too far?

Where'd you get 90 million from? The original made $55,153,403 stateside on a budget of just over a million. The sequels gotten better reviews so far then the original and had a bigger budget so it could probably make the same as its predecessor.

If you don't like gore you'll hate this one. One example of a painful "game", in this one, a man is digging around in a room filled with needles
 
the thing about sawII though, that there wasnt in Saw, was the 'nonono' factor. You know, in the first one, they had no choice but to be there, but in SawII most of characters did stupid things, eg. the girl putting her hanRAB in the glass box :rolleyes: , the guy allowing Jigsaw to take him to the house :rolleyes: etc. I found myself sitting there a lot saying 'dont do that you idiot!'. of course in the first film, they didnt have much of a choice with anything they did
that spoilt it a bit.
 
I saw Saw II last night, I thought it was a fantastic film, really thought provoking. I love a good horror film generally but I like the way the Saw films make you think as well as scare you. I noticed a number of peope (maybe about 10) leaving the cinema mainly couples - this is not a date film!! As sequels go this one is great, but expect to walkout feeling rather disturbed!
 
well i went to see it at the weekend, and thought it was excellent, maybe as good or better than the first, i'd recommend anyone to see it, although as most have said it is well gory, infact i was cringing in my seat, not because it was scary, but the fact of what is was that was happening, :eek:

wont say anymore, or i'll be getting blasted!!!! :)

But i advise all to go see it, or even better, watch Saw 1 and then Saw 2 straight after!
 
i thought saw 2 was slightly lame compared to saw. it really played to the teen audience. the suspense was pretty poor as well as the direction and acting, apart from jigsaw.
apparently they have already announced saw3.... hope james wan and his mate are back in controll for it.

the only reason why i liked it was the twist at the end. everyone was really shocked/excited by that.

if you want a great horror/suspense watch the descent or wolf creek.
 
The first to me was a masterpiece, absolutely loved it. Really Gorey and Scary, and usually I can't stand gore, can't even watch an operation on hospital Dramas but to me, the way it was shown on Saw was brilliant, I found it impossible to turn away from the screen even though I wanted to, and I'm glad I never the ending is amazing.

The sequel Looks even better!
 
Good point. Although the main game in Saw was a bit like that. It had two guys in the bathroom, and the obvious thing to do was to share information and figure out what was going on. But they both tried to keep their secrets.
 
I like horror films but i dont like films with really graphic torture and nastiness in them (i.e: Saw, Wolf Creek) It's not that i think they're bad films they're actually very good it's the...cruelty.

Does anyone else think that it might give other people ideas? I used to laugh at people when they'd say things like that but as i've gotten older i just feel that writers are getting more inventive, people are becoming more desensitised to violence and it really could warp some impressionable people, making them think violence is 'cool'.
 
I have just come back from seeing this and absolutely loved it. It was the most graphic, gory horrible film I have ever seen, but very entertaining (in a sick way) and thought provoking. At times I even found myself agreeing and liking Jigsaw! (how creepy is that man?!)

The only thing I didnt like was the twist at the end.

About Amanda actually being on his side and 'taking over'

I thought it was a bit cliche and a cop out. But, all in all a fab film and very disturbing
 
LOL too horrific? People usually moan that horrors have no horror and when they have a bit of blood people cry about it, they cant win! And as for not making $90m it made $30.5m in 3 days
 
I saw the first one by chance as the movie i wanted to see was sold out.

I was not expecting anything from the first movie and didn't think i would enjoy it. However the movie had me entranced and fixated to the screen. It was one of the best movies i saw last year.

However i don't know if i could see the second one after seeing the trailer (i cant stand needles).
 
Interesting. I think a lot of that success is due to the marketting, specifically the way they targetted the hallowe'en period. I remember someone doing that with a director's cut of Alien too. I suspect other people will jump on that bandwagon, so the next Saw installment may have more competition and not do so well.

In any case, a 2nd sequel is always hard to do well. By then all the good ideas have been used up, the creative talent is getting bored, and the previous films determine the franchise's formula so that if you do have an original idea the marketting people won't let you use it. It becomes all about the money. See for example Terminator 3, Alien 3, Hellraiser 3, Blade 3 (the last I've not seen but I'm told it sucked).

That said, with the end of Saw II
we get a change in protagonist, and most of the other characters die, so we have the potential for radical change if only they take it. I suspect Amanda's motivation was different to Jigsaw's. Jigsaw wanted to revitalise his subjects, to redeem them. Amanda seemed to want revenge on the cop who planted false evidence against her. This may be bad, because revenge is a very sterile motive for a franchise, but at least having a different character at the helm gives them an opportunity to break the formula. If they want to, which they probably won't if they're making money.
 
I agree with mintchocchip, excessive cruelty in films for the sake of it really turns my stomach. If it's a proper part of the plot possibly but it neeRAB to be making a damn good point rather than just there so people can go "there's a really cool bit when the man slowly slits a pregnant woman's belly open and shows her the graphic vivisection of her unborn son while she's still alive!.

When evil goes unvanquished at the end it just leaves me with a sick feeling in my stomach.

People say 'well in real life good doesn't always win'. Fair enough for a political thriller or an environmental disaster movie. But films like Wolf Creek or Saw aren't teaching us lessons about life. They're (supposedly) entertainment movies.

As for Cheek's advice "The easy solution is not to watch it if you don't want to and leave it to those that do..." I don't think anyone here was seeking a 'solution'. We're just debating these kind of movies - we're all well aware that we don't have to view these movies. If you don't like the debate there's an 'easy solution' to that too...
 
Has anyone seen "Audition"? It's a Japanese film, and it's horrible - pins in the eyes, foot cut off with cheese wire! ARGH! The Japanese go all out on psychological gore! (if you can get that?! lol)

Saw was alright, I might see Saw II, I dunno...
 
The way I see it, there were several twists. For me the main one is that the TV monitors were showing recorded footage, and that the boy was safe in the, er, safe, all along. And that the game was primarily about the policeman rather than the victims in the house.

That someone was working for Jigsaw from the inside was not something I guessed, but I know other people did. I think the writers tried to forestall it by including that character who died in the oven - he had helped Jigsaw kidnap the other victims and we may have been supposed to believe he was the stooge (and that there was only one stooge). If so, this was underwritten.

Anyway, I saw Amanda not so much of a cliche as an architype. Kind of like the victim of abuse becoming an abuser in turn. As a character in The Lexx once said, "Everything dies. That's why we have children."

That Jigsaw did not escape, but instead finally succumbed to his cancer, was a good thing. I'm glad they didn't spin that out over more films.
 
Back
Top