Self torture
October 29, 2010 12:33 PM Subscribe
Elvis, I don't think you saw what he did there.
posted by jbickers at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2010 [7 favorites]
posted by jbickers at 12:37 PM on October 29, 2010 [7 favorites]
It's pretty weird to see Michael Emerson eyeballing around in Saw, now that LOST was a thing.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:46 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by shakespeherian at 12:46 PM on October 29, 2010
Saw one is relatively charming and naive in retrospect. I especially love the part where they illustrate that Danny Glover's character has gone insane by pointing it out in voiceover as he flips through old scrapbooks laughing maniacally.
And the extra pale makeup on Cary Elwes to indicate serious blood-loss, but which mostly just looks like extra pale makeup.
posted by hermitosis at 12:46 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
And the extra pale makeup on Cary Elwes to indicate serious blood-loss, but which mostly just looks like extra pale makeup.
posted by hermitosis at 12:46 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
Well, that was more pleasant (?) than actually watching any of the films....
posted by hippybear at 12:47 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by hippybear at 12:47 PM on October 29, 2010
Well, that was more pleasant (?) than actually watching any of the films....
Yeah. Talk about a time saver.
Glad I never.. saw them.
posted by hanoixan at 12:49 PM on October 29, 2010
Yeah. Talk about a time saver.
Glad I never.. saw them.
posted by hanoixan at 12:49 PM on October 29, 2010
Saw one is relatively charming and naive in retrospect.
It's true. It's a decent stupid horror film, assuming you can put out of your head the fact of the trillions of sequels and look-alikes.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:49 PM on October 29, 2010
It's true. It's a decent stupid horror film, assuming you can put out of your head the fact of the trillions of sequels and look-alikes.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:49 PM on October 29, 2010
Am I the only person who is really curious about Saw, but can't get around the actual content to watch it? It sounds really interesting, in concept, and all the different tortures and torture devices are really neat -- I once spent a good while on Wikipedia reading about all of them -- but once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast.
posted by griphus at 12:50 PM on October 29, 2010 [9 favorites]
posted by griphus at 12:50 PM on October 29, 2010 [9 favorites]
The shocking complexity of the Saw movies.
posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 12:50 PM on October 29, 2010 [8 favorites]
posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 12:50 PM on October 29, 2010 [8 favorites]
Am I the only person who is really curious about Saw, but can't get around the actual content to watch it?
No, I'm right there with you. I love a good tense thriller, and a good jack-in-the-box horror film. But I'm not really interested in torture porn, and by all accounts, that's what most of these movies are.
I'm still toying with the idea of a stage version of Saw I, however. I think it could work if done correctly. Grand Guignol and everything.
posted by hippybear at 12:54 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
No, I'm right there with you. I love a good tense thriller, and a good jack-in-the-box horror film. But I'm not really interested in torture porn, and by all accounts, that's what most of these movies are.
I'm still toying with the idea of a stage version of Saw I, however. I think it could work if done correctly. Grand Guignol and everything.
posted by hippybear at 12:54 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
griphus: "Am I the only person who is really curious about Saw, but can't get around the actual content to watch it? It sounds really interesting, in concept, and all the different tortures and torture devices are really neat -- I once spent a good while on Wikipedia reading about all of them -- but once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast"
It took me a while to be able to watch them. But I've only seen the first 3. The 3rd one bothered me intellectually, while the first 2 did in only a gross out how can I be watching this kind of way.
My wife doesn't want to be in the same building it's playing in, but she does like making the blade bounce around in the blood with the box of Saw II (I think?)
posted by theichibun at 12:54 PM on October 29, 2010
It took me a while to be able to watch them. But I've only seen the first 3. The 3rd one bothered me intellectually, while the first 2 did in only a gross out how can I be watching this kind of way.
My wife doesn't want to be in the same building it's playing in, but she does like making the blade bounce around in the blood with the box of Saw II (I think?)
posted by theichibun at 12:54 PM on October 29, 2010
but once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast.
My advice: get drunk. I watched Saw III while relatively blitzed, and I don't remember much about the story (well, because it didn't have one, mostly) but I do remember that at the point where I would normally be cringing and half-covering my eyes and feeling vaguely ill, I just pointed at the teevee screen and said 'Hey that guy's leg is going to get twisted until it snaps' and then it did and I said 'See?'
posted by shakespeherian at 12:55 PM on October 29, 2010 [5 favorites]
My advice: get drunk. I watched Saw III while relatively blitzed, and I don't remember much about the story (well, because it didn't have one, mostly) but I do remember that at the point where I would normally be cringing and half-covering my eyes and feeling vaguely ill, I just pointed at the teevee screen and said 'Hey that guy's leg is going to get twisted until it snaps' and then it did and I said 'See?'
posted by shakespeherian at 12:55 PM on October 29, 2010 [5 favorites]
tl;dw
posted by clvrmnky at 12:56 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by clvrmnky at 12:56 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
Glad I never.. saw them.
YEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHH!
posted by emelenjr at 12:56 PM on October 29, 2010 [18 favorites]
YEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHH!
posted by emelenjr at 12:56 PM on October 29, 2010 [18 favorites]
I was just thinking the other day that I had no idea what the series was actually about.
Me too... except I still don't really get it.
posted by uncleozzy at 12:57 PM on October 29, 2010
Me too... except I still don't really get it.
posted by uncleozzy at 12:57 PM on October 29, 2010
I watched the first film in the series almost by accident - channel-surfing late one night, it was just starting, my curiosity got the best of me. (Identical thing happened with the first "Hostel" film, but I digress.) And as a few people have said, the first one is pretty clever, with some good actors and an amazingly clever/stupid "gotcha" at the end.
Haven't watched any of the others and don't really plan to, but I do recall that number 6 got some critical acclaim for a fairly ambitious health care metaphor.
posted by jbickers at 12:59 PM on October 29, 2010
Haven't watched any of the others and don't really plan to, but I do recall that number 6 got some critical acclaim for a fairly ambitious health care metaphor.
posted by jbickers at 12:59 PM on October 29, 2010
The shocking complexity of the Saw movies.
What's fascinating about that summary is the assertion that Jigsaw is basically putting his victims through the same experience that Michael Douglas had to endure during The Game.
Now, I quite liked The Game. It's one of those odd films in which horrible things happen but which leave the viewer with an astonishing sense of hope and rebirth.
Somehow, I don't think the Saw movies do that for their audiences.
posted by hippybear at 1:05 PM on October 29, 2010
What's fascinating about that summary is the assertion that Jigsaw is basically putting his victims through the same experience that Michael Douglas had to endure during The Game.
Now, I quite liked The Game. It's one of those odd films in which horrible things happen but which leave the viewer with an astonishing sense of hope and rebirth.
Somehow, I don't think the Saw movies do that for their audiences.
posted by hippybear at 1:05 PM on October 29, 2010
I watched the first movie for the first time just a few weeks ago. I thought is was a decent film, and not particularly shocking by current horror standards. It was bit of a surprise to me, give the reputation of the series and the fact that the thing was only made six years ago.
What really endeared me to it was watching the bonus footage and realizing that the whole thing was made by a couple of Aussies in their mid-twenties, just out of film school and so totally stoked to be making a Hollywood movie. There is an interview with the in the avclub this week, which is pretty interesting.
posted by Lazlo Hollyfeld at 1:07 PM on October 29, 2010
What really endeared me to it was watching the bonus footage and realizing that the whole thing was made by a couple of Aussies in their mid-twenties, just out of film school and so totally stoked to be making a Hollywood movie. There is an interview with the in the avclub this week, which is pretty interesting.
posted by Lazlo Hollyfeld at 1:07 PM on October 29, 2010
In a recent trailer for SAW 3D the cinema audience gets clamped to their chairs, then circular saw blades emerge from the scene and hack them to pieces.
Ah, one can hope...
posted by Artw at 1:07 PM on October 29, 2010
Ah, one can hope...
posted by Artw at 1:07 PM on October 29, 2010
Thanks for posting this! I was just thinking the other day that I had no idea what the series was actually about.
At first, it was about a guy with terminal cancer lashing out at people who were 'wasting' their lives; forcing them to go to ridiculous lengths to stay alive. Then he started taking on protegees who didn't stick to the "do what I say and you'll live" plan, which was kind of lame.
I like Saw for how incredibly complicated and connected all of the movies are. And for the goofy twist endings.
posted by graventy at 1:10 PM on October 29, 2010
At first, it was about a guy with terminal cancer lashing out at people who were 'wasting' their lives; forcing them to go to ridiculous lengths to stay alive. Then he started taking on protegees who didn't stick to the "do what I say and you'll live" plan, which was kind of lame.
I like Saw for how incredibly complicated and connected all of the movies are. And for the goofy twist endings.
posted by graventy at 1:10 PM on October 29, 2010
gladIneversawthefilms, beyondthefirst. butunfortunately, thewaythenarratorspeaks, madethingshardtodiscern. especially, whenreferringtocharacters, allIgot, wasriggsmatthewsmurtaughlynnamandachiefmccloudandjerrymathersasthebeaver. plusspokensomecommasplices, forgoodmeasure.
posted by Spatch at 1:11 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Spatch at 1:11 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
griphus: "Am I the only person who is really curious about Saw, but can't get around the actual content to watch it? It sounds really interesting, in concept, and all the different tortures and torture devices are really neat -- I once spent a good while on Wikipedia reading about all of them -- but once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast."
I'm totally with you. A few nights ago, after reading a bunch of the plot summaries on Wikipedia I was like, "I can watch this." I started watching Saw 6, since it's the only one on Watch Instantly. About five minutes in I was like, "Oh, nevermind. I can't watch this."
posted by roll truck roll at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm totally with you. A few nights ago, after reading a bunch of the plot summaries on Wikipedia I was like, "I can watch this." I started watching Saw 6, since it's the only one on Watch Instantly. About five minutes in I was like, "Oh, nevermind. I can't watch this."
posted by roll truck roll at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
The shocking complexity of the Saw movies.
That's for sure; I know I saw the first one, and either/or the second or third one, but the 6:66 clip reminded me of a bunch of stuff I never paid enough attention to, or thought was from another installment. If anything, they're pretty well-plotted.
once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast
Cary Elwes' accent is probably the most disturbing part. That is the one thing about the movie that I definitely remember.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
That's for sure; I know I saw the first one, and either/or the second or third one, but the 6:66 clip reminded me of a bunch of stuff I never paid enough attention to, or thought was from another installment. If anything, they're pretty well-plotted.
once the stuff hits my visual cortex, I want out and fast
Cary Elwes' accent is probably the most disturbing part. That is the one thing about the movie that I definitely remember.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
I always thought the Saw series was just a bunch of torture set pieces, and that watching this video would show them all to me so that there would be no point in seeing the movies. I was pretty surprised that the video skipped over most of the death scenes in order to explain the massively convoluted plot. And now the Overthinking It article has me actually wanting to see the series. I did not think that I'd ever say that.
posted by painquale at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by painquale at 1:12 PM on October 29, 2010
So... this is a spoilerfest? Any other reason for its existence?
posted by Decani at 1:13 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Decani at 1:13 PM on October 29, 2010
Also, now I have to watch the fifth one, if only for the goodness that is Carlo Rota.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:14 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 1:14 PM on October 29, 2010
Saw 1 actually has a potentially nice little thriller plot sat inside all the MTV horror theatrics, and had me wondering if the crappier bits were there as a result of quickly padding it out to meet a Hollywood required length once they had interest in it as a feature. The sequels would seem to count against this theory.
posted by Artw at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Artw at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
I'm biased towards mainstream conceptions of "good" writing, so I find the SAW movies as prime examples of flashback & voiceovers being the hallmarks of bad writing. In the first one, I believe there is a flashback, within a flashback, within a flashback. I think there are voice overs over the last two levels. I marvelled at the audacity. I can still enjoy a bad movie, so I thought the first few were okay, but not as good as Hostel.
posted by dobie at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by dobie at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
"I know you saw SawBoy does this make me glad that I avoided those movies. The linked-to song is a delightful little unicorn chaser.
And you saw Saw II too
But I don't know what you saw Saw IV for
..."
-The Saw Song (http://www.spaff.com/poesy/saw.html)
posted by pmb at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
I liked that. I've been curious about the movies, but not at all interested in watching that many hours of torture porn.
posted by Forktine at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Forktine at 1:15 PM on October 29, 2010
That Overthinkingit link made me actually consider seeing these things for the first time, but I'm still not sure I've got the stomach for it. I think maybe shakespherian's booze suggestion may have to be attempted.
posted by valkyryn at 1:18 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by valkyryn at 1:18 PM on October 29, 2010
I always thought the Saw series was just a bunch of torture set pieces, and that watching this video would show them all to me so that there would be no point in seeing the movies. I was pretty surprised that the video skipped over most of the death scenes in order to explain the massively convoluted plot. And now the Overthinking It article has me actually wanting to see the series. I did not think that I'd ever say that.
You can kind of say that about any long running horror series though.
Me, I'm waiting for the Saw movie set in space. Stupid and convoluted horror series's always get a space one, from Hellraiser to Leprechaun.
Jason X remains the best though.
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
You can kind of say that about any long running horror series though.
Me, I'm waiting for the Saw movie set in space. Stupid and convoluted horror series's always get a space one, from Hellraiser to Leprechaun.
Jason X remains the best though.
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
So... this is a spoilerfest? Any other reason for its existence?
Um.... Yes.
posted by hippybear at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
Um.... Yes.
posted by hippybear at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
I think maybe shakespherian's booze suggestion may have to be attempted.
It really does work. I watched Cannibal Holocaust that same evening.
posted by shakespeherian at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
It really does work. I watched Cannibal Holocaust that same evening.
posted by shakespeherian at 1:19 PM on October 29, 2010
Jason X remains the best though.
Jason X is a beautiful masterpiece. It's one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:22 PM on October 29, 2010
Jason X is a beautiful masterpiece. It's one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:22 PM on October 29, 2010
The Onion AV Club has an interview with the guys who made the first Saw movie. It's actually a pretty interesting read.
I watched Saw VI yesterday, and yeah, it's pretty terrible. The whole health insurance angle is pretty heavy-handed (surprise) and the acting is really bad. Oddly enough, there also was more contrived plot expository and not as much gore as I expected.
posted by elder18 at 1:23 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
I watched Saw VI yesterday, and yeah, it's pretty terrible. The whole health insurance angle is pretty heavy-handed (surprise) and the acting is really bad. Oddly enough, there also was more contrived plot expository and not as much gore as I expected.
posted by elder18 at 1:23 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
You can kind of say that about any long running horror series though.
I guess... but the links between the various Jason movies or Final Destination movies or whatever are pretty tenuous. They usually just have some of the same characters. The Overthinking It article made it sound like the Saw franchise was like the horror version of Lost.
Jason X was amazing.
posted by painquale at 1:32 PM on October 29, 2010
I guess... but the links between the various Jason movies or Final Destination movies or whatever are pretty tenuous. They usually just have some of the same characters. The Overthinking It article made it sound like the Saw franchise was like the horror version of Lost.
Jason X was amazing.
posted by painquale at 1:32 PM on October 29, 2010
The Onion AV Club has an interview with the guys who made the first Saw movie. It's actually a pretty interesting read.
Aw, see, I can't really dislike them for unleashing the Saw series on the world after that.
posted by Artw at 1:32 PM on October 29, 2010
Aw, see, I can't really dislike them for unleashing the Saw series on the world after that.
posted by Artw at 1:32 PM on October 29, 2010
Wow. I couldn't even make it through a summary of these movies. Had to shut down the YouTube window and think about kittens for a while. Just horrible.
posted by Help, I can't stop talking! at 1:38 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Help, I can't stop talking! at 1:38 PM on October 29, 2010
In Saw 7, a movie director is locked in a room. He is told that he has two choices: spend the rest of your life getting rich by making really bad horror movies while earning the scorn of everyone who has any taste, or fading into obscurity.1
1The movies have grossed 370,203,890 to date.
posted by mecran01 at 1:38 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
1The movies have grossed 370,203,890 to date.
posted by mecran01 at 1:38 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
Over-manufactured raised-stakes ethical and/or logical quandaries in horror seems really boring to me. I've never seen a Saw film because they looked kind of like Seven in that the killer has some sort of motive or method that I'm supposed to empathize with or appreciate and that didn't really work for me.
Is Saw that sort of thing or am I misreading it entirely?
posted by ODiV at 2:28 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
Is Saw that sort of thing or am I misreading it entirely?
posted by ODiV at 2:28 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
flashback & voiceovers being the hallmarks of bad writing.
More properly, over-reliance on these things is the hallmark of bad writing... except that sometimes the awesome thing you wrote would break the budget, so you just have to establish it via VO.
posted by Mister_A at 2:30 PM on October 29, 2010
More properly, over-reliance on these things is the hallmark of bad writing... except that sometimes the awesome thing you wrote would break the budget, so you just have to establish it via VO.
posted by Mister_A at 2:30 PM on October 29, 2010
The Onion AV Club interview really does make for interesting reading on all those points.
posted by Artw at 2:32 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Artw at 2:32 PM on October 29, 2010
Thanks for posting this! I was just thinking the other day that I had no idea what the series was actually about.
Heh, me too. A friend of mine keeps claiming the first one is really good. Hm.
tl;dw
Heh, me too.
I only made it through the summary of the first one. Then I got bored.
posted by mrgrimm at 3:48 PM on October 29, 2010
Heh, me too. A friend of mine keeps claiming the first one is really good. Hm.
tl;dw
Heh, me too.
I only made it through the summary of the first one. Then I got bored.
posted by mrgrimm at 3:48 PM on October 29, 2010
The final Saw film should simply feature an unfortunate waking in a grimy cell with a single television screen. The screen fizzes into life and the victim is subjected to the entire Saw series, films 1 to 7. The tv's remote control is lacking batteries.
posted by 4eyes at 4:07 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by 4eyes at 4:07 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
Yeah, I've never seen any of them because I have no interest in torture porn, but the OverthinkingIt article has me intrigued too, as I loves me some complex plots. But I imagine I'll wait at least until the word on Saw 3-D comes in as to whether it provides a satisfying ending to the series.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:21 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:21 PM on October 29, 2010
First off, I hated The Game. I had no buy in at the end. My gut reaction was "Give me a break!"
As for Jason X:
As for Jason X:
Ebert: "Jason X sucks on the levels of storytelling, character development, suspense, special effects, originality, punctuation, neatness and aptness of thought."posted by NortonDC at 4:32 PM on October 29, 2010 [2 favorites]
Yeah, but it's in SPACE!
Heh. Well, I'd say that pretty much invalidates his entire career. What an idiot.
posted by Artw at 4:35 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by Artw at 4:35 PM on October 29, 2010
mecran01, you've been following this, haven't you?
posted by queensissy at 4:44 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by queensissy at 4:44 PM on October 29, 2010
It was time for me to watch all of the 'Saw' films in one sitting.
Marathon Man: The 'Saw' Series
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 5:16 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
Marathon Man: The 'Saw' Series
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 5:16 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
I, like some other people here, got interested in checking the Saw movies out a few years back and promptly went and watched the first one. I was hooked and went and watched the others.
Most people have it wrong about the Saw movies when they call it tortue porn, or at least partially, but mostly because they just haven't seen them. It probably is readily lumped into the "torture porn" category because of Hostel, which came out about the same time, and the scary scenes that are shown which mostly depict that idea. The point of the "tortures" in Saw is not about extracting pain for others pleasure in a sadistic sense but it is about allowing the person to make a choice. Albeit not a good choice to have to make between extreme short lived pain or death, but it is suppose to be a choice that allows a sort of forced redemption. Yes, there I said it. Saw is supposed to be a redemptive movie, and in the end it only shows that people make stupid and wrong choices.
So, yeah, it's a horror/gore film but I will say that at least the first and maybe the second one are worth checking out. After that they get more convoluted in the plot and narrative while they start to totally toss out any kind of central theme just to show the next guy getting hacked up.
Oh, and the most ridiculous ending is the one with Wahlberg and the ice.
posted by P.o.B. at 5:26 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
Most people have it wrong about the Saw movies when they call it tortue porn, or at least partially, but mostly because they just haven't seen them. It probably is readily lumped into the "torture porn" category because of Hostel, which came out about the same time, and the scary scenes that are shown which mostly depict that idea. The point of the "tortures" in Saw is not about extracting pain for others pleasure in a sadistic sense but it is about allowing the person to make a choice. Albeit not a good choice to have to make between extreme short lived pain or death, but it is suppose to be a choice that allows a sort of forced redemption. Yes, there I said it. Saw is supposed to be a redemptive movie, and in the end it only shows that people make stupid and wrong choices.
So, yeah, it's a horror/gore film but I will say that at least the first and maybe the second one are worth checking out. After that they get more convoluted in the plot and narrative while they start to totally toss out any kind of central theme just to show the next guy getting hacked up.
Oh, and the most ridiculous ending is the one with Wahlberg and the ice.
posted by P.o.B. at 5:26 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
this is more disturbing, and entertaining, and funky, than any saw movie could dream of
posted by lukievan at 5:57 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by lukievan at 5:57 PM on October 29, 2010
I couldn't make it through all of the first movie; it made me too uncomfortable. But it wasn't so much the gruesome deaths that squicked me out, it was watching Cary Elwes desperately attempt to emote. They should make a Nick Cage Saw movie, now I'd line up for those lulz.
posted by mek at 6:27 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by mek at 6:27 PM on October 29, 2010 [1 favorite]
my bro knows i love horror movies (such as Jaws, The Shining, The Exorcist, Blair Witch Project). So he brought over one of the Saw movies, I have no idea which one, but it begins with an autopsy with loving shots of the brain plopping out of the brain pan and such.
After a while (i.e. until we got bored) it wasn't even disgusting. It was like watching people play with cherry jello.
Re: Hostel. I am a really big Tarantino fan, but it really squicks me out that he put Eli Roth (and his good friend) in Inglorious Bastards. Blech. It reminded me of what it was like listening to Tarantino being interviewed and noting that he sounds just as creepy as his character was in Dusk til Dawn, or whatever that George Clooney/weird vampire thing was.
posted by angrycat at 7:09 PM on October 29, 2010
After a while (i.e. until we got bored) it wasn't even disgusting. It was like watching people play with cherry jello.
Re: Hostel. I am a really big Tarantino fan, but it really squicks me out that he put Eli Roth (and his good friend) in Inglorious Bastards. Blech. It reminded me of what it was like listening to Tarantino being interviewed and noting that he sounds just as creepy as his character was in Dusk til Dawn, or whatever that George Clooney/weird vampire thing was.
posted by angrycat at 7:09 PM on October 29, 2010
also, why is the first of the 'Related Posts' at the bottom page: "Excited dog plays with baby"?
posted by angrycat at 7:10 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by angrycat at 7:10 PM on October 29, 2010
I tend to think that most things are off the table for anyone who is prone to use any variation of the term "squick".
posted by P.o.B. at 7:22 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by P.o.B. at 7:22 PM on October 29, 2010
Grateful for this, as it saved me about 10 hours of my life I would have never gotten back.
posted by pianoboy at 7:50 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by pianoboy at 7:50 PM on October 29, 2010
hours of my life I would have never gotten back.
I never understand it when people say that. So like opposed to that one time you actually did get back time back? If so, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
angrycat, it makes me think of = squeak, which makes me think of = mice, which makes me think of = mousy
posted by P.o.B. at 7:59 PM on October 29, 2010
I never understand it when people say that. So like opposed to that one time you actually did get back time back? If so, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
angrycat, it makes me think of = squeak, which makes me think of = mice, which makes me think of = mousy
posted by P.o.B. at 7:59 PM on October 29, 2010
ah, got it. i thought it was a lame word i should be ashamed of using. Which, perhaps, it is. /shrug
posted by angrycat at 8:08 PM on October 29, 2010
posted by angrycat at 8:08 PM on October 29, 2010
Whoa, 66 comments. I guess I've ruined that now though. Next stop: 666 comments.
posted by hnnrs at 1:24 AM on October 30, 2010
posted by hnnrs at 1:24 AM on October 30, 2010
P.o.B.: Most people have it wrong about the Saw movies when they call it torture porn...The point of the "tortures" in Saw is not about extracting pain for others pleasure in a sadistic sense but it is about allowing the person to make a choice...a choice that allows a sort of forced redemption. Yes, there I said it. Saw is supposed to be a redemptive movie...
Using bizarre devices to inflict pain/injury/death on a captive in hopes of bringing about a forced redemption -- that's Torquemada right there. Saw may be high-minded about torture as compared with Hostel, but it's more full of torture than the Spanish Inquisition.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:46 AM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
Using bizarre devices to inflict pain/injury/death on a captive in hopes of bringing about a forced redemption -- that's Torquemada right there. Saw may be high-minded about torture as compared with Hostel, but it's more full of torture than the Spanish Inquisition.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:46 AM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
I haven't seen this much blood and violence since that Rand Paul rally.
posted by incessant at 10:13 AM on October 30, 2010
posted by incessant at 10:13 AM on October 30, 2010
Saw may be high-minded about torture as compared with Hostel, but it's more full of torture than the Spanish Inquisition
Well to be clear, I'm not saying it's high-minded, but you haven't seen Saw have you? The first one, which is the one I'm really endorsing here, has only maybe three(?) onscreen deaths and two of those take place in quick flashbacks. It's not a full couple of hours of torture and death. By comparison, the body count in most horror films is quite a bit more and it's not even close to the body count in most action films. Like I said, even the second Saw isn't that bad in comparison.
I never watched the show 24, but wasn't that hugely popular and had a bunch of "torture porn" in it? In light of that I'm not sure why people randomly dump on the film without even seeing it. Well, I guess people do that with any film.
When watching any film, such as a horror film, what gives people a thrill is the idea of being in the protagonist position. In most of the Saw films there is usually an option of sure escape offered. So the tension building question is posed in your mind: could I cut my foot off to save myself? You are also put in the position of having to root for someone, usually someone who in some ways deserves it, to self inflict pain. Which can create a disparity in your feelings of the outcome and may create a bit of duplicity in your feelings towards the outcome. Now I'm kind of curious whether it's more *ahem* humane of an idea to be hunted down and killed off as in most slasher films, or to have the option of escape resting in your own hands.
What's funny here is I'm not even that big a fan of horror films.
posted by P.o.B. at 1:44 PM on October 30, 2010
Well to be clear, I'm not saying it's high-minded, but you haven't seen Saw have you? The first one, which is the one I'm really endorsing here, has only maybe three(?) onscreen deaths and two of those take place in quick flashbacks. It's not a full couple of hours of torture and death. By comparison, the body count in most horror films is quite a bit more and it's not even close to the body count in most action films. Like I said, even the second Saw isn't that bad in comparison.
I never watched the show 24, but wasn't that hugely popular and had a bunch of "torture porn" in it? In light of that I'm not sure why people randomly dump on the film without even seeing it. Well, I guess people do that with any film.
When watching any film, such as a horror film, what gives people a thrill is the idea of being in the protagonist position. In most of the Saw films there is usually an option of sure escape offered. So the tension building question is posed in your mind: could I cut my foot off to save myself? You are also put in the position of having to root for someone, usually someone who in some ways deserves it, to self inflict pain. Which can create a disparity in your feelings of the outcome and may create a bit of duplicity in your feelings towards the outcome. Now I'm kind of curious whether it's more *ahem* humane of an idea to be hunted down and killed off as in most slasher films, or to have the option of escape resting in your own hands.
What's funny here is I'm not even that big a fan of horror films.
posted by P.o.B. at 1:44 PM on October 30, 2010
Wow, the guy from Horrors Not Dead really isn't a fan of the I Spit On Your Grave remake.
posted by Artw at 7:19 PM on October 30, 2010
posted by Artw at 7:19 PM on October 30, 2010
Mrs. Thabombshelter and I went to see Saw II on our 1 month anniversary, so now we've made it a tradition to keep up with the series. This video actually saved us since we've since lost what number we're on (we're always a year behind, so we still have to see Saw VI, which is on Netflix Instant, sweet!) The movies are confusing and weird and squicky and all, but we still watch them...and I suppose we'll make a point to see VII in the theater so we can experience the 3-D :-p
posted by ThaBombShelterSmith at 10:10 PM on October 30, 2010
posted by ThaBombShelterSmith at 10:10 PM on October 30, 2010
ODiV: " Is Saw that sort of thing or am I misreading it entirely?"
*spoilers*
You are misreading it. Each of the people in the traps has taken their life for granted in some way (in the earlier movies) or done something harmful to themselves and/or others. For example, a drug addict. The original killer has cancer and does not want anyone to take their lives for granted. So yes, the killer does have a motive.
posted by IndigoRain at 12:47 AM on October 31, 2010
*spoilers*
You are misreading it. Each of the people in the traps has taken their life for granted in some way (in the earlier movies) or done something harmful to themselves and/or others. For example, a drug addict. The original killer has cancer and does not want anyone to take their lives for granted. So yes, the killer does have a motive.
posted by IndigoRain at 12:47 AM on October 31, 2010
Everything about Saw I-VI in 18 words:
Dudes living in a world where all lighting is sea-green shoot each other and die a lot.
posted by sixohsix at 7:03 AM on October 31, 2010
Dudes living in a world where all lighting is sea-green shoot each other and die a lot.
posted by sixohsix at 7:03 AM on October 31, 2010
So yes, the killer does have a motive.
It's kind of a stupid motive though. As excuses to off a bunch of people in torture traps Dr. Phibes has a better one.
posted by Artw at 7:41 AM on October 31, 2010
It's kind of a stupid motive though. As excuses to off a bunch of people in torture traps Dr. Phibes has a better one.
posted by Artw at 7:41 AM on October 31, 2010
I never watched the show 24, but wasn't that hugely popular and had a bunch of "torture porn" in it?
Well, I was a big fan of 24. It had a lot of torture in it, yes, but I wouldn't call it "torture porn," that is, torture intended to give the audience (or at least a certain segment of it) a titillating thrill. Also, I didn't find the scenes in 24 that graphic—for example, when Jack cuts off Chase's hand in season 3 to remove the device attached to his wrist, the actual severing isn't even shown on screen (yes, technically not torture, but still). At the same time, I do know one person who watched the first few seasons then stopped because she found the torture scenes too graphic.
And it's the particular graphic-ness(?) of the violence that potentially bothers me; from what I've heard and seen (possibly inaccurate), far beyond even that of an ordinary "slasher" movie. Not so much the idea of "torture" per se, except inasmuch as having someone immobile and helpless allows the villian to do far worse things to the victim than a machete-wielding madman chasing them through a forest could.
In any case, thanks for your comments, which gives me some hope that I might actually be able to watch these.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:17 PM on October 31, 2010
Well, I was a big fan of 24. It had a lot of torture in it, yes, but I wouldn't call it "torture porn," that is, torture intended to give the audience (or at least a certain segment of it) a titillating thrill. Also, I didn't find the scenes in 24 that graphic—for example, when Jack cuts off Chase's hand in season 3 to remove the device attached to his wrist, the actual severing isn't even shown on screen (yes, technically not torture, but still). At the same time, I do know one person who watched the first few seasons then stopped because she found the torture scenes too graphic.
And it's the particular graphic-ness(?) of the violence that potentially bothers me; from what I've heard and seen (possibly inaccurate), far beyond even that of an ordinary "slasher" movie. Not so much the idea of "torture" per se, except inasmuch as having someone immobile and helpless allows the villian to do far worse things to the victim than a machete-wielding madman chasing them through a forest could.
In any case, thanks for your comments, which gives me some hope that I might actually be able to watch these.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:17 PM on October 31, 2010
It's more "RepubliPorn". "ha ha, torture works, suck it liberals!"
posted by Artw at 2:20 PM on October 31, 2010
posted by Artw at 2:20 PM on October 31, 2010
1The movies have grossed 370,203,890 to date.
Whoops, according to the L.A. Times they've brought in 750 million.
posted by mecran01 at 5:03 AM on November 1, 2010
Whoops, according to the L.A. Times they've brought in 750 million.
posted by mecran01 at 5:03 AM on November 1, 2010
« Older Fix The Economy, Health Care, Watch This Link | Civil Civics Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by OverlappingElvis at 12:36 PM on October 29, 2010