General Chat / SAW II

man it was hard to stomach at some parts. at the end when he's cutting his own skin off for the number... that was sickkkk. but the thing i liked about it was that it was real. not like the ring or darkness falls crap thats stupid and fake. this is stuff that could really happen.

I liked the key behind the guy's eye. That was classic haha... The rest of the movie sucked. The only good thing about it was the preview for Hostel.

Look who's back. Anyways, I saw this movie last night, so dull, so boring, so gory. If a movie needs to depend on the flashy/gory technique then it isn't a good horror, and that IS that.

I for one would like to see people explain why they like/disliked a movie other than say:

"That movie sucked, it was boring"
or
"I LOVE THAT MOVIE ITS AWESOME"

We're talking in this thread to discuss the movie and why it's good or bad. Please explain if why you thought it was awesome or boring.

That shit was whack as fucking hell. I thought the first one was better, but I can't wait for Saw III to come out.

You saw a History of Violence? Ick. I'm not even bothering with that! Watching a master sell out is not on my "to do" list.

Watch a real Cronenberg movie, okay?

This quote certainly deserves justification.

Sell out how?

Because he didn't make a grotesque movie about baboons turning inside out while watching car-accident victims have sex with each others open wounds?

man it was hard to stomach at some parts. at the end when he's cutting his own skin off for the number... that was sickkkk. but the thing i liked about it was that it was real. not like the ring or darkness falls crap thats stupid and fake. this is stuff that could really happen.

Um... what?

Didn't you feel Cork, like you were watching a "snuff film" while watching TCM?

It really has that feeling, like you're watching live footage that you shouldn't be seeing.

Tobe Hooper's crowning moment (aside from the collabo disaster otherwise known as Poltergeist).

Yeah, I kinda did. Horror films don't really get me nowadays as much as they used to, but this was a very enjoyable movie. Leatherface coming out of nowhere, then slamming that kid with a mallet. Leatherface putting the girl onto the hook. It was straightforward but effective.

Even the chase scene, though corny in some ways, was effective because of the use of camera angles and such. I mean, really, when you think about that scene, you laugh because it's so stupid... she screams like crazy and bursts through windows and runs into every possible obstacle and just barely stays ahead, but the way it's done is just so damn chillingly effective. I enjoyed that a lot.

and the fact that it was based on the true story of fine Texas American Ed Gein (sp?).

Ed was from Wisconsin, actually. And he never killed with a chainsaw. cg? basically explained it.

Also, he was a crossdresser or something, I believe.

Because he didn't make a grotesque movie about baboons turning inside out while watching car-accident victims have sex with each others open wounds?

LMAO... what film(s) are you alluding to there?

The Fly and Crash.

He 'sold out' by making a by-the-numbers studio 'thriller', rather than a unique David Chronenberg thriller, or drama, or science fiction movie, or, heck, even a comedy. For instance, I loved Existenz, and that didn't have any gore, or sex, or anything (although it did have some innuendo, and violence, and scenes which made you sick regardless).

The Fly and Crash.

He 'sold out' by making a by-the-numbers studio 'thriller', rather than a unique David Chronenberg thriller, or drama, or science fiction movie, or, heck, even a comedy. For instance, I loved Existenz, and that didn't have any gore, or sex, or anything (although it did have some innuendo, and violence, and scenes which made you sick regardless).

So you've seen it now? Because everyone who has seen it has said it's certainly not a "by the numbers studio thiller".

eXistenz did absolutely nothing for me.

No, I haven't. I have seen trailers, and clips, and promotional materials, and, yes, it all makes it seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller". Even if that's "just marketing", and they culled together all of the "normal" bits, I'm not really sure making a movie which can be carefully edited to seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller" is any better than actually going ahead a making one.

No, I haven't. I have seen trailers, and clips, and promotional materials, and, yes, it all makes it seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller". Even if that's "just marketing", and they culled together all of the "normal" bits, I'm not really sure making a movie which can be carefully edited to seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller" is any better than actually going ahead a making one.

How did you speak so assuredly when you've only seen a trailer? Naughty cg!

No, I haven't. I have seen trailers, and clips, and promotional materials, and, yes, it all makes it seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller". Even if that's "just marketing", and they culled together all of the "normal" bits, I'm not really sure making a movie which can be carefully edited to seem like a "by-the-numbers studio thriller" is any better than actually going ahead a making one.

Go watch it before judging. Otherwise, you have no credibility.

Come back, and THEN slam it.

How can you call Crash a "Studio Film"?

That was some very kinky and disturbing shit....very Cron.


His best film is still Naked Lunch.......I'll forgive him for Boxing Helena (I think he directed that...if not, then nevermind).....as for Existenz...I understood what he was trying to do....I just didn't think it was any good.

And, whoops on my lack of Gein knowledge....I do know he was a trannie or something...making women's suits out of flesh or something......(pre Silence of the Lambs).

Anyway, I have had this film explained to me....and I still think it would be utter crap.........the boys who made this (and the first one) are doing parlor tricks for the bigwigs in Hollywood...and laughing all the way to the bank.

Pulling the old Pymguy "Listen to one song, pretend you know the whole album" trick, except film-style, I see.

Nice.

Pulling the old Pymguy "Listen to one song, pretend you know the whole album" trick, except film-style, I see.

Nice.

I remember that kid.

When did I ever say that I saw the movie? I didn't, and, in fact, said I hadn't, and never would, and, so, everything I said about the movie wouldn't be based upon viewing the movie, and I assumed you all knew that. If I hadn't, I would have placed a good amount of words like "seem", "propably", etc, which would of more accurately described my intention.

Besides, it isn't hearing "just one song", because I've seen about 5 or 6 scenes from the movie, in addition to the trailer, and read synopsis of the plot, and everything else that is supposed to make you want to see the movie, and it makes me not want to see the movie, which was my point.

I wasn't judging the film as if I had watched it, but stating that I would never want to watch it, and why.