Jason Roer
Supporting Actor
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2004
- Messages
- 977
Hey All,
I was surprised to discover there wasn't a single thread revolving around what will most likely be the number one movie at the box office this weekend.
Anyway, I just got back. To give you a little background - I thought the first Saw had a great concept, but I really didn't like the execution. Just didn't work for me. I thought the second one was slightly better in execution, however it lacked the inspiration of the first one - that great novelty of concept.
With Saw 3, I had my best experience with the franchise. I think it started with the pack - probably 15 - of 13 year olds who snuck in. Just brought me back to when that sort of thing was so damn exciting and I think it set the tone for how I would take in the movie. Hell, their conversation was worth the price of admission alone and so I was in a great mood.
On to the film. Well, I found it engaging this time around. The problems I had with the first 2 installments were still there - I hate the MTV style editing they've developed, clearly a Dan Bousman thing as James Wan's did not share this annoying (at least for me) trait. Despite this, I was interested in seeing where they were taking us. And it did feel mostly satisfying at the end. My biggest gripe with this one was what I consider to be a major plot hole or a major oversight on the part of the studio. I've heard this was intended to have a much longer runtime and that a director's cut DVD will include much more footage, so it could all wrap up nicely in the extended cut. If someone can tell me how to spoilerize I will put it out there and we can see if it's just something I missed or something the studio missed - but it revolves around the opening scene with the female doctor, Lynn. What aggravated me was that by simply removing one line, there wouldn't be a hole. Again, with additional footage I can see how they might be able to solve it, but it would work much better if only they lost that damn line. Oh Well.
Cheers,
Jason
I was surprised to discover there wasn't a single thread revolving around what will most likely be the number one movie at the box office this weekend.
Anyway, I just got back. To give you a little background - I thought the first Saw had a great concept, but I really didn't like the execution. Just didn't work for me. I thought the second one was slightly better in execution, however it lacked the inspiration of the first one - that great novelty of concept.
With Saw 3, I had my best experience with the franchise. I think it started with the pack - probably 15 - of 13 year olds who snuck in. Just brought me back to when that sort of thing was so damn exciting and I think it set the tone for how I would take in the movie. Hell, their conversation was worth the price of admission alone and so I was in a great mood.
On to the film. Well, I found it engaging this time around. The problems I had with the first 2 installments were still there - I hate the MTV style editing they've developed, clearly a Dan Bousman thing as James Wan's did not share this annoying (at least for me) trait. Despite this, I was interested in seeing where they were taking us. And it did feel mostly satisfying at the end. My biggest gripe with this one was what I consider to be a major plot hole or a major oversight on the part of the studio. I've heard this was intended to have a much longer runtime and that a director's cut DVD will include much more footage, so it could all wrap up nicely in the extended cut. If someone can tell me how to spoilerize I will put it out there and we can see if it's just something I missed or something the studio missed - but it revolves around the opening scene with the female doctor, Lynn. What aggravated me was that by simply removing one line, there wouldn't be a hole. Again, with additional footage I can see how they might be able to solve it, but it would work much better if only they lost that damn line. Oh Well.
Cheers,
Jason