This is a great DVD. I loved this movie the first time I saw watched it, and even more once I got the DVD and watched it with the writer/director commentary. I dont think most people who have seen this movie realize it is an Indie fiml that was shot in under 2 weeks for around $5mil. And actually, the entire movie was shot on one location, an abandoned warehouse in LA. Also, it was interesting to learn that this was just 2 guys from Australia who came up with an idea for a movie and went with it. The writing was so good, that Hollywood caught on and gave them some funding. And I agree with some earlier posts about the acting, but if you listen to the commentary and what the writer and director have to say about the 2 main characters, it all doesnt seem that bad. Watch the movie again with the commentary, and I promise you will like it a lot more. Also, even without that, I think this is the best movie I have seen in over a year. The ending really gets you. I thought I had this movie figured out a few times, and I was totally wrong.

2/18/2005 12:41:27 AM

indent

2/18/2005 1:04:47 AM

Quote :

"And actually, the entire movie was shot on one location, an abandoned warehouse in LA."

hah, thinking about all the scenes and locations that makes a lot of sense

how did they get both cary elwes and danny glover for way under $5 mil?!?!

2/18/2005 1:35:52 AM

Quote :

"And I agree with some earlier posts about the acting, but if you listen to the commentary and what the writer and director have to say about the 2 main characters, it all doesnt seem that bad. Watch the movie again with the commentary, and I promise you will like it a lot more."

So what you're saying is, the movie is better and the acting isn't so bad if you don't pay attention to it at all?

2/18/2005 1:43:07 AM

wow not to be mean and this is a rant from my own opinion but that movie was predictable from the start, the writing was not that great, and the acting was about the worst out of ANY movie i saw this year. perhaps the fact that it was indie gives them a little more slack but thats being generous

2/18/2005 1:52:43 AM

you knew the dead guy in the room was the serial killer dude the moment the movie began?

2/18/2005 1:54:47 AM

i didnt know THAT from the beginning im just saying that i could tell it was going to be the type of movie where they were going to try and surprise you with who the killer was. and about 10-15 mins before they showed that it was the person in the room i actually told my friend that this movie was so ridiculous and TRIED to be clever and confuse you that they would be stupid enough to make the guy in the room the killer.

i dono the acting just totally ruined it for me for the whole thing. ill admit it was pretty dang hard to look past that.

PS
and..COME ON the part where he saws his leg off to get that phone was just cheesy as all. the phone was much closer and easier to get than the tape recorded they used a shirt or whatever to get at the beginning of the movie. he could have easily used some of his close to bring that phone over or whatever. no need at all to freaking cut his leg off

[Edited on February 18, 2005 at 2:03 AM. Reason : ]

2/18/2005 2:01:47 AM

Quote :

"i didnt know THAT from the beginning im just saying that i could tell it was going to be the type of movie where they were going to try and surprise you with who the killer was"

you could tell that from the trailer and commercials...

and just because you knew what type of movie it was doesn't mean it was predictable

to be predictable you would have had to predict the actual things that occurred

like the dude on the floor being the killer

but you didn't know it was the patient dude until they showed him and then you were like-dammit, i shoulda caught that when they showed that dude b/c why else would they show him if he weren't relevant to the plot

Quote :

"and..COME ON the part where he saws his leg off to get that phone was just cheesy as all. the phone was much closer and easier to get than the tape recorded they used a shirt or whatever to get at the beginning of the movie. he could have easily used some of his close to bring that phone over or whatever. no need at all to freaking cut his leg off "

yeah, i totally hated that part too

don't get me wrong, i'm not saying this is the best movie ever and there were many things wrong with it and many things that were just retarded, but predictable wasn't one of them. cheesy? definitely. drawn out? hell yeah it was

[Edited on February 18, 2005 at 2:09 AM. Reason : asdfgb]

2/18/2005 2:07:11 AM

that was the worst movie ever.

2/18/2005 2:08:53 AM

like anyone could possibly know that ^

2/18/2005 2:56:27 AM

Why didn't they saw off the locks instead of the heavy chain

2/18/2005 3:56:55 AM

I thought it was rather funny when the guy pretended to be poisoned.

2/18/2005 7:33:58 AM

Quote :

"how did they get both cary elwes and danny glover for way under $5 mil?!?!"

Neither has made a good movie in about 15 years? Thats just off the top of my head.

2/18/2005 12:56:10 PM

12 years

Robin Hood: Men in Tights

2/18/2005 1:08:41 PM

cary elwes was in Liar Liar

2/18/2005 1:31:29 PM

Princess' Bride was 17 years ago???

AND DONT TELL ME YOU DONT LIKE THAT MOVIE!!!

2/18/2005 1:40:51 PM

Glover was in Royal Tenenbaums and Gone Fishing (this movie was awesome)

[Edited on February 18, 2005 at 1:41 PM. Reason : Glover]

2/18/2005 1:41:06 PM

I didn't mind the acting so much. It wasn't great, but it wasn't as bad as people keep giving it shit for. It's a decent thriller. The ending was set up nicely enough.

That said, my real problem was the fucking doctor couldn't tell that the dead guy in the room was alive and his patient.

But I liked the flick. Just saw it last night, by the way.

2/18/2005 2:02:34 PM

that movie was horrible, not only was the acting bad, but i would have loved to have known how the killer would've gotten all that technology/stuff he used/whatever. not a big fan of movies where they always hide the killer's identity to the last possibly second, they're just hoping for the cheap thrill and i cant stand it.

3/2/2005 12:05:51 AM

^^I agree with him not being able to tell that he was dead. If the guy was alive, even if he was drugged to keep him limp, he would still be breathing and his lungs would still move even if it ever so slightly. But his face was to the ground and had fake blood/make up all over it so he probably wasn't able to get a good look.

3/2/2005 8:34:22 AM

I thought it was an okay movie, but the writing was kinda bad, and as others have pointed out, it has some weird plot holes in it.

Also, they did drop very, very subtle hints as to who the killer was, but not that he was the one in the room.

3/2/2005 9:35:29 AM

Don't forget Cary Elwes' stellar performance in Twister. Haha.

3/2/2005 2:20:19 PM

Danny Glover is basically shit without Mel Gibson or a Predator.

3/2/2005 2:33:26 PM

Keep in mind that one of the doctor's flaws was that he did not care about his patients... or at least that's what was portrayed. He treated them less like humans and more like "just work". So it is very believable that even if he had seen his face, between the blood and gore and the lack of attention that he gave them, he still may not have noticed.

I'll give you the cell phone thing... that was cheesy, he could have reached it.

3/2/2005 5:13:36 PM

he didnt saw off his leg to get the phone, he did it to get the gun and shoot the other guy to try to save his family, even though the time was up. The phone being out of reach and the sounds of his wife is just what drew him to be crazy enough to build up the nerve to cut his leg off.

3/3/2005 12:15:01 AM

These dumb movies where the serial killer is trying to teach the victims a lesson.

It's like the movies have invented a type of serial killer that doesn't exist, but now it's so common we expect that to be the serial killers motive.

And I don't like that the movie wants you to agree with the killer's message, if not his methods. Like the doctor, doctors have to keep a distance from patients.

3/3/2005 12:46:23 AM

^^ he sawed it off to get the phone.

and i hate the fact that people are comparing this to se7en. this movie doesnt touch se7en, not anywhere close. its just a cheap thriller that hopes to keep people on the edge of their seats with no character development at all.

3/3/2005 12:59:47 AM

No, he did it to get the gun.

3/3/2005 1:00:51 AM

its just a cheesy movie, not worth over-analyzing

it was entertaining enough...

3/3/2005 1:55:21 AM

i hate to bring this from the dead............

but i honestly just watched this DVD (and the movie itself) for the 1st time tonight...alone, and it honestly creeped me out. I usually can pick things out from a mile away but this one caught me off guard. I picked Glover as having something to do with it way back in the interigation room but boy was I wrong.

at first, I thought the 2 actors weren't great....but it's only b/c we pay SO much attention to them. the movie was incredibly good, and I thought, genuinely scary. wow.

4/19/2005 8:56:21 PM

eh i kinda laughed when i saw it in theatres

4/19/2005 8:57:26 PM

Yeah, I really like SAW alot. I thought it was a good movie. Especially the last scene, that was really cool. But then again, I'm not entirely too picky with movies like alot of people are.

[Edited on April 20, 2005 at 7:27 AM. Reason : .]

4/20/2005 7:27:09 AM

I got the dvd over the weekend. Love it. They got a sequel that is suppose to come out this fall. I wonder what they will do with it.

4/20/2005 7:29:00 AM

Oh sahweet!

4/20/2005 7:34:02 AM

UGHHH reverse bear trap....

4/20/2005 7:35:01 AM

i was always confused as to why the lady in the interrogation room had scars on the side of her mouth when she got the thing off intime.

4/20/2005 8:26:17 AM

http://brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=256381

bah - the original thread is too old to post in & i just saw "Saw" & just have to respond to the several people who posted in that thread complaning about the acting being awful in this movie.

just in case you meant cary elwes ( the main actor ) & i'm suspecting you did b/c he was struggling bigtime & at times i even thought the actor was acting w/in the film to fool the Perp - HE IS BRITISH so all you experienced was a generally good actor, whom simply sucks at sounding like "Americans" do, especially when he's in an intense horrow scene ( i will assume it's harder to master another accent while your emotions are at their limits ) . they really just should've let him keep his british accent throughout the film imo.
AS YOUUUUUU WIIIIIIISHHHHHHH

that movie was on the level of Silence of the Lambs, imo, & i havn't seen such until now. all the qualities that make a psychological thriller successful were present & i give Saw much props, everyone involved........

k i'm done

6/13/2005 4:38:45 AM

also - it was obvious that the cancer patient, John, was behind this. the only question that arised was if Zep was involved criminally or was he a victim himself? i mean, it fit in logically in how the perpetrator could attain "lethal dosages of opiates", as well as w/ the smoker comments about that cigarette - plus, i couldn't think of any possible reason a terminally ill cancer patient would have any personal vendetta against a cancer doctor...... omg you don't know my name??!?!!!

6/13/2005 4:45:37 AM

Upon further thought and a second viewing, I like this movie even more than I did the first time. I still don't buy the doc not knowing dude's alive...but I'll give you not knowing who he was. I'm terrified that the sequel will suck. It will live or die by the traps moreso than the acting, and that alone makes me a little bit uneasy about the concept.

Maybe I just like it so much more now because High Tension was so disappointing...

6/13/2005 9:29:48 AM

i could have told u high tension would suck

the doc had no way of checking the body's pulse + he never could see the face of the body laying face down, which we learn, was wearing a mask & looked nothing like we remember the cancer patient looking like in the brief second we saw him ealier in the film.

6/13/2005 10:12:57 AM

i agree this was no se7en, but i did like it. also wasnt quite what i was expecting and thus was a lil dissapointed, but not so much to make me not enjoy the film.

the fact that it was an indy flick (low budget) really was impressive to me though.

6/13/2005 10:52:15 AM

I like the fact they have an Asian person in this film.

6/13/2005 10:58:46 AM

it was better than se7en. se7en had a serial killer with a boring purpose for his madness, atleast when compared to Saw. Saw's "madman" had goals with far deeper & meaningful methods. that's why the detectives were so clueless in Saw, until the madman picked the freggin cancer doctor as a victim - thus easily pointing to what his greater motives were, means & opportunity etc. since the victims all = people that he was around - the victims relations to each other & to the "madman" followed & you soon realize his greater purpose for what he's done ........

also - the killer in se7en simply took it upon himself to act out "eye for an eye" punishments to his victims. Saw's "madman" never killed anyone except himself ( i'm assuming his terminal cancer was from smoking; he poisoned his own body with the free will of being a smoker ) yet he gave the victims the chance to sort of redeem themselves by learning a life lesson & literally living if they do so. whatever clues/rules he gave them, basically told them the key to survive his "test". i mean - if you are going to play God like that - atleast Saw's guy did it by extreme "wake-up" calls instead of just killing the "sinners" via whatever means they've been guilty of doing themselves.....

the victims were simply picked b/c they were directly in contact w/ the "madman" & i truly believe he picked ( the MOST redeeming victim ) the cancer doctor after he learned that the Doc was possibly having an affair w/ one of the Scrubs - the madman wanted the cancer doc to realize how horrible a mistake an affair would be & for him to appreciate and value having a wife & daughter. the madman viewed such an appreciation as being more valuable than the fact that this cancer doc devoted his life to trying to save cancer patients!!

the madman blamed no one but himself for his cancer & STRESSED how important free will is for an individual - so the cancer doc / workaholic should even put 'saving people from cancer on hold' b/c he was dangerously close to forgeting about what's most important in his own life. the cancer doc passed every part of his "test" & ultimately amputates his own foot to ultimately prove he's guilty & ashamed for ever cheating on his family.

god this movie makes me not want the cigarette i'm about to smoke

6/13/2005 12:14:47 PM

Good job reading so much into a horrible horrible horror movie.

6/13/2005 12:22:38 PM

that's what the movie gave me - i just saw it late last night so this are spontaneous thoughts - & i loved the movie, which = the only reason i'm talking about it at all.

if i hated it - i wouldn't have watched it all the way

6/13/2005 12:24:11 PM

^ No I actually enjoyed that bit, pretty spot-on IMO.

Whether it was good or bad will always be a matter of opinion, but for such a low budget it was definitely a fresh idea and good execution.

6/13/2005 12:27:15 PM

i dunno, some of the traps the madman set up seemed almost impossible to get out of

especially the one with the guy covered in flammable gel, and the guy who has to get out of the razorwire maze

6/13/2005 12:34:04 PM

wasn't that a clip from what ends up happening to Adam? that's how i interpreted it at the end of the movie............

he doesn't get out of the trap, he dies - it shows his face charred in the crime scene clip / clue we see early in the movie. there are clips thrown into the movie & it's not clear about when they happened & that particular clip that i believed was Adam, wasn't someone's memory from the movie - it was just the director's story telling / subtlety with clues.

unless i'm way off - that's exactly how the ending made it appear.

[Edited on June 13, 2005 at 12:57 PM. Reason : my lord]

6/13/2005 12:56:55 PM

^huh?

What on earth is that saying?

Wasn't Adam the guy who was in the bathroom with Elwes' character?

[Edited on June 13, 2005 at 1:44 PM. Reason : ]

6/13/2005 1:42:44 PM

yes, but i thought it was made obviously clear w/ the ending of the movie, that he was eventually killed in the "test" to get the combo off the wall, w/ glass on the floor & flammable stuff on his body.......

we only saw a clip of this in the movie early on. this is my interpretation though.

6/13/2005 2:10:14 PM