|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 10th, 2006 04:15 PM | ||
| Johnny Couth | What I liked about the first one was that in was based primarily on dialogue, I thought that was a pleasent change. | |
| Mar 10th, 2006 01:43 PM | ||
| Mad Melvin | Just watched the second one. It was crap. The first one was ok, even though the ending was just stupid, but this second one didn't entertain me at all. A few nice gorescenes, but thats it. | |
| Mar 10th, 2006 12:23 PM | ||
| Johnny Couth | The first one was alot better. I liked the first one. The second one was pure shit. | |
| Mar 10th, 2006 10:52 AM | ||
| KevinTheOmnivore | They're both equally shitty, so it's a tough call. Photo finish! | |
| Mar 10th, 2006 10:04 AM | ||
| bigtimecow |
donnie wahlberg i duditz! :hijack |
|
| Mar 1st, 2006 02:53 AM | ||
| Rez |
to me, they're both worth about $6 each on dvd. the true fun flick, absolute crap, but good to put on at anytime you can think of. the sucky part is waiting until you find it in the bins for that price, but spending over $12 for it is suckier. |
|
| Feb 28th, 2006 12:51 AM | ||
| TwinkieFace |
The fact that they could only get Donnie Wahlberg in the second one doesn't really say alot for it  PS: fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck |
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 11:21 PM | ||
| Emu |
|
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 10:33 PM | ||
| bigtimecow |
i'm an admin?........... :admin |
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 09:50 PM | ||
| lumpisan |
Quote:
|
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 09:31 PM | ||
| the_dudefather | i liked the first saw, the plot was pretty clever, up until the retarded twist at the end | |
| Feb 27th, 2006 09:02 PM | ||
| King Hadas |
Quote:
You know it's funny, if they had just stuck with "HOLY SHIT, the killer was right there the whole time!" and left out the goofy foreshadowing that "OMG, IT WAS THE OLD DYING MAN FROM EARLIER," it really would have been a cool twist ending. Still I liked the movie (even though it was kind of dumb) and I think the only reason most people didn't like it is because of how it was advertised and the particular group of people claiming it was the greatest horror movie ever made. |
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 05:05 PM | ||
| iron mitchell |
re: Quote:
|
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 10:09 AM | ||
| bigtimecow |
i think the second one had a better twist than the first SPOILER AHEAD not the fact that the girl was in on it, but that michael was in the safe the entire time. when watching it again, there's a scene where jigsaw says "he's in a safe and secure place." i noticed that this one sentence is said when the camera is in 2 different rooms (as in, the first half of the sentence is said and the camera is in another room so the audio sound different but then it cuts to him so the audio is clearer). the audio is coming from a radio/walkie talkie in the first half of the sentence then the second half is just his voice. it cuts off like this "he's in a safe and secure place." i thought that was neat because if you were paying attention enough the ending is revealed RIGHT then (underlined means it was coming through the walkie talkie)[/color] i love both of the movies, but they are definately not the goriest or BEST horror movies i've ever seen. |
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 09:20 AM | ||
| MetalMilitia |
To elaborate on my 'they are gay' argument I just thought they where too 'blockbustery' big-budget 'omg a twist' and where not clever at all. "Ok guys who is the least likly person to be the murderer?" "wait! I'v egot it! make it the dead guy then make some rubbish scenes to make it seem more plausable" 
|
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 08:28 AM | ||
| ItalianStereotype |
Quote:
|
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 01:15 AM | ||
| Mockery |
I don't see how they're clever at all really. I can picture the writers at a table getting drunk and having that typical, "ok dudes, what's like... the most... like... crazy way you could think of dying?" discussion. The storylines themselves are predictable, the gore isn't nearly up to par compared with loads of other horror movies (ie: constantly cutting away just before something happens, which is a BIG no-no in horror movies). What actually made you cringe? Hell, even the "Final Destination" movies have more cringe-worthy moments in them than Saw does haha. The Saw movies are just too overhyped... and the only reason half the people who are seeing them these days think of them as the most "extreme" horror movies ever, is because they've hardly seen anything else. But yes, we do agree on one thing, even though the Saw movies are big budget, they've yet to include good acting for some reason. I couldn't believe how bad Cary Elwes was in that first one. |
|
| Feb 27th, 2006 12:32 AM | ||
| Ninjavenom | Roger, i love you and all, but your taste in movies sucks so bad. What wasn't to like about the Saw movies? Granted, the acting sucked, but i thought the stories were original and pretty damned clever. It's the first horror movie that's actually made me cringe, too, so that's gotta be worth something, considering that i spent a summer of my life frequenting sites that focus on videos of horribly gory deaths. | |
| Feb 26th, 2006 10:35 PM | ||
| Mockery | The second one has better production and better actors, but that doesn't stop it from sucking all the same. The "Saw" movies are weak as shit if you ask me, just like that other recent let-down of a horror flick "Hostel" was. | |
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:51 PM | ||
| lumpisan |
|
|
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:38 PM | ||
| Guitar Woman |
Quote:
|
|
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:38 PM | ||
| lumpisan |
Quote:
|
|
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:32 PM | ||
| MetalMilitia |
gay like your hole then geez
|
|
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:31 PM | ||
| lumpisan |
Quote:
|
|
| Feb 26th, 2006 09:28 PM | ||
| MetalMilitia | The first one was gay like your mum so I never watched the second. :/ | |
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||
