Topic: Saw III will make you call 911?

[Pugnate]

Horror fans faint at new movie

A UK cinema chain had to call emergency services three times in one night because of people fainting during a new horror film.

Four people passed out in separate incidents while watching slasher movie Saw III at Cineworld complexes in Stevenage and Peterborough.

One woman was taken to hospital and two other adults were treated by medics after fainting in Stevenage, Herts.

And in a separate case, a man collapsed at a cinema in Peterborough, Cambs, "due to the film's content".

"If you know you're squeamish, don't go," warned a spokesman for the East of England Ambulance Service.

"This is obviously a blood-thirsty film. Some of the scenes are fairly horrific," Matthew Ware told the BBC News website.

The movie is currently number one in both the UK and North American box office charts.

Cineworld have declined to comment

Or 999 if you are in the UK.

[Quemaqua]

Sweet.

[PyroMenace]

Heh, yea, when I saw it there was an officer who was tearing the ticket stubs. My mom went to the bathroom and I just waited outside by him. He told me there were three people the night before that went to the bathroom to vomit, and I said the same thing, sweet indeed.

[MysterD]

I want to see Saw 3 -- especially if they put an Unrated Edition on DVD.

[idolminds]

Pfft, weaklings. I've looked at Ogrish and Rotten.com. Nothing can phase me now.

[beo]

ogrish.com = teh rock. but then i am sick.

[Pugnate]

ogrish.com = teh rock. but then i am sick.

I find it disgusting.

[MysterD]

Anyone seen this yet?

It's now on DVD.

[iPPi]

I want to see it but I haven't had the chance yet.

[ender]

I vomited at how shitty the editing and direction were in this movie. Oh... and the ending. I fainted because I got a big whiff of bullshit so strong I couldn't stand to be conscious anymore. Call 911!

[gpw11]

I thought the second one kind of blew.  The whole thing has a good concept, but they kind of went the wrong way with it in my mind. 

Oh, and in the second one...the chick who cut herself...how the fuck was she supposed to get out of her little trap?  I don't think it would have been possible.

[PyroMenace]

Saw II displayed stupid people dying horrible deaths, I loved it.

[MysterD]

I saw Saw 3. (sounds funny to say that or even type "saw" two times in a row...)

Did I like it? Yes. It was decent. But, it feels like a rehash of Saw 1 and 2.

I liked Saw 3 for a few reasons -- yes, it was a very disgusting, yet enjoyable watch. The plot was fine, as usual....but again Saw 3, has "too much of the same" going on -- especially since again, Jigsaw's pretty much just about on his deathbed, again....

They probably could've combined some of the best elements of Saw 2 and 3 into one longer Saw 2 movie and had a better movie, basically.


Saw 3 ENDING Spoilers coming...

(click to show/hide)

About time Jigsaw and Amanda died. Absolutely loved that ending.

I wonder if that Vengeance-filled guy, since everybody died around him, will become a serial killer like Jigsaw...or what? Who knows.....

Or if they decide to do a Saw 4, since something is left hanging, will he go and try to save his daughter???

We can assume she will probably die, since Jigsaw says she has a limited air supply. And Jigsaw is the only one who knows where she is, in some locked room....but, Jigsaw's dead now.

[Raisa]

bah, real life has wayy more things that'll make one faint and throw up.

[iPPi]

Finally saw this today.  Overall I'm somewhat disappointed.  The first two were more well done, and the twist here at the end was a mediocre one.  A fourth Saw has been announced, but I'm having doubts now.

This one is also by far the most gruesome one as well.

[MysterD]

Finally saw this today.  Overall I'm somewhat disappointed.  The first two were more well done, and the twist here at the end was a mediocre one.  A fourth Saw has been announced, but I'm having doubts now.

I liked the ending...

...But the series needs to, somehow, reinvent itself, if you ask me....

That or Twisted Pictures needs to make a non-Saw horror movie.

This one is also by far the most gruesome one as well.

I don't know how Saw 4 will top this, in violence, gore, and gruesome-ness....

...I still love the Needle Pit trap from Saw 2, though.

[shock]

I finally got around to seeing these.

I saw the first one and the third one.

The first one was decent.  I enjoyed it, for sure.  The acting wasn't top notch, nor was anything really, but it was acceptable.

The third one was nuts.  It was just a total gorefest with a boring storyline and nothing really exciting happening the entire movie.  It was rather predictable.. and just boring.  I liked that the first one sort of had you making moral choices, but the second one just let the guy get away with doing whatever.

So I doubt I will see the 2nd one.  Or the 4th one.

[MysterD]

First one was definitely the best movie of the first three.

Ain't seen Saw 4. I think that'll be on DVD very soon, this month...

[KontrollerX]

The first one probably was the best because it established a fresh new take on the genre but my personal favorite is the second film.

The third one is good but actor Angus Mcfayden has seen better days as Robert The Bruce in Braveheart.

Haven't seen the fourth yet but I'm sure I will get around to it since I plan to get all the Saw movies on DVD at some point.

[MysterD]

Yes, the first one was very good; definitely a new fresh take on the horror genre of films. Even the story and premise was actually pretty good. And the ending was pretty good -- even if it's great in one way, but not-so-great in another way.

Saw 2 was not as good as the original -- namely because it feels like a rehash of the first one, in many ways -- just on a bigger scale, with more traps and more characters this time. But the "traps", were even better in this one than the first. Many memorable "traps" here -- but, The Syringe Pit was just flat-out awesome.

Saw 3 was okay. Torture Rack and The Freeze Chamber were my favorite "Traps," but it feels way too much of a rehash of the second film

I hope Saw 4 don't repeat the trend of each Saw being not as good as the previous installment...

I will definitely see Saw 4, so I'll see probably soon enough. It's on DVD next week.

[MysterD]

I saw Saw 5 yesterday. As usual with Saw installments, the traps just seem to be getting more inventive, more crazy, and outlandish each time around. I don't know how they do it, but they do it. Probably b/c the rest of the flick is pretty much "Rehashing" the same structure, formula, and style of the Saw formula -- a handful of people get thrown into a room trapped; they are sinners in some way; they got to find their way out of the mess; cops and FBI agents get involved; etc etc. They probably need extra writers or something and more people on-board to come up with a new structure here.

Saw 5 takes some of those loose ends from the previous Saw movies and fills them in with back-flashing sequences. So, if you ain't seen ALL of the previous Saw flicks (Saw 1-4), you probably will be lost as can be with Saw 5. Hell, Saw fans might want to re-watch the old ones and/or read up some plot synoposis' online or something, if they need a refresher course before watching Saw 5. There's just probably too much going on in Saw 5, if you don't know the previous flicks well and/or ain't seem them.

Saw 5 was decent, though. As you expect, Saw 5 definitely ain't nowhere as good as the first one. No way -- Saw 1 was really good, if you ask me. Saw 1 is still by far the best of the Saw flicks, across the board -- in terms of plot, story, acting, premise, fresh-ness, and everything else.

[Pugnate]

I am scared of anyone who watched Saw 5.

The first was good. The second wasn't. The glimpses I saw of the third on late night TV made me think that only a person with serious mental issues would willingly watch and enjoy any subsequent sequels.

Those later sequels have no redeeming characteristics, and are little better than snuff. There is no art to them, there is no wit to them, and there is certainly no fear evoked by them; only disgust.

What sort of a person would enjoy watching a movie that entirely consisted of realistically depicted elaborate torture sequences?

Look, I enjoy the blood and guts in stuff like Gears of War, 300, and any of the number of countless zombie movies. I even enjoyed the highly entertaining death sequences in Final Destination 2, but that's because in each of those pieces of fiction, the violence was stylized to the point where it didn't appear realistic, and there was an element of fantasy that broke reality.

The Saw series, on the other hand, has now reached a point where it tries to depict torture as realistically as possible. I find it quite disturbing that there such a massive market for what these movies have become.

[Xessive]

Fear meeee Pugnateeer! Muahahahha!

[MysterD]

What sort of a person would enjoy watching a movie that entirely consisted of realistically depicted elaborate torture sequences?

This flicks to me, as realistic as they might seem to be for some, are still works of fiction. They're not real -- even if they do a good job of trying to emulate real world torture/violence, I still see them as fantasy.

Obviously, the Saw movies have done a good job at making the violence and gore look realistic and all....

...But I really would ALSO like to see these movies do a much better on elaborating plot depth, character depth, and all the stuff that namely the original did right. Of course, the movie would have to be longer than 1 hr 30 mins, as each of the recent Saw flicks (for me) have felt way too short b/c there's too many characters and threads to get any depth into with a flick that is this short.

Look, I enjoy the blood and guts in stuff like Gears of War, 300, and any of the number of countless zombie movies.

Indeed. Ditto.

I even enjoyed the highly entertaining death sequences in Final Destination 2, but that's because in each of those pieces of fiction, the violence was stylized to the point where it didn't appear realistic, and there was an element of fantasy that broke reality.

I liked Final Destination 1 the best of the bunch, myself....

...As the sequels felt like retreads of the original and were more focused on the mad-cool deaths than the actual story, plot, and character depth.

The Saw series, on the other hand, has now reached a point where it tries to depict torture as realistically as possible. I find it quite disturbing that there such a massive market for what these movies have become.

Would it work for you if they keep these films *that* violent AND added more character depth and story to them?

B/c clearly, I think this is what the last 4 Saw flicks have lacked.

[W7RE]

I guess you can fear me too then, lol.

I still think the Saw movies are a little tamer than they could be. They present a violent trap or whatever and you know what's happening to the person, but you don't always get to see it. For example, near the end of Saw V:

(click to show/hide)

The guy and the girl stick their hands into a machine with a sawblade that cuts splits their hand in half. The only time you see the extent of the damage done is for a friend second when you see that the guy's hand is split halfway tot he elbow with the pinky and ring finger on one side and the index, middle, and thumb of the other. You see it for just a second or two, then never again. The girl stumbles out of the room holding her bloody arm in such a way that you never see the damage.

The first movie did the same thing.

(click to show/hide)

You see Cary Elwes cut his foot off, but you never really see it. I don't even remember if you see the stump, I think you just see the severed foot, and only for a moment. Then you see him hopping around but you never see the stump.

Oh yea and I guess adding something to the movies other than gore, like story and such, would be good, but I honestly never expected that from the series. Sure the first movie was fresh and original, but 2-5 were just for the gore. And yea, I've visited ogrish and the like too. Sometimes while eating.

[Xessive]

Saw is like the "mainstream" set of gore movies, there's far worse stuff if you actually want to look for it. There's Hostel too.

[MysterD]

Oh yeah, both Hostel flicks were brutal.
Both Hostels were far better movies than the last 4 Saw movies, I might add.

[Cobra951]

Films like the Saws and the Hostels help me understand the cries for censorship.  They don't make me support censorship, but neither does a bowl full of shit with an American flag on top presented as art at an exhibition.  Extremes of disgust and fictional depravity must be tolerated, or our principles mean nothing.  That's not the same as embracing or supporting them.

[Quemaqua]

I can see that with Hostel, not so much with Saw.  Even as far as gore goes, the first two were very tame.  The contraptions and such are rather diabolical, but far gorier movies have been made regularly since the 70s.

[Cobra951]

I will defer to Pug's reply #21 above.  I found the first Saw shocking, and I could not get through Hostel 1.  I watched no more of either series.  The object seems to be to make you experience what that sort of evil is for real, as graphically and viscerally as possible, not as short point to establish how bad some bad guy is, and then move on to the rest of the story, but as an end in itself.  Who can enjoy that who is not himself depraved, and seeking catharsis or personal enjoyment by proxy?  What innocent could avoid being at least a bit corrupted by it?

[W7RE]

I don't know, I see gore and if it's extreme enough and well done enough, the first word I think to say is "cool". If I know it's real, it's more of a reminder that it could all end so easily.

[Quemaqua]

Yeah.  Fake gore doesn't bother me, but real stuff makes me sick to my stomach.  Like watching some of the old riot videos of the 90s, and when that truck driver got beat to death with a brick.  That makes me ill.  Pictures of the holocaust, same.  Fake movie crap?  Who cares, it's makeup.  Sometimes I find the concepts disturbing (I debated watching Hostel and eventually just said forget it, the premise was a bit much for me).  But something like Saw is just a cartoon, a caricature, a comic book.  At best.

[Pugnate]

I wasn't so bothered by the first two Saw movies at all. Especially the first.

[PyroMenace]

I am scared of anyone who watched Saw 5.

The first was good. The second wasn't. The glimpses I saw of the third on late night TV made me think that only a person with serious mental issues would willingly watch and enjoy any subsequent sequels.

Those later sequels have no redeeming characteristics, and are little better than snuff. There is no art to them, there is no wit to them, and there is certainly no fear evoked by them; only disgust.

What sort of a person would enjoy watching a movie that entirely consisted of realistically depicted elaborate torture sequences?

Look, I enjoy the blood and guts in stuff like Gears of War, 300, and any of the number of countless zombie movies. I even enjoyed the highly entertaining death sequences in Final Destination 2, but that's because in each of those pieces of fiction, the violence was stylized to the point where it didn't appear realistic, and there was an element of fantasy that broke reality.

The Saw series, on the other hand, has now reached a point where it tries to depict torture as realistically as possible. I find it quite disturbing that there such a massive market for what these movies have become.

Whether its Saw, Evil Dead, or Romero's zombie movies. Gratuitous violence has been the center and art of entertainment since its birth, arguing against this fact just seems pointless to me. Even going back to how ridiculous horror films look, you can guarantee the special effects team were always going for "as realistic as possible" within their limitations.

[Pugnate]

Sure, but my objection to Saw III or Saw IV, doesn't solely concern its realistic violence. Hell, I am sure there is fiction where I enjoyed realistic gore. The purpose that Saw's violence serves is elaborate torture.

Watching a zombie eat a human being's guts doesn't bother me... but watching a thirty minute sequence where a person's appendages are slowly twisted till they break, while he screams his lungs off, is pretty sickening to me. It is just a few notches above watching a long and violent acted rape sequence, even if it is for the horror -- it is just mentally depraved.

I don't care what hyper realistically ultra violent piece of fiction anyone enjoys... hell I'll probably enjoy it too. But come on, sure sadism crosses the boundary. Heck, I even have trouble classifying some of this torture porn as horror.

Yeah.  Fake gore doesn't bother me, but real stuff makes me sick to my stomach.  Like watching some of the old riot videos of the 90s, and when that truck driver got beat to death with a brick.  That makes me ill.  Pictures of the holocaust, same.  Fake movie crap?  Who cares, it's makeup.  Sometimes I find the concepts disturbing (I debated watching Hostel and eventually just said forget it, the premise was a bit much for me).  But something like Saw is just a cartoon, a caricature, a comic book.  At best.

I don't know, but neither of the first two saw movies bothered me. Then I saw a few sequences of Saw III on TV, and then caught a few glimpses of Saw IV another time, and noticed that they had really pushed the ante.

Also, I haven't heard of his truck driver thing, but I am glad I haven't seen it.

One time, back when P2P was new, I downloaded this Lion attack video, thinking it would be some cool documentary clip. Turned out, it was a recovered film from a family handicam, where they are out on a safari when the husband goes out to take some pictures, and some lions attack him. The video was being shot from within the family's jeep, and well, it was all pretty disgusting. While the clip lacked audio, you could see the kids crying while the lions ate the guy.

To this day, I am still not sure if it was 100% real, but it made me really really sick.

[iPPi]

I enjoyed the first two Saw movies.  The third was absolute garbage and I have no desire to see the fourth or the fifth.

[Quemaqua]

I think what it comes down to is that a lot of what we consider entertainment is really degenerate filth.  Akin to what Pyro said... it's been that way since forever.  Humans are sick beings by nature.

[Xessive]

And so I resort to entertaining myself with a ball of yarn.. Like my cat.. Ok, my cat has long been bored of that old ball o' yarn.

Seriously, humanity has had a fair share of genuinely fucked up members. Is it mere sadistic voyeurism or just a curiosity to understand the darker side of things?

[MysterD]

Oh yea and I guess adding something to the movies other than gore, like story and such, would be good, but I honestly never expected that from the series. Sure the first movie was fresh and original, but 2-5 were just for the gore. And yea, I've visited ogrish and the like too. Sometimes while eating.

And I think maybe Saw 6 heard your cry of wanting a little more story - as this Saw 6 feels more of a focus on the story than the traps. Sure, there's a good handful of traps - but it feels like the deaths and traps moved along quicker than before. Like previous Saw flicks, if you ain't followed ALL of the Saw movies, you're bound to be lost - as there is plenty of back-flashing of stuff we seen in past Saw flicks and again it's filling in some stuff with some stuff we ain't seen just thrown somewhere into the whole Saw timeline.

The file opens and ends pretty much w/ the most vicious traps in the films...

(click to show/hide)

The Cut Your Own Flesh Trap as the opener; and the Corrosive Trap as the closer. It really doesn't get more disgusting than those.

Sure, the traps in Saw 6 are brutal (of course) - but they feel like they moved quicker than before. Some of them just didn't seem as vicious and as crazy as some of the stuff we've seen in Saw 3, 4, and 5. This time around, such traps like the...

(click to show/hide)

Carousel Trap Filled With Guns, The Two Body Crushing Traps, and The Two Hangmen Trap just don't spew out the violence other traps from Saw 3, 4, and 5 have.

These traps were used more to heighten the story and on-going moral choices a certain character will continue to make throughout the film - which really goes back to what made Saw 1 (especially) and 2 interesting. The other Saw films (3,4,5) seem to lost that somewhere along the way...

Saw 6 is the best Saw flick since Saw 2.
And as we all know and probably figured, Saw 1 is by far my favorite of the Saw flicks.