Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Saw ME Nooo!! and Moral Lessons....I KNOW!!

Don't worry this is not graphic detailed, I watch out for my horror-adverse friends.I swear it is made matter of fact FOR you!! Okay just as Saw V started, I admit I cheated. I looked on Wickipedia and read about the first victim and KNEW I had to fast forward as soon as the trap was explained. I know I AM a chicken apparently with THIS franchise! There ARE others you guys. I will NOT watch ANY of the Hills Have Eyes movies , The Hostel movies, or The Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies (only saw a preview for the first two series, and saw one of the Chainsaw with Renee Zelwegger and that mask freaked me out so much, I vowed NOT to watch those). I had planned on doing that with the Saw franchise and accomplished that goal for years, but just before Saw III was released I broke that vow, and fast forwarded my way thru I and II. The twist in the first one IS... Wow, I have to give the creator credit for that. I mean, the murderer is IN the room that WHOLE time with them, that is in a sick way, brilliant.

But the bloodiness that Saw and it's sequels utilizes, and those other series I mentioned I won't watch, just give me the heebeejeebies. Give me a good old Scream, which follows a formula, THE horror movie formula, and I will be much more...sane and happy. And not having goosebumps all over, when I have only READ about and fast forwarded the first death.

- 30 minutes later: Okay I stopped because my Mom needed help she had to go in to catch 3rd shift and do some inservices with them. I looked to make sure there were NO plans on another sequel as the reviews are said to have been harsh, but my hoped are dashed. A Saw VI is already in developmental stages. *cries* Okay lemme get back to you and THIS post in awhile or as soon as I need to pause for some scared reason...this is reassuring...in it's own way.

- 15 minutes later: Okay I AM watching it, but at the same time I read the synopsis on Wickepedia which is usually dead on. If it makes me less scared and knowing WHEN I need to fast forward is that SO BAD? I already know Scott does not escape the "newest" Jigsaw, and unlike Jigsaw ala Tobin Bell, this freak does not give him an out the first time he/she attempts to kill him (Scott gives himself a tracheotomy to survive and surprises nu-Jigsaw). The last time he does give an out, painful as it would be, but Scott thinks he has one up on the killer (Scott!!) only to be errrr squished apparently...

- 68 minutes later: Man that "big" trap really sucks. If they had only worked together they could (5 victims) have ALL survived. But because most of them were looking out ONLY for themselves, and stepped (nice way of putting it) on the others to survive, only two MAY survive, I don't know how though, down to 3 pints of blood each. In the original room all five could have survived if not for the selfishness of one. Nu-Jigsaw made it appear in each new room they went into, that 1 would have to die (in the next room there were only 3 safe places to hide with an explosion on it's way, then 2 blah blah's, etc) but when they get to the room where you think only one can survive, that is when they find the bucket that has room for 5 holes and demands 10 pints of blood to open the doors. If all 5 had made it to the room, then each would only lose 2 pints, and live for sure. Instead these two , have to ummm give a little too much. If they make it to the sequel I will be surprised....maybe one will survive and nu-Jigsaw will have plans for that one. Anyone who survives does not really seem to escape. Amanda was a victim in Saw I, but ended up Jigsaw's accomplice, so you are never safe. Ohh the one exception seems to be children, yes even teens, they are USED to get the adults/parents where any Jigsaw wants them. They are always thus far, found basically safe and unharmed, except that they are now parentless. *sighs*

And as usual all these people were connected, but only some knew it. All had in some way been involved with a fire that killed 8 people. A fire investigator who made a false report, a news reporter covering it, a city planner, the man who set the fire and the real estate developer who hired an unknown person to burn the building, in hopes of making a quick buck. The last two had not known the building was occupied and felt great guilt. The reporter figured most of it out immediately but did he share? No. And he figured out in room two that 5 people could have fit in the 3 safe zones, but before he could share, yeah he was a goner. So the only smart one had to be a jerk and be one of the guys who could figure it out but dies before sharing time. Agghh. It almost seems there is actually a moral lesson in this set of traps. Don't worry these are RARE, there is only one other that feels like this. Seriously hear me out! If they had worked together, all 5 would be alive and free. No one gave any trust, people were selfish, etc. No one had compassion for anyone else, they thought only of themselves. If they had worked together...see?

In Saw III, a depressed doctor is taken hostage by Amanda and Jigsaw and has a special collar around her neck that will kill her if she tries to escape or can't keep Jigsaw alive (he has cancer in his brain). Also in a dark building an extremely angry man awakens, who lost his son to a drunk driver. He has a series of tests from Jigsaw. Throughout this building he is trapped in, he finds the witness to his son's death who lied on the stand. Will he save her? He tries but is not quick enough. The next place he is directed to is a room where the Judge who let the killer go free is being drowned, the father saves him. He later dies but not because of the father. Meanwhile, the doctor is forced to operate brain surgery to relieve pressure on Jigsaw's brain and is successful. Amanda is jealous and thinks Jigsaw is telling the doctor he loves her, when in reality the doctor confesses she has a new appreciation for her life and her family. She has passed her test.

Meanwhile the father comes to his last room and...yeah his son's killer is inside hooked to a horrible trap. As much as he wants him to pay for what he did and lets the trap begin, the father ends up trying to save him but fails. His tests, it seems, are complete. Back at Jigsaw's, crazy Amanda won't let the doctor go, to Jigsaw's dismay. He does have rules. Amanda tells him how she created traps with no escapes, and shoots the doctor in the back, who falls into the father's arms as he stumbles into the room. The father shoots Amanda with a gun he found in the tunnels on the way there. As Amanda is dying Jigsaw tells her this was HER test, her willingness to keep someone alive. It is then revealed to Amanda, that the father and the doctor are married. Jigsaw says the father has one test left. If he forgives Jigsaw, Jigsaw will call an ambulance and save his wife. But even as he utters the words of forgiveness, the father kills Jigsaw, which slams and locks all 4 inside and sets off his wifes collar which kills her. The father's test had been about forgiveness. He failed. As Jigsaw dies he plays a tape. Jigsaw had taken the couple's other child and was going to tell them where he had hidden her if he had passed his test. ( I told you no child ever gets hurt, chill) The movie ends with the father the only alive person trapped. This actually DID seem like a lesson in forgiveness on the father's part, and on the doctor/mother's part, she needed to appreciate her family and life, which she did do, but lost it because of the anger in her husband. The forgiveness he could not give, even though he was alive and his wife could be saved and he had a child at home. A lesson in forgiveness. Don't worry he doesn't suffocate to death, in a weird time loopy thing, at the end of Saw IV a cop enters the room, sees a blood covered man with a gun and says drop the weapon, but the father screams "Where's My daughter?" and raises the gun and the cop is forced to defend himself. This cop would be Scott Patterson and how Saw V begins.

Seriously, do you see how in ONLY these 2 traps, there was a moral lesson? But in these 2 tests, that involved a plethora of people, there actually was a moral lesson. And no bad ones either. Forgiveness and appreciation of what you have? Good lesson. Think of others and not just of yourself? Another good one. So while these movies are filled with too much even for me, these 2 lessons are actually amazing, being from...THIS. Anyone got any opinions on the matter, IF you actually read this?

9 meaningful meanderings:

Natalie said...

I personally love scary movies and if you've found a moral lesson that makes me feel less guilty about loving them then I'm going with it!

CaJoh said...

Never got into gore and horror flicks— but if there is a moral lesson I may just have to reconsider.

Jillene said...

I don't do sacry movies--personal preference.

Kristina P. said...

I have to say, that the morality of torturing and killing people outweigh any good morals that may be in it, for me. I just can't do these movies.

blueviolet said...

I just can't do torture horror. No way.

Mary said...

I am a total baby & will have nightmares...and I don't get enough sleep as it is!

Whitney R said...

I like suspense and some scary things - Supernatural is pretty scary some times for me. So I can't do gory bloody murder everyone movies...

Donna said...

Even just seeing the previews for horror movies of any type make me feel sick. Can't do it!

in time out said...

love your writing, love the picture of arms and hands. thank you for commenting on my blog, and for your support when i was falling a part a while back. just wanted to say thanks. i have posted three awards that i want you to have. thanks again. and i will keep reading!!!!

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Feed

Awards and Such