What website is complete without an advice columnist? No website is. That’s why we scored us a Doctor Maggie! She’ll supply advice for virtually any subject imaginable. Feel free to write your questions to her at dearmaggie@tehblitz.org. The weekly selected articles are published on Wednesdays.
Dear Maggie
No Comments! =( Put those fingers to the keys!
Saw one, Saw II
I recently read Maristar’s review of Saw II, and I think I’d agree with most of what she said.
Don’t get me wrong - I haven’t myself seen Saw II. From what I understand, she saw a preview of it before official release date, so I’m not exactly entitled to my opinion. But I do know this: Saw rocked. The original movie, I mean. A lot of people gave it some flak, and I think it was undeserved. Un-origional? Name another movie that puts people in a position of choosing extreme pain over death!
Saw was shot in 5 days, with post-production taking 18 days. That’s a grand total, from start-to-finish, of less than a month. Hell, the time it took me to design this website was just shy of a month. It reminded me a lot of PhoneBooth, another good movie (which incidentally took 12 days to shoot). Likewise, Saw II took 25 days to film. Any movie that can convey emotion and a story in that length of time gets props for efficiency. Anyone that knows me personally knows that I love efficiency. :)
I also enjoy Saw because it was financed through Lion’s Gate Films, which is a Vancouver film studio that officially ranks as one of the two I’ve seen in real life (the only other one being Universal Studios, but that’s only because it was part of my Disneyland vacation package). Being right across the pond from me, I feel a need to support my local companies. :)
Biased preferences aside, I do have a criticism. The movie was written and scripted well before Saw hit the theatres. It was criticised as being too violent, and writer Darren Bousman’s work was even called “too Saw-ish to be marketable.” The day Saw opened in theatres and got better than expected returns, Bousan received a phonecall asking if he would consider re-writing his script to become a saw sequel. This explains how Saw (2004) could be so quicly followed by Saw II (2005) (as there is usually two or three years between sequels).
It also helps define how consumer-whorish the ideal of Hollywood really is. This movie wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the original; and the writer only benifited because another beat him to the punch.
Despite that, I still want to see it. :) Maybe I’ll wait for it to come out on video… And Maristar keeps recommending it to me ;)
Saw II
I’ve not watched Saw nor Saw II, but I plan to if the opportunity arises. I love horror movies of all kinds. I don’t care if the critics don’t like them, they’re not made for critics. Proper horror movies have no critical value at all. They’re meant only to allow you to bask in somebody else’s misfortune and make you feel a little less bad about your own problems. Seriously, who can worry about a bad day at work when the dude on the screen just had his head taken off. He probably had a slightly worse day than you.
Some of my favorite movies are the ones that are reviled the most by critics. I love the House on Haunted Hill and The Haunting remakes. I am a huge fan of anything that Full Moon put out in the 90s. Puppet Master, Demonic Toys, Doll Man, all hated by critics and all universally fantastic. Just because nobody stands around in a room talking to Cecil in a British accent while arranging matches, that doesn’t mean it’s not art and doesn’t have value.
So I’ll be watching for Saw and its sequel to cross my path. Hopefully it will join the other critically panned but viscerally entertaining classics.
2 comments : D to 'Saw II'
Put those fingers to the keys!
Re: Saw II
Ok, all of the clever puns I can make about the title without a gag reflex have been taken, and that makes me upset.
I saw saw, and I will see saw 2. but not the one about the one small kid and the one fat kid - its kinda one sided.
Bazing. nevermind. Ok, Saw 1 was very interesting and provocative. I actually haven’t seen it to the end, which I should, and will if my lady friend will sit down in front of it with me sometime. It was so provocative because it was so new and fresh, both in basic premise and in the incredible shock value of the sequences shot for the movie. Because of this, I don’t think that saw 2 could be nearly as inventive - same bat bad guy, same bat channel sort of thing. But as i haven’t seen it, this review is not. So if you like horror movies, and nonconventional ones (if you like regular ones go see house of wax, elisha cuthbert is hot) then I would recommend this series of films. And, if you are merely a fan of gory situations, I am completely assured you will love them both.
I admit it - I saw “Saw II”
I know that most people don’t think much of a lot of horror movies. The writing is usually cheesy, and the acting sub-par. Personally, I usually get a kick out of them. They tend to be a lot funnier than the comedies that come out these days. And occasionally a horror movie will come along and actually be entertaining in the way it had intended. So when I found out that I would be escorting my client to a movie, and that she wanted to see “Get Rich or Die Trying”, I was pretty thankful when she changed her mind to “Saw II”. Ya it’s a horror movie, ya it’s a sequel, but it wasn’t starring 50 Cent and that was important.
Without giving too much away, the sequel brings back “Jigsaw”, the villian from the original, who creates traps which require his victims to prove their desire to live to save themselves from death. The original brought Cary Elwes and Danny Glover back from the land of lost actors. When I was watching “Saw II” I was surprised that, with the exception of characters from the first movie and 7th Heaven’s Beverly Mitchell, I did not recognize any of the leads. A few days later, I was shocked to learn that freakin’ Donnie Whalberg played the main character. Some people may have to get past the movie starring a New Kid - I understand, they traumatized us all - but seriously, I didn’t even notice during the movie, probably due more to his role than acting skills.
I’d seen the original “Saw”, and despite the gore, I did enjoy that movie. It wasn’t 100% original, but it was entertaining and interesting. Still, I had my reservations about “Saw II”. Rotten Tomatoes didn’t seem overally impressed, giving it a score of 36% fresh. Although theatres have seen some good sequels of late, sequels in the horror genre usually signal bad news. But I was getting paid to see a movie, so I couldn’t really run away, screaming in terror of the sequel-ness.
“Saw II” pleasantly surprised me. Yes, again it had the gore-factor. Yes, it had a couple plot holes. But overall - it was an entertaining movie. Some parts made me cringe, and that’s good - a horror movie should give you some reaction besides uncontrollable laughter. And some parts kept me guessing, and I find movies like that pretty rare. A lot of movies try to keep you guessing, but few can actually pull it off.
Saw II isn’t a movie that’s going to be for everyone - but if you want to see horror flick for more than just humour value, then I recommend you see this movie.
The Movies
Hey, look! Peter Molyneux has another wacky, nigh unworkable idea for a game! I’ll admit, I was worried. Even though I look forward to every one of his games, I am inevitably disappointed by most of them. Yet there I am, ready with money in hand everytime something with his name on it hits the shelves. Though he always aimed for the sky, his games used to deliver a fair amount of their promise. Comparing the gaming nirvana that was the games of Bullfrog with the tech demo that was Black and White, one can’t help but to be let down.
Which is why, as I said, I was totally worried that a game based on a movie studio was going to flop big time. Luckily I’ve been known to be wrong once in a blue moon.
The Movies is a trip back to the 1920s when studios ruled over their actors and lot with an iron fist. Ushering their fleshbags from lot to lot, from trailer to lot, and of course from bar to lot in order to crank out dozens of bottom of the barrel to slightly better than bottom of the barrel quality flicks. As you work your way through the game you get new and fancy places to usher them to, such as my the plastic surgeon which is my fav, but overall you’re just doing the same things all the way up through the end of the game.
What? That sounds bad? Well, I’ll admit that it isn’t fantastic. The game does tend to wear you down a bit with the micromanagement of your whiney employees, but there’s another game lurking inside. That’s right, two games in one package. Once you grow bored of “Theme Movie Studio”, you can start to work on your own creations. You fancy yourself a Martin Scorcese in tshirt and jeans? Well then step on up. The tools you have to work with are a little on the melodramatic side, and the scenes take a lot of work to get them to fit into your vision, but overall if you’re a decent editor you can whip up pretty much anything you want. The only downside is you either have to make them at your studio in game which requires you to research and build all the lots you need for that particular movie, or you can build it in sandbox mode where you have to do the same thing but at least you can start with a barrel of cash and at a later date where more tech is available.
I figure two decent games for the price of one in a completely untouched genre adds up to solid value from the boys from Britain. Maybe Peter is starting to get the hang of packing his vision into a box and putting it on the shelf. Maybe now I can start buying his games sight unseen as I do his fellow gaming masters Will Wright and Sid Meier and not have to worry about crying myself to sleep afterward. A man can dream I guess.
“The Movies” - It’s Just not the Sims!
I had very low expectations for “The Movies”. I tend to enjoy these types of games, but really - do we need any more of these? We’ve already got micro-managed schools, hospitals, rollercoasters, malls, zoos - now a movie lot? Come on…
But somehow Weasel managed to tear me away from The Sims (which gets about 10 billion thumbs up by the way) long enough to get me to try out yet another game.
At first, I was about as impressed as I expected to be. Oh look. My movie got 1/5 stars. Yipee. And what’s that? Oh we need more restrooms. Fantastic. I didn’t help that the game constantly reminded me of a cheap, sleazy version of The Sims either.
I had pretty much given up hope, when I finally figured out the much better part of the game - making movies. And then, I had yet another addiction.
I’ve made 3 horror movies (a trilogy) now. Seriously - I’ve only been playing this game for about 4 days. And now nothing has gotten done, because, who needs clean laundry when there’s voiceovers to be done?!
Unfortunately, I think by next week I will have forgotten all about this game. Or just plain be bored with it. And that’s disappointing too.
But because I have a short attention span (that and I just can’t stay away from The Sims for too long), and others might not be so quick to dismiss this game after making a couple quick films (which also weren’t that quick for me, cuz I’m all picky in post-production), I would recommend this game.
on December 2nd, 2005 at 8:06 am #
When you look at the reviews for, say, Jason X, they all say “I wasn’t scared at all” and “more jokes than frightening scenes.” I think Jason X is the penultimate execution of my favorite style horror movie - the one where the director knows it can’t be taken seriously.
Yes, the people on screen are screaming as they die, but when Jason grabs a girl-filled sleeping bag and bashes another girl over the head like so many sacks of potatos, I can’t help but laugh for the next… Well shit, it’s been how many years since that movie came out?
I don’t think critics “get it” when it comes to horror flics.
on December 2nd, 2005 at 4:42 pm #
Fozzie, I hope you’re watching Saw tonight! Maybe it will cross your path if you…say …go to the video store? :) I’m sure it’s a cheap one by now!