Saw I, II and III

...

Saw : Directed by James Wan : Written by James Wan and Leigh Whannell : Starring Cary Elwes, Leigh Whannell, Danny Glover, Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith and Dina Meyer

Saw II : Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman : Written by Leigh Whannell and Darren Lynn Bousman : Starring Tobin Bell, Donnie Wahlberg, Shawnee Smith and Dina Meyer

Saw III : Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman : Written by James Wan and Leigh Whannell : Starring Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith, Bahar Soomekh, Donnie Wahlberg and Dina Meyer


The ‘Saw’ films have been an extremely successful franchise to date, grossing over $400 million at the worldwide box office against a combined production budget less than the fee per film for the average “A-list” (male) star. Combined American DVD and television revenue has been estimated at something close to $300 million. There is no reason to assume that the fourth film will not be equally as successful. Apparently, Tobin Bell is already signed on to appear in ‘Saw V’ and ‘Saw VI’.

Although it is rarely mentioned, the saga began in 2003 with a short film made in Australia, written by Leigh Whannell and directed by James Wan, in which a hospital orderly tells the terrifying tale of being kidnapped and forced to play a horrifying game of survival.

In the first proper film two strangers find themselves in a derelict bathroom of some description. Both are chained to the wall by shackles around one ankle, on opposite sides of the room. In the middle of the room lies a body, seemingly dead, with a severe head injury. They don’t know where they are and they don’t know why they are there.

The strangers are played by Cary Elwes, who is probably best known from a six-episode story arc in season nine of ‘The X Files’, and Leigh Whannell, the co-writer of the film with director James Wan.

As the film unfolds they each discover small clues to explain the situation they find themselves in. Elsewhere, the police have a serial killer on their hands, one whose operandi modus is to have his victims kill themselves in a variety of horrendously inventive and brutal ways. The killer is given the nickname “Jigsaw” because he carves the shape of a small jigsaw piece into the flesh of his victims. His catchphrase is, “I want to play a game.”

The detective leading the case, played by Danny Glover, eventually drives himself insane in pursuit of “Jigsaw” and is dismissed from the police force, becoming increasingly deranged as he continues to pursue the killer on his own.

The most “famous” scene in the film, one that was parodied in ‘Scary Movie 3’, has Cary Elwes’ character saw off his own foot with a hacksaw to free himself from the shackle around his ankle.

The film is gory, although perhaps not as gory as might be imagined. However, it is unpleasant. The premise is quite inventive and Wan makes the most of his zero-budget. The main problem is the acting, which in places is decidedly poor. The pacing of the film is also plodding, quickly becoming borderline tedious.

‘Saw’ was released in the UK first, on 1 October 2004, and then in America, on 29 October 2004, one week after ‘The Grudge’. Although it took less money than that film, both at the cinema and, I believe, subsequently on DVD, it was the point at which the change in trends within the horror genre occurred. Films like ‘Saw’, ‘The Devil’s Rejects’ and ‘Hostel’ were a direct reaction to the remakes of “J-Horror” films that had dominated for a couple of years.

Ultimately, we were taken from ‘The Ring’, an intelligent and well-made remake of a fascinating Japanese horror film that used the imaginations of its audience to create the scares, to ‘Captivity’, a film that would seem, at best, to be a repugnant cesspool of misogynistic twaddle.

‘Saw II’ doesn’t have the surprise factor of the first film. We already know what is happening and who is responsible, even if we don’t initially know why Jigsaw has chosen this particular group of victims. None of this is of any great relevance because, whether or not there was ever any intention to make some kind of statement about the fragility of life, the premise is simply a set-up to wheel out a succession of elaborate medieval-type torture/death contraptions.

The various deaths are gruesome, with extravagant use of offal and fake blood. One character is cooked and then burnt alive inside an old crematorium furnace, which made my stomach churn, but even more sickening is the hand trap with blades that cut into the wrists and arms of the victim.

The deaths of the male characters are brutal and gratuitous, but I can’t shift the notion that the camera lingers rather longer on the torture of the female characters, creating an abstractedly sexual connotation. Possibly I am being overly sensitive and reading too much into the imagery, but it does trouble me.

Although the second film can no longer claim the inventive premise of the first one, it is better constructed and is probably a better film. It is actually a re-interpretation of a film called ‘The Desperate’ that had been hawked around Hollywood by its writer and director Darren Lynn Bousman without success. The script was re-written by Leigh Whannell to fit the ‘Saw’ template and Bousman was hired to direct it.

This time around Donnie Wahlberg plays the police detective in charge of the case. He does what he is there to do, but principally he simply proves that he doesn’t quite possess the acting chops and screen presence of his younger brother Mark. Dina Meyer, who made a fleeting appearance in the first film, reprises her role here and although she doesn’t have a great deal to do she is given a lot more screen time. I think it would be fair to say that, in keeping with much of her career, Meyer’s talents are wasted, but she is very popular with the loyal fanbase of the franchise.

Tobin Bell is very effective in the role of Jigsaw and he seems to be developing the same kind of reputation that Robert Englund once enjoyed because of the ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ films. Back in 2000 Tobin appeared in ‘Brand X’, a season seven episode of ‘The X Files’, playing a character called Ashman who shares some similarities with Jigsaw. I have never seen any mention of this elsewhere, but I would not be surprised if it were not just coincidental.

Shawnee Smith also returns from the first film. She plays Amanda, a drug addict who was the single victim of one of Jigsaw’s games to actually survive the ordeal. Smith is an actress who seems to have been around forever, having made her film debut back in 1982 playing a bit part in ‘Annie’. By coincidence, or possibly not, she was in a season two episode of ‘The X Files’ (‘Firewalker’), playing a character whose personality is not entirely dissimilar to that of Amanda. James Wan has said the character Amanda was specifically written with Smith in mind.

By the end of ‘Saw II’ we discover that Amanda has become Jigsaw’s protégé.

This brings me to ‘Saw III’, which opens as a direct continuation of the second film. Detective Kerry (Dina Meyer) makes a third appearance, but becomes an early victim of Jigsaw and Amanda. She is suspended off the floor and locked into a contraption in which metal pins pierce her skin and hook around her ribs. The key to unlock this torture device is dropped into the bottom of a large jar full of highly corrosive acid. She is given one minute to retrieve the key and unlock the contraption, before spring mechanisms release the pins, ripping her ribcage open and allowing her internal organs to spill out.

The third film is another succession of grisly and shocking brutality. This time around there is a subplot about the strange relationship that develops between Jigsaw and Amanda, who is becoming increasingly deranged, unstable and psychotic. It has been suggested that Amanda suffers from Stockholm syndrome, although this is not referenced in the films. There are, however, allusions to an abusive childhood, a predisposition towards self-harm, as well, of course, as her addiction to heroin. Whether or not this is sufficient to explain her participation in Jigsaw’s sick games, I don’t know. Maybe there doesn’t need to be an explanation.

‘Saw III’ contains a scene of horrendous brutality near to the beginning of the film. A man has a dozen chains attached to his body by large metal rings piercing his flesh. He has to rip out the rings with his bare hands, tearing the flesh apart, to free himself from the chains and reach an explosive device to stop the countdown.

It cannot be denied that it has a visceral impact, but basically it’s just revolting.

In a later scene, a young woman is locked inside a walk-in freezer (like a meat store), suspended off the floor by her wrists. She is sprayed with freezing water from a number of hoses, building up a covering of ice across the length of her body until she becomes entirely frozen and dies. In the original script the victim was male and clothed. However, it was decided that for it to be visually effective the victim should be female and naked. Bizarrely, the makers of the film have claimed that showing the female victim naked avoids the trap of making the scene too sexual.

I have been quite critical of the three films. The first one is quite clever and the next two are very well made, playing to the strengths of the franchise. They are repulsive in places, but this isn’t something that should take viewers by surprise. I would be a fool were I to pretend not have expected an overabundance of gore. They are not blatantly misogynistic, at least not as I interpret them, but the second and third films do fall into the trap that snares a lot of horror films (especially from the “slasher” genre) and I think there is at least the suggestion of a misogynist undertow that becomes much more noticeable with each film.

Tobin Bell, Dina Meyer and Shawnee Smith are very good. The films are not to be avoided at all costs, but they did open the door that seems to have allowed a whole lot of shit to come flooding through. Having said that, it’s quite conceivable that even if Leigh Whannell and James Wan had not made their original film the likes of Eli Roth would still have found an audience for the stuff that followed.

Is there any need for films like ‘Saw’? Are they actually harmful?

These are hard questions to answer. There is obviously an audience for them. Ultimately, however, I think they are, or can be, harmful because they lend a certain validation to a particular mindset. Having said that, I am not trying to suggest that everyone who watches these films turns into a psychotic serial killer.

The problem is that even the suggestion of a misogynist undertow, be it intentional or not, sends out a dangerous message.



...

Stranger Than Fiction

...

Rating 3


Directed by Eric Bross

Written by Tim Garrick and Scott Russell

Starring Dina Meyer, MacKenzie Astin, Natasha Gregson Wagner, Todd Field and Frances Bay


There are all sorts of things wrong with this film (which shouldn’t be confused with the later Will Ferrell film of the same name), but I really enjoyed watching it.

Four friends in Salt Lake City find themselves in an increasingly surreal nightmare scenario when one of them commits murder and the others agree to help to dispose of the body.

For three-quarters of its running length the film is played as a black comedy. The various twists and turns are not especially original and the script is perhaps a little too obvious, but the four leads work well together and make the most of the material.

The sudden change in tempo in the final quarter when the film moves to a new location and the black comedy is discarded in favour of a rather nasty conclusion is somewhat jarring. However, what lets the film down most are the weak bookend scenes that seem to have been borrowed from an episode of ‘Murder She Wrote’ and the director’s annoying insistence on marking scene changes by fading the picture out and in using a decidedly tacky looking colour-negative effect.

These faults aside, this is a very watchable film. I can happily sit down and take 100 minutes out of my time to watch it, something I can’t honestly say about a great many of the films that are clearly of greater “artistic” merit. Not everyone would agree, of course.

“It doesn’t help that the cast deliver mediocre performances. Natasha Gregson Wagner is worse than that, as her acting simply isn’t credible.”
Brian Webster, Apollo Guide: Intelligent Reviews Online



...

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (film version)

...

Rating 3


Directed by Fran Rubel Kuzui

Written by Joss Whedon

Starring Kristy Swanson, Luke Perry, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer, David Arquette, Hilary Swank and Natasha Gregson Wagner


“You threw a knife at my head.”
“I had to test you.”
“But… you threw a knife at my head!”

I’ll deal with some facts and figures first. ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ was released into cinemas in America in July 1992 and grossed $16.5 million at the box office. I don’t have any idea what the production budget was. Supposedly, 20th Century Fox had hopes it would become the summer hit for teens that year. If that is the case, they must have been sorely disappointed.

26 reviews collected at Rotten Tomatoes result in a 31% rating, although some of these reviews post-date the subsequent TV show.

There has been much discussion over the years about what is wrong with the original film. Joss Whedon has more or less disowned it, claiming his script was butchered. He places most of the blame for its failure directly as the feet of Donald Sutherland, who he called, “A prick.”

The general consensus is that the film is an unholy mess, an abysmal turkey, something that is blatant for all to see, even without the benefit of the comparison to the critically acclaimed cult TV show that followed in 1997. It does have its fans; even amongst the ‘Buffy’ TV show fanbase. However, the majority of hardcore Joss Whedon followers tend, perhaps understandably, to be very hostile towards it.

I think this is a pity because, for all of its myriad of flaws, it is a much better film than its reputation would suggest, and the similarities with the subsequent TV show are striking.

“Buffy is amusing for a time but its destiny is to die in a disappointing, long-winded conclusion. The second half feels stretched out and muddled, as if screenwriter Joss Whedon drove a stake through his script. However, in his depiction of the vapid SoCal world, Whedon knows the territory.”
Desson Howe, Washington Post, 31 July 1992

This review extract is, I think, quite accurate in summing up the strengths and the problems with the film. For the first 40-minutes or so it really is rather good, especially when watched again with the knowledge of the subsequent TV show. There are some fairly major faults, admittedly. Playing it straight instead of going for a campy, kitsch approach would have worked much better. I thought this even back in the days when I watched the film before the advent of the television show.

Donald Sutherland’s performance seems to shift from one extreme to another, from an almost serious straight portrayal to one that piles on the ham. He can’t seem to decide if he wants his character Merrick to be a rather melancholy and tired figure or some kind of foppish cartoon creature. The film is at its best when he tones down the ham and concentrates on the increasingly tender relationship that develops between Buffy and Merrick.

Rutger Hauer is also guilty of an inexplicable performance as the Vampire King, Lothos. Presumably, this is what the film’s director Fran Rubel Kuzui (also one of its executive producers) wanted, but I think a real opportunity was lost here. Had Hauer been allowed to give a much darker performance it would have made for very interesting results.

The one scene when Hauer isn’t apparently auditioning for a role in the end-of-the-pier Christmas pantomime is also one of the film’s creepiest moments. It comes after Buffy’s first encounter with Merrick and her first vampire slaying. Merrick drives her home. She asks him, “They can’t come in, right? Unless you invite them. Is that true?” He tells her, “It’s true,” and she mumbles, “Good.”

Having gone inside the house and had her mom entirely blank the cuts and grazes all over her face and arms, she goes up to her room and gets into bed, blindly lying on top of Lothos as she does so and curling up with her cuddly toy to go to sleep.

I’ve always thought this is a very strange and unsettling scene. It’s an idea that Joss Whedon seemed to return to again in the TV show episodes ‘Passion’ and ‘Buffy vs Dracula’.

Kristy Swanson is fabulous as Buffy. I think of her as the true Buffy. She’s certainly a more obvious choice to portray Buffy as a vapid cheerleading valley girl. Sarah Michelle Gellar, for all the brilliance of her sustained performance in the role, was too quirky for that to be entirely believable, I’ve always thought. Buffy’s cheerleading friends, including Sarah Vaughan’s daughter, Paris, and future double Academy Award winner Hilary Swank, are great fun. The influence of this can be seen in ‘Clueless’ and on through films like ‘The Hot Chick’ and ‘Mean Girls’.

“Let me get this straight, I have to go to the graveyard with you ‘cause I’m chosen… and there’s vampires?”
“Yes.”
“Does Elvis talk to you?”

I have a soft spot for Luke Perry and I like the character Pike. In some ways I think it was a pity he didn’t get a mention in the TV show. Having said that, there is a connection. In the film, Pike gives Buffy his leather jacket. This is repeated in the show in the episode ‘Teacher’s Pet’ when Angel gives Buffy his leather jacket.

The vampires are atrocious and ineffectual, another failing of the film when it gets bogged down in trying to be camp and kitsch. Only Paul Reubens (primarily for the line, “Kill him… a lot”) and David Arquette make any real headway in these roles.

In the end the film is derailed, as the Washington Post critic suggested, when the vampires attack during the school prom. These scenes are, for the most part, shockingly badly choreographed and directed. What we are left with is a film that contains much more to recommend it than might seem obvious, but one that ultimately falls flat despite some great moments and a lot of potential to have been much better than it is.

There is a lot of stuff in the film that turns up again in the TV show. The Buffy of the film can easily be identified again as the same character in the television show, even if her parents are portrayed very differently here.

Equally, some interesting stuff didn’t make the transition. When vampires are close by but not visible, Buffy can sense their presence because she gets menstrual cramps. “Oh, wonderful. My secret weapon is PMS,” as she puts it. I can understand why it was dropped, but I think it was an interesting idea and very much fits in with Joss Whedon’s intended message.

In the film Buffy is reincarnated as the Slayer each time she dies, although as a different person, and she retains memories of her previous self in the form of dreams. Merrick is the Watcher of each Slayer in turn and it is his perpetual role to find her each time. “I’ve searched the entire world for you, Buffy,” he tells her when they first meet.

“Okay, guys, how about the ozone layer?”
“Oh, yeah!”
“Right!”
“We gotta get rid of that. That’s right!”



...

Urban Legend

...

Rating 3


Directed by Jamie Blanks

Written by Silvio Horta

Starring Alicia Witt, Rebecca Gayheart, Jared Leto, Tara Reid, Joshua Jackson, Natasha Gregson Wagner and Loretta Devine


Horror films, certainly those being made by the mainstream Hollywood studios now for a largely teenage audience, are frequently approached with hostile distain by mainstream critics. The hardcore horror film fanbase can often be even more hostile, but for them instead of simply being suspicious of all horror films it becomes increasingly about personalities and sub-genres. For example, the emergence of “torture-porn” was partly a reaction to the glut of Hollywood remakes of “J-Horror” films, which were dismissed (offensively, I think) as, “Horror films for teenage girls that don’t like horror films.”

‘Urban Legend’ is the product of a studio looking to cash in on the success of ‘Scream’ and its immediate successors, ‘I Know What You Did Last Summer’ and ‘Scream 2’, three films that grossed more than $471 million between them at the box office. It could be argued that because ‘Scream’ already existed (and, indeed, John Carpenter’s timeless 1978 masterpiece ‘Halloween’, surely the most influential horror film of the last 30 years) there was no need to make a film like ‘Urban Legend’, except as a purely cynical moneymaking exercise.

Whatever the reasons behind the making of this film, it is one of my favourite horror films. Based on the number of times I must have watched it now, I could probably put it into my top five. Set in an isolated university, a group of friends are menaced by a series of sinister and suspicious deaths, each one appearing to match an urban legend.

The film was written by Silvio Horta, who is now the executive producer of ‘Ugly Betty’. It was directed by Jamie Blanks, who doesn’t seem to have done anything else of much note, except the rather horrible David Boreanaz and Denise Richards horror flick ‘Valentine’, although it was he who originally pitched the idea for ‘I Know What You Did Last Summer’ and filmed a promotional demo trailer prior to the directing duties being passed to Jim Gillespie.

It has a cast of young actors who were starting to make waves, mainly on television, many of them popular teen pin-ups at the time:

Alicia Witt had just spent three seasons and 87 episodes in the sit-com ‘Cybill’.

Jared Leto came from the short-lived but highly praised ‘My So-Called Life’.

Rebecca Gayheart had featured in eight episodes of the sixth season of ‘Beverly Hills 90210’ and more recently had a supporting role in ‘Scream 2’.

Joshua Jackson had also made an appearance in ‘Scream 2’ and was on his way to ‘Cruel Intentions’ and a lead role in ‘Dawson’s Creek’.

Tara Reid is probably better known as an early example of the new breed of Hollywood “hellcats”, but she came to this film on the back of her role as Bunny Lebowski in ‘The Big Lebowski’ and went on to feature in ‘Cruel Intentions’.

Michael Rosenbaum ended up with one of the lead roles in ‘Smallville’ and has now appeared in 140 plus episodes of that TV show.

Natasha Gregson Wagner, whose brief appearance at the beginning of the film (memorably singing along to ‘Total Eclipse Of The Heart’) mirrors that of Drew Barrymore in ‘Scream’, is the daughter of Natalie Wood. Her film debut was in ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’.

Added to this was some clever casting among the older supporting actors. John Neville had played the title role in Terry Gilliam’s ‘The Adventures of Baron Munchausen’ and was familiar from a recurring role in ‘The X Files’. Robert Englund, playing one of the college professors, was a nice piece of casting for horror film fans.

The film is almost stolen by Loretta Devine, playing an eager squeaky-voiced campus security officer who dreams of being like Foxy Brown and ends up getting her chance to be just that.

The film grossed $72.5 million worldwide against a production budget of $14 million. A sequel, ‘Urban Legends: Final Cut’, was released in 2000, achieving a $39 million worldwide gross. Only Loretta Devine from the original cast returned for this film. A direct-to-DVD third instalment, ‘Urban Legends: Bloody Mary’, appeared in 2005. I have not seen either of these films.



...