Showing posts with label Scott Patterson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scott Patterson. Show all posts

Sunday, 23 February 2014

Saw V (2008)


"They're connected. So in the end all of the pieces will fit together."

Veteran readers of this blog will recall that I blogged the first four of these films four years ago, and rather enjoyed the intricate plotting and clever final reveals that these films have always had. But I always had my qualms, being of a somewhat liberal bent, as to whether John Kramer's brutal attitude to law and order was endorsed by the authorial voice. I finally stopped watching, though, after the gore went a little too far. I'm not very squeamish, but I have my limits.

Still, it's time to return to the final few films in the series, starting with this one: I hate to leave a job unfinished. And it's a good 'un; the plotting is as intricate and superb as ever, with a cruel twist at the end in which Strahm not only dies horribly but is framed for Hoffman's crimes. It was surprisingly good to get back into this series of films; the familiar Twisted Pictures logo put a huge smile on my face.

We begin with a typical torture puzzle from Jigsaw, the details of which, I think, we shall draw a veil over. The difference, of course, is that he does what's required and dies anyway, as it is Hoffman, not Kramer, who is in charge. Crucially, those who, like myself, see absolutely no moral difference between Hoffman and Kramer. They're just different types of psychopath.

Strahm, the poor bloke, is certainly warned from the start not to enquire further, but he is certainly the good guy here. Sadly, though, he's no match for the late, evil, clever Jigsaw, whose control over his intricate plans, and indeed his wife, extend well beyond death. He reminds me very much, I think, of Ian Brady. It seems absurd that the films can continue on and on after the demise of the central character, but they do, and it never feels silly.

Mark Hoffman, meanwhile, is praised and promoted, the smug bastard. At least we know, even at this point, that he will eventually get his brutal comeuppance. We see flashbacks to his first meeting with Kramer, and everything is neatly retconned for him to have been Jigsaw's accomplice all the time. There is a discussion about "ethics" between these two evil men, as Kramer is under delusions that he is somehow less evil; he rages against a "corrupt legal system that puts murderers back on the streets" but, rather revealingly, conspicuously fails to give a monkeys about the wrongfully convicted.

The film centres around an intricate, sadistic trap for a group of people involved in corruption surrounding a building that proved to be a death trap, one if whom is Julie Benz from Angel. It's a clever sequence, in which it is their failure to work together, as intended, which dooms them; the Saw franchise is back on form.

I must say that Strahm's eventual death is needlessly horrific, but this is bloody good. I hope this standard can be kept up.



Monday, 26 November 2012

Saw IV (2007)




“You think it’s over, but the games have just begun…”

John Kramer is dead. Very dead. So dead, in fact, that the film begins with his autopsy. But that doesn’t mean that we’ve heard the last of Jigsaw. Things have been set in motion from beyond the grave, and an unsuspected individual is carrying on the nastiness.

This film covers some edgier themes than its predecessor, but in spite of some extreme gore it doesn’t feel as sadistic, perhaps because of these themes. There’s a slightly stronger focus (relatively speaking) on character, with even John himself being given some greater depth in flashback, not that his past remotely justifies his actions, of course. Nevertheless, Tobin Bell is excellent as ever.

As before, a supporting character in previous films (in this case Officer Rigg) is promoted to a starring role because of the disturbingly high death count amongst his colleagues. Intricate and sadistic situations happen. There is blood. There is suffering, much of vaguely ironic. You know the drill by now. The references to previous filmed are becoming increasingly intricate, as are the concluding revelations. The “everything you think you know is wrong” factor gets bigger and bigger with each entry in the series.

And yet… well made though this is, and less gory than its predecessor (that, of course, is a relative statement!), the very serious themes leave a bad taste in the mouth. Child abuse and miscarriage are used, without much in the way of subtext, to titillate, and this makes me feel a little uncomfortable.

Time for an extended break from the Saw films, methinks. I’ll eventually be back to do the rest.