IT WAS IN JIGSAW'S BUTTCRACK WHENEVER HE WOULD LET OUT A SILENT FART IT WOULD SHOCK ONE OF THEM

The remote could have quite easily been concealed under the 'arched' palm of the 'dead' guys hand...use your imagination. If you remember the scene where the tape player was pulled from the 'dead' guys hand, his hand was facing palm down, with his fingers just clasping the player... the guy pulling the player from his hand, did not have to pull the chain very hard to remove it from the hand. i.e the 'dead' guy was clearly not holding the player tightly.

right... with this in mind, it would be quite easy to conceal the remote underneath his 'arched' palm facing downwards, whilst claspng the tape player. My own car alarm remote is small and it is possible to do the same thing and conceal it whilst 'clasping' something else. The scene did not require the guy who pulled the tape player, to analyse wether there would be any concealed object, since they were in a desperate situation, with desperate circumstances....their minds were 100% on playing their tapes.

ok... now you ask, how would the 'dead' guy be able to operate the remote, without being seen to do it. Well that would be simple. As the 'dead' guys hand was facing palm down, and the remote could be under his palm, it would be easy to press the remote against the floor by flexing the palm.... we just have to assume the remotes buttons could be pressed that way.


AUSTIN316426808 has answered the other question about the 'dead' guy being able to set the whole thing up....quite an easy task, given he could have the full co-operation of the janitor guy, since he was convinced he was slowly being poisoned. Then you could say, well why didn't the janitor guy not co-operate, not stallk and attempt to kill everyone, and setup the room and go to the hospital, then tell some doctors that he'd been poisoned... well it would be a pretty difficult task in indentifying through blood testing etc, as to what type of poison he had and would eventually die. So carrying out the task seamed like the only option, and no doubt if he'd done something like this the 'dead' guy would have killed him and found someone else to carry out the task.


any more questions? you picky lot. lol

The film isn't worth much. The problem is that a lot of it didn't work. Not even the remote stuff, that could've been anything. If the blood was poisoned, and he was lying face down in it, couldn't he have gotten poisoned from it? Kinda sloppy for someone who supposedly thinks of everything. And why even be there in the first place? Why have the corpse be the killer? It's a completely useless twist and it's only there so that Joe Dipshit can say "OMG, that corpse was really Jigsaw Man the whole time! I totally didn't see that coming! Best. Ending. Ever!" and talk about how brilliant the writer is to his friends in English 11 the next day. It's cheap. And they did that stupid fucking "show the killer, but only PART of him" shit. The Jigsaw Man was right there with Danny Glover, and they always fucking obscured his face. If you're going to do that, why not go the distance and just mosaic it out? At least then you won't have to resort to contrived camera angles and shit for that.


And the only way it's like Se7en is the look of it. Other than that it's just any other "serial killer does complicated stuff for no reason" movie. I was more interested in the chick who survived saying "he helped me." Make a movie around THAT situation, and do it right, and it could be a great movie.

AGREED

I would have been happier if Zepp was the killer.

The Twist ending is unguessable and its a cliche movie

The blood wasn't poisoned....why would he poison himself. You do realise that the 'dead' guy lying down was the guy who setup the whole thing. The two chained up guys were told it was, as part of the setup. He knew that even if they realised the blood wasn't poisoned, one of em would end up getting shot, which we saw happen, but he survived. The remote stuff is easliy explainable. Didnt you read my previous post.

the only reason I said it was like Se7en is because of the look(which you mentioned) and the way he picked people because of some kind of morality reason other than that it had absolutely nothing to do with Se7en.

Did they EVER establish that the blood wasn't poisoned? And of course I know the dead guy was the guy who set the whole thing up.

And I don't care about the remote stuff, the remote stuff is a non issue for me

The remote was a issue for me

and Shanks you need to stop defending a movie that has no logic..

They never explained if it was poison or not.

The end was lame, Saw is not a good film

jeeezz you guys :rolleyes: ...use your imaginations.

Just because it wasn't spelt out for you, that it wasn't poisoned or they guy didn't hold the remote, you think it's not possible. What I said earlier was perfectly plausable and possible.


and Sedated, you up to your usual, or being sensible.??

sensible is my middle name.

Sedated Sensible Replica