saw 2
 

i just saw saw 2 today 2/24/06 & it was much better than the first one. dont get me wrong, the first saw was different, it wasnt bad, but how long can u see people in the same room throuout the whole movie.. to me , that was boring.. although, the ending was a surprise.:)

Re: saw 2
 

As long as it's interesting, which I found it to be. I agree the second was better but not by a whole lot.


btw, you should search for a thread before making it.

Re: Re: saw 2
 

almost exploded on him... but you crossed the line first.:D

...the fuck?

Compared to Open Water this movie has quite a few different environments, hence open water is basically water for the whole thing

Arragami took place in one room and it was an excellent film. Anyway, in Saw there was the parking lot, the bathroom, the hospital, doctor'ss appt., photographer's appt., run down appt. the detective was in with all the articles on the wall, the abandoned warehouse, the police station, not to mention the locations of Jigsaw's other victims. I know they focus on that bathroom but c'mon, there's more to it than that.

Over all I liked the second one better, but the only thing that I didn't like was that you never found all of the peoples tapes in the house. Otherwise I thought it was better than the first, you got to know Jigsaw more and I LOVE THE ENDING! *evil grin*

The second was years better in my opinion. The first was good, but the acting sucked to me. I mean come on, if you were locked in a bathroom and ordered to kill the guy across from you to save your wife and child....I'd be damned if I'm gonna sit there and try to save the guy across from me while calmly sitting in a corner!

SAW 2
 

i loved the first one and couldnt wait for the sequal and when i saw it i loved it. it was better than the furst but i love both of the films.

Re: saw 2
 

..it wasnt better ...period !

There were alot of people in the House, alot were there for the same reason...finding all the tapes would have made the movie longer, boring and less realistic.

Re: Re: saw 2
 

Yeah, I agree. I can't believe the rest of you liked SAW 2. . .actually, the first SAW film is terribly overrated. I mean, I suppose it did have a sort of old-school, William Castle-esque charm (cheese, empty performances, silly gags and all), and the ending was kind of neat. . .

. . .but then comes SAW 2. I disliked this movie intensely. I almost didn't finish it, it was THAT BAD. MY GOD! Even Beverly Mitchell was a let-down--she had like. . .TEN words to say THE WHOLE film--all of her time on screen was devoted to covering her ears and gaping at the horror of it all.

The REAL horror is this movie. I'm sick of these ADD-inspired horror films--like, I know we're the MTV generation and all, but can we please bring back a sense of restraint and pacing, instead of these God-awful one-note orgies of fast editing and shock?

Horror movies today just don't stay with you like THE SHINING (its pace was ten times slower than either of the SAW films, and yet it's fifty-gagillion times scarier!) Look at Roman Polanski's REPULSION--SLOW!--but TERRIBLY scary!

I'm not trying to say that fast editing can't be scary, I'm just saying it's not working here. And it CERTAINLY doesn't help SAW 2--but then, what could?

I really enjoyed both movies, there about even.

both good. tie for me. better deaths in 2 though.

I liked Saw 2 but definatly like the 1st one better. It was more original and I liked trying to guess what was going on, and then being totally thrown off at the end was nice. The second one I already knew what was going to happen,and I wish we got to know more about the characters and their past.