last night instead of going out to a club like we had planned, we went to see the movie "saw". i had no idea what it was about. i had only seen the poster for it in theaters, which emits a horror vibe on a low budget. the film was more psychologically scary in terms of what would you do in the situation the characters are in. there are some gross things about the movie, but that's to be expected of any american 'scary' movie.

i had slightly cheated before watching the movie because i wanted to know a basic plot, but i couldn't find anything other than it's like "seven" or "silence of the lambs". bullshit. don't make such comparisons. those films were only used as a point of reference because they are well known thrillers. both deal with serial killers where the killers do the actual killing. "saw" is different because the mastermind creatures controlled situations, much like a psychological experiment but with a deathly end. the mastermind doesn't kill, just creates scenarios for killing to take place. the situations are what i found to be interesting. imagine the brainstorming that was going on during the writing sessions. also, "silence of the lambs" wasn't scary. it puts me to sleep! "seven" was predictable. i liked it, but it was just a little too long and predictable. some moments of "saw" were probably predictable to avid movie-goers, i just didn't think about them so much. instead, when they happened, i thought "of course!"

as i watched the film, part of me thought that the filmmakers were trying to make the film outdo other films. trying to make twists and pull the floor out from under the audience. which is why the beginning of the film was a bit awkward. you couldn't really tell what kind of film it would be. when i watched "scream" in theaters and the main star, drew barrymore, was killed in the first 5 minutes or so, i knew it would be a good movie because they pulled a "psycho". there was a little bit of tug and pull in playing with who the audience thought the mastermind is. that was fun but resolved too quickly. it would have been much better if the audience thought someone was the mastermind for 20 minutes, then shifted to another character. instead, the film led the audience to believe the mastermind was 1 character, then shifted about 20 seconds later. not much of a roller coaster ride there.

there were some flaws in the script but so do all films. is it script or editing? these days you can learn more about the faults of the film thanks to extra features on the dvd release. being in a theater though is an atmosphere of experience. you enjoy being there and have a greater chance for getting sucked into the story and not questioning film flaws. this happened to me with the film. i forgot about the flaws in the beginning as i got sucked into the film. the one thing i have to say about the film overall is that i think it would have been much tighter if they hadn't use big name actors, namely cary elwes and danny glover. who the hell wants to see danny glover in another cop role? the writer played a main character and that was a shame. either he is so invested in the film that he thought he could best play the part, or he wrote the part in order to get an acting job (think damon/affleck). at some points, his acting was atrociously bad. if a big name were to play the part, i think ed norton would have been perfect.

towards the end, there's a very overdramatic moment. the lines cary elwes spits out are so terrible that it had us rolling in our seats. some of the audience was laughing but dani and i were dying. i was crying and couldn't stop laughing long after the lines were delivered. thanks for the laughs!!