Reviews | Top Tens | Independent Film-Makers | Cinemas | Links
	Saw Director: James Wan Plot: Two men awake in a room, chained at opposite ends. They don't know each other, and all they have is a saw each. One man, a doctor, finds out his family have been taken hostage and unless he kills the other they will me murdered. Writer: Leigh Whannell Starring: Cary Elwes   Leigh Whannell Danny Glover Genre: Thriller Cert: Critic - Review:               Like Se7en, in Saw we have a killer who is exceptionally imaginative punishing those who he feels do not appreciate the life they have been given. Like Se7en the killer concocts torturous ways to end the life of his victims, although allowing them the opportunity to save themselves yet knowing the chances of them succeeding are slim. Like Se7en, the story takes place in an un-identified, dark and depressing American city. You'll notice that I am writing "Like Se7en" a lot, and that's because this film is exceptionally similar to Se7en, and it is because the film is so comparable to Se7en it comes off like a middleweight trying to punch at a heavyweight level. Everything drips with Fincher's masterpiece, from frenetic camera work around the victims, to the apparent innocence of some of the victims. Unfortunately, the film seems to try to emulate Se7en to such a degree it ignores some vital areas. Characters in a movie like this need to be the focus. I did not care for any of the characters in this film. While watching I didn't care if Lawrence (Elwes) or Adam (Whannell) died and had no empathy for the situation they found themselves in. Glover's police officer seemed to lack any sort of natural intelligence or calm under pressure. He meets the killer, and you would assume could see his face. Yet he remains convinced the wrong person is the killer. Elwes seemed vastly out of his depth as the doctor, and the changes in his character are random. He knew about the killer, what he was capable of, yet never seemed to believe the killer would actually follow through on his threats. This would have been fine had he not shown such regard and passion for his family, yet in spite of this his worry was more getting out of the room than going to any lengths to save his family. I would have more forgiveness for these holes had the finish been a wonderful payoff for my patience. An analogy, the film cost £6 to see, I gave £10 and got 50p change. Yes, I feel short-changed. I didn't guess who the killer was, which is usually a good thing. But, and I must emphasise a but here, you are given no clues as to the killers identity. When you finally meet the him, you feel kinda ripped off. There is method and motive behind having this character as the killer, but there isn't enough throughout the film to suggest it is him. Like anything, there are positives to join the negatives, and it creates a neutral state where this film is concerned. The situation these two men are placed in is interesting, and the clues to getting out, saving themselves, are well configured and well laid out. The traps and deaths of the previous victims are also interesting and imaginative, as is the concept of the killer keeping his word of letting his victims live should they find a way out of their predicament. Wan show's certain directorial abilities with this film but I can't see him exceeding it. Matching it in the future possibly, but not exceeding it. Whannell shows more ability as an actor than his screenplay showed as a writer, and I'm sure we'll see him popping up now and again in larger features. Overall, the film finds an even ground, clever in story yet weak in character. The good doesn't outweigh the bad, and the bad doesn't outweigh the good. I wouldn't say average, due to the interest of the situation, but then the film doesn't live up to the situation.