Why do shitty movies continue to make money and spawn sequels? They're making
another National Treasure movie. Larry the Cable Guy continues to release movies with just
hilarious titles (Delta FARCE! Wit-LESS Protection Program), which serve little purpose other than to further Larry's masturbatory vision of himself. "Hey fellers, let's spend millions of dollars and countless man hours making me look like I saved America from the Saudi's! Hoo-WEE! Best chuck a little chicky with big knockers on the poster too, so's I don't look queer."
I don't know a single person, even the people I know who at times display questionable taste in films, who goes to this kind of movie. But they just keep on cranking them out, so SOMEONE must be partaking. The ironic thing is that they keep the production values low (thereby reducing overall quality) in order to save money so that their take after opening weekend is bigger! Crappier product = bigger profit! In any other business these jokers would have been run out of town on a rail (most likely after several years of being quietly put up with).
I'd like to organize a protest against terrible movies. Not because they're offensive or pornographic, but because they're terrible, time wasting, cultural vacuums. I read about a small independently owned theatre in the States that, rather than showing "Scary Movie 4" or "Wolf Creek," closed it's doors. The owner said something to the effect of "We'll open up again when something worth watching comes out." That's the kind of attitude of which I want to see more, more, MORE!
The film series that triggered this outburst is the ridiculously disgusting
Saw franchise. I was coaxed into watching it because I was led to believe that behind all the grimy bathroom walls and foot-sawing-off, there was some kind of message (ie/ Be glad you're alive, gosh darn it!) I was also told that it "Messes with your mind!"
Bologna.
I've watched three of the four films so far, mainly out of morbid curiosity which, I assume is why most people see them in the first place. The first film operates almost solely on that basis. It's certainly not relying on the acting or direction, both of which take giant strides into Goofy territory. The psychology behind the second movie seemed to be "Let's do it again, but with more money!" Because that's all that it was. The third movie had probably the same budget as the second, but upped the "eww" factor by adding more sickly gadgets and gruesome special effects. Common sense fell by the wayside.
The problem with centering a series of films around an antagonist confronting a rotating cast of protagonists is staggering (that is, if you're trying to make "sense"). Maybe I'm old fashioned, but isn't the protagonist supposed to draw on her/his inner well of strength to overcome her/his foe, ending up triumphant but fundamentally changed by what (s)he's encountered? When your antagonist is always triumphant and, more to the point, foundationally unchanging you run into some problems.
Jigsaw assumes the role of the giver of tough love, an instructor in the value of life. He constantly preaches that he is not the bad guy, but his victims are, for not appreciating their lives (this whispy filament of a cause he has latched onto). In fact he eschews the label of "murderer," even going so far as to say that he "hates murderers more than anything." I wonder how much the writers know about the judicial system, because I'm pretty sure these death mazes constitute Murder One, and you'd be hard pressed to find a sentimental jury willing to absolve guilt based on a technicality. "Well, y'see your honour, I may have put the fat guy into the razor wire maze(
note: for the crime of cutting himself) and then told him that he would be locked in there forever if he didn't get through it, but it's not like I actually pushed him into it." "Agreed! Off you go!" "Oh, did I mention that I have cancer? That's pretty rough." "You poor man! I will morally disassociate you with this whole ugly mess!" Vomit.
But I suppose it's a waste of time to analyze characters who have no depth or complexity (Example: At the end of the 3rd movie when Jigsaw tells the guy who has just been through one of these death mazes, and whose wife he has forcibly held at pseudo-gunpoint that he can either take his vengeance or he can "forgive him." Why on Earth or Hell would you forgive someone who does not seek forgiveness. Jigsaw doesn't ask for or beg for forgiveness, he demands it. You can't forgive someone who does not change).
UPDATE: I was recently put through the 4th movie which attempts to add some sort of back story to the character, and that was even more irritating.
While watching the 3rd (and most needlessly graphic) installment, I was almost physically ill. I could feel the blood draining from my head and had to go to the washroom to sit with my head between my legs for a few minutes. Even thinking about it now is making me a little light headed. I don't mind being made to feel that way
if it's for a reason. This clearly was not. Apparently, there wasn't even a way for the guy to get out of his ridiculous twist-o-matic contraption! THERE WAS NO POINT. And then they throw in some crap about "cherishing your life" to try to justify it all. When will they realize that there is a HUGE difference between being shocking and saying something significant.
Well, I could go on forever and a day about how terrible these movie are (they're making a 5th one now! AG! WHY?!) but I think I want to comment on something larger. These movies are in a way... Christian (in basically all the bad ways). There is a certain bombastic "be good or else" logic to them which syncs up with some of the more fundamentalist religions. Picture Jigsaw as God, constantly testing his victims like Job, and maybe they'll live and maybe they'll die but (according to the psychology of these movies) they'll be indebted to him, follow him, love him. In the fourth movie Jigsaw kills 3 (maybe 4, maybe more, I can't keep track) to "save" a police officer from the obsession of wanting to save everyone. Isn't wanting to help people a good thing? And somehow he gains a bunch of new accomplices, thus ensuring the franchise will keep going and going and going... I just thought it was funny too that the horrible gruesome killing at the end of the 3rd movie contains some pretty explicit "Jesus on the cross" imagery and philosophy. That guy died so that whatshisname could forgive and be forgiven... bleagh. This mix is so soupy and messy that you can probably find a few unintentional connections in there.
Anyone else see that documentary "This Film is Not Yet Rated"? If not, it basically exposes the arbitrary and hypocritical film rating system in America. One of the major points made is how much easier the rating system is on violence as opposed to sex (for added interest/hilarity, see Maria Bello defend her pubic hair.) It only underlines the outrage that kids (with a parent) can see a man's shin bones get splintered and his head mechanically twisted ALL THE WAY AROUND, but less than one second of pubic hair spells the commercial death penalty.
Well, my spleen feels vented.
