Powered by Google
Home
Listings
Editors' Picks
News
Music
Movies
Food
Life
Arts + Books
Rec Room
Moonsigns
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Personals
Adult Personals
Classifieds
Adult Classifieds
- - - - - - - - - - - -
stuff@night
FNX Radio
Band Guide
MassWeb Printing
- - - - - - - - - - - -
About Us
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Work For Us
Newsletter
RSS Feeds
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Webmaster
Archives



sponsored links
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
PassionShop.com
Sex Toys - Adult  DVDs - Sexy  Lingerie


   
  E-Mail This Article to a Friend

SAW

The strength of a joke lies in its delivery; so does that of a one-joke movie. Highly praised by the oxygen-deprived audiences at Sundance, Saw begins with a diabolical set-up. Two strangers (Leigh Whannell and Cary Elwes) wake up in a disgusting lavatory chained to pipes. Between them is a gruesome corpse, and scattered about are assorted clues and other items. If they piece — or unpiece, as the situation calls for (among the available objects are a pair of hacksaws) — things together in time, they just might escape the doom orchestrated for them by an unknown and apparently omnipotent tormentor. Sounds like a metaphor for life, but first-time director James Wan instead makes it into what looks like a student filmmaker’s cocky, sloppy homage to Seven, itself an overrated exercise in pretentious pulp. Maybe if the acting were less hysterical (even Danny Glover as a driven and perhaps demented detective is embarrassing), the characters and their fates might arouse emotions other than repugnance and indifference. Saw’s punch line is clever, unexpected, and irrelevant; the joke is on anyone who still cares. (100 minutes)

BY PETER KEOUGH

Issue Date: October 29 - November 4, 2004
Back to the Movies table of contents
  E-Mail This Article to a Friend
 









about the phoenix |  advertising info |  Webmaster |  work for us
Copyright © 2005 Phoenix Media/Communications Group