Saw III

Sunday, August 31, 2008

I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm excited for Saw V in October. I've seen each one theatrically so far, and I hope to never break that trend. If this new one follows in the footsteps of the sequels, they should hopefully up the crazy-levels yet again. There's nothing scary or what have you about the sequels, but there's a ludicrousness to them that is unrivaled in the world of horror movie series.

Part 5 is set to have a new director, after Darren Bousman did 2 through 4. I'm not sure that's a good thing. I'm hoping at least he'll try to closely copy Bousman's absurdly over-stylized manner, although I'm worried that he won't be as good at over-directing. But who knows, maybe he'll match him, or even bring a new, unique brand of crazy to the series.

I noticed this time watching part 3 that there a lot of well-staged, intricate camera shots that are ruined by the hyperactive editing. They'll cut from a shot too fast, or they will suddenly for no reason speed the shot up and accompany it with a "whoooosh!" sound, as if the camera is actually making noise. (Or at least, I think there's a "whooooosh!" but it could just be that the shot leaves the impression of a "wooooooosh!") I'm not complaining. When I say that the editing ruins it, I mean that it ruins it so bad that it becomes great. I can't ever remember seeing a horror series so often try to bring attention to its own style. All the silly transitions and flash cuts and speed changes are part of the story, instead of being the means to some sort of effect. With, say, the Nightmare On Elm Street movies, you were there to see the gore and the special effects. With Saw, you're there to see the gore and all the stupid editing tricks.