SAW 3 - The Film is seriously fecked up and should carry a warning

[Uncle Spielberg]

It's really not that bad. what kind of idiot picks up a film that promises such gore then f***ing complains about it?

let me explain in simple English, READ THIS AND READ IT CAREFULLY AS IT IS JUST NOT SINKING IN IS IT. HERE WE GO

I LIKED SAW 1 AND SAW 2, I THEREFORE LOGICALLY WANTED TO WATCH SAW 3, I AM A HORROR FAN, I WENT TO THE DVD SHOP AND SPENT £ 3.50 TO WATCH IT. I ALWAYS WATCH EVERY FILM I HIRE / GO TO SEE AS I FEEL I CANNOT MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION IF I DO NOT. I WATCHED SAID FILM, I HATED IT, I MADE A REPORT BASED ON WHAT I SAW

WHAT IS SO FECKING HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT

 

[Berk (of 'Trapdoor' fame)]

sorry, you've lost me there

 

[coventrygull]

I really worry about people that like Gore films.

 

[Lokki 7]

I WENT TO THE DVD SHOP AND SPENT £ 3.50 TO WATCH IT. I ALWAYS WATCH EVERY FILM I HIRE / GO TO SEE AS I FEEL I CANNOT MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION IF I DO NOT.

I regularly turn films off if they are shit, EVEN IF I HAVE SPENT £3.50 ON THEM . Basically because my time is valuable to me and I would rather use it more productively than watching something I hate. Most recent example is Basic Instinct 2 which I lasted 30mins for comedy value alone, but sticking pins in my eyes was preferable to watching the last hour so I turned it off. If you chose to watch it, why are you so angry? If you mistakenly hired a child porn film would you watch that until the end in order to make an informed decision?

 

[bullshit detector]

Couldn't agree with you more, Cov. The ones I've met are geeks who get some sort of weird sexual kick out of it. Absolute f***-ups. The kind who would run a mile from real violence.

Many of the out of control kids who infest our streets these days have dads with libraries of the stuff they watch while their parents are out.

Banning the bloody things would be a small part of the battle to get a decent set of human values back in this country of ours.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Not seen it but wanting too.

Hostel two looks f***ed up.

 

[¤DãŃn¥ §êãGüLL¤]

No film can be as bad as Irreversible.

THAT is what you call f***ed up.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I regularly turn films off if they are shit, EVEN IF I HAVE SPENT £3.50 ON THEM . Basically because my time is valuable to me and I would rather use it more productively than watching something I hate. Most recent example is Basic Instinct 2 which I lasted 30mins for comedy value alone, but sticking pins in my eyes was preferable to watching the last hour so I turned it off. If you chose to watch it, why are you so angry? If you mistakenly hired a child porn film would you watch that until the end in order to make an informed decision?

that is riciculous and frankly insulting

 

[Buzzer]

1 and 2 were well put together stories but this was just an excuse to see if we can make the audience vomit which they suceeded in.

Nonsense. Number 1 was dreadfully contrived and far, far too silly to merit serious discussion. How can someone lie entirely still for hours on end without even moving slightly? How can a cancer patient set up so many contrived settings? How do the very muscular "victims" get captured in the 1st place?

Number 2 was just as ludicrous. It's about as schlock horror as the horror films of the 80s like Halloween or Nightmare on Elm Street.

The only redeeming features of the films are the novel traps that are planned but well put together? No, no, no.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

A Child Porn Film is slightly different to a major release which is in the DVD store. I doubt if Tomorrow's World rent Child Porn. lease try and present a reasonable argument if not sod off

 

[Lokki 7]

that is riciculous and frankly insulting

I don't find the comparison ridiculous. It is not meant to be offensive, just asking a hypothetical (extreme) question to show the weakness of your argument.

 

[¤DãŃn¥ §êãGüLL¤]

Flounce in a minute,
He's gonna flounce in a minute

 

[Buzzer]

that is riciculous and frankly insulting

No it's not. It's pertinent and well-constructed.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Hollywood / DVD hire shops do not release child porn so how is it pertinent and well construed, it is entirely illogical and just put down for shock value

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

anyway the film was an endurance test and not enjoyable in the least but as I said I always watch a film to the end to be able to give a proper review no matter how shite it is.

After all I sit and watch the Albion at home every game even though I know after 10 minutes that it will be total shite and what the end result will be

 

[coventrygull]

I watched Hostel to the end. I hadn't even payed for it as someone had leant it to me. I thought it was seriously f***ed up and like i said worry that people see this as entertainment.

 

[Buzzer]

Hollywood / DVD hire shops do not release child porn so how is it pertinent and well construed, it is entirely illogical and just put down for shock value

You are taking the general and making it specific. It's a logical leap you can't make within the bounds of your previous comments.

The question is, would you sit through something else that you found misleading from the description (or lack of description as in this case) purely because you had paid for it? The example was something that we would all find abhorrent but could easily have been for, say, Troy (A film with no redeeming features), a child's film (The Wiggles, Teletubbies) or say a documentary about paint drying.

I think the answer is probably 'no'. Yet, this film was, according to you, gratuitously violent from the very beginning and still you chose not to turn off but to watch it all the way through. And then gripe about it here.

Very odd.

It's exactly the same point that Lokki made. Whereabouts is it illogical or insulting?

 

[NMH]

Bring back Mary Whitehouse, she would ban loads of shit films with excessive violence and shock-value crap in.