Well, for starters I can say it is one of the best franchises ever, not only because the "killer" has a real good motive for "killing" people, and it isn't like most of the genres were the killer is "just insane" and does it just for "fun"...also, no matter how well you think you have figured out the genre you will have a lot of surprises in all the movies of SAW, for me its simply one of the best movies ever and if you have a chance to see the other ones you wont get disappointed, but I have to say that they are more of the "gore genre" than the scary genre... never the less still a great movie franchise. I highly recommend them.

It is not exactly true that James Wan et Leigh Whannell have written Saw. They should have mention that they "borrowed" a lot from The Abominable Dr. Phibes (1971) written by James Whiton et William Goldstein. You will find less blood in the Phibes movies, but a lot more humour (with Robert "the avengers" Fuest as the director, and Vincent Price as the sadistic killer).
Fans of Saw, if you want to know the real origin of this story, watch "The Abominable Dr. Phibes" (1971) and Dr. Phibes Rises Again! (1972).

Heck yeah! Finally, a mainstream horror movie that's not afraid to be gritty. No campy, PG-13 family-friendly crap. No teenagers running around having sex and then getting hacked by a lumbering serial killer. Just 2 men locked in a dirty bathroom, cryptic clues left by a deranged killer, and a puppet.

The beauty of this movie is in its simplicity. The entire film was shot in one building with an extremely low budget. The two main characters, a photographer named Adam and a surgeon named Lawrence, wake up one day to find themselves locked in a grimy bathroom, chained to pipes on opposite sides of the room. In between them, there is a dead body with a gun in one hand, a tape recorder in the other, and his brains blown out and pooling on the floor. From then on, the two men must work together to solve the puzzle the killer, Jigsaw, has left them, and get out of their situation alive.

Jigsaw is a serial killer who uses "traps" to test his victims. His basic M.O. is that he puts them in situations, often with medieval-like torture devices, that will either kill them horribly, or leave them alive with permanent psychological and/or physical damage. Most of the time, these traps relate in some way to the person's lifestyle. Jigsaw's goal is to teach people to be grateful to be alive.

There are many misconceptions people have about this movie. First of all, it's not THAT gory. Yes, there is blood aplenty, and the traps Jigsaw sets for his victims(including a web of barbed wire a man must plow through, and a device hooked into a woman's jaw that could potentially permanently rip her mouth open) are just sick. But most of the horror comes with the THOUGHT of how painful the traps are, and not necessarily what is shown on screen. The majority of the gorehounds I know say that this movie is pretty tame.
Second of all, "Saw" is NOT torture porn. "Hostel" is torture porn. "Touristas" is torture porn. "Saw", however, is not. You know why? The fact of the matter is...THERE IS NO PORN IN THIS MOVIE. Not even a boob or a buttcrack. THERE IS NO NUDITY. And heck, there isn't really any "torture" either...not really.

However, I'm not gonna lie and say this movie is flawless. This has a lot to do with the director's lack of money, but that doesn't account for everything. In fact, I can see why some people really don't like this movie.
There are a ton of plot holes and unanswered questions. There are quite a few hammy one-liners("This is the most fun I've had without lubricant!"), and the acting in some places is hilariously abysmal(Like when Adam pretends to die). I understand how these could get in the way of enjoying the movie, but for me, they weren't that big of a deal.

All in all, this is one creepy and fascinating movie. The most enjoyable aspect of it is discovering more and more facts about the two main characters as the movie progresses, and discovering the connection they have while watching them learn to cope and work with each other. While not perfect, it's certainly entertaining and worthwhile.

From an admittedly gruesome but purely artistic viewpoint, this first Saw movie is the only 5 star and by far the best film of the series. Sure, the premise is a bit far-fetched and unlikely, but a good movie can ask you to believe the unbelievable, if it's well made. If movies did nothing more than reflect our everyday mundane lives, there would be no reason to escape to the theater to bury ourselves in fantasy. But if that fantasy just so happens to include a little carnage and gratuitous violence to the point of inducing just the tiniest bit of innocent nausea, then grab a barf bag, smile and enjoy it! I'm exaggerating now. I'll spare the synopsis I'm sure you've seen about the two men chained to filthy bathroom pipes with a violent suicide victim between them. Instead, I'll focus on what makes this a brilliant movie. There is an actual premise to this movie, and an actual psychology as well. It's difficult to imagine the main antagonist in this work, Jigsaw, could have the financial or mental (or any other necessary) resources to pull off the stunts in this movie. But to imagine a nearly surrealistic vengeance in such an unlikely form of vigilanteism still holds a fascination for the average viewer with a typically human blood lust. What Jigsaw does to his victims is a vengeance that we all wish at some point that we could take....and as Jigsaw says, "I never kill people, I merely gives them the means by which they either kill themselves or survive." Of course, you should never try any of these stunts at home, kids...but there is a brutal realism, in the human emotions displayed by Jigsaw, and his victims. His dream of 'helping people to appreciate the life that they too often take for granted' is taken too far to the extreme in this movie, and people should never go this far in real life, but in the fantasy of cinema, the sense of victimization of everyone involved is truly felt by the audience, even while watching someone inadvertantly slicing themselves open or hacking off a limb. There is gruesome violence here. There are blatant real emotions, self-preservation and testing of the human spirit in the extreme. As always, this first movie opens and explains a premise, and all subsequent sequels destroy the beauty and carnage of the original...because with the explanations out of the way, parts 2-4 can focus on more special effects, violence and even less plausable violence scenarios. This movie stands alone as a work of art...violent, bloody, grotesque art...but art none the less! Parts 2-4 are good movies and a fun viewing experience, but this first movie keeps the human traps simple, more believable and less complex...leaving the complexities in the thin, flimsy study and testing of the fragile human spirit. Sure, you can break a person emotionally, but if someone's going to kill him or hack off a limb, it's better to let him do it to himself! This is a great movie! An inspired, gruesome work of grotesque art! Make a point to see it, but not if you have to chop off an arm or something!

This was a great performence, shocking, thrilling, touture, enjoyment i really enjoyed it. I liked all the saws but part3 was not that good but theothers were, so this was a great movie.

I saw this in distribution. I actually had to turn my head at certain points. This, along with Trent Reznor's soundtrack made for a great splatter flick. I thought the uncut version could only be better.....WRONG. It is not nearly as tense and nerve-racking as the theater version. Plus, they have replaced Reznor's soundtrack with something else. In this case, the orginal was much better. Be warned!

I've managed to miss this one over the last four years. Doesn't deserve four stars in my view. For a film that was obviously made on a reletively low budget it mostly works well though.

The story reminded me of the sort of thing Clive Barker might have written in his Books of Blood (a series of short stories). OK there are a few inconsistencies in the plot but I thought it was pretty well acted and the twist at the end is well done. There are some genuinely creepy, not to mention grisly, moments scattered throughout the film.

However do not be mislead by the hype and the advertising blurb. This isn't a touch on 'Seven', which is better written, acted and in a totally different class. I have watched 'Seven' many many times, but having just finished watching 'Saw' I really have no desire to see it again.

[Note: Beware... Spoilers lie ahead. Proceed at your own risk if you've never seen this movie.]

2 1/2 Stars.

This is another instance where hype leads to disappointment. Saw was a big "word-of-mouth" film when it came out in theaters. It was supposedly "different". Not typical horror, more of a mix of twisted psychological horror, suspense, and whodunit. It wasn't a gore fest by any means (although it's pretty darn gruesome at times). And some people loathe it for that because they expected copious amounts of blood and gore, and Saw didn't really deliver that.
Its story and devices are not original. Just watch Vincent Price in "The Abominable Doctor Phibes", or "Se7en". Saw plays with several genres including the detective story.
It's not a fun movie by any means. Some horror movies are fun because they are truly scary and entertaining. Saw is neither entertaining nor scary when you really examine it.

I'm not going to describe the premise or plot too much. Too many reviews for Saw start by saying "These two guys wake up chained to a pipe in a disgusting bathroom..." and they begin to delve into a nutshell synopsis. You'll find out what it's about when you watch it. And if you're already familiar with it, chances are you either love it or hate it.

Anyway, while not a great film, Saw seems fairly engrossing, at least for a bit. It presents, at first, a situation (although incredible to the Nth degree, like many scenarios in the movie) that makes the audience curious. And eventually the audience realizes that sooner or later one of these men is going to cut off his own foot. But it takes ninety minutes to get there. And when the time comes for said cutting, less is shown than I expected. I was ready for the most gruesome sight, and it didn't happen. Fine by me. I prefer using my imagination sometimes.

The scariest scene (arguably the only truly frightening sequence in Saw) arrives in a flashback involving one of the characters, Adam, walking through his dark apartment with a camera, trying to see if there is someone else in there. This scene was truly creepy because of its simplicity; you're alone in your home at night and have heard someone or something make a noise. After this scene, I kept wishing there were more creepy moments like that in the movie.

Saw doesn't really quite know what it is, or what it wants to be. Is it a horror movie? Some say yes, others deny it vehemently. Yes, it's stylish enough (but sometimes the silly sped-up cinematography gets too obvious, like the film is trying hard to be cool), and the twisted scenarios that the psycho has dreamed up are pretty disturbing. But there seems to be not really enough meat here. When it's finished we are left feeling a bit empty... like what we just experienced was just an exercise in sadism, and not much more. And the entire story falls apart when carefully scrutinized.

Maybe it's so disappointing because of the deus ex machina at the end. That moment when the guy gets up off the floor is done in such a bombastic manner that the writers/director obviously felt that it was a completely brilliant moment, that the audience would be utterly impressed and mindboggled. At first it sort of blows your mind a little, but after some introspection, you feel really gypped. You begin to consider the whole story. This guy supposedly lay there on the cold floor, motionless for more than eight hours. Right.

I do like the fact that Saw ends on a very bleak and grim note. Adam, the poor guy, after all he's been through in that bathroom, is locked inside to rot and die in the dark with a corpse.

Typical horror movies seek to use startle horror or just throw intense amounts of gore to scare.

Saw has some of both but by far blows away any other attempts to categorize this film. Unique movies are becoming very difficult to find but this movie will leave you wanting more and with a pleasantly disturbing feeling in the pit of your stomach that I haven't felt since such awesome films as Seven and Frailty.

The movie was excellant. This is the type of movie to have in your collection.

My corny title is not just there to be funny in a stupid way, as it is also meant to convey to horror fans who have not seen SAW, thinking it to be another HOSTEL/HILLS HAVE EYES/any "let's torture young people for fun instead of trying to be, you know, scary" movie, that it's definitely worth their time. I have not seen SAW's sequels (though I liked this one enough to see the others), but I can say that this movie is more in the SE7EN kind of vein than the torture porn flicks we've been subjected to over the last few years. Yes, it is quite often gruesome, graphic, and disturbing, but it is all accredited to a very clever and darkly interesting premise.
We are introduced to our two protagonists (if they can be called that, as they have their vices) first, workaholic doctor Lawrence (Cary Elwes) and cocky youngster Adam (screenwriter Leigh Whannell), who awaken in a dark room resembling a larger version of a prison cell, each of them chained to pipes adjacent from each other. In the center is a dead body holding an unloaded gun with a gunshot wound to the head and a tape recorder. Adam and Lawrence each have tapes to be played on that recorder, on which a raspy voice, their captor, informs Lawrence that he must kill Adam by 6:00 that night, or he will kill Lawrence's wife and daughter. To further explain what could possibly be going on, Adam and Lawrence both tell certain stories about their past, leading to flashbacks where we are introduced to other key characters like policeman Det. David Tapp (Danny Glover) and his partner, Det. Steven Sing (Ken Leung), who are on the trail of the Jigsaw Killer, a sadistic serial killer who forces his victims to save their own lives through twisted puzzles and games. Lawrence believes this Jigsaw is their holder, and that Tapp believes Lawrence is somehow in cahoots with Jigsaw. More plot complications pile on top of each other, leading to the bloody, shocking finale, which whether you like it or not, is a doozy.
Writer Whannell and director James Wan, both newcomers, showcase a great confidence towards filmmaking, as Whannell's writing is very fluid and engrossing (I'm not saying he's David Mamet, but for someone not much older than college age he's very talented) and Wan's direction points toward a long future in filmmaking. Elwes should have won some sort of horror acting award or at least award for best desperate screaming and wailing (something I can't quite say for Whannell, a much better writer than he is an actor, though he's more than adequate in his role). I can't tell you if the sequels are able to have a nice psychological thriller along with the blood and guts, but this one has it and more.

This was defiantly the best of the SAW franchise, but they lacked on traps, the creativity wasn't ver great, as the SAWs go on, they get more and more creative. This is a must see for any horror movie fan.

Horror films are definitely a mixed bag when it comes to quality. There are some horror films that are really good, meaning they have a solid story, genuine thrills, and leave you on the edge of your seat from start to finish. Examples of good horror films are "Final Destination", the `Scream' trilogy, and the classic "Halloween". But for every really solid effort in the horror genre there are about 10 terrible entries that give the genre a bad name, most of these inferior entries consist of sequels to average or above average horror movies that are made for nothing more than cashing in on the original film's success and hopefully making a little money before fading quickly from the public's memory. In 2004, amidst a crop of forgettable horror releases, one horror movie caught audiences completely by surprise with its in-your-face brand of terror that hadn't been seen in most horror films, with a surprisingly strong story that was full of twists and turns that would make any mystery fan happy, and a fairly solid cast of actors that didn't consist of fresh-faced teenagers that barely have any acting experience. The movie I'm referring to was the smash hit "Saw" from director James Wan ("Death Sentence"), and starring Danny Glover (`Lethal Weapon' series), Cary Elwes ("Robin Hood: Men in Tights"), and Monica Potter ("Along Came a Spider").

"Saw" focuses on a deranged serial killer who feels that it is his mission in life to teach those who take life for granted a lesson by capturing them and forcing them to choose between fighting for their lives by surviving horrifying circumstances or giving up and dying. His latest victims are a successful doctor (Cary Elwes) and a young photographer (Leigh Whannell, who also wrote the screenplay). These two unwitting participants in the killer's twisted game must try to work together to solve the mystery of why they are being held captive, while determining the means of their escape from certain death. Meanwhile, a former detective (Danny Glover) is trying to put the pieces together regarding the last case he was working when he left the force, which unbeknownst to him is directly linked to the two captives who may soon become the latest victims of this methodical killer, with a simple message of, "Live or die, make your choice."

This is one of those movies that I was a little mixed in my opinion of. The first time I watched "Saw" I didn't really care for it all that much, I thought that it was a better than average entry into the horror genre, but was trying too hard to cross genres with being a horror film and also a thriller in the vein of "Se7en". But after watching "Saw" for a second time, I feel it was a much better horror movie than I initially believed it to be, and was also an adequate mystery thriller that set itself apart from most horror films by actually having a decent story and not relying on some supernatural killer, that for some unknown reason audiences are intrigued by, to propel the movie forward. In fact, you barely even see the killer in this movie, which is even more surprising for a horror film these days, having a modern horror film that actually leaves its killer shrouded in mystery is unheard of, and was very much appreciated here.

Now, some of you may be wondering where I came up with the comparison of "Saw" and "Se7en", well here it is. Both movies feature villains who feel it is their sole purpose in life to teach others a lesson about what they've done wrong in their lives. Both villains are patient, smart, and incredibly deranged in their view of the world, and feel completely justified in the pain they inflict upon their victims. I also feel that director James Wan was aware of this comparison, and purposely paid homage to "Se7en" with the use of the exact same type of notebooks that were used by the killer in the movie "Se7en" spread all over Danny Glover's apartment in this movie. With all the various types of notebooks out there why choose that same exact one, unless you were meaning for people to recognize it, and therefore draw comparisons. Now, James Wan and writer Leigh Whannell may not have intended for there to be as much comparison between the two films as I have seen, but the similarities are there all the same. With all that being said, I don't feel that "Saw" as a film, suffers from its similarity to "Se7en" (granted its not as strong of a mystery thriller as the latter, but it's adequate), the two films are different enough in their execution (no pun intended) that the similarity is nothing more than an obvious influence for their story.

The actors were of a much higher caliber than one normally expects from horror films these days. Generally the cast of horror films consists of some of the newest actors Hollywood has to offer, and generally will focus heavily on talk of sex and feature plenty of nudity from its attractive leading ladies, thus ensuring plenty of teenagers (especially guys) will give the movie a generous box office return and maybe even repeat business. But, "Saw" went a different route by casting veteran actors such as Danny Glover and Cary Elwes, along with the not as well known Monica Potter to bring their characters to life. Most of the cast were very effective in their roles, even screenwriter Leigh Whannell as the other man trapped with Cary Elwes, was surprisingly good as an actor. But the weakest link in the acting chain was Cary Elwes. For an actor who has been around as long as he has, it's kind of a surprise that he's never managed to elevate his craft from anything more than that of an average actor who has a tendency to overact in his dramatic parts, but excels when it comes to comedy which is probably why "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" and "The Princess Bride" are the two biggest movies of his career. The decision to give Cary top-billing for this movie seemed odd, since he's not that big of a name, and from a talent perspective, I figured they would have given that honor to Danny Glover, but I'm not the one making those decisions.

One more thing regarding this movie that also further set it apart from most movies of this genre is the lack of blood and gore that was actually seen in the film. Most horror films opt for putting as much blood and gore on the screen as they possibly can, leaving nothing to the imagination, and frankly most audiences are numb to it at this point. But "Saw" went with the approach of implied gore; yes, there were moments of bloodshed on the screen but not much more than what is shown in an all-out action movie. Although the blood and gore were implied, the film still delivers on the horror, by forcing the audience to envision in their heads what could have taken place onscreen. However, in place of actual blood and gore, the director and writer included plenty of disturbing traps and images, along with creepy music and quick, frantic editing, that gave the audience the impression that the film was much more violent and gory than it actually was which may cause some viewers to dislike the film due to an implied sense of an overabundance of gratuitous graphic violence.

"Saw" is without a doubt a very creepy horror film that delivers plenty of chills, but also gives audiences a solid story that will keep them guessing what will happen next. A word to parents, this is one horror film that's rating should definitely be heeded, as I don't feel that viewers under the age of 17 should see this movie without parental approval.

"Saw" is available in both rated R and unrated editions both contain violence and language.

This is a superb horror film. Spawning multiple sequels, the original is still the best. Horror films are often over looked by award givers in part to the genre in general- most "award" films are more drama films.
This isn't some European horror trip leaving you confused, and searching for the meaning to the film. And it isn't the squirting blood fest that many "horror" films are. This is a well thought out film- relying on plot and acting, rather than CGI or over the top gore.
Excellent film- rent it first if you like, but buy it too. Five stars all the way. -If you like Se7en, Hostel, Jaws, or Zodiac, check this film out.

I expected to be entertained, frightened, and disturbed by this film.

Instead, I was bored, disappointed, and disgusted.

You can get better violence in any action movie; you can get a better psychological thrill from 'Silence of the Lambs' or even a cheesy sci-fi like 'Event Horizon'; you get more plausibility out of 'Lord of the Rings'. At least Lord of the Rings doesn't pretend to be reality.

In 'Saw', the film's apparently omiscient, omnipotent, and short sightedly self-righteous 'Jigsaw Killer' sets ridiculously contrived and unnecessary traps for his victims. That's pretty much it. Maybe he's a surviving henchman from some old Bond film?

There are a dozen points in the movie when an intelligent person says, "Wait, why would they do that?" and the movie loses all its plausibility. The characters act and interact in ways that only the most unintelligent and illogical people would; in order for the plot to progress as it does, the screenwriters throw one deus ex machina after another at you.

I can only take so many absurd twists and revelations before realizing that I got swindled. If you were thrilled by this idiotic film... kudos, I'm glad you don't feel gypped. That makes one of us, at least.

I mean, it was pretty whacky and freaky and bizarre, but I mean, I was misled by the reviews, because people said it was the "scariest thing ever." It's certainly not the scariest thing ever, but it's pretty chilling.

This movie is a great mind games horror movie.
You have to have creativity to understand this movie.
Plus it's not the same old slasher movie.
I got to say slasher horror movies are old,
to me this was a good change of pace.
If you think this is stupid you haven't
seen "The Grudge 1 & 2"!!
I rate this DVD a 9 from 1to10!!

Wow, what [.....] and [....] what a piece of[....], this [.....]poor, [.......]. Everything [.....] this [....]movie is so [.....] lame!!!!! and the [.....]story of [....]bad, and a[......] little corny puppet???? This pop-horror [....],what kind of[.......]stupid[....], and[...] a saw??,[...] old guy and ,[.....],[...] a with [...]tape recorder!!! Hollywood can [...]a fat[....] ,it's[....] stink's and[....]corny!!!!! Bad acting [....] .and [...] mainstream , but[....]a room [.....] ,just[.....] boring!!!!!!! I didn't like it.

Not a review but a question. Does this work on UK Playstations as only SAW III is available on Region B for some reason?

The dialogue is bad, the budget is low ($1.2 million), the acting is wooden, and the gore is off the charts. All of which makes for a fun b-movie from writer/actor Leigh Whannell, who plays "Adam." There are two editions--rated and unrated--although the difference is minimal (8 seconds of additional footage).

I heard this was a good film through some friends and considering it was the week of halloween I thought celebrate with a good scary movie. I don't really care for movies that have a gotcha or someones going to getcha theme. This really played into the mind I figured out almost right away who the guy was but I really liked it any way. In fact the point of the movie is to make you appreciate your life. I got out of it what I needed a little scared but not grossed out by blood.

There, is that better? A little less harsh than "a film for the mentally ill?"

Alright. I am going to disappoint you.

I do not come on here to write reviews merely to make people angry. I come on here to tell the truth. So here it is.

"Saw" and its kith and kin of successors and imitators are the lowest of the low in my book. Coming from a reviewer with taste and class (that's me), I can vehemently say that these "Saw" series of films are disgusting, low-brow, trashy, worthless, and utterly horrible films. It boggles the mind why anyone would want to watch these films unless they get off on pain and suffering.

As I told my husband out loud in Blockbuster one evening, this is NOT a horror film, and neither are its sequels!

Coming from a person who loves horror films and has seen (and read) virtually everything that can be classified as horror, I can assure you once more -- THIS IS NOT HORROR. Add to that my studies in psychology, and I can also assure you without a doubt that if you *love* the "Saw" series, you need professional help. These are films for sick people, and people who have something mentally askew. A healthy, normal person does not want to watch people being tortured in the most sick and vile ways imaginable. I'm not sure that registers, but allow me to say this again: well-balanced people don't seek out this sort of garbage. There is enough horrific violence in the world as it is.

All I have to say going to say, is it was the first film to make me cringe in a long while, from something other then wondering whos' rear hollywood has it's head stuck in. Gory it's true but with a method to the madness, and a twisting plaot that only a fewe have mentioned they figured out before the film had finnished. I loved it.

When `Saw' was first released it took the nation by storm. It was the freshest thing to hit the world of horror and it still to this day has a large following. With `Saw IV' set to hit theaters this weekend the anticipation is already thick for what new and disturbing things lay in store for the general public. With the sequels though there has been an onslaught of critics for the original film as well calling it an overrated piece of trash. I feel that this is an unfair assessment. The original film was unique and thought provoking. Finally we had a detour from the abundance of prefabricated copycats, horror films that relied heavily on severed limbs and large amounts of gore to establish a fan base. This is not to say that `Saw' is lacking in the gore department, or even in the severed limbs area (just what do you think that `saw' is for) but it's smarter than that. By the closing credits the audience has been forced to really open their minds, turn on their thinkers and delve into the material presented before them. Saw is gritty, real, disturbing and most importantly stimulating.

The film opens with two men waking up in a room alone with a corpse. The two men are chained to opposite sides of the room, the corpse lying between them just out of reach. The two men are Adam, a student, and Lawrence, a doctor. Soon after awakening the two men are informed that they only have a short period of time before they are to be killed. They have been left clues in order to lead them to survival but they must find and follow them. Before long it becomes apparent that they are being toyed with by a mastermind bent on making them atone for past indiscretions. As their sanity begins to fray they uncover that they are linked in more ways than their current situation.

As far as acting is concerned, this is far from a showcase that's for sure. Cary Elwes is somewhat all over the place here and Leigh Whannell (who co-wrote the film with director James Wan) is very amateur. Danny Glover is decent as is Monica Porter but really the only effective actor is Tobin Bell and he's rarely seen, only heard.

What `Saw' lacks in acting it makes up for in originality and sheer eeriness. In fact this is one of the only films that have kept me on the edge of my seat from start to finish. It has been compared to `Se7en', which is a nice compliment (`Se7en' is the better film), but `Saw' really is a film all its own. Aside from the scare tactics there really is no similarity between the two films. The subsequent sequels have been less effective than this original and it's a shame that Hollywood rushes these things because of that `it' factor, embracing a hot commodity to the effect of tarnishing a good thing. If only a little more time and effort had been placed into creating sequels with the same originality and gritty flare as this original film then maybe we would have a complete set of worthy horror films. Sure `Saw' has its flaws (mostly found within the acting) but it works hard within the script and plot to make up for its flaws and deliver one disturbing, horrific and gruesome good time.

I saw this movie for the first time on the SciFi channel. It is so poorly filmed that it could've been a made-for-tv movie. They must have had a very low budget to make it.

Ok, this movie is so stupid. It is not a scary movie AT ALL. It was boring, predictable, and only had a few moments that were really suspenseful. I can't believe that there's been three sequels from this movie. I mean, come on!!

The horror genre is almost always inherently weak. This movie along with films like Nightmare on Elm street are its best offerings.

A decade ago I used to watch my fair share of horror movies, but at some point I started to have trouble finding good films in this genre. This resulted in a sharp decrease in the number of horror productions I watched each year. I am happy to say that "Saw" was reminiscent of the good old times. This is a movie that has an electrifying pace, plenty of gore, thrills galore and a clever plot.

It all starts with two men chained on opposite ends of a filthy, rusty and generally disgusting bathroom. Between the two, there is a dead man with a gun in one hand and a tape recorder in the other. The two prisoners are clueless as to what is going on, with Dr. Lawrence Gordon being by far the calmer of the two, and Adam freaking out. Of course, at this point we are asking ourselves, what does the kidnapper want? But we do not have to wait long, and soon enough, the games begin. Adam finds a tape in his pocket, and Lawrence finds not only a tape, but also a key and a bullet. You can probably guess, but just in case, let me tell you that the key does not work on the locks that are keeping them chained.

The point of the game is that Lawrence has to manage to kill Adam by 6 pm, or the psycho will kill his wife and daughter. At that time, we also find out that Lawrence has been a suspect in previous murders by this killer. We then get a combination of flashbacks to previous events related to this case, and the ordeal the two men are going through.

The previous cases show us a very creative and twisted individual, who does not really kill his victims, but makes them kill themselves. In these scenes you will get a high dose of gore, so this movie is not for people that are even a little bit squeamish. If you like horror films though, I guarantee that you will be entertained through the duration of this movie and that your nerves are going to be seriously tested. There is only one reason I did not give this movie five stars; the acting. Both, Whannell and Elwes, deliver sub par performances, with exaggerated facial expressions that do not fit the mood of the film. Everything else on this movie is right on target.

Yes, this is simply nothing more than mind rot at its most blatant! There is no plot, no psychology, no suspense, just gore-gore-gore-and MORE gore just for the sake of showing gore. And to think this film not only is a 'hit', but it has spawned sequels. Now, that to me is psychologically frightening, a lot more scarier than this film (or its sequels) could ever dare to be. If I wanna see someone being tortured, I'll visit youtube and watch some Iraq footage or something, but I really don't prefer to view someone being tortured just for shock value.
I advise anyone with any common sense of decency to stay as far away from these trash 'snuff-porn for dummies' films as possible. They are a plague on our country, and people are sitting in theaters eating them up as they are eating their popcorn and being told 'this is ok to watch', brainwashed like mindless sheep. Treat this crap like AIDS or Typhoid Mary, for it is liken to a very scary virus that's overtaking theaters in place of what used to be great cinema.
I just read someone reviewing "Hostel part 2" saying that Hitchcock would love it. HUH??? REALLY???! What drugs are these people on to even remotely try to compare this garbage to anything Hitchcock???! He wouldn't even watch such crap, let alone applaud it. And the same goes for Jonathan Demme (the director of the classic "Silence of the Lambs", another film these 'fans' are comparing this crap to).
Don't get me wrong, for I believe everybody has the right to form their own opinion, but these type of films were hidden from sight and concidered illegal just 20 years ago, and now they are being paraded from theater to theater with pride. What the h*ll happened to our society???
If I wanna see someone digging in a toilet, I will watch a plummer working, that would be more entertaining than this trash anyday.
And, since I prefer my horror films to be psychological, I will steer as far from this as Humanly possible, and I advise the same for any other intelligent/intellectual film goer out there. Thank you.

This is the first and as far as im concerned the best of the Saw movies. This movie is very original and the ways the writter has Jigsaw torture these people is cool and very disturbing. Personally, I didn't see the twist at the end coming and was blown away, I think that is why this is my favorite of the Saw series. Highly recommending, but be forewarned; it's demented.

This movie was deliberately shot in a grainy style. It is not the fault of Blu-ray. The movie does not look excellent, but it does look very good. It is difficult to judge a movie with such a different style of filming...kind of like 300. Either you think it is Extraordinary, or bad...all due to the filming. I would expect Saw 4 to look the same when it comes out in the fall.

Definitely one of the smartest and best thriller in history.
This movie proves that a good story and good script is far more important
than a good budget (only $1 million).
All the suspense, gruesome, witty elements are in the highest standard in
movie standard.
Truly a must for not-so-easily-fainted.

After countless raves from nearly every one of my horror film loving friends, I decided one day it was time for me to watch "Saw," an indie slasher film premiering at the Sundance Film Festival as one of the "Midnight Movies" that is widely considered one of the greatest horror films of its generation. In no way does this film disappoint, no matter what you are looking for in a film.

Let's start with the story. Two young men--a doctor named Dr. Gordon, and a photographer named Adam--wake up chained to the wall in a dirty, old washroom. Neither of them know how they got there--and they don't know each other either. There is a slaughtered corpse between them eerily clutching a tape recorder and two tapes addressed to each of the men. The message is clear: one must find a way to kill the other by 6:00 that evening or they will both--along with Dr. Gordon's family--be killed.

Before long, they realize they are now victims of the Jigsaw killer--a known serial killer who captures people who do not appreciate life and force them to hurt themselves or others in order to save themselves from a bloody, gruesome, brutal, torturous death. In a series of flashbacks, ze discover more about Jigsaw, and experience previous encounters his victims' have had. We learn of Gordon and Adam's past, an obsessed detective dedicated to finding Jigsaw, and a young drug addict named Amanda who survived Jigsaw's sick "games" and is now mentally scarred. As the story unfolds, it suddenly explodes into a brilliantly twisted psychological thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat until the credits roll after the shock ending and even for some time after that. Lots of hardcore gore and an INCREDIBLY SCARY atmosphere accompany this much-above-average slasher flick.

The acting is both great and dreadful at different times, but is always thoroughly realistic. Jigsaw is perfectly cast in his role. Adam was sort of an annoying character, but still managed to deliver, and Dr. Gordon seemed like some WAY overdramatic guy out of Star Trek, and was the only character in the small cast I was actually hoping to get killed.

The directing and editing is absolutely nothing to rave about and is solely why I didn't give Saw 5 stars. The flashbacks are adequetly done, sometimes poorly, but unfortunately, for a super psychological horror film like Saw, that is a huge failure and deserves negative feedback. Very fortunately, the strong storyline and sheer terrifying simple atmosphere holds the film together.

Overall--a very enjoyable movie watching experience, and it will scare the living daylights out of you if you watch it alone on a big screen with surround sound. Not one for the little kids however, as it is very violent in some select scenes (particularly the ending) but that shouldn't keep you from seeing it. Very good and much, much more and above and ultimately smarter and more brilliant the average super-violent slasher horror films that are out there today.

This was not as gory as I had been led to expect. The twists ARE NOT as predictable as most people think. No.. you don't really see the ending coming.
This is a psychological thriller and it's very good. Well done. There were discrepancies like someone having flash backs to someone else's memories. And some people acting pretty much annoying and the excuses for acting out of the very character templates are rather weak. A cop stays a cop. And if he's watching someone leave a building, he should have noticed when someone went in - or more specifically that he missed it when they went in and had an alarm go off in his head.
Characters are engines to further a plot but they need to be more or you end up with GhostShip where frankly you don't even bother remembering anyone's name - you already know their parts and purposes.

I will definately get the next one. This movie was such a pleasant surprise!

Many people are either going to enjoy Saw or hate it, and both for the same reasons - those sick, twisted games you gotta play to shed blood (and usually more) to see how badly you want to live. Not only did Saw raise the bar on horror, it practically started the whole "gore" horror sub-genre (thus leading to films like Hostel, and making it a rare find to not see a recent horror film focused more on gore than the classic horror scares. Personally, I can't say I am in love with this film because of the gritty nature, but it is still scary entertainment to an extent nonetheless. However, with questionable films such as these today, I still enjoy the pleasure of seeing if there is a positive message I can still hack out of this, and though it's certainly wrapped around in insanity, the message is clear - are you grateful to be alive?

This is where Saw gets my praise for being very original. It's certainly scary at times and packed with grit, but it also has a side of it that makes you think. Kind of a mystery to be solved, and when the answer is revealed in the heightened climax, its quite rewarding cause no one could have ever seen it coming. The story uses flashbacks and pieces them together like a puzzle up til the very end, and just when you thought you knew what the puzzle is going to look like, it turns out to be a whole other picture. The traps in Saw also carry originality, putting people in near impossible situations to escape, but not impossible. Our villain Jigsaw (Tobin Bell) is no murderer, but he finds ways for people to kill themselves - which is usually the case. The reason for the traps is explained as a game you must play (in Jigsaw's eyes) to test and see how much you desire life. Generally those placed in the traps are not grateful to be alive, and these horrific games quickly put things in perspective. Once you see these scenes, its enough to say "Yes I am grateful."

The cast is an interesting mix for a horror film. Danny Glover is probably the most famous actor associated with the film, but the script is somewhat limited for his role that any actor probably could have pulled it off. Cary Elwes is also an interesting addition when I think back to his roles in Princess Bride and Men in Tights...his character is the main focus in this film and his acting may have been better suited in non-horror films. Tobin Bell, while he gets very little screen-time as Jigsaw and even then he is usually wearing a cloak, he feels like a perfect cast (though I say this after watching the Saw sequals where he gets a lot more screentime). Tobin Bell is to Jigsaw like Anthony Hopkins is to Hannibal Lecter - you see the actor's face and that's the role he was born for.

Overall, Saw brings a variety to a horror film, though really its much more than your basic horror film. It focuses less on scares and more on what's truly scary - very disturbing scenarios that ask a simple question, and the mystery of events that is impossible to solve.

Acting - 3
Characters - 3.5
Horror/Gore - 4.5
Story - 4.5
Overall - 4