Saw/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions

* Why oh why did the executives have to push for ''Saw IV'', ''V'', and the inevitable ''VI''? ''Saw V'' was just awful and uninventive. Not to mention that Jigsaw winning as a twist has already gotten way too old.

** Duh! Because there are people who will pay to see these movies anyway! It doesn't have to be good. It just has to make money.

*** And ''Saw VI'' turned out pretty well all around. Whether this continues, well...it's Hollywood.

* I don't mean to sound dismissive of the entire series, but...doesn't Jigsaw realize just how hypocritical he is? Now, I know he's dying from inoperable brain cancer (which somehow was created through ''colon'' cancer...huh? What, did he ''literally'' have his head up his ass to contract it?), and his psychosis may not allow him to see it, and there ''is'' that deleted scene in the third movie where he realizes on his death bed that maybe he isn't the savior of humanity he thought he was, but...for someone who's trying to make people "live their life to their potential" and force them to realize how they're wasting it through their perceived vices (including ''social and personal stagnation''), he's surprisingly blind by those same vices developing in him via his own obsession with his "games". Considering he was already a skilled craftsman, and he learned several other skills during his run as a killer, he surely could've done ''something'' better with his life. Has there been a canonical point in his past story where he looked at his work, stepped back, and went "Wow, I have issues. Maybe this isn't such a good idea, after all..."?

*** If possible, that's even ''worse''; and sure saving only women and choosing at random didn't win him any bonus points with {{spoiler|Tara and Brent}}.

**** Why? Nothing in Tara/Brent's dialogue suggests they have noticed he tends to save the women, nor do they come across as militant men's rights activists. They kill him solely for the personal grievance against someone they knew. It's likely little he could have done would have stopped them from doing it, even if he'd spent every spare moment talking about how he donates to charities, volunteers at a homeless shelter and saves stray animals.

** But the fact that Saw VI has a lot more men die is literally the only example of possible anti-male sexism in a franchise that includes a man smacking a woman's head against a table while calling her a cunt, ridiculous views on prostitutes (Addison from II was originally meant to get a trap that scarred her face as punishment for coasting through life on her looks... yeah cause all prostitutes are lazy and beautiful), zero ''sexualized'' deaths of men (although I give the franchise credit for sexualizing relatively few women's deaths, it still pops up occasionally), and has far more significant male characters (i.e.: those that drive the plot). I wouldn't say Saw is egregiously sexist either way, but concentrating on this is a bit far-fetched, and it's on every single Saw sub-page, coming across as someone with an agenda.

*** Um, it has ''almost every single male character apart from the villain and [[The Scrappy]]'' die. Not just 'a lot more men'. And in all fairness, that was Eric after having been trapped by Amanda, and he was fighting ''against'' her. Are you ''seriously'' telling me he was ''wrong'' in being enraged against his '''captor'''?? Besides, notice how many women survive their traps against the men who do.