I just binge-watched the Saw series

(Warning: Giant open spoilers.)

…and I have a couple of questions.

First question: When will I stop having nightmares?

Second question: What exactly was the point of Jigsaw hanging out on the floor, posing as a dead guy, in the first movie? I always see people calling it this great twist ending, but I don’t really see why he was even there. If the two guys had only known it was him, they could have… called him a poopy-head? How would that even have helped? They’d still be chained to a bathroom. And what was in it for Jigsaw? It must have been pretty boring for him, stuck on his face for hours like that, and I don’t see how it improves the trap. And you’ll note that he never does anything like that with any of the other traps.

BTW, I thought the twist in the second movie was great (and for some reason, I hadn’t spoiled it for myself in advance, for once, so I actually got to be surprised by a twist). But I don’t really get the point in the first one. Maybe I’m missing something, though. Any ideas?

:confused: What makes you think there’s a point to anything in a Saw movie other than making the viewer go “whoa!”?

Well, first of all, it’s a twist ending just for the sake of it. But it’s nothing that (pun not intended) puzzling, after all he did all the insane stuff in an attempt at studying human nature or some zany motivation like that. And he could remain perfectly still for hours because… he was really badass?

Now admittedly, aside from the original, I think that’ I’ve only seen 2 (which I hated) and another one with the actress who played Dexter’s wife, but, unless something really unusual happens, there’s a perfectly logical explanation why he never does something like that again.

I always explained it as “This guy is a crazy serial killer type, even though he never actually killed anyone by his own hand…so is it any surprise that he’d love to actually be right there in the room with them witnessing every conversation and moment close up?”

I thought the purpose of the movie Saw was simply to enable Cary Elwes to make redundant the question, “What is the worst acting performance of all time?”

That always struck me as bullshit, like someone who planted a bomb claiming he didn’t personally kill anyone. Those people what got blowed up, they just didn’t choose to leave in time.

And it’s not like it actually works as a defense. Just ask Manson.

Wasn’t Elwes supposed to be a DOCTOR???

How could a DOCTOR not know the body on the floor was alive?

Well, was it ever established he was a GOOD doctor?

Nor has it been established that it was a good movie. With, you know, good writing.

I don’t think I’ve seen all of them. I might have seen up to 5.

I remember as they came out, I liked each one just barely enough to go see the new one but I went into each new one knowing it could easily be the last one I’d bother with.

The one thing I remember that I liked a lot:
For one of the sequels, the timeframe/action of the story was actually concurrent with the previous film (though you don’t find this out until the end). I did like that. I hadn’t seen a film franchise do that before and I thought it was pretty cool.
Refresh my memory? Which pairing of films would that have been?