That's not the part I observe with annoyance. I just observe it, as it seems to be a fact (most evidence suggests). But you will have noticed that I sometimes have a bug in my bonnet about inaccurate reportage.
The $14.8 million estimated weekend total had to be a disappointment to Lionsgate, the series, sponsor. "If we end up with at least $20 million," David Spitz, the company's executive VP and general manager, told the industry blog The Wrap, "we'll be talking about Saw VII, this time next year." Oh, no — a fright season without Jigsaw luridly dismembering nubile teens? Say it ain't so!
Ha ha, your sarcasm is very amusing, Richard Corliss--but Jigsaw has absolutely never "luridly dismembered a nubile teen." First of all, the victims are rarely dismembered--luridly or otherwise (I'm not saying never, but rarely).
And second the average John Kramer subject is in their early 40s. In six movies, the closest he's ever come to testing a "nubile teen" is Daniel in Saw II.
I don't know about Richard Corliss, but "nubile" isn't the word that jumps to my mind for Dan, although the character is a teen. What's more he wasn't "dismembered" in any way, shape or form, in fact he's one of a very small percentage of people to live all the way through a Jigsaw "game."
Is my making this entry petty? Yeah, probably--but I don't mind if Saw VI went down because it was overmatched, or because of what the series has become. I have definite opinions on much of that as well (and for your pleasure, I won't be talking about all of them here).
But, I don't like it when a critic I'm not convinced has watched a single movie in a series that, overall, I still love, takes a swipe at it that seems to have it confused with Friday the 13th.
No comments:
Post a Comment