Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Poisoning Angel in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Some people may already know of the prolific French serial killer of the 1800s. Hélène Jégado, over a lengthy period of forty years, is thought to have murdered at least thirty-six people, most likely more, in the region of Brittany. By being hired as a cook in a wide range of establishments throughout her life gave her the opportunity to poison people through their meals, predominantly with arsenic. Jean Teulé, a French novelist, combines his own imagination with the historical statistics in order to create an insight to the tale of this infamous poisoner.
The tale begins at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when Hélène is only seven years old, in the small hamlet town Kerhordevin, Plouhinec. Nicknamed Thunderflower by her mother, a name that she is often referred as throughout the narrative, she becomes fascinated with superstitious stories about Death’s henchman, Ankou. In order to extinguish her fears of this formidable character – something she later claims – she decides to become Ankou beginning with the poisoning of her own mother. Soon after she sets off on her first of many journeys to work as a cook, where her killing spree begins.
It may seem surprising that she were not caught earlier on in her murderous career, especially with entire households succumbing to their deaths, but - at least in Teulé’s telling - the Breton’s still held strong belief in their old Celtic superstitions and altered between worshipping Hélène as a saint for not dying herself, or accusing her of witchcraft and bringing misfortune wherever she went. It is not until Hélène is approaching the age of fifty that the police begin to investigate, arrest and finally send her to the guillotine.
Each chapter begins with a map, detailing Hélène’s journey through Brittany so that the reader can see just how many places she went doing Ankou’s work. Teulé also turns this disturbing historical novel into a black comedy with the inclusion of two wig makers from Normandy who happen to go where Hélène goes, although are completely unconnected to, to whom bizarre misfortunes constantly fall.
<i>The Poisoning Angel</i> is an interesting tale and absurdly fascinating at times. From time to time it could fall a bit dull with the repetitiveness, but in a way it could not be helped, as it remains a fact that Hélène Jégado poisoned a large number of people. Melanie Florence must be commended for her translation from the original French, something that is by no means an easy feat.
Some people may already know of the prolific French serial killer of the 1800s. Hélène Jégado, over a lengthy period of forty years, is thought to have murdered at least thirty-six people, most likely more, in the region of Brittany. By being hired as a cook in a wide range of establishments throughout her life gave her the opportunity to poison people through their meals, predominantly with arsenic. Jean Teulé, a French novelist, combines his own imagination with the historical statistics in order to create an insight to the tale of this infamous poisoner.
The tale begins at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when Hélène is only seven years old, in the small hamlet town Kerhordevin, Plouhinec. Nicknamed Thunderflower by her mother, a name that she is often referred as throughout the narrative, she becomes fascinated with superstitious stories about Death’s henchman, Ankou. In order to extinguish her fears of this formidable character – something she later claims – she decides to become Ankou beginning with the poisoning of her own mother. Soon after she sets off on her first of many journeys to work as a cook, where her killing spree begins.
It may seem surprising that she were not caught earlier on in her murderous career, especially with entire households succumbing to their deaths, but - at least in Teulé’s telling - the Breton’s still held strong belief in their old Celtic superstitions and altered between worshipping Hélène as a saint for not dying herself, or accusing her of witchcraft and bringing misfortune wherever she went. It is not until Hélène is approaching the age of fifty that the police begin to investigate, arrest and finally send her to the guillotine.
Each chapter begins with a map, detailing Hélène’s journey through Brittany so that the reader can see just how many places she went doing Ankou’s work. Teulé also turns this disturbing historical novel into a black comedy with the inclusion of two wig makers from Normandy who happen to go where Hélène goes, although are completely unconnected to, to whom bizarre misfortunes constantly fall.
<i>The Poisoning Angel</i> is an interesting tale and absurdly fascinating at times. From time to time it could fall a bit dull with the repetitiveness, but in a way it could not be helped, as it remains a fact that Hélène Jégado poisoned a large number of people. Melanie Florence must be commended for her translation from the original French, something that is by no means an easy feat.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Within (2016) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – John is the father of the house, we know he has been on hard times and this house is all he can afford for his family. He does love both his wife and daughter and is trying to teach his daughter a lesson after her mistakes have led them to this location. Hannah is his daughter of John that has been getting herself in trouble which caused the move, she is grounded and is the first one to notice the strange events around the house. Melanie is the new wife and step-mother to Hannah, she doesn’t do much beyond the normal, which is mostly trying to be the best friend in her time of need. Ray is the creepy neighbour that offers to help change the locks, less we say about him the better.
Performances – When we look at the performances in this film we must be praising Erin Moriarty as she is excellent in her role, the weaknesses come from the parental characters, Michael Vartan and Nadine Velazquez who both don’t seem to do much with their roles in the film.
Story – The story here follows the family that move into a new home only to start seeing strange things happening and we fall in the, ‘creepy person living in the attic’ sub-genre, which is one that I feel is getting tiresome, there is only so much you can do while telling this story and if we are being honest we have seen it done on better levels before. The build up follows the checklist and by the end of the film the story just feels like it is trying to hard to be different, rather than good.
Horror – The horror in the film comes from the idea that someone could be living in your house, it is an easy idea for because being haunted in your own home should be working, though this misses the tension required for the film.
Settings – The film is set entirely inside the one house, which is all we need as this keeps the film contained for the maximum levels of horror, even if they don’t use it well.
Special Effects – The effects for the most part are good with the kills looking extra brutal when they hit.
Scene of the Movie – The first meeting of David.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We have seen this too much.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the books horror that doesn’t test the audience enough, it has an easy out which doesn’t get used at all, though the killer does look creepy throughout.
Overall: Been here seen this.
Performances – When we look at the performances in this film we must be praising Erin Moriarty as she is excellent in her role, the weaknesses come from the parental characters, Michael Vartan and Nadine Velazquez who both don’t seem to do much with their roles in the film.
Story – The story here follows the family that move into a new home only to start seeing strange things happening and we fall in the, ‘creepy person living in the attic’ sub-genre, which is one that I feel is getting tiresome, there is only so much you can do while telling this story and if we are being honest we have seen it done on better levels before. The build up follows the checklist and by the end of the film the story just feels like it is trying to hard to be different, rather than good.
Horror – The horror in the film comes from the idea that someone could be living in your house, it is an easy idea for because being haunted in your own home should be working, though this misses the tension required for the film.
Settings – The film is set entirely inside the one house, which is all we need as this keeps the film contained for the maximum levels of horror, even if they don’t use it well.
Special Effects – The effects for the most part are good with the kills looking extra brutal when they hit.
Scene of the Movie – The first meeting of David.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We have seen this too much.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the books horror that doesn’t test the audience enough, it has an easy out which doesn’t get used at all, though the killer does look creepy throughout.
Overall: Been here seen this.
Andrew Sinclair (25 KP) rated Demolition Man (1993) in Movies
Nov 25, 2019 (Updated Nov 25, 2019)
I've decided it will be fun to review this classic action-packed sci-fi thriller as I watch it. I've watched it many times before and I guess I'm feeling nostalgic.
The film opens with a violent action scene with Stallone the hero pursuing his nemesis Wesley Snipes. It's tense stuff as they come face to face and stare each other down. It's literally an explosive beginning. Snipes manic laughter in that first scene gives you an idea of the kind of psychopath he is playing. After the destruction they have both caused they are both sentenced to be cryogenicly frozen for their crimes. That's a harsh punishment for an over-zealous cop but probably a fair one for a psychotic killer.
35 years later and America is a very different place. There is barely any crime but very little freedom. It is even illegal to swear. It's this philosophical debate that the film sheds light on which makes it both intriguing and funny. When the main characters, Snipes first then Stallone, find themselves in this supposed utopia their reactions are both humorous and volatile.
However one character played by Sandra Bullock actually appreciates Stallone's hardline old-fashioned ways as she has a fascination for the 20th Century. This creates an amusing and romantic interaction between them. Her inept attempts at 20th Century phrases adds to the comedy.
The scene where the police need instructions to arrest a violent criminal from a device which is like a modern day tablet makes me smile. And the line "We're police officers. We're not trained for this kind of violence!" makes me laugh out loud.
There is also a conspiracy story line. Snipes was released on purpose in order to hunt down rebels who resent the choice limiting laws. Meanwhile others unaware of this conspiracy release Stallone in order to capture Snipes. Then things really kick off!
The list of things that have been made illegal is laughable and this is brilliantly summed up with Stallone's line "Are you shitting me?!"
The films futuristic vision is entertaining and is also a good vehicle for humour as Stallone and Snipes are constantly taken aback by the technology. They both finally cross paths again in a museum where Snipes is stealing old weapons as of course weapons are illegal now. From this point on they continue their cat and mouse pursuit until the spectacular climax.
I love this film! It's over the top full-on fun which also manages to be philosophically thought-provoking. Definitely worth watching!
The film opens with a violent action scene with Stallone the hero pursuing his nemesis Wesley Snipes. It's tense stuff as they come face to face and stare each other down. It's literally an explosive beginning. Snipes manic laughter in that first scene gives you an idea of the kind of psychopath he is playing. After the destruction they have both caused they are both sentenced to be cryogenicly frozen for their crimes. That's a harsh punishment for an over-zealous cop but probably a fair one for a psychotic killer.
35 years later and America is a very different place. There is barely any crime but very little freedom. It is even illegal to swear. It's this philosophical debate that the film sheds light on which makes it both intriguing and funny. When the main characters, Snipes first then Stallone, find themselves in this supposed utopia their reactions are both humorous and volatile.
However one character played by Sandra Bullock actually appreciates Stallone's hardline old-fashioned ways as she has a fascination for the 20th Century. This creates an amusing and romantic interaction between them. Her inept attempts at 20th Century phrases adds to the comedy.
The scene where the police need instructions to arrest a violent criminal from a device which is like a modern day tablet makes me smile. And the line "We're police officers. We're not trained for this kind of violence!" makes me laugh out loud.
There is also a conspiracy story line. Snipes was released on purpose in order to hunt down rebels who resent the choice limiting laws. Meanwhile others unaware of this conspiracy release Stallone in order to capture Snipes. Then things really kick off!
The list of things that have been made illegal is laughable and this is brilliantly summed up with Stallone's line "Are you shitting me?!"
The films futuristic vision is entertaining and is also a good vehicle for humour as Stallone and Snipes are constantly taken aback by the technology. They both finally cross paths again in a museum where Snipes is stealing old weapons as of course weapons are illegal now. From this point on they continue their cat and mouse pursuit until the spectacular climax.
I love this film! It's over the top full-on fun which also manages to be philosophically thought-provoking. Definitely worth watching!
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Nightingale (2018) in Movies
Dec 11, 2019
Brutal and beautiful
In 1825 Tasmania, a young wife and mother experiences brutal atrocity against her family by the British soldiers in her midst. With her entire world shattered, the battered and broken young woman embarks on a quest for revenge. Not thinking clearly through her grief, she decides to escapade through the harsh and unforgiving countryside with only a native guide to show her the way and maybe catch those who have violated her world. Haunted by the images of her recent past, Clare is tortured by what she remembers, but needs to persevere for her wits to remain intact.
The path is ripe with treachery. The jungle can be beautiful and harsh simultaneously. Her guide is reluctant to lead the way and has to be bribed to do so. Clare, the young woman, has to deceive her real motives and says she has to meet her husband who as gone on ahead a few days journey. The duo have several unforgiving encounters while tracking the soldiers. The soldiers themselves continually perpetrate barbarism on those they encounter as their own guide takes them on an equally perilous journey through the unforgiving countryside.
Clare's quest for revenge and redemption could end up costing her her own life and soul in the process.
Writer/director Jennifer Kent is now one I will start having to keep my eye on for her future theatrical endeavors. First she spooked us all in the cleverly inventive, The Babadook, and now shows us a glimpse as to the brutal world of 1825 in unrelenting realism. The Australian county is go gorgeous during the day, but during the night presents many ghouls and strange sounds.
The intrigue the film presents is not the brutality itself, but Clare's reaction to it and thus her sense of retribution. She presents strength and weakness sometimes at the same moment, but you feel for her, her tough life and her struggle to meander through it. She wanders from soul to soul trying to get help, but finds few who are willing to help her.
The leading role for actress Aisling Franciosi was astonishing. Her portrayal of Clare was honest, heartbreaking and inspiring during different parts of the film. She wasn't just a victim of violence then a heartless killer, she shows depth and compassion as well.
Some of the images the film shows the audience will be hard to forget any time soon, but I am so glad I found this film. Highly recommended.
The path is ripe with treachery. The jungle can be beautiful and harsh simultaneously. Her guide is reluctant to lead the way and has to be bribed to do so. Clare, the young woman, has to deceive her real motives and says she has to meet her husband who as gone on ahead a few days journey. The duo have several unforgiving encounters while tracking the soldiers. The soldiers themselves continually perpetrate barbarism on those they encounter as their own guide takes them on an equally perilous journey through the unforgiving countryside.
Clare's quest for revenge and redemption could end up costing her her own life and soul in the process.
Writer/director Jennifer Kent is now one I will start having to keep my eye on for her future theatrical endeavors. First she spooked us all in the cleverly inventive, The Babadook, and now shows us a glimpse as to the brutal world of 1825 in unrelenting realism. The Australian county is go gorgeous during the day, but during the night presents many ghouls and strange sounds.
The intrigue the film presents is not the brutality itself, but Clare's reaction to it and thus her sense of retribution. She presents strength and weakness sometimes at the same moment, but you feel for her, her tough life and her struggle to meander through it. She wanders from soul to soul trying to get help, but finds few who are willing to help her.
The leading role for actress Aisling Franciosi was astonishing. Her portrayal of Clare was honest, heartbreaking and inspiring during different parts of the film. She wasn't just a victim of violence then a heartless killer, she shows depth and compassion as well.
Some of the images the film shows the audience will be hard to forget any time soon, but I am so glad I found this film. Highly recommended.
JT (287 KP) rated Halloween (1978) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Without a doubt Halloween was one of the finest horror films ever made, John Carpenter was spot on with his portrayal of a serial killer descending on a small American town.
Michael Myers was to become a horror icon and even though it spanned seven sequels, the original will always be the best in many people’s eyes. It is certainly my all time favourite horror film. Carpenter’s cinematic vision of Halloween was brilliant right from the opening credits. The long and short camera angles coupled with the “was he there or wasn’t he” shots of Myers were sublime.
The sinister musical score as well is paramount in making this film a household name in its genre. Jamie Lee Curtis was a scream queen for the 70s and although the acting talents were not up to scratch, it made no difference to the overall outcome of the film. Michael Myers was a disturbed child and after committing a horrific murder when he was just six years old he was committed to a mental institution where he escaped to stalk Laurie Strode, his long lost sister.
His the perfect boogeyman, and during the first part of the film he stalks Laurie sometimes just appearing out of shot as a blur between trees of a faceless driver passing by in his car. Laurie of course has no idea who he is but starts to feel like she is being watched, and her fears are finally realised one night descends and Carpenter ramps up the tension to breaking point.
What I love about this film is the pure simplicity of it, with a budget of just $320,000 it grossed $60m world world and was a massive hit with horror fans the world over. It didn’t want for fancy special effects, and the musical score was hardly a masterpiece but it did the job and it did it well. It is the model slasher flick and most of what has preceded it (maybe with the exception of the first Scream) have not been able to stand up in competition.
We’ve had Freddy and Jason, and we’re still having to sit and watch teenagers heading to remote and desolate locations to be butchered in a variety of unique ways while pints of blood are splashed across the screen. Halloween doesn’t require that, it will have you jumping out of your seat at least more than once and it just goes to prove that simple scares are the most effective.
Michael Myers was to become a horror icon and even though it spanned seven sequels, the original will always be the best in many people’s eyes. It is certainly my all time favourite horror film. Carpenter’s cinematic vision of Halloween was brilliant right from the opening credits. The long and short camera angles coupled with the “was he there or wasn’t he” shots of Myers were sublime.
The sinister musical score as well is paramount in making this film a household name in its genre. Jamie Lee Curtis was a scream queen for the 70s and although the acting talents were not up to scratch, it made no difference to the overall outcome of the film. Michael Myers was a disturbed child and after committing a horrific murder when he was just six years old he was committed to a mental institution where he escaped to stalk Laurie Strode, his long lost sister.
His the perfect boogeyman, and during the first part of the film he stalks Laurie sometimes just appearing out of shot as a blur between trees of a faceless driver passing by in his car. Laurie of course has no idea who he is but starts to feel like she is being watched, and her fears are finally realised one night descends and Carpenter ramps up the tension to breaking point.
What I love about this film is the pure simplicity of it, with a budget of just $320,000 it grossed $60m world world and was a massive hit with horror fans the world over. It didn’t want for fancy special effects, and the musical score was hardly a masterpiece but it did the job and it did it well. It is the model slasher flick and most of what has preceded it (maybe with the exception of the first Scream) have not been able to stand up in competition.
We’ve had Freddy and Jason, and we’re still having to sit and watch teenagers heading to remote and desolate locations to be butchered in a variety of unique ways while pints of blood are splashed across the screen. Halloween doesn’t require that, it will have you jumping out of your seat at least more than once and it just goes to prove that simple scares are the most effective.
JT (287 KP) rated The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
When Edward Norton [SPOILER ALERT] raised a smirk at the end of Primal Fear to reveal himself as a sick and twisted killer it capped a sublime performance from an actor that would go on to do bigger and better things.
Primal Fear was a courtroom thriller that held you all the way to the bitter end, and as that solemn expression washed over poor Richard Gere‘s face at the end you could only stand up and applaud.
The Lincoln Lawyer travels down a similar premise, but despite all the twists and turns in a plot based on the novel by Michael Connelly it fails to keep the tension high enough to satisfy us to a pay off that is only blip on the thriller spectrum, I personally wanted something bigger.
Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone whose comfortable in this type of atmosphere
McConaughey plays Mick Haller a defence attourney working out the back of his sleak looking black Lincoln, and whose job it is to pretty much keep the scum of the earth on the streets, something which has obviously damaged his marraige with Maggie McPherson (Tomei). His reputation though is flipped over mid way through and we suddenly get an insight into a man that is as much a doting father as he is a great defence attorney.
Well alright, alright, alright!
When he’s asked to defend rich boy Louis Roulet (Phillippe) for beating a prostitute to within an inch of her life he suddenly gets a conscience when he realizes that the clean cut image might be a façade to something much more sinister. The film itself is not bad at all, and in parts it’s actually very good with McConaughey calling on his supporting cast for help which includes John Leguizamo and William H. Macy.
McConaughey’s court presence is smooth and charismatic, which would probably make him quite a good litigator in the real world. Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone who’s comfortable in this type of atmosphere.
Phillippe is certainly no Norton, and you know right off the bat that he’s as guilty as hell but its a good turn from him nonetheless. As thrillers go its up there and is thoroughly enjoyable, most notably for McConaughey’s performance which is a role that has been a long time coming for him, and one that he nails right to the court room wall.
Primal Fear was a courtroom thriller that held you all the way to the bitter end, and as that solemn expression washed over poor Richard Gere‘s face at the end you could only stand up and applaud.
The Lincoln Lawyer travels down a similar premise, but despite all the twists and turns in a plot based on the novel by Michael Connelly it fails to keep the tension high enough to satisfy us to a pay off that is only blip on the thriller spectrum, I personally wanted something bigger.
Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone whose comfortable in this type of atmosphere
McConaughey plays Mick Haller a defence attourney working out the back of his sleak looking black Lincoln, and whose job it is to pretty much keep the scum of the earth on the streets, something which has obviously damaged his marraige with Maggie McPherson (Tomei). His reputation though is flipped over mid way through and we suddenly get an insight into a man that is as much a doting father as he is a great defence attorney.
Well alright, alright, alright!
When he’s asked to defend rich boy Louis Roulet (Phillippe) for beating a prostitute to within an inch of her life he suddenly gets a conscience when he realizes that the clean cut image might be a façade to something much more sinister. The film itself is not bad at all, and in parts it’s actually very good with McConaughey calling on his supporting cast for help which includes John Leguizamo and William H. Macy.
McConaughey’s court presence is smooth and charismatic, which would probably make him quite a good litigator in the real world. Maybe you’re seduced by his Texan drawl or his searing good looks, either way its a solid performance from someone who’s comfortable in this type of atmosphere.
Phillippe is certainly no Norton, and you know right off the bat that he’s as guilty as hell but its a good turn from him nonetheless. As thrillers go its up there and is thoroughly enjoyable, most notably for McConaughey’s performance which is a role that has been a long time coming for him, and one that he nails right to the court room wall.
Cristiano Ronaldo: Kick'n'Run
Games
App
How would you like to be in the shoes of Cristiano Ronaldo – one of the world’s top football...
Nick McCabe recommended Street Sounds Electro 5 by Various Artists in Music (curated)
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Art of Death in Books
Jul 1, 2021
The main character in this novel is DI Grace Archer, she is a leading investigator in a series of very bizarre and very cruel murders. There is a very wide variety of diverse and intriguing characters in this novel, and this book is told from multiple perspectives, including the victims and the killer as well. DI Archer is a very complex character, her childhood had its horrors, and she is an outsider in her new police station. But I really admired her strength, sharp mind and complexity. This book allows me to delve deeper into the characters, especially the victims, I think all the victims were suffering from one thing or another, and it was interesting to read about their lives.
The narrative of this book always changes, from the investigation it jumps to new abductions, to personal character’s lives. All these things made the book very fast-paced and enjoyable for me. Even though it is a debut novel, I felt like this book is a part of a series because of the way the author incorporated the details from DI Archer’s past. I felt like I missed the investigations that happened in the past. 😀 I found the plot very multi-dimensional, absorbing and creepy. The topics discussed in this book were grief and loss, traumatic experiences, workplace discrimination, many mental health issues, drug use, domestic and other violence and many many more.
The writing style is very easy to read and enjoyable, but at the same time, it felt unusual, different. (I can’t describe how though 😀 ) The author has experience in cybersecurity, and it was interesting to see, how he highlights the mistakes people do in their daily lives when it comes to our social media and online presence. There are a lot of gory murder scenes in this book, so it might not be suitable for sensitive readers. The atmosphere and the setting of the novel constantly change, depending on the perspective, and I really enjoyed it. The chapters are pretty short, and the whole novel was a page-turner for me. I really loved the ending, it left me very intrigued, and I can’t wait for another book. 🙂
So, to conclude, it is a very rich novel, full of layered and diverse characters as well as a plot that is fast-paced and always changing. I really enjoyed this book, it highlights so many various topics and social issues, you just need to find it.
The narrative of this book always changes, from the investigation it jumps to new abductions, to personal character’s lives. All these things made the book very fast-paced and enjoyable for me. Even though it is a debut novel, I felt like this book is a part of a series because of the way the author incorporated the details from DI Archer’s past. I felt like I missed the investigations that happened in the past. 😀 I found the plot very multi-dimensional, absorbing and creepy. The topics discussed in this book were grief and loss, traumatic experiences, workplace discrimination, many mental health issues, drug use, domestic and other violence and many many more.
The writing style is very easy to read and enjoyable, but at the same time, it felt unusual, different. (I can’t describe how though 😀 ) The author has experience in cybersecurity, and it was interesting to see, how he highlights the mistakes people do in their daily lives when it comes to our social media and online presence. There are a lot of gory murder scenes in this book, so it might not be suitable for sensitive readers. The atmosphere and the setting of the novel constantly change, depending on the perspective, and I really enjoyed it. The chapters are pretty short, and the whole novel was a page-turner for me. I really loved the ending, it left me very intrigued, and I can’t wait for another book. 🙂
So, to conclude, it is a very rich novel, full of layered and diverse characters as well as a plot that is fast-paced and always changing. I really enjoyed this book, it highlights so many various topics and social issues, you just need to find it.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Jigsaw (2017) in Movies
May 1, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
10 Years after the events in saw 7 (the Final chapter/Saw 3D) a new 'game' has started and a new group of police officers have to try to find out what is happening and who is responsible.
Jigsaw runs to almost the same formula as the previous films , there is a game in progress and the police have to stop it but as well as the game there is still enough of a story to make the film interesting. The biggest difference is that there isn't really the back story in the same way the other films had mainly because, with the exception of John Kramer (the original Jigsaw), we have all new characters. Instead Jigsaw focuses on finding out who the new Jigsaw is or even if it is a new Jigsaw or if John has some how come back from the dead. This is where the film is cleaver, it gives us a number of possible suspects and even makes it seem it may be John.
Jigsaw doesn't seem to be as gory as the previous films, yes you still have people in a game and yes at least some of them loose but there are no intestines littering the ground or close ups on people getting cut in half. Don't get me wrong there is still gore, closeups of the dead bodies and people loosing limbs but it doesn't quite have the same feel to it.
The story aspect to the film is good , as I said, it does leave you guessing to who the killer is although, if you pay attention there are clues. The film also plays with time a bit and, as in the other films, this is used to throw the viewer off track.
Jigsaw is a good entry in to the Saw franchise, as it has a ten year gap from Saw 7 it doesn't get bogged down with the original charters and doesn't get (too) bogged down with the past timeline which was getting a bit muddled (in my opinion) but it does manage to pull from what has gone before and use it further the story.
And that's it, the end of the Saw franchise. OK not quite, at the time of writing 'Spiral, Chapters from the book of Saw' is due out at the cinema (Corona willing) in a couple of weeks and it looks to bigger and better however I probably won't get to see it for a while so, for now, it's time to move onto something new.
Jigsaw runs to almost the same formula as the previous films , there is a game in progress and the police have to stop it but as well as the game there is still enough of a story to make the film interesting. The biggest difference is that there isn't really the back story in the same way the other films had mainly because, with the exception of John Kramer (the original Jigsaw), we have all new characters. Instead Jigsaw focuses on finding out who the new Jigsaw is or even if it is a new Jigsaw or if John has some how come back from the dead. This is where the film is cleaver, it gives us a number of possible suspects and even makes it seem it may be John.
Jigsaw doesn't seem to be as gory as the previous films, yes you still have people in a game and yes at least some of them loose but there are no intestines littering the ground or close ups on people getting cut in half. Don't get me wrong there is still gore, closeups of the dead bodies and people loosing limbs but it doesn't quite have the same feel to it.
The story aspect to the film is good , as I said, it does leave you guessing to who the killer is although, if you pay attention there are clues. The film also plays with time a bit and, as in the other films, this is used to throw the viewer off track.
Jigsaw is a good entry in to the Saw franchise, as it has a ten year gap from Saw 7 it doesn't get bogged down with the original charters and doesn't get (too) bogged down with the past timeline which was getting a bit muddled (in my opinion) but it does manage to pull from what has gone before and use it further the story.
And that's it, the end of the Saw franchise. OK not quite, at the time of writing 'Spiral, Chapters from the book of Saw' is due out at the cinema (Corona willing) in a couple of weeks and it looks to bigger and better however I probably won't get to see it for a while so, for now, it's time to move onto something new.