Headscratchers / Saw

  • Jigsaw's whole philosophy that separates him from his apprentices is that he abhors killing, and doesn't see the devices he places his victims in as murder. Yet he slashes Tapp's throat in a fashion that clearly should have been fatal and leaves a disguised row of mounted shotguns to cover his tracks. Is this just because he's an insane Hypocrite, or is it a legitimate plot hole?
    • Jigsaw, for all intents and purposes, is a psychopath who's simply found a way to 'justify' his actions. Note that he also says he's not a murderer despite the fact that he puts people in the situations that kill them.
    • Everyone who discusses the matter (specifically Lawrence in the first movie) knows/assumes John means this in a purely technical sense; he doesn't kill anyone himself, his traps do... never mind the fact that he built them (initially, anyway), he (and his accomplices) abducted the victims, he (and accomplices) set them up in the traps and he did this knowing full-well that they'd die if they failed to complete their "test". With that said, he (maybe intentionally) didn't cut Tapp deep enough to do any serious damage, something Tapp himself notices, which is why he chases after Sing to begin with.
    • It could be that since he thinks that what he's doing shouldn't be illegal, that assaulting people trying to capture him morally counts as self defense.

  • Forgive my lack of understanding of the legal system- but how could Timothy get 6 months in prison, as opposed to a longer sentence, due to lack of witnesses? Either he killed Jeff's son or he didn't. The court would need witnesses to prove it was him who did it but once they'd done that (which they did) what further role could witnesses play in determining his sentence? You'd think Timothy would have gotten a reduced sentence due to lenience or sympathy from Judge Halden. Lack of witnesses just doesn't make sense.
    • This would depend on how it was seen. The legal system can see it as an accidental death, which would carry a lighter sentence, wreckless driving, drunk driving, hit and run, etc. Without a witness to say if the car was say, speeding or driving erratically, it can be easy to present it as an accident.
    • Timothy's lawyer might also have argued that Jeff's son ran out into the road very suddenly. If no witness was available to dispute such a claim, it would've been easier to argue that, drunk or not, Timothy couldn't have seen the boy until it was too late.

  • First movie, key in the bathtub: why was it there in the first place? As far as I understand, Jigsaw was "punishing" both men, the doctor by threatening his family, and the voyeur by trapping him along with the guy he was snooping on. So what was that for, besides looking like a "very clever" move on the part of the killer?
    • In the 3rd movie it was revealed, through flashback, that Amanda just tossed the key into the tub haphazardly, instead of putting it wherever it was meant to go.
      • And yet, Jigsaw knew it at the end. So, why didn't he put it wherever it was meant to go?
      • A test for Amanda, most likely.
      • It was a final torture that they could have freed themselves at any time.
      • Except they couldn't because, you know, the key was in the bathtub, which would be drained when Adam woke up, and the key would be lost with the water. Oh, wait, it was exactly what happened wasn't it? Seriously, that was my point from start.
      • Considering that Jigsaw was pretending to be dead but knew that the key had been in the bathtub, one has to assume that it was supposed to be in there. However, the bathtub was set up to drain the moment that Adam woke up, THERE WAS NO WAY FOR HIM TO WIN. The key would be drained unless he, for some reason, reached around the bathtub before getting up, which he would have no reason to do. Which makes his sermon at Amanda for making his games unwinnable in the later film just a tiny bit hypocritical.
      • For all his criticism of Amanda, his games are nigh unwinnable anyway: who's going to be able to successfully remove their eyeball, and then use the key embedded in the socket to unlock a steel trap from their head in a matter of seconds without, you know, being too distracted by the agonizing pain? In his twisted mind, he probably did expect Adam to have the presence of mind to search his surroundings before rising up from the tub, and the key going down the drain was Adam's punishment for not being more careful (or alternately, maybe he was just too distracted with the self-drugging to notice that the key wasn't in its right spot - although, Saw 3 aside, it seemed like he was well aware that the key's no longer be accessible to Adam).
      • And for all this talk of how smart Jigsaw is, he seems remarkably idiotic in this instance if he was trying to teach Adam to be more careful of his surroundings. If you know someone doesn't check their surroundings, then having the key go down the plug hole isn't "teaching them a lesson", if they now have no real way of escaping the scenario and putting that lesson into practice. It's like deliberately running over and killing a jaywalker: they won't make the same mistake again, but they haven't learn a lesson about looking before they cross, either.
      • Its perfectly possible that, for all his rhetoric, he is simple a vengeful sadist out to settle some scores by torturing and humiliating his victims and make them know what power he has over their lives- in other words, it wasn't idiocy, it was Jigsaw being an asshole.
      • Actually, Jigsaw told Amanda to tie the key around Adam's ankle, but Amanda wouldn't have any of that and just threw the key in, almost guaranteeing Adam's failure. This flashback in Saw III was to show that Amanda was a straight-up murderer, or at least very careless, right from the very beginning.
      • If that was the case, the key makes even less sense. Had it been tied to his ankle, he would have found it immediately, turning a can't-win into a can't-lose scenario. Regardless of Jigsaw's intentions, there's no way the key is fair play.
      • I always interpreted it as being a final torture. Knowing that if he'd only just reached and grabbed the key the voyeur could have freed himself, and the knowledge that the chance to escape had washed down the drain forever, would haunt him until his final moments. The trick here is that hindsight is 20/20. There's no reason he should have thought to grab the key, of course, but when you're desperate and doomed to die it's not an unnatural response to beat yourself up over something like that, knowing freedom brushed ever so close to you. Basically Jigsaw's using his knowledge of human nature to be a dick. Obviously this doesn't take into account the sequels, but then again the first movie was originally meant to be a stand-alone, so Amanda wouldn't have factored in yet when they filmed this final scene.
    • When the bathtub was draining of water and Adam was still in it, there was a chance he would feel the key on its way to the drain and would grab it before it was lost forever. That didn't happen, but that doesn't mean the game was unwinnable. He had another option — or he WOULD have if he hadn't have broken his saw. If he hadn't have done that, he could have done what Lawrence did and cut off his foot to live. Alternatively, Lawrence could have thrown his saw to Adam to achieve the same thing.
    • If Jigsaw was on the floor, then who was causing Lawrence and Adam to be electrocuted through their chains? Did Zepp do that? Because there is never any indication in the film that he was responsible...
      • The end of the movie shows Jigsaw using the zapper on them in order for him to escape leaving them behind. It could have been they were just too involved in their predicament to notice any (very slight) movement from him after they've already dismissed him for dead.
    • In Saw III it shows Jiggy injecting himself with, as loosely quoted by the zombie himself, something that will "slow the heartrate" which extends to slowing breathing. And by the time it wears off, both men would be too frantic to even bother to acknowledge the body in the middle of the room anyway
    • Neither of them was close enough to even touch the body's outstretched fingertips. Seeing him breathing would've been fairly hard from that distance, particularly if the drug made him do so very shallowly.
    • It should also be noted that both characters claim they were 'electrocuted.' Electrocuted means to die as a result of an electrical shock - think 'executed' by electricity. What they should have said was 'electrified.' Especially perplexing as one of the characters is a doctor and really ought to have known better.
      • "Electrocuted" is also used in reference to non-fatal injury by electricity in common parlance.

  • 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..."?
    • He's just the guy from Seven with the serial numbers filed off. He really is a hypocrite, and his problem is envy. He wants what others have, the potential to live a normal life, but he can't so he gives them the choice of dying or living how he thinks they should.
    • Minor point, but if a cancer has major access to a patient's bloodstream, it can spread practically anywhere with a little luck. Getting brain cancer as a secondary from an internal organ cancer isn't unheard of.
      • To go with this; Colon cancer is one of the cancers that sends secondaries to brains quite (relatively) commonly. Cancer doesn't have to spread by direct contact with the primary.
    • He claims he want to make people "live their life to their potential"... by placing most of them in inescapable death traps. Do you have any doubt the guy is a hypocrite?
    • Glad I'm not the only one to see how stupid this character is. I mean, if he gave them more chances, maybe even put them in non-lethal (just seemingly from a stand point) situations, he'd be more sympathetic. Otherwise, he's just a murderer who doesn't directly kill his victims.
      • Well, basic psychology is one of Jiggy's subroutines, after all.
      • Really, the answer is in the first troper's assessment. He has an inoperable frontal lobe tumor eating away at his brain. His morality center is likely swiss cheese. He doesn't think like a normal human being, and is in fact lucky he even got that moment of rationality in Saw III's deleted scene. The series makes a lot more sense that while he may have incredible fortune when it comes to remaining high-functioning, John Kramer is completely, irreversibly insane.
    • His personal epiphany came when he nearly killed himself, so his cancer-fucked brain decided other people needed that brush with death to figure it out. As to the "inescapable" label, enough people survived his traps to form a support group by the final film. It's more likely that his being an engineer and not a doctor meant that he simply didn't quite realize exactly how fragile humans can be.
      • For that matter, given how many painkillers he's been on during his cancer treatments and how much his tumor had damaged his brain, he may have lost sight of just how crippling pain can be to an undrugged, neurologically-sound human being.
      • It's actually really simple: He is that cartoon villain who tie people under a closing buzzsaw and wait to see if they can make it, his ramblings are as deep as Zsasz because yes he is just a toy maker turned serial killer after losing his baby, getting cancer and surviving a car crash. You're not supposed to root for him.

  • In the first movie, the cops won't shoot (the guy they think is) Jigsaw, because he has information and they don't want to kill him. As a result, he's able to get away. But "shoot to kill" and "don't shoot at all" aren't the only options. Why don't they just shoot him in the leg? Or at least try to?
    • Sing did shot him when he made a run for it. Sure they aren't gonna shoot him when he is on his knees that's an execution but yes they did shot him in the back and he just got up. https://youtu.be/sy8hp938RMw?t=28 why do you think they didn't shoot him.
    • Fiction has led you astray. There is no "safe" part of the body to shoot someone in, and another problem, too.
      • I know it's not all as easy as it sounds, but... still. At certain points they're at pretty close range. If they shot very low, one would think, they would have a large chance of missing him entirely, a decent-ish chance of hitting his foot, and a pretty small chance of killing him. Which would arguably be better than a 100% chance of him getting away. But of course, this could be completely wrong.
      • Well, wrong yes, and wrong no. It's possible potentially... but any responsibly gun owner knows that you don't point your gun at anything you aren't trying to destroy (See I Shot Marvin In The Head) because it's not really all that easy to shoot to wound - there are major arteries in the leg, after all, and maiming usually isn't something police are want to do. More than that, police aren't allowed to shoot unless there is an immediate threat to life - someone holding a gun isn't enough reason to shoot. Only if they show intent to harm another or themselves or have actually shot at someone, then is an officer allowed to shoot. And then, officers need to be aware of what's behind the target - shooting into a crowd is bad even if you have a clear shot and the bad guy is shooting at you - if the bullet passes through the target, it can retain enough energy to do harm to whatever (or whomever) is behind it. Of course, as the next troper mentioned, all this is why tasers, beanbag shotguns, and other less-than-lethal weapons are more common place than TV would have you believe... so officers -can- shoot at people and take them down without maiming and killing them.
    • The real question is where were all the tasers and beanbag shotguns?
      • Many major city police departments (e.g. San Francisco) do not issue tasers for a variety of reasons (lack of budget for deployment/training, potential danger to the person shot (because it's so much better to shoot someone with a gun that's going to hurt or kill them than a taser that has a chance to harm them), potential for lawsuits, etc.). This occasionally leads to situations such as a drunk waving a knife around being shot and killed. Attempts to aim for a "less lethal" shot don't seem to even be considered. On the other side many police officers seem to frequently use tasers more as a compliance device (i.e. not doing what they say and/or not doing it as quickly as they want you to) such as in the infamous "don't tase me bro" and UCLA library incidents and don't always seem to see as much use to disarm a dangerous suspect.
    • Taser-shocks tend to make a target's muscles contract uncontrollably. That's the last thing you'd want to do if someone has a gun pointed at you, ready to shoot, because it's just going to make their finger cramp up against the trigger.
    • Re-watching the first film, it seems Tapp and his partner rushed over to Jigsaw's hideout as soon as Tapp noticed the clue in the video, then refrained from calling for backup because they didn't care to wait around for the warrant. They'd have probably had to requisition non-lethal equipment like bean-bag guns specially for the occasion, which they couldn't do because Tapp was too eager to get there quickly and bust Jigsaw himself.

  • Exactly why does everyone in the movie (and some fans) believe that Jigsaw can't be punished because he "never kills anyone"? He designs the death traps (which, considering how many times each of his hideouts have been ransacked by the police, those designs should be in the authorities' hands by now), kidnaps his targets, and even videotapes them while talking to them through the video feed. Seriously, does no one seem to understand how the concept of premeditated murder works in a court of law?
    • For reals. Jigsaw more or less puts a gun to people's heads and tells them to jump off of a cliff. Murder, kidnapping, assault, battery, reckless endangerment, conspiracy to commit murder (once Amanda comes into the picture), etc.
    • Do any of the characters actually say this? Even Jigsaw, who thinks he shouldn't be culpable, surely isn't dumb enough to think he really isn't. And Eric Matthews makes no bones about it in Saw II: "Putting a gun to someone's head and forcing them to pull the trigger is still murder."
      • In Saw, Lawrence says that Jigsaw is not "technically" a murderer. Especially ironic since later in the movie, we see one of the cops die, as a result of one of Jigsaw's traps. If somebody dies as a result of you trying to protect your home, you're a killer. Plain and simple.
      • In fairness, he was referring to the tabloid's moniker 'Jigsaw Killer' rather than whether he was actually a murderer or not.
      • Well, we didn't exactly get to see Jigsaw put to trial. After all, TECHNICALLY Ed Gein wasn't a serial killer - a serial killer needs to have killed three or more people in a period of more than thirty days, Gein was only officially found to have killed two people.
      • It's more them being pedantic about it.

  • One of the series' traps involves two men bound to a winch. Guy A has his eyes sewn shut, and guy B his mouth, theoretically to "prevent communication". Did nobody consider that A could still ask yes/no questions and get meaningful responses from B? Are they really that shortsighted?
    • Why would A ask yes or no questions? He doesn't know the other guy's mouth is sewn shut. He also has no idea what's going on around him - so no reason to ask or talk to begin with.
      • Me again. Does he have to have an idea what's going on? He should feel right away that he's being restrained, for one. Odds are that he'd be able to hear the other guy breathing, which in most people would cue "Who's there?" or the like. Any response from B would tip A off that B can't talk for some reason — why doesn't matter.
      • That also bugged me. I was confused as to how A couldn't just say (once he had the general idea that B couldn't talk) "do some action that produces sound so many times for yes, so many times for no, and so many times for I dunno." Then they could work together to get out of there.
      • Well, look at it like this. If you were chained to something in a room with your eyes sewn shut, wouldn't you immediately think the other person is a threat, somehow, if not completely responsible?
      • Possibly, but exactly how else are you going to escape? Your only chance is assuming the other guy doesn't want to kill you.
      • Well they didnt even make any effort to communicate, and even if the other guy wasn't responding, you'd think if the response to your call was "mmf, mmf" coming from the other guy, you would suspect something is up.
      • So why didn't the other guy try going "mmf, mmf" in an S-O-S pattern, or otherwise signaling that he was just as much in need of help as the blinded one?
      • Well, don't know about you guys, but if I suddenly woke up unable to open my eyes, chained to something and with a complete stranger near me, I wouldn't be able to think much aside from "what is going?". Some might have the nerve to calm down in extreme situations and think of something, others simply don't.
    • It actually bugged me that the guy with his mouth shut didn't force his mouth open to speak and try to find a way out together. Yes, it would hurt like hell, but it would be a lot easier than the other guy forcing his eyelids open, it'd probably save them and he actually did it after he killed to other guy anyway.

  • In the climax of the first movie, Lawrence goes crazy and saws his foot off. Never mind getting the job done with a rusty old saw. The bones in the human leg are extremely hard, and it would take a very long time to cut through it with a saw. Lawrence would be in excruciating pain and I doubt he'd be able to get very deep into his leg, crazy or not. He would probably pass out from blood loss, exhaustion or shock before he even made a dent on the bone, and then die.
    • Likely true, but don't underestimate the power of adrenaline. People in life-or-death situations have gone far beyond normal human endurance before.
      • I don't recall where he cut through, but isn't it possible he (being a surgeon) went for the space where there's just ligament BETWEEN hard bones and didn't attempt to cut through bone?
    • That actually didn't bug me. What did bug me is that: Lawrence- you're a doctor. A SURGEON, in fact. You should know that to minimize damage to the leg and overall blood loss, you should cut BELOW the chains, and then slip the leg through them. Instead, you cut above the chains, more or less guaranteeing that you're going to die. I know, I know, it was a stressful situation, but...
      • A. He was the one continually telling Adam to calm down and think things through
      • B. In those kinds of situations, it's the little minutiae that you keep in mind, to distract you from the situation that you're in. I can't help but think that in the several hours he is in that bathroom, Lawrence never recalls that lesson in basic human anatomy.
      • No "but". He had snapped, convinced that his family was dead. You try keeping your wits about you in that kind of situation. For the whole time in the cell, I don't think they ever considered cutting off their foot as a viable option, and once it was, there was no thinking about it.
      • For that matter, why wouldn't a surgeon think to amputate part of the foot rather than cut through the leg? Easier to go through the cartilage between tarsals than to transect the tibia, and the arteries would be a lot smaller, reducing blood loss.
      • Because - as with many of the things listed here - people do not think rationally in utterly horrific situations. It cannot be stressed enough how easy it is to think this all up when you're sitting at a computer in a comfy room with a cold glass of Coke, versus when you've been trapped in a shithole for hours and think your family was just murdered.
      • Except he wouldn't have had to come up with an idea for how best to do the amputation right then: he'd had quite a while to muse over the idea, however reluctantly, between his realizing what the saws were for and his finally losing it. Even if he'd never actually had the slightest intention of going through with cutting his own foot off, how could he not have had morbid thoughts about what it would be like to do so, and how best to survive it, during those interludes between conversations with Adam or other distractions...? It'd be like someone stranded on a deserted island never so much as wondering how to build a signal fire until they notice a ship on the horizon.

  • Lawrence saws his foot in order to reach the cell phone, which was just a few inches away from his full arm's length. Why did he not use his shirt to bring the phone closer? Don't say they'd be too worried to think for this option, because they had already done it before!
    • Or just flip the box around and use the empty part to snag the phone. The answer is the same as the one to most of these questions: panic is the antithesis of logic. Perfectly obvious answers are rarely so clear when one is sure that their family is currently being murdered by a madman.
    • Or he wasn't so much trying to get the phone as trying to appease Jigsaw so his family wouldn't die. Remember that he shoots Adam after he's free and can retrieve the revolver; presumably he does this in the desperate hope that Jigsaw will spare them if he carries out his task of killing Adam for real. Then Zep breaks in and is killed, so Lawrence offers to find help for Adam because, with the man he thinks is Jigsaw dead, it's no longer necessary that his fellow-trap victim die.

  • Some, if not most of the death traps could be solved in other than the intended ways. E.g., if there are easily accessible cogs, stuffing something like a shoe or your clothing in there should stop and/or destroy the machine. Yet, all characters seem to be obsessed about solving the puzzles exactly in the "official" way.
    • Remember that the victims have only minutes, sometimes seconds to do what Jigsaw instructs. If they try something else and it fails, they won't have enough time left.
    • Some of the traps have no time limit until the person tries to brute-force their way out of it and trigger the timer, like the reverse bear traps. And some of the traps, like the glass box in Saw II and the beaker of acid in Saw III, have an incredibly obvious solution that the person avoids in favor of something that will hurt, a lot, and will most likely make it impossible to solve. The glass box had the girl put her other hand through the other trapdoor when her first hand got caught, instead of trying to free her first hand or using one hand to hold the door open and the other to grab the syringe (she was shown to be an idiot, though, and the "Sarin gas" could be an excuse for the freakout), and even if the person in 3 could see the pour spout on the opposite side of the beaker, the first thing I thought was "Chains... The acid can be poured out away from her" (she even lifts and tips it slightly to get a better vantage point, after running her hands over where the chains are linked to the beaker, so it's not like it couldn't be moved). It makes sense that you can't think of something when you have ten seconds to cut a key out of your skull, but when you're sitting in a chair with a large bladed object strapped to your face, the key phrase would be "careful, planned movements" (not "jump up before you understand your surroundings"), and some of the victims' actions are far from the most intelligent thing I could see, and really, in many cases probably the most dangerous thing possible short of jamming or scraping a key or scalpel or whatever into the carotid artery.
      • Many of the traps tie into Jigsaw's philosophy of requiring a critical piece in order to make it out alive. Too many people assume it to be a brute force solution of jamming your limbs and body into harmful places, which is actually self destructive and the antithesis to Jigsaw's ideas. If they had remained calm and hadn't panicked, hard as it is in their predicament, they might have seen the third option that avoids injury and death, with calm being an oft repeated requirement for survival. His victims don't see this and automatically take the most dangerous and nihilistic option imaginable. This is why they are Jigsaw's victims.
    • So...Saw VI's scale trap that opens the film. Nevermind the scenario's lack of realism (few people have the nerve to amputate their limbs, let alone do it in under a minute to toss their body parts into a scale, and not kill them from blood loss/shock). Why didn't either of them consider throwing the tools down the chute or their shoes instead of their mutilated limbs/stripped fat? The scale wouldn't have known the difference.
      • This is taken to new and ridiculous levels in Saw 3D. Specifically, Bobby's final trap with the hooks. There are at least 3 answers better than "shove the hooks into yourself". For the record, these are (1) step into them like they are stirrups, (2) put them under your armpits (3) hook them onto your clothing. The "freak out" excuse doesn't really work here, since he takes a good 15 seconds of his allotted time to talk to his wife, consider what he is about to do, and then do it. Of course, Bobby is shown to be an idiot.
      • The point with Bobby's final test is that Bobby is the one who absolutely ruins it. Jigsaw hints before he begins that Bobby's trap isn't physically possible and the options above are obviously what any sane person listening to the tape would probably go for, considering that Bobby only made up what would happen in the hook trap before. It's the last one - Bobby's martyring himself to his wife and to everyone else for being such a massive fake, too, but the grand gesture doesn't really work out for him.
      • Also from Saw 3D... why did the automated gun kill more than one person? As soon as it started shooting, I would think that the natural reaction of any human being, especially a trained cop, would be to hit the deck. Since it can't shoot down, being automated and all, that would have saved everyone but the first guy.
      • More from Saw 3D:
      • With the publicist in the fishing hook trap we're told that if the decibel meter registers too high it will automatically trigger the trap before the time limit is up. Ignoring her screaming before the tape is played and the trap is triggered she continues to scream nearly constantly often red-lining the meter yet this never triggers the trap and time simply runs out a few seconds short of safety.
      • The screaming only speeds up the timer. It doesn't end the trap outright.
      • While Bobby doesn't have a great deal of time he still has sixty minutes to save his wife and based on the videos he's shown failure at a trap results in her situation worsening (or simply coming off as an average night at a BDSM club). While he doesn't have any clue how many potential victims he'll need to save (only four including his wife and excluding his two traps) he nevertheless starts each tape as soon as he notices it thus starting the trap. He never pauses to try and figure it out or find an alternate solution in advance. Considering that each trap only has a time limit of one minute and he probably doesn't spend that long wandering around he would have had at least fifteen minutes each. Assuming he was trying to rush he would have had a substantial bonus upon reaching his wife and could have afforded to spend more time trying to work it out.
    • With the spikes-and-fishhook trap from 3D, wouldn't the sensible move for Bobby to make be to simply cold-cock his publicist, so she'd neither have to suffer the hook being withdrawn nor make noise that would set the trap off early?

  • In Saw and Saw II, Jigsaw uses poisons... And estimates, with a fair bit of accuracy, the speed at which they would react (assuming that the characters didn't fall for the other traps) ... Which is problematic, because each person should have more variation on how much time it takes for them to succumb to poisoning. They (the writers) should've factored in weight, fat in the person's body, etc., and secondary symptoms of the poisons. So how does Jigsaw accurately guess that (assuming that he didn't have access to medical records)?
    • Either it's a poison which attacks specific parts of the body which don't vary much between people (brains, for example) or the time he stated was a minimum or rough estimate. Or he lied.
    • This isn't really true though... except in Saw III:
      • Saw - Zep is told it's a "slow acting poison" and to get the antidote he needs to play the game. He is told he will live long enough to finish the game (6 o'clock). There is no indication that he will drop dead at 6:01.
      • Saw II - There is no explicit time given for how long the gas will take to kill people. The timer throughout the movie is meant to look like that's what it is doing, but it is actually timing something very different. In fact, the different effects on different people aspect is shown with Laura, who dies of the poison well before anyone else, and before she even finds her trap.
      • Saw III - no poison, but there is the ice shower which has a similar problem. This is the only time that Jigsaw has amazing timing skills in the entire series. How exactly Jigsaw knew exactly when Danica would freeze to death, and that she wouldn't already be dead when Jeff got there, is anyone's guess.
      • I'm guessing a person can survive rather longer when they're merely exposed to subzero temperatures while naked, so Jigsaw only had to know that much. Danica wasn't subjected to sprays of water until Jeff actually arrived on the scene, and said sprays of water were what actually killed her, and fast, because she was very cold already. Still pretty impressive.
      • I'm no doctor, but her skin was blue when Jeff first walked into the room. If that doesn't indicate a serious medical condition, I don't know what does. There is no explanation given for how Jigsaw knew her obvious hypothermia wouldn't kill her before Jeff ever walked in.
      • The whole scene is blue.
      • Agreed. That said, look at this image (SFW, nudity is cropped out), from before the water sprays start (I think). Compare her to Jeff, standing in the background, and try to tell me that she doesn't need to be in a hospital for acute hypothermia... like... now...
      • For all we know, the hoses could've been periodically dousing her with warm water to keep her alive until Jeff broke out of his box.
      • Which would be worse for her than no water at all since whenever the hoses weren't dousing her she'd be soaking wet and in a freezer, which certainly wouldn't keep her alive longer than leaving her dry in the freezer. The constant alternating between warm and freezing cold would probably kill her from shock, and she'd be in agony every time the water hit (have you ever run your hands under even the most lukewarm tap after being out in the cold? It's agony even without hypothermia involved).
      • Maybe she hadn't been naked until Jeff broke out of his box, but was wrapped in a thick blanket that was attached to a cable in the ceiling. When Jeff busted loose, the tipping of the box tripped a winch that automatically withdrew the blanket, leaving Danica exposed for only a matter of minutes before he found her.
      • Saw IV - Still no poison, but the timer seems to be timing how long it will take the ice block to thaw under Matthew's feet, which Jiggy couldn't possibly know. Of course, that isn't what it's timing at all, so there is no issue.
      • Actually, ice melts at a fairly consistent rate for a given temperature and pressure.
      • Saw V and VI have no relevant examples that I can think of.

  • I can't believe no one asked this question yet but, Where Does He Get All Those Wonderful Toys?? Seriously, those death traps didn't build themselves out of nothing. Jigsaw was merely a civil engineer in his past life so he wasn't exactly Bruce Wayne in terms of wealth.
    • Actually, the movies do state he is rather wealthy. He even owns several abandoned buildings (which are presumably where the "games" take place). It's also not unlikely that Amanda and Hoffman help him financially.
      • Of course, him being wealthy undercuts his backstory, which was that he was denied insurance coverage for an experimental treatment. He certainly had enough wealth to have paid for the treatment in cash, all the more so since the treatment did not involve surgery, which is generally more expensive than pure drug treatments. (It was stated that his cancer could not be treated by surgery.)
      • Kramer explicitly stated he could pay for it, but he was more angry with the principle of not getting the coverage.
      • Possibly his insurance plan considered the treatment so experimental that buying it outright would've obviated the rest of his coverage, meaning they'd quit paying for his already-ongoing hospital care if he did so.
    • A lot of the traps' equipment consists of re-purposed materials from his properties, like machinery from old factories. That stuff wouldn't have cost him anything, if it was abandoned along with the sites.
    • Amanda the junkie and Hoffman the (admittedly often-promoted) cop? Eh, maybe... Lawrence was a doctor, so there's also that.

  • The more I think about it, the less Lawrence and Adam's trap makes sense to me:
    • First, why would Jigsaw trap Lawrence anyway? From the clips of his private life we see, he seems pretty respectful of life. The only thing a bit reprehensible he does is THINKING about cheating on his wife, but he cancels the date before it's too late, and if anything, that shows he enjoys life a bit too much. Jigsaw himself gives an awfully vague reason to trap him: "every day you tell patients they will die soon, now it's your turn to end a life." What the hell?! Is Jigsaw really blaming him for not being able to magically cure patients with terminal diseases? And what about Adam? So yeah, he's a private investigator and as such, he stalks people. Big freaking deal, his job leads either to punishing assholes or cleaning innocent people's image.
      • I think the point of Doctor Lawrence's punishment is basically for being a dick. It's sort of implied (with the whole first scene with Zep) that he's nonchalant about the lives of his patients. Which (especially if you're crazy, like Jigsaw) you can somewhat twist into him being a 'bad person'. But every doctor isn't Patch Adams here, some just kind of get deadened to the emotions that go with oncology. So I'd say that in Jigsaw's mind there is a logical reason Lawrence needs to learn a lesson, though not logical by any stretch of the word in reality.
    • Second, we know that Lawrence must kill Adam, but what is Adam supposed to do? Jigsaw never explains it (and Adam isn't here just as part of Lawrence's test since he gets a tape as well, meaning he too is being tested). Is he just supposed to escape using the key or the saw? And then is he supposed to help Lawrence or leave him to rot? And if Adam escapes early on, does Lawrence lose even if he has plenty of time left?
    • Third, why give them the saws? Okay, maybe one for Adam since it's apparently his secondary mean of escape, but why give Lawrence one too since the goal of his game is explicitly to kill Adam?
      • He had to kill Adam to save his family. That doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't have had to free himself too.
    • And last but not least, why on Earth would Jigsaw put the key to Adam's chain right next to him?! Had Amanda not tossed it in the bathtub, Adam could have just used it and walked away. What is he supposed to learn from that game? Don't forget your keys at home?
      • If Adam's tape is anything to go by, the point of his test was to change his attitude of watching other people's lives while ignoring his own. With that, it seems like he was meant to pay attention to himself enough to find and use the key. According to material that didn't make it into Saw III, Amanda was supposed to have sabotaged the trap by placing the key on his chest rather than tying it to his neck, and by tying the chain for the stopper to his foot.
      • Still makes no sense. If you know someone doesn't pay attention, then to make their survival reliant upon them checking their surroundings when waking up under great stress isn't teaching anything or making a point. It's just rubbing their face in it when they fail in the way you expect- "Ha ha, if you'd looked, you'd have escaped. But you didn't, so you'll die". Which isn't what Jigsaw claims to be doing. And if the key had been tied around Adam's neck, he would have noticed it. Even an unobservant person would notice something unusual around their neck, especially if they were looking for something like a key. Or Lawrence would have noticed it and mentioned it, hoping Adam would free him too.
      • Even unchained, they'd still have had to search around for ways to get out of the room.
    • Was it ever explicitly stated that the key left with Adam was to Adam's shackles? Maybe it was the key to Lawrence's shackles, and the point of leaving it with Adam was to see if he'd actually get involved with one of the people he's been performing surveillance on from a distance, by trusting the doctor - who, after all, might actually be the one who put him there and/or might have noticed he was being followed and be pissed about it - enough to free the man when he's still trapped himself. Which would add a new level of challenge to Lawrence's test, since he'd actually owe the man he's ordered to kill a favor.

  • Just a legal point: Jigsaw says at least once that he's not a murderer, because he gives all his subjects a chance (however slim) to escape. However, there's definitely a crapload of crimes he could be charged with (kidnapping, unlawful detention, etc). Is his statement that he's not a murderer technically correct, or is he just that far out off-plumb?
    • I'm no law expert (especially not US law since I'm European), but I assume he could still be condemned for endangering other people's lives by putting them in the traps, at least second-degree murder, and definitely for torture. His association with Amanda also makes him an accomplice of a murderer. But either way, I think what he means is that he doesn't consider himself to be a murderer, regardless of what the law says.
    • Best case scenario, he gets off on "only" a huge numbers of counts of manslaughter. However, he's designing things that are intended to kill people, and leaving them to die unless they do something horrible/self-destructive. I'm pretty sure that American courts would say murder in the 1st degree is an acceptable sentence.
      • Simple. Jigsaw is insane, and not a lawyer. Aside from that, the first answer is probably correct: He wasn't talking in legal terms, but in how he saw himself.
    • Well, if he had lived past the first three movies, then he probably would've been caught and tried for all those counts but seeing as how he's insane, he could be put in an insane asylum or under medical care for his cancer or something like that.
    • Lawrence, Jigsaw and some of the cops say that Jigsaw isn't "technically" a murderer. These people are wrong. Murder, as defined in most U.S. states, is "knowingly causing the death of another human being". Jigsaw knowingly put his victims into situations that would result in their deaths if they failed to escape. He put them there, and he thereby caused their deaths. If they fail to escape, it's murder. If they escape, it's attempted murder.
    • Moreover, every death in a fixed-location trap rates as felony murder, because they're the direct consequence of a felony (kidnapping).

  • Where did Jigsaw get the crapton of (presumably) used syringes for the needle trap in 2 and to stuff the toilets with in the video game? I thought maybe the hospital where he was diagnosed with brain cancer, but then I realized that most hospitals lock up the used sharps boxes to prevent cross-contamination.
    • His wife is helping drug addicts, Amanda was/is a drug addict, Hoffman is a cop. It's not much of stretch to think that one of those three would have been able to get used syringes.
    • You can buy syringes by the box of a hundred. Faked prescriptions or, even easier, a faked business that happens to include a pharmacy and buy 'em by the case. Used syringes don't look much different from new ones — all you'd need to do is take the protective caps off.
    • Also, some cities actually have needle and syringe programs where clean ones are provided for free, to lessen the spread of blood-borne diseases and such.

  • Jigsaw told Amanda that she killed 4 victims. They seems to be Adam, Eric, Kerry, and Troy, but in Saw IV it is revealed that Eric was just captured by Amanda, not killed. So who was the 4th victim? Was it Lawrence? Could it be possible that after the end of the first movie Amanda found Lawrence in the passage outside the room and killed him and this is exactly what Jigsaw was speaking off? Or is someone else is the 4th victim? I don't understand.
    • Her 'dead' cellmate.
      • That doesn't make sense because she had to kill him for the game, and she didn't kill him out of mercy (Adam) or as part of the game (Kerry and Troy), she killed him because she had to or she would've died. There was also an unused part of the story where Amanda really did kill Eric but the director took it out. So maybe, that's what Jigsaw meant. I don't know
      • I just rewatched III, and I don't recall her ever giving a number of victims. She just says "That's right, I'm a murderer" when confronted with what happened to Eric Matthews. She never explicitly says she killed him, though it is heavily implied. That's the Unrated version. The director's cut (which I havn't seen) may have different dialog on one or more of these points.
      • Jigsaw said that because that's what Leigh and James wrote on the script. Saw III was supposed to be the end, Eric was supposed to die. Infact, Donnie apparently only came back on the condition that his character be ended and was pissed off when he saw that it was't. There was originally a scene showing Amanda returning to Eric and stabbing him in the throat, as someone mentioned above. However, they were made to take it out as one of the edits they made to make Saw IV possible (others include the clip of Jigsaw pouring wax on the tape) so instead they just showed Amanda angrily walk back to Eric after he starts mocking her.
    • Maybe she didn't know Eric was alive. Amanda and Hoffman both worked for Jigsaw, but not always together; he was the one who set up Eric's final trap after Amanda "left him for dead". And Jigsaw let her think she'd killed him because the intent is what matters.
      • The actual issue is related to a real-world one, not a plot hole. The original script for Saw III has Amanda outright killing Eric, and apparently the scene was even fully filmed. At the last minute, Lionsgate excs made them cut the scene short on the hopes they could convince Donnie Wahlberg to return for Saw IV. However, because of how last minute the change was, it still says four people instead of three.
    • I recall Jigsaw saying this right after Amanda shot Lynn. I took this as Jigsaw foreseeing the chain reaction about to ensue and saying that Amanda's decision to shoot Lynn effectively killed 4 people: Amanda and Jigsaw (via Jeff), Lynn (via shotgun collar), and Jeff (via Agent Strahm).

  • Danica, in the third movie, has never made any sense to me. She is supposedly a witness of the drunk driving accident. She never testified at trial, and never told anyone of authority what she saw. So... how could Jigsaw possibly know that she witnessed the accident?
    • Jeff knew she saw something and may have tried to contact her. Jigsaw found out.

  • It just kind of bugs me that Amanda, who arguably had the easiest trap of anyone else in the entire series, was a survivor. The only thing she had to do was cut open another person and dig for a key, which should have been a huge decision and a moral conundrum, but Jigsaw explicitly told Amanda that the person was dead, when they really weren't. Seriously, why did he tell her he was dead? And who was this person that Jigsaw simply chose to die? Did he fail a trap in a non-lethal way, with his "death" being used in this way?
    • Probably because cutting someone open is still Squick, and realizing he's still alive before doing it, makes it Nightmare Fuel.
    • It wasn't THAT easy. She had to stab a path through a guy's stomach with a little tiny scalpel and then find a tiny little hidden somewhere inside his intestines and the unlock the RBT and get it off her face. In under sixty seconds, no less. That's not arguably easy — it's pretty damn hard. Lawrence had the easiest test of all: all he had to do was shoot a stranger who had been taking pictures of him to give to a crazy ex-police officer. And he was given several hours to do it. And yet, he still didn't succeed.
    • It wasn't easy by any normal definition of the word, but it was easy relative to the other games that Jigsaw's subjects had to play. Most involved severe self-mutilation (Pound of Flesh) or the possibility of dying a horrible death as a result of attempting to escape (Flammable Jelly). Compared to having to gouge one's own eye out or crawling through a barbed-wire maze with a time limit, finding a key in some half-conscious guy's entrails is a walk in the park.
    • You might want to cut down on the horror films, it's skewed your perspective. People on here handwave victims acting in a stupid fashion by claiming they're in shock or terrified and thus do silly things, but then talk of how easy some traps were and say ridiculous things like 'all she had to do was murder another human being, then root around in his guts to find a key that would unlock the bear trap that's been ticking down this whole time to tearing her face apart...'. Amanda is a junkie, not a psychopath. Sure, some traps are less difficult compared to others, but they're still objectively near-impossible and horrendously traumatizing for the average person. To be honest if you put most people in the RBT and put the key on the other side of the room, most people wouldn't have in undone within sixty seconds, since they'd waste time panicking and fumbling with the lock.
    • Well, maybe, because the trap was easier than most she was able to escape it? That kinda makes sense. Also, Amanda was one of the first victims, so, maybe, after she managed to survive Jigsaw decided that was too easy and made the subsequent traps to be harder to beat.

  • In Saw IV what was up with all the Mind Screw transfers between scenes? A guy breaks a window and suddenly it shatters into a door and suddenly we're in another area? My friends were getting frustrated by it and eventually screaming at the TV "Stop it!" They never did that in the first three movies. Why try something annoying and awkward like that now?
    • I don't have a good answer for that, but in the earlier three movies they also tried to put plot above gore and Technology Porn. All of that went out the window in the fourth movie, and it only went downhill from there, so it's quite likely that they were just trying to be flashy and stylistic instead of producing anything of quality.
    • Actually they used screwy scene transitions like that in the first couple of movies. In "Saw 2" Detective Matthews appeared to walk from his hotel room onto the first crime scene.
    • There's solid logic to Saw IV's fragmented narrative. Like Saw II, Saw IV splits into two separate chronologies, though it was less obvious in IV's case. When Rigg's test begins, the viewer watches him try to solve Jigsaw's puzzles. After each test, which results in the death of whoever Rigg tried to save, the narrative shifts to Detective Strahm and Agent Perez investigating those murders, and then back to Rigg again. Again, like Saw II, near the movie's end, it begins to explain the chronology of the narrative shifts. Rigg's test starts around the same time as Jeff's final test (from Saw III) after he killed Jigsaw. Not too confused yet, right? Okay, now when Strahm/Perez closed in on the same warehouse, some time had to pass before the investigation started (between several hours or even an entire day, though it's tough to guess with the movie's screwy chronology). Then, once viewers see Rigg fail the final test (which kills Detective Matthews with two ice blocks), we realize Detective Hoffman was behind Rigg's test. After that, the movie flashes back to Saw IV's opening scene with the autopsy done on Jigsaw's body, and Hoffman grabbing the tape from Jigsaw's stomach. Chronologically, that scene happened last, not first as viewers originally assumed.
      • On the one hand, this was a very brave, atypical approach to making more Saw sequels without severely damaging the mythology. On the other hand, this approach confused many viewers (especially non-fans), largely because of how subtle and non-distinctive these details are. It also doesn't help if you, like several others, couldn't tell Detectives Strahm and Hoffman apart. Even if you figured out everything above without help (rottentomatoes forums helped me out greatly), it's impossible not to think the overall plan was extremely convoluted. Think too hard about everything, and it makes your head hurt.

  • In Saw, we see Zepp playing with his kidnap victims in a sadistic manner; i.e. putting a gun to Alison's head and using a stethoscope to observe how Diana's heartbeat reacts. This makes sense while we think that Zepp is Jigsaw, but Fridge Logic kicks in once we learn that he was just yet another innocent pawn. One is left with the feeling that this scene was put there merely for effect, and admittedly it is a very powerful scene ...
    • Innocent pawn? There must have been some reason Jigsaw decided to put him in a "game" and poison him. Odds are even though he isn't Jigsaw, he was still a sick fuck.
      • Being in Jigsaw's games reveals nothing about the victim's character. Saying that "there must be a reason Jigsaw chose him, so he's probably a sick fuck" makes no sense; most of his victims are just ordinary, albeit flawed, people. Word of God has it that Zepp was relishing a situation where he was finally in control over the lives of others, and he was getting sick thrills from it while he had the opportunity. So, yeah, he was a sick fuck, but that has nothing to do with why Jigsaw chose him.

  • So why exactly does Jigsaw make all these traps where it is literally required for another person to die for the other to survive? If the purpose of his games are to test people's merit and worthiness of survival then making tests where people aren't given a chance, such as William's parasol trap where he has to choose who the shotgun kills and who it doesn't, contradicts everything Jigsaw claims to stand for. He is a hypocrite regardless because putting people in deadly situations is still murder, but it gets into hypocrite of the freaking century territory when you consider this part too.
    • Well, I wondered the same thing until I realized that most of these traps were actually designed by his apprentices, so it could be explained by them not understanding Jigsaw's goal (especially when you consider the inescapable traps Amanda created), but then again, in Saw V, he appears in person to explain the rules of such games, implying he approves of them (though one could argue he decides not to interfere with his apprentices' games and only appears to do his bit without giving his opinion). I also had another theory that this is Fridge Brilliance. That the makers of these movies do NOT want the viewers to like Jigsaw and that they intentionally made him gradually more hypocritical when they realized many people thought his message (enjoy life or don't live at all) made sense. Or you could Take a Third Option and say that Jigsaw is a freaking psychopath, and as such he is nuts and completely unreliable.
    • Or there's always the WMG option: that at least some of the designated victims in such death-required traps had also been put through one of Jigsaw's ordeals, and the price of failing in their own individual games was to become cannon-fodder in somebody else's.
      • Hold up, isn't the price of failure usually death?!
      • Yes, but we know that sometimes death can mean sitting in a room starving to death. It doesn't always end in a direct trap kill. Such people have already lost, so Jigsaw would have no issues with knocking them out and using them as part of someone else's test. He might even consider it an act of mercy, since he's basically giving them a small chance of living after all, if the new test subject spares them. Then again, Jigsaw might just keep right on using them in test after test until a new testy kills them.

  • Given most of the Saw devices would require hours or days to assemble and then have to tested before being deployed,when would a man dying of cancer find the time to gather so many victims and "test" them? Even with assistance?
    • Well, some of the simpler traps probably could be tested rather easily with a dummy, but given that his apprentices helped make some of them and expected multiple people to die anyway, it's not impossible they just slapped them together and said "what's the worst that can happen if it goes wrong? They die anyway?"

  • How did Tapp survive with his throat slashed if no one knew where they were?
    • It was supposedly Jigsaw who patched him up for the tests in the Video Game.

  • Why was Hoffman "tested" at the end of VI?
    • Because Jigsaw caught on the fact that Hoffman was a sadist (Do you like how brutality feels, Mark?) and was keen on just plain murdering as Amanda (Let's be honest. I want him to suffer just as much as you do.) and gave orders to put him in a trap to make him realize how the victims feel. Also, it was supposed to be an escape route for Jill, in the case Hoffman died.
    • Even so, if Jigsaw was so great at predicting human behavior, he should've known that Jill might want Hoffman dead and use it as a simple deathtrap — and that if Hoffman survived, he'd be out for blood. It seems a careless thing to do if he was so worried about Jill's safety.
      • In fact, it was built in such a way so he would die... but I think Jigsaw didn't predict the window with the bars, which turned out to be the thing that helped Hoffman survive.

  • Okay, Saw 3D. I was thrilled to see Lawrence return... but why the hell was he working with Jigsaw? Sure, it explains some details of past traps, but it doesn't fit his character from the first film at all. And how did he track down Hoffman, and why did he do it after Jill was dead? And who were the other pig-mask guys?
    • Lawrence was the only person who truly understood what John was trying to do. John told him all about Hoffman, and his instructions were to only punish him if Jill died. Not before, as he still had hope that Hoffman would change.
      • That doesn't quite explain why a man with a new-found appreciation for his family's well-being would associate with a serial killer. Likely ending up with a life sentence and risking the wrath of a pair of Ax-Crazy associates doesn't exactly help his family.
    • It's not "explained" on screen so we just have to assume, but there's plenty of scenarios that would make sense to imagine how he got there. Word of God tried to fill in some of this but I think we can lay the brutal truth that this probably would have been fleshed out more had they have gotten to do it as two movies instead of one.
    • Honestly, I think, just like Amanda, it was a cocktail of trauma-induced vulnerability and Stockholm Syndrome. God knows how long John kept him there, and since we know that neither Amanda or Hoffman knew about his apprenticeship, I'll bet you anything that for whatever time it takes to mend a man who lost a foot (assuredly a long time), John was the only person Lawrence saw or spoke to. Amanda was loyal to a fault to John, and he didn't literally nurse her back to health, so just imagine how Lawrence must feel.

  • As for the other plotline of 3D... Why did everyone believe Dagen when he had no evidence of being in a trap? And who designed the traps in this movie, Jigsaw or Hoffman? The last film suggested that William and friends were the last advance victims Jigsaw had prepared, but that's definitely his voice on the tapes, and the grudge against Dagen is his.
    • We know that Hoffman can use voice-editing techniques on tape to make himself sound like John. And who's to say that John didn't have Bobby planned out enough to make the tapes, and schedule all the other stuff for a later date?
    • The way it's shown it would imply William was the last planned chronologically but that doesn't mean John couldn't have planned Bobby earlier and just put priorities later. After all with the ending, Lawrence was at the Survivors meetings even before Bobby got there, so Bobby's been under watch by an apprentice for a while even if not yet truly abducted. And according to Word of God it would actually be three apprentices keeping an eye on him, including Brad and Ryan, even if they are just basically helping out Lawrence. Hoffman could have been looking to use up what John had left to help with his own foil the police plans.

  • Hoffman's letter to Amanda is something that has always bugged me about VI. I think the writers simply forgot that John told her to get the letter in III and thought she found it on her own, and didn't bother to go back and re-watch the scene while reusing some of the footage for VI. Or they hoped the Viewers Are Morons.
    • So, to clarify, Hoffman tells Amanda to kill Lynn, or else he will tell John what he knows. John already knows what Hoffman has to tell him, and Amanda knows that John already knows since he pointed her to the blackmail letter in the first place. So, she calls Hoffman on his bluff by... killing Lynn... what? I think Amanda's drug use really screwed up her short term memory, since that's the only way this makes any sense.
    • Or, you know, John had written a letter for Amanda, but Hoffman switched it with his own.
      • Yeah, according to the Saw VI commentary, that is the official explanation. It would have been nice to see some indication of that in the movie itself though. It would have only taken up 10 seconds or less of screen time to show Hoffman pull a letter out of the desk and replace it with his own instead of just showing him putting his letter in the desk.

  • Why is the razor wire trap still standing when Strahm visits the location in Saw V? The body is removed, and as best as I can tell the blood has been cleaned off, but the trap itself is still there. Isn't "removing the razor wire" part of "cleaning the crime scene" in the Saw universe?
    • On a similar note, why are the police not constantly monitoring that one house from the first film that Jigsaw keeps reusing?
      • The police don't know where it is until Hoffman leads Erickson there at the end of Saw V. At the end of that movie the only 'non-psychos' that know about the place are Erickson, Brit, and Mallick. It's safe to assume other cops showed up shortly afterwards to assist with the investigation (between V and VI).
      • The "five become one" game was in a completely different location from the house. Nobody besides Hoffman and Lawrence know where it is.
      • Hmm... in that case I guess it is possible that the house was never found, but only if Lawrence converted really fast so he wouldn't tell anyone. And Jigsaw has to have covered his tracks even better than we already knew; for example, didn't Eric Matthews drive his squad car to the house? Even if they moved or destroyed it, those cars are surely tracked from the station by GPS or something. (Also, I don't remember off the top of my head if any victims or traps from that house were mentioned by the police later, but the whole thing falls apart if so.)
      • Lawrence did convert pretty quickly, as shown in VII. Since John nursed him back to health instead of taking him to a hospital, he had little contact with the outside world until he was able to actually move on his own again. By that point, he was firmly in John's corner.
    • Replying to OP, the structure (i.e. the fencing and the door) are still there, the wire was cleared out, it's not shown very well, but there's a shot that's clearly from behind one of the fences, and another with the fencing visible over Strahm's shoulder, and there isn't any wire there.

  • Joyce's death in Saw 3D just bugs me. Throughout all seven movies, I can think of a justification why Jigsaw (using his twisted logic, that is, if there's anything at all wrong with you or even just something he has a chip on his shoulder about) put everyone else in a trap (excluding Lawrence's wife and daughter, but they ultimately survived, and I don't think they were actually supposed to be in any danger; see Fridge page for my theory on that), but not her. We don't learn much about her, but from what we see, she's pretty much a perfect wife and genuinely loved Bobby and was the only reason the guy is actually sympathetic at all. Sure, she was a bit annoying as a character, but if there's anyone in entire Saw who seemed like they would pass Jigsaw's morality standards, it was her. And then she is fried alive in what is possibly the most Nightmare Fuel sequence of the series. I can't understand that. Joyce never did anything wrong, anything at all. The only explanation I can think of is that Bobby's expected failure in the last trap was supposed to kill him, not her; but Hoffman changed this detail, just because he's that much Ax-Crazy.
    • By the time saw 3D comes around, Jigsaw had been dead for a while. Hoffman doesn't quite have the same "vision" as John.
      • Yeah, Hoffman's the main fault. Also, Joyce is perceived as Bobby's prize for all the lying and glory he's got out of his book, so the best thing to do when he fails?
    • I don't think we ever figure out what was up with the guy in Amanda's trap from the first movie, either. Or the other dude in the chair with the neck-drills. Jigsaw didn't have a habit of hurting 'innocent' people, but Joyce wasn't the first time.
      • I checked the Saw wiki. Apparently the man in Amanda's trap was her drug dealer at least according to the original script. The guy in the neck-drill trap suffered from suicidal tendencies which meant that from Jigsaw's POV he didn't appreciate his life.
    • John puts Lawrence's wife and child in a position to be killed by an unstable Zepp so an innocent person being part of a game isn't surprising.

  • How, exactly, did the key get embedded in William's abdomen? Lawrence being in on it all along helps clear up the plot hole of how an engineer, John, could possibly know how to do the medical stuff shown throughout the series. However, by the time that William is captured, John is dead, and so Lawrence isn't helping anymore. So... who cut open William, buried a key in him, sewed him back up, and still had William alive/mobile enough to carry through with his game?
    • Not even just mobile enough to carry on, apparently unaware of the key implant even taking place. Maybe it was the same person who did the teeth thing in Saw 3D, and apparently did the job so well that Bobby didn't even realize his teeth has been extracted and replaced. Wish my dentist was that skilled with the pain avoidance...
    • Possibly the key's implant took place some weeks before, during an otherwise-unrelated operation? If William had needed his gallbladder removed or something, an accomplice at the hospital could've possibly slipped the key into a gauze-pack during the procedure. Maybe even Zepp could've arranged it, if Jigsaw put William on his "to-do" list long enough ago.
    • Given the fact that it was bleeding when he woke up, and that he reacted with surprise when he saw the scar, I don't think that it was implanted until then. It's possible that Hoffman had cut into William while he was unconscious, and stitched him back up once the key was put into him.
    • Hoffman can improvise some surgery, as we saw when he sewed his cheek back up, also who's say there is not more accomplices in on it? He could've just hired a shady back alley doctor for the drugs and surgeries.
    • Actually, William notices practically the moment he gets out of the trap, and he's clearly in a lot of pain from it throughout the movie (he's almost always limping or hunched over), the clamp pressing on his abdomen the whole time probably made it worse.

  • On a similar note, Hoffman has always bugged me. One of the complaints about the first movie when it came out was "How can Jigsaw do all of this by himself?" In order to answer that question, he was given apprentices. However, Hoffman was never given helpers, and yet he manages to set up traps that are far more elaborate than anything Jigsaw ever did. The main trap in Saw VI is a great example. First of all, we are supposed to believe that he built everything shown in that movie (the carousel, the breathing thing, and, especially, the steam maze) all by himself. We are also supposed to believe that he kidnapped, what, 14 people? In one night? Really?
    • The only explanation I can come up with is that Hoffman is magical.
    • Perhaps Jigsaw himself acquired the parts and made the blueprints for the traps before his death, or even started construction on them, and Hoffman merely got them finished and utilized them.

  • This has nothing to do with the Saw films directly, but the public perception of the Saw series (i.e., from people who never watched it). I'm trying to figure out exactly why these people loathe the series to such a degree. Yeah, you can debate the films may not be fantastically produced, but since when did gratuitous violence single out an entire horror series as utterly deplorable torture porn (which doesn't accurately classify the series, since there's no real torture performed), and its viewers as sadistic perverts? Hollywood is built on showcasing graphic violence, especially these days, yet Saw gets singled out as THE point where it goes too far, and is an indication of the impending apocalypse? Hello?! Ever heard of Marquis De Sade, whose literature jump started the concept of sadism? Hell, before De Sade, public brutality (a la Gladiator) was a staple of entertainment. Human brutality has always been around, and even with new technology, people have always discovered awful ways to kill each other. Even more ironic, when the Saw video games were released, hardcore gamers saw it as an abomination. To say nothing of the survival horror genre, Grand Theft Auto, Gears of War, and especially Rockstar's Manhunt, which predated the first Saw movie, AND even made people who're used to violent video games very uncomfortable. So why single out the Saw series to this extent? It's one thing to dislike a film series, but to absolutely trash it for simply being malevolent comes off as absurd and hypocritical.
    • It set a terrible trend in horror movies, that's all.
    • Which doesn't accurately classify the series, since there's no real torture performed: So people getting slowly crushed to death, injected with large amounts of acid, slowly getting cut in half by a pendulum, their limbs twisted and broken, and their scalps torn off for the sake of punishing them for crimes they have committed doesn't count as torture?
      • This is probably splitting hairs, but that depends on your definition of torture. Torture, to me at least, means slow and painful. With very few exceptions, most of the deaths in the films are actually quite quick, if gruesome. Most are under a second (RBT, Angel, Shotgun Collar, Garage, etc.), and almost all are under a minute. Granted, that is an extremely unpleasant minute (The Rack comes to mind...)
      • The time it takes has nothing to do with whether something is considered torture or not.
      • However, as implied above, there are exceptions. The Freezer (III), and starving in the bathroom (I) are definitely torture. Of course, neither is particularly gory, and neither is what people are talking about when the describe the series as Torture Porn.
      • Original poster here. With few exceptions - like The Rack from III and Scalping Seat from IV - many of the gruesome deaths don't exactly seem like torture in the traditional sense. Hostel does, but most of Saw's tests involve lots of self-mutilation and the occasional murder. While the victims were highly coerced to harm themselves, what with the threat of impending death, they still have some control instead of being bound, helpless, and getting tormented by some third party. This pretty much classifies every death in the first two movies, and most deaths within the entire series. Hell, even The Passion of the Christ fits the torture porn bill more accurately than Saw does.
      • There are plenty of forms of torture where the perpetrator never lays a finger on the victim. The United Nations Convention Against Torture defines torture as 'any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as...punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person'. So torture is the use of pain and injury, or fear of pain and injury, to force another person to behave in a certain way or perform a certain action (ie the self-mutilation in Jigsaw's traps), or punishing someone for a perceived crime through severe mental or physical suffering (Jigsaw's entire reason for his actions).
      • Also, saying that because the victims are merely "highly coerced to harm themselves" is ridiculous as in pretty much every trap the victims are FORCED to MUTILATE themselves, there's no other solution. The fact they're not tied up means nothing- they have no control, since the absolute only thing they can do to save their life is what their capturer wants.
    • Popularity is the answer. Why do you think people raged about GTA San Andreas having the "sex scene" (through hacking and it was pretty lame anyway) when Indigo Prophecy had a sex scene you could control with the analog stick (and necrophilia in a cutscene)? GTA:SA was far more popular, that's why.
    • People being killed quickly= okay-ish. People suffering for a minute or 2 before death= OMYGODTHISISDEMONICANDEVILANDISTHEENDOFCINEMA!!!!!!!

  • The "Pound Of Flesh" trap. How did the skinny woman win?? A 300 lb guys slices off the chunks of his belly, giving himself a huge advantage. She chops off her arm (which had very little body fat on it), drops it in the chute, and it doesn't even go all the way through! Most of it is still inside the chute, resting against the wall. Even if it did somehow outweigh three large chunks of fat, most of it's weight was still being supported, and wouldn't have registered on the scale!!
    • My guess? The hand alone might have been enough with the bones' combined density. With the additional forearm, that only adds up to the total weight.
      • The above troper is correct. Fat is more voluminous than muscle. It takes approximately twice the volume of fat to match the equivalent weight of muscle. In other words, if you put a pound of fat and a pound of muscle side-by-side, the muscle will take up half as much space as the fat does; it will look as though there is more fat despite the fact that they weight the exact same amount. So while all those chunks of fat look like they'd be able to tip the scales in his favor, that's not necessarily the case. What is more irritating about the trap is that Simone specifically told Eddie not to lean forward so as not to activate it, and that is exactly what he immediately proceeds to do.
      • Fat floats, which is a good indicator of how lightweight it is.
    • Also, the girl in the "Pound of Flesh" trap was the winner of Scream Queens (2008), so it was pretty obvious she was going to survive.
      • The Scream Queens (2008) winner that was in Saw 3D didn't survive, and on top of that had less than a minute of screen time.
      • Her character was going to survive, but it was changed while filming.
    • I heard the director's cut (hardy har har) of the film was different but Simone severed her wrist instead of her arm (at the elbow)? That's crazy man!

  • Could the survivors of a Jigsaw trap be charged with homicide if the means of their escape was dependent upon killing a co-victim?
    • Apparently not in the Saw universe. See Tapp's treatment of Amanda in Saw for an example. In the real world, it probably depends on the jurisdiction.
      • Their lawyer, hopefully current with ethical theory, would immediately point out that a forced action is automatically morally neutral and secure their acquittal.
      • There's actually a name for this: The Plank of Carneades, a thought experiment that questions if a murder in such a situation wouldn't be considered self-defense as it's a case of do-or-die.
      • I'm Brazilian and I would think most places would have exceptions for what Brazilian law calls "state of necessity", meaning you violate someone else's right (s) because it's the only way to protect a right of your own. The person would still be prosecuted, but proving state of necessity would either make the case get thrown out before it gets to a jury, or it would go to a jury, and the person would be acquited (well, techically, it would be decided that their act wasn't a crime) if the jurors decided the act was comited in "state of necessity".
      • In Amanda's case, one could also argue that she believed Jigsaw's tape that said the guy was already dead when she'd started cutting.
      • I think the court would take the circumstances into consideration, having woken up in a room, completely disoriented and having been drugged, you might not even be charged with a crime.
      • In the case of the Acid Needle trap, the teenage son would almost certainly be charged with something for what he did. He had no incentive to pull the lever and kill William- had he not pulled it they would have all been rescued. It was done purely out of revenge and was cold-blooded murder (in one of the most gruesome ways possible). He also has no deniability- it was laid out for him in pretty certain terms what would happen if he pulled the "Life or Death" lever.

  • If John is wealthy enough to own several large warehouses (with previous plans to redevelop them), buy expensive medical equipment, buy the materials and equipment to build all of his traps, why did he not put that money toward treating his cancer? Yes, medical treatment for chronic diseases is expensive, but it can't be more expensive than everything else he buys, can it?
    • Could be a matter of what John finds to be worth the money. For John Kramer, what's more important: prolonging a life that's inevitably going to end no matter what he does, or using it to "help" as many people as he can in the time he has left? John's not afraid of death following his suicide, so lengthening his life isn't particularly vital to him. Especially once he has Amanda & Hoffman to carry on his work.
    • In VI, Kramer tells the insurance agent who turned down, "Don't talk to me about money; I have money. It's about principle." Earlier in the movie he's shown bald in a flashback, obviously due to chemotherapy. So my guess is he did put money towards treating his cancer, but when he knew his death was inevitable, the games began.
    • The first movie shows him getting treatment in a hospital, it just that money won't stop him from dying and he became insane over it.

  • One of the later movies shows the origin of Billy the Puppet: John was making it for the child his wife Jill was pregnant with at the time (and subsequently miscarried due to an attack by one of her drug clinic patients). While it hadn't yet achieved Creepy Doll status in-universe, it still looks pretty demented. What sort of sane father would plan to give that sort of thing to his own kid?!
    • The sort of sane person who would put people in death traps.

  • Fridge Logic: In Saw 3D. Okay seriously, What idiot leaves only five police officers and a coroner guarding a police precinct? Hoffman led most of the officers away from the building, but there is no excuse for leaving that few people inside a POLICE PRECINCT.
    • Well they were understaff, what with all the detectives dying every movie. I mean, at some point, you've gotta run out of cops.

  • I was just wondering, at the end of Saw II, what happened to Daniel after he's saved?
    • Hopefully, therapy.

  • One major one that bugged me and has me denounce all films after three. Has Lawrence just gone off and forgot about his family at the end? Seriously, the first one he was majorly caring about them, what happened after. Yet at the end of VII he's been shown to have turned to the quote unquote dark side. Did the writers forget about one of the major plot points in the first film about his family or something?
    • He wanted his family safe. Considering how merciless this series is towards its characters and their loved ones, it's possible Lawrence agreed to help Jigsaw on the sole condition that his wife and daughter be allowed to leave the city and never get involved in these "games" — not Jigsaw's, not Hoffman's, not Amanda's, not anyone's — again.
    • While I didn't "denounce" any of the films I thought that one of (if not the biggest) flaw of Saw 7 was spending so little time with Lawrence. It wouldn't have hurt them to spend a few minutes showing how Lawrence's experience and new outlook on life affected his relationship with his family. However, him accepting Jigsaw's philosophy doesn't mean he stopped caring about them.
    • You're talking as if Lawrence's own desires are the only ones that matter. After what she and her daughter went through - went through, because his own indifference to patients caught the ire of Jigsaw - and given how many more times Jigsaw-victims' loved ones have been targeted, it's entirely possible that Allison refused to stay anywhere near her husband, let alone keep her Diana in the same city where they'd been kidnapped and threatened. If Lawrence pressured them to stay with him, that might only have convinced her that he's become unstable himself from his experiences, giving her even more cause to leave him. Realizing they'll never feel safe around him until the Jigsaw Killings are indisputably over, and knowing John Kramer is dying of cancer, Lawrence agrees to assist John in bringing Amanda and Hoffman to heel: once John dies and his other apprentices are either retired (if they pass their tests) or taken down, the doctor can honestly assure his estranged wife that it's safe to live with him again.
    • Word of God says that Lawrence and his wife divorced after he reunited with them, due to their previous marital problems and his instability from the trauma in the bathroom and brainwashing from John's nursing him back to health. So he did get back to them and they're still probably in his life, because we saw how much he cared about them in film one. Brainwashed or no, Lawrence isn't the kind of guy to up and leave his family.

  • It bugs me that people constantly refer to Hoffman, Amanda and Lawrence with the term "apprentice". Throughout the series it was clear that the one that was being groomed to take over his work was Amanda; the other two were basically just tools he brought in (and in the former, brainwashed and possibly blackmailed) to help with the dirty work. Those two are more correctly "accomplices" than what everyone chooses to call them.
    • Lawrence maybe, but Hoffman was a true apprentice. Jigsaw's goal from the start was to convert him — teach him "a kind of rehabilitation that'll let you sleep at night". What's more, it worked. Unlike Amanda, Hoffman made real Jigsaw-style tests for victims like Strahm and the cops in 3D. He actually believed in John's method (remember him asking Simone if she'd learned anything?) however skewed his view on it eventually became. He intended to continue, insisting to Jill that he now "control[led] all aspects of the game". Once there was too much evidence to hide, he scorched the earth; his plan after that was probably to skip town and start the game over in another city. His one flaw as Jigsaw was his habit of indulging in personal revenge... and he was only defeated because John shared that flaw, arranging for Lawrence to avenge Jill if the need arose.
      • The latter seems unlikely with Hoffman's insistence that John's work "is almost finished". From the beginning he was only involved out of being blackmailed and wanted out, hence the Gambit Roulette he pulled by tampering with Amanda's test rather than letting it play out the way it was supposed to. Strahm was less a test than an orchestrated murder due to Hoffman's Manipulative Bastard skills knowing exactly how he would act in that situation. All indications seemed to be that Hoffman was intending to finish off William's test and skip town and the Jigasw philosophy entirely, until he went completely Ax-Crazy in the final film.

  • First Saw: Why didn't Lawrence, Adam, or both use something heavy and solid, such as for instance the nearby toilent cover to break their chained feet and then slip out of their cuffs, which they could have done at any point in the movie? Sure, it would have hurt like HELL, but it wouldn't have hurt any less than cutting their own feet off, and it would have been infinitely more survivable and even offered them some mobility if they could've fashioned a crutch out of something.
    • Banging their feet against something solid could just as easily cause the foot to swell, thus making it harder to get out of the cuffs. Still way better than cutting your foot off, though.
    • Neither man wanted to hurt themselves during the game. Laurence only sawed his foot off and attempted to murder Adam after hearing his wife fight for her and their daughter's lives.

  • The Steam Maze in Saw VI: could Debbie have used the portable saw to cut the leather (?) straps holding the device to her and thus survive without having to use the key?

  • Where does Hoffman find the time to put people in his traps in The Final Chapter? Isn't he on the run?
    • At least for the Public Trap, the explanation is that it's a flashback, and also that it was Lawrence's first trap he had a hand in (not just performing surgery for other traps) so it was probably his and John's trap.

  • Ok, I know that they were scared and disorientated, but does anyone else think there was a way to escape the opening trap in Saw 3D (with Brad, Ryan and Dina) without anyone dying? I get the point of the guys "breaking up" with Dina, but seriously. They were tied to the machine only by their hands. If one of the guys had dropped to their knees to avoid the buzzsaw blade, the other could have pushed the device far enough to one side that the middle blade wouldn't hit Dana.
    • Most of the traps in the series could've easily been gotten out of by their victims if they only used their heads instead of freaking out, especially the ones without any real time limit and this is no exception.
    • I think Brad and Ryan were both too tall to kneel down and get out of the way of the blades, which were high enough to hit each one in the lower-middle chest when the other pushed. They can really only get down as far as the level of their shackled hands anyway, which would probably put their faces at spinning-death-level.
    • Even then, what if Dina had been released and fallen onto one of the other blades, she'd have been gutted anyway.
    • In theory it makes sense that they only way Dina wouldn't get gutted was to push it too far on one side. But the way it's shown on film does make it seem possible there's enough space to take care of that. I would expect a real life equivalent wouldn't be escapable for all three without some outside interference or factor.

  • Are we to believe the FBI just flat out gave up after Saw VI? The last film has Internal Affairs of all people trampling onto what had become a federal investigation. A mass murderer that had just killed multiple agents doesn't seem like something that would be shrugged off and ignored, especially after Hoffman was outed, that evidence should have been immediately turned over to the lead investigation instead of the locals charging in and screwing up massively.
    • Maybe they were trying to tread lightly, seeing as two of their top agents were killed.

  • Did Jigsaw ever wonder if his traps would have the opposite effect on the victim's psyche if they survived? For example, plenty of soldiers get into horrifying situations during wartime and many usually suffer PTSD symptoms even when there is no danger around. Same goes for POWs. While a few people did come out a little happier with their lives (Amanda being one of them, although that's YMMV), just as much people may come out of it learning absolutely nothing but the fact that they were part of a crazy torturer's mind games and were somehow lucky to survive. Misery does not always build character you know.
    • See Simone. She rejects John's idea of rehabilitation, asking (not verbatim), "What am I supposed to have learned from being forced to cut off my own arm?" She even calls out other survivors who seem to have bought into it, questioning their supposed lack of effort to get their life together that lead them to a place where they were placed into a trap.

  • I was watching "How Saw Should Have Ended" and it brings up a couple of interesting points. Like how do you sleep underwater without drowning? I'd mention the blood loss thing as well but they did the same thing in The Walking Dead Season 1 If you choose to amputate Lee's arm. So I'm assuming a good bandage/tourniquet stops blood loss.
    • Adam wasn't actually pushed underwater in the flashback from III when Amanda and Jigsaw were setting up the bathroom game; he only slipped below the surface when the sedative started to wear off and he reflexively shifted position in the uncomfortable bathtub. That dipped his face underwater, which woke him up pretty much instantly.

  • What if in the time between Kramer recording the tape and the victim being put in the trap they have gotten a condition that somehow makes it impossible for them to get out, like they're blind or otherwise physically disabled? What if they're deaf and can't hear the tape?
    • Presumably, the test is either canceled (because the victim's psychological profile has probably changed enough to invalidate its "lesson") or re-designed to take their impairment into account. If it's canceled, the traps designed for them can be re-purposed for somebody else, same as the Reverse Bear-trap wound up being used repeatedly throughout the series.

  • While the ending of Saw VI is one of my top two favorites in the series, part of it bugs me because I feel like William could have easily avoided his death. It's hard to tell from the camera angle but it looked as though the swinging wall of syringes wasn't as long as the room, so in theory if he'd moved back and stood against Pamela's cage he might have been all right (and wouldn't his instinct have been to move AWAY from the people debating on whether or not they're going to kill him?). Also, there is a very definite gap between the bottom of the wall and the floor - if he'd just dropped he would have been fine. Granted, this is assuming he even noticed the syringes in the first place - which, admittedly, isn't a guarantee - but still...
    • I rewatched Saw VI and when William stands on Pamela's side of the cage, you can hear a pressure plate when he steps on it. Once he goes to beg on the other side, you can hear the same noise as it shows him stepping on the other pressure plate. Maybe if he was with Pamela, the plate he was standing on might've kept him protected or perhaps even cause the switch to activate a separate way to kill Harold's family had they chosen to kill William.
      • As a light switches from red to green on the "Life or Death" lever when he steps onto the other pressure plate, it's likely it wouldn't have activated if William wasn't in front of it, or even until he stepped in front of it, probably to prevent Harold's family being sprayed with acid if it didn't hit him.
    • The answer is that the trap was a Batman Gambit by Hoffman in which he predicted exactly what William would do when placed in that situation. William definitely could have avoided the needles if he stood back or lay on the ground but, much like with Adam's bathtub trap, his human nature (moving close to the people he's pleading with) proved to be his undoing.
    • Dropping prone would've made him look like a weaselly coward afraid to face his accusers, which wouldn't have helped persuade Harold's family to spare him.

  • Could the police have located the bathroom using Zepp's laptop with the camera feed and the cell phone given to Diana in the first movie?
    • Clearly not.

  • If the house at the end of Saw V is the nerve gas house from Saw II and Erickson has alerted the authorities of its location, then why has the bathroom not been discovered and cleaned up by the time of Saw VII?
    • The 5-Become-1 test takes place at a totally different location. The house shown in Saw 2, 5, & 7 is never discovered by the authorities.

  • How did Hoffman know that Amanda was with Cecil on the night of the miscarriage? Also, why did Amanda let Hoffman blackmail her? John was already on his death bed, so he might not have even lived long enough for Hoffman to tell him. There was also the possibility of Jeff killing John (which he did). Even if John had lived long enough for this, it would have been Hoffman's word against Amanda's.

  • Does John realize that when people are under pressure, they make mistakes? His games are unfair. It is HIS fault some victims fail the tests and die. If Jigsaw is really so smart, shouldn't he know that putting selfish employees in a game will not end well for them? He did background checks on these people, so it should not be a surprise they would double cross each other to save their own butts. Also, he expect his victims who are scared and confused to solve puzzles in under 1-5 minutes? He expect confused and angry criminals and sleazy employees to work together and cooperate?!

  • The obvious timing errors in some trap sequences is one thing, but what confuses me even more is how the timers even start on their own, especially by a separate device.
    • From about the third film onward, most of the traps activate because; 1) A victim pulls the tripwire just before/after the video/tape is played, in the former case, the trap is often timed to activate after the victim has had ample time to hear the rules. 2) Someone is observing the game and activating the traps/timers accordingly by themselves. Before then, most of the traps are fairly basic anyway and, therefore, either they weren't timed anyway, or they were timed to leave the victim a couple of hours.

  • In Saw VI, what would've happened if "Live" was picked instead of "Die" at the end?
    • Presumably, their cages would have opened and they would have been able to escape.

  • In Saw VI, William gets to the end of his tests, only to find that he has no control whatsoever as to whether he lives or dies. So, what exactly was the point of him going through those tests? He was supposed to learn how his policy was flawed and hopefully be better (at least from Jigsaw's insane perspective), and yet, if Tara and the kid aren't feeling particularly merciful, he's not going to live to see it? What was the point?
    • The point is that John is a dick.

  • In Jigsaw, how exactly did Logan pull off a good portion of his whole stunt? How did he manage to get inside Eleanor's studio to plant that body in her closet, how did he get the hanging body up on the bridge without anyone seeing him (even if he did it in the dead of night, likely someone would notice a man hanging a dead human off a bridge) how and when did he dig up John's corpse and replace it with Edgar's, again, with nobody seeing them? Did he grave-dig and replace a body all by himself? It took a small crane to lift the casket out of the ground, how did he manage that? Did he find help in people like Brad and Ryan? If so, how? If he attended the support group, isn't that something his loved ones would have maybe known about?

  • Additionally, what was Ryan's test supposed to be? John points out that the No Exit trap that Ryan got trapped in wasn't supposed to happen. So how was the game supposed to continue if that event hadn't happened?

  • In Jigsaw, we see an apprentice we've never known about: Logan, who survived his test years ago and whom John took sympathy on and enlisted him. Who else besides the two of them knew about his apprenticeship? Did Amanda and Hoffman and Lawrence know about him? We know his test took place about 10 years ago, so was that before or after Amanda's, since we see him and John constructing what might be the ORIGINAL Reverse Bear Trap, if not one of them. Did he ever help out with other tests, or did he just lie in wait for 10 years?

  • In-universe, what's with Jigsaw's obsession with pigs? His "volunteers" wear pig masks. Even the brazen bull-like contraption at the end of Saw 3D is in the shape of a giant pig.
    • In Saw V, John is shown to kidnap his first victim Cecil (the druggie that caused Jill to miscarry) at a Chinese Year of the Pig Festival. He does so by stealing 2 plastic pig masks from one of the stands: One to conceal his identity, and the other one with a rag of chloroform inside to use on Cecil. I'm going to assume he just kinda decided to stick with the motif while also making it a morbid tribute to his unborn son Gideon, who would have been born in the Year of the Pig. Also, as he explains in Jigsaw, pigs are remarkably compassionate animals, showing distress whenever they see another animal, including humans, in pain. I guess he wished we could be more like them.

  • What was the point of the "game" part of the tests, back when they were still arranged by John? John learned to appreciate the life he had when his suicide attempt failed, and learned the importance of the will to live when he had to ignore the immense amount of pain from extracting the metal from his wound in order to save himself. Duplicating that for his test subjects does require making it into anything like a game. Plus what he did to save his life didn't require fast or smart thinking while under a considerable amount of stress, nor did it require applying concentration and fine motor skills while under stress and a short time limit (like having to use blood slick hands to unlock a padlock at the back of your head).

  • In Saw II, how did John not only figure out that Eric Matthews had planted evidence to on some of the people he arrested, but which of his arrestees he'd done it to?

  • In Saw II, John set a non-lethal trap for one of the police officers that raided his base. What was the point of that? Was is just John being an asshole? Or was there some sort of lesson it was supposed to teach the entirely randomly selected police officer who was first up the stairs?

  • In Saw VI how did they get the kidnapping of William Easton to work so perfectly? They: 1) broke into the insurance building without raising any sort of alarm, 2) broke into the power supply room so as to shut off power to an entire floor of the building, 3) gotten such precise timing of that night guard's route that they could time the power outage to engineer a confrontation between William and the guard, 4) knew that William would come out on top of the confrontation, and 5) managed to sneak past any other guards both on the way up and the way down. And this was pulled off with just the resources of Hoffman and Gordon?

  • In Saw I the restroom where the game takes place is in a sewage treatment plant (or something like that). However, in Saw II that same restroom can be reached by going through some hallways connected the basement of a house. Did John buy a house really close to the sewage treatment plant and dig a tunnel over to the restroom, just so that the participants in the game of the second movie could have the opportunity to stumble across the mummified corpse and foot from the first movie?

  • John and Amanda's scheme in Saw II could've easily fallen apart. It relies on playing mind games with Eric Matthews to see if he'll crack before finding out his son is alright. However, while Daniel has been administered the antidote and isn't at risk for succumbing to the nerve gas in the house, he could've died in other ways. He came close to being murdered by Xavier and any of the other people in the house could've killed him out of vengeance upon discovering his connection to Eric. He also could've volunteered himself or been forced into a trap, which he then could've failed as well.
    • Furthermore, what would happen if others managed to successfully retrieve and administer themselves the antidote, only to realize Amanda and Daniel didn't need it? Wouldn't they realize at least one of them was in on it and be furious? Would Amanda give herself and Daniel a needle full of the antidote just to save face? Is that a good idea if they're not actually being poisoned?

  • In Jigsaw, how did John know that Anna killed her baby? There was nobody else in the house that could have seen. Or that Mitch was unaware that the brakes didn't work on the motorcycle he sold? Or that Ryan's crash was quote-unquote "his fault?" Or that Carly was the purse-snatcher? Or that Logan's the one who messed up the x-rays? How does he know half of the things he knows that gives him justification to put these people in their traps?
    • For Anna it's hinted he just put the pieces together from hearing her breaking down from across the street just before her baby's crying stopped. He mentions Mitch is his nephew, so it's not inconceivable he was close at hand to get a look at the bike very soon after the crash, or knew the deal well enough to inspect the garage later, where he maybe found evidence. And it's not out of question that Logan's role in the X-ray mixup would come to his knowledge after the mishap was detected. Can't help with the other two.

  • From the new movie, Jigsaw; our killer goes to the hospital where his pawn Edgar Munsen is comatose. He injects his IV with something milky white which immediately causes Munsen to wake up, despite the actual doctors believing it could take him years to recover. This magical-coma-fixer juice makes no sense. What is it, how did the killer get it, and why wouldn't medical professionals utilize this stuff on someone who's an important informant to an ongoing crime spree?
    • Edgar’s coma was medically induced for his own safety due to the proximity of the bullet he’d been shot with to his heart, and therefore could be reversed at any time. The doctors were waiting for him to stabilise before doing anything further. Waking him from the coma was issuing a pretty-much-guaranteed death sentence, but since his purpose was to be buried in John’s grave anyway that didn’t matter. Logan probably wanted Edgar to wake up and see him as the killer so he’d know his fate was a result of having killed the guy’s wife.

—-
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Headscratchers/Saw