Poll: Is Jigsaw a good guy? SAW movie series possible spoilers

[Dogstile]

Its not really a choice if the alternative is death.

Firstly to choose is to to select from a number of possibilities in this case the choices being live or death so the only way it wouldn't be a choice would be if they were stuck in an inescapable trap, so the choice would become die or die.

You misunderstand. The majority of the traps is "mutilate yourself, or die". Therefore, it isn't a choice.

 

[Stasisesque]

He's just as bad a guy as the next serial killer without supernatural properties. The difference is, he's a very well written serial killer. He has a proper backstory, a life that led him to his crazy, and a convoluted (and awesome) mystery surrounding him, his accomplices and his connection with each victim.

He's 100% sane, and completely unapologetic, and he does keep his promises - but he's a very bad man.

 

[Evil Smurf]

evil monster. he chose to kidnap people and torture them.

 

[krazykidd]

This has been bugging me for quite some time as I don't know what to make of Jigsaw.

The original Toby Bell one, amazing actor by the way, not the other ones. So in my opinion Jigsaw is a good guy as he helps people gain a new appreciation of life and sometimes saves them from their vices e.g he stopped Amanda doing drugs.

Another example in SAW IV, when the rapist was given the two buttons which would lower icepicks into his eyes, he offered the man a chance at redemption. So Jigsaw would either end the thing that allowed him to do evil, his eyes as without eyes he couldn't see so he couldn't rape anyone or let him get killed in which case he did a good thing again. Toby Bell, never actually kills anyone, as they all have the chance to redeem themselves, so the rapist could have saved himself.

Another example would be Dr. Gordon. He has a family with a child but still he cheats on his wife with some girl. By doing the test in SAW Jigsaw helps remind Dr. Gordon how important family is and that he shouldn't take them for granted.

So basically what I am trying to say is that Jigsaw is not a bad guy because he tries to teach criminals or people who had taken life for granted by i.e doing drugs and whatnot the value of life and tries to help them rectify their mistakes. He never kills them as they all have a chance of getting out alive.

Hoffman and Amanda are just killers who don't care about helping people, so we are not going to talk about them.

If most of what I wrote seems to be in random order is because I am writing my points as they are coming to me.

So do you agree that he is a good guy or am I completely crazy not to see that he's a complete lunatic ?

Hes a complete lunatic , and you are too for thinking that way . Who is he to judge if someone is taking life for granted? Who is he to determin if someone is in need of redeption or not . It's all a ploy . His victims are lab rats for him to experiment on . His victims are people he KNOWS will fail in some way form or manner . It's the worst kind of evil , the one that gives false hope but at the end of the tunnle there is only death . Since you seem pretty knowledgable about the movies, you should know that no one survives , no one.

Remember what jigsaw said , "when you understand the human pshyche , nothing is left to chance". implying he knows how these people think , and knows the end result . It's all a game , there is no way out .

 

[Yokillernick]

Wall of Text Snippity

I see I missed some words. You lied that I said it had to do with it. Or implies it by attacking a strawman.

I didn't say that, I think. I know I said that a choice is a choice regardless if you agree with it or not. If I indeed said otherwise then I apologize. But back to the core of this argument. I was not talking about "real" choices or the ones that require coercion, I was talking about any choice and look at it any way you can even a literal choice is still a choice as you pick between life and death. I don't understand why it is so hard to actually get this.

Second Snippity

You misunderstand. The majority of the traps is "mutilate yourself, or die". Therefore, it isn't a choice.

Again two things here. If mutilate yourself=you don't die then isn't live or die a choice ? Secondly you get the choice mutilate yourself and live or die which is still a possibility to pick between two outcomes. Plus not all the people mutilate themselves to live, that black girl in SAW 3D had to push her husband down into some fans for her to win.

 

[DoPo]

Its not really a choice if the alternative is death.

Firstly to choose is to to select from a number of possibilities in this case the choices being live or death so the only way it wouldn't be a choice would be if they were stuck in an inescapable trap, so the choice would become die or die.

Right, that's like the choice of me putting a gun to your head and saying you need to give me everything you own or die and pretending you actually agreed if you hand stuff over.

Still a choice. I don't have to agree with it for it to be a choice. this "to choose is to to select from a number of possibilities" came from the online dictionary and it didn't mention whether you had to agree with it or not. I mean you make hard choices sometimes, choices you don't agree with like lie to someone or things like that right ?

So in other words you don't really get what people mean by a real choice. Could have just said that. But please say that instead of lying and saying it has to do with whether I agree with it or not.

Well that escalated quickly =P

But in all seriousness, Choice is having the possibility to pick from a number of outcomes. You can Choose to live or to die, so I am not lying to you. And for the record I said "I don't have to agree with it for it to be a choice. this "to choose is to to select from a number of possibilities" came from the online dictionary and it didn't mention whether you had to agree with it or not." So basically I said the opposite of what you are accusing me of saying I didn't it has to do with you agreeing with it or not, I said that you didn't have to agree with it for it to be a choice.

If anyone wants to pitch in and help me convince him that live or die is a choice please fell free.

So in others words, not only can you not see the word 'real' and not understand common phrases people use, you can't even tell what I accused you of lying about. Try reading it again without coming to your conclusion before reading.

Trust me that's exactly what I thought when I read your last post. So let's start again. How more "real" can you get with a choice other than picking if you want either life or death. I think the way you are referring to it is that even though he says he offers them live or death, he only really offers them death or death as they mostly die. Is this what you are trying to say ? If that's not what you are trying to say then please go ahead and explain it to me why you think the victims don't have a "real" choice.

By the way, that's exactly what you acussed me of. I still don't see where I lied but OK.

It's called a false dilemma, my friend. The "choice" offered by Jigsaw is either "be mutilated in some bizarre ironic punishment for your crimes and possibly live through it or alternatively die". If you don't understand this, then let me give you several other examples that all follow the exact same pattern "either drink a cup of tea or be disembowelled", "eat a sandwich or be decapitated", "get your right or left hand cut off". You following me? No? Here is the thing - there aren't only two options. It's a false dilemma. Jigsaw is shown as a capable and smart person, surely he can try to help people with something other than pain and death. However, he chose brutality and brainwashing as his tools, so his victims are robbed of choices.

Oh, yes, and if you didn't notice he is brainwashing and programming people. That is of very questionable morality at best, not a real solution and wrong in most other cases. Surely you'll agree that if he is capable of that much psychological manipulation, he could, at the very least, do the same thing sans the brutality.

Finally, about the murder. If he didn't kill anyone, why did people die? Without him in the picture they wouldn't have died (well, at least not nearly the same way as they did). He set up the contraptions with the full knowledge and purpouse to kill people. If you deny that, then one could argue that deaths caused by bombs are pretty much the same as natural causes, since the bomber didn't actually kill anybody, they just made a device that could.

 

[Yokillernick]

Snippity Since you seem pretty knowledgable about the movies, you should know that no one survives , no one.

Remember what jigsaw said , "when you understand the human pshyche , nothing is left to chance". implying he knows how these people think , and knows the end result . It's all a game , there is no way out .

Doctor Gordon survives, the black girl in SAW 3D survives, basically all of the people at the survivors meeting except the guy who faked it survived so you see they do make it out alive. Plus I don't understand what you are getting so upset about calling me a lunatic. I'm just making y point of view. No offence taken.

Also yeah he got Amanda to quit drugs. How? By making her cut open the stomach of a drugged man, my memory fails me but I'm pretty sure she thought he was dead. So he made her kill a man. Had he told her the guy was still alive maybe she'd have some moral conflict but he didn't, he tricked her into killing a guy.

Yes but wasn't that guy a criminal and for the few seconds until she saw him move she thought he was dead. But when she cut him open she knew he was alive. But I kind of understand what you are trying to say.

 

[Yokillernick]

Wall of Text Snippity

I see I missed some words. You lied that I said it had to do with it. Or implies it by attacking a strawman.

I didn't say that, I think. I know I said that a choice is a choice regardless if you agree with it or not. If I indeed said otherwise then I apologize. But back to the core of this argument. I was not talking about "real" choices or the ones that require coercion, I was talking about any choice and look at it any way you can even a literal choice is still a choice as you pick between life and death. I don't understand why it is so hard to actually get this.

I don't see why you don't get that it doesn't matter if the literally have a choice, that alone isn't enough to make it ethical.

I wasn't arguing whether it was ethical or not, I was saying that it was a choice. Again a choice is a choice even if it is unethical.

Can't help double posting like this when there's so much to reply.

 

[krazykidd]

Snippity Since you seem pretty knowledgable about the movies, you should know that no one survives , no one.

Remember what jigsaw said , "when you understand the human pshyche , nothing is left to chance". implying he knows how these people think , and knows the end result . It's all a game , there is no way out .

Doctor Gordon survives, the black girl in SAW 3D survives, basically all of the people at the survivors meeting except the guy who faked it survived so you see they do make it out alive. Plus I don't understand what you are getting so upset about calling me a lunatic. I'm just making y point of view. No offence taken.

Also yeah he got Amanda to quit drugs. How? By making her cut open the stomach of a drugged man, my memory fails me but I'm pretty sure she thought he was dead. So he made her kill a man. Had he told her the guy was still alive maybe she'd have some moral conflict but he didn't, he tricked her into killing a guy.

Yes but wasn't that guy a criminal and for the few seconds until she saw him move she thought he was dead. But when she cut him open she knew he was alive. But I kind of understand what you are trying to say.

Gah saw 7( 3D) was complet bullshit . I liked saw up to that point because it all made sense up to that point . But saw 3D focused on the 3D aspect as opposed to the story . That why it all fell to shit , also , appart from what they "tell us" we didn't see none of that happen . And i swear Dr Gordon was pulled outta thin air , he died , everyone knows he died .

The only one we saw and actually survived was the black girl who cut her arm off to outweight the fat guy .

I can't accept saw 3D for prove of anything , they story just fell through so bad in that movie just for some extra gore.

And i only called you a lunatic because you refered to yourself as crazy .

 

[Dogstile]

Wall of Text Snippity

I see I missed some words. You lied that I said it had to do with it. Or implies it by attacking a strawman.

I didn't say that, I think. I know I said that a choice is a choice regardless if you agree with it or not. If I indeed said otherwise then I apologize. But back to the core of this argument. I was not talking about "real" choices or the ones that require coercion, I was talking about any choice and look at it any way you can even a literal choice is still a choice as you pick between life and death. I don't understand why it is so hard to actually get this.

I don't see why you don't get that it doesn't matter if the literally have a choice, that alone isn't enough to make it ethical.

Wall of Text Snippity

I see I missed some words. You lied that I said it had to do with it. Or implies it by attacking a strawman.

I didn't say that, I think. I know I said that a choice is a choice regardless if you agree with it or not. If I indeed said otherwise then I apologize. But back to the core of this argument. I was not talking about "real" choices or the ones that require coercion, I was talking about any choice and look at it any way you can even a literal choice is still a choice as you pick between life and death. I don't understand why it is so hard to actually get this.

Second Snippity

You misunderstand. The majority of the traps is "mutilate yourself, or die". Therefore, it isn't a choice.

Again two things here. If mutilate yourself=you don't die then isn't live or die a choice ? Secondly you get the choice mutilate yourself and live or die which is still a possibility to pick between two outcomes. Plus not all the people mutilate themselves to live, that black girl in SAW 3D had to push her husband down into some fans for her to win.

No, as long as death is the other options it is not a choice. It never will be. And no, not all people do, because its a film and people want to see people die.

I said most traps, not all. And even then, those traps where someone else has to die are worse, because they don't get to choose.

Actually, i'm done replying to you. You're not gonna get it.

 

[BeeGeenie]

Bad actions can have good consequences, that doesn't make the action any less bad. The first person that shot somebody may have inadvertently led someone to invent the bullet-proof vest. That doesn't make them a hero.
Dropping nukes on Japan may have been for the best overall, but that doesn't change the fact that it was a horrible thing, hence we've spent the last 65 years trying to make sure it never happens again.
Jigsaw uses cruelty and violence to show off his trap making ability. He's stroking his own ego by manipulating people. Telling his victims that it's their fault, or that they can redeem themselves by surviving is just how he justifies it in his own mind.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Oh and if you mean the police squad in SAW 2 that got electrocuted on the stairs, that wasn't his fault. The guys shouldn't have been busting in his place. All he did was ensure some security.

Why shouldn't the police have been raiding the headquarters of a guy who forces people to either seriously maim themselves or die? Jigsaw was breaking the law and the police are meant to enforce it; breaking into his place was the only way they would've been able to do their job.

Toby Bell, never actually kills anyone, as they all have the chance to redeem themselves, so the rapist could have saved himself.

He never kills them as they all have a chance of getting out alive.

If I shoot someone and say that they had the chance of saving themselves if they gave me their wallet and that they died because of their inaction in handing it over, it still counts as me killing someone. In trying to portray Jigsaw as a good guy you're blaming the victim for murder.

 

[Yokillernick]

The first movie. Cops chasing him, trip-wire, shotgun, cop's head becomes jam.

Yes it was the Asian cop. Jigsaw had no intention of killing him. If the cop wouldn't have chased Jigsaw then he wouldn't have died.

SNIP

And who gives a fuck if it's a literal choice if it's a coerced choice? How is it relevant?

That's exactly when I'm saying! I said a choice is a choice no matter if ethical or coerced and then you bring up ethical and coercion as if it was somewhat relevant. Live or Die is a choice. GAH!

The captcha was spot on : think hard; I really have to if I will make you understand that because above you basically contradicted yourself. You bought the ethical and coercion in this and then ask "How is it relevant ?"

 

[Yokillernick]

If I shoot someone and say that they had the chance of saving themselves if they gave me their wallet and that they got died because of their inaction in handing it over, it still counts as me killing someone. In trying to portray Jigsaw as a good guy you're blaming the victim for murder.

Can't argue with the first point, you might be onto something there. But Jigsaw didn't want for them to die.

Secondly, no that makes you a murderer because you assaulted an innocent. Would Jigsaw actually put them through those tests if they were innocent people ? I kind of think that he is a sort of man who believes in the "eye for an eye" thing, as in he pick criminals and either makes them see why they were wrong or gets them killed.