«

[Fawfulhasfury]

Hmm, you have a big point there. I remember in the first Saw movie what happened to the guy who was tracking down Saw (Danny Glover) though. He never did see Saw, he was killed by someone Saw was manipulating. But Danny Glover was already mad at his partners death at the hands of Saw. (6 shotguns, if I remember right, can give a bad headache). So that made Glover too into it. Holmes, if Watson stays intact, would probably be able to track down Saw without incident. the only hard part is that Jigsaws real identity is a (supposedly) comatose man with leukemia or some cancer or something. I'm not sure if Holmes would consider him a suspect when found. And Jigsaw picks people and does these things to them to show them how precious the gift of life is, so you're right thats another reason he wouldn't have any reason to pick holmes, as holmes has never taken life for granted as I can see.

[#BlakhOle#]

Ive never seen Saw, or read a Sherlocke Holmes book. Damn now i feel depressed... <_< Carry on, just ignore me...

[rabadi]

I have never seen Saw either, but heck if I don't vote for Sherlock Holmes. I also agree with rlbell's points about Holmes.

[rlbell]

Originally posted by Fawfulhasfury@Apr 26 2006, 12:05 AM
the only hard part is that Jigsaws real identity is a (supposedly) comatose man with leukemia or some cancer or something. I'm not sure if Holmes would consider him a suspect when found.

It was to Holmes that the remark "Once you have eliminated the impossible, what is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" was first attributed. Holmes has no problem with finding the unlikely suspect, if it was impossible for anyone else. Holmes is likely to know much about faking a comatose state, with all of the blanks in his knowledge filled in by Watson.

However, the most important factor in who beats whom is who writes the tale. If Sir Arthur Conan Doyle came back from the dead to write Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Comatose Murderer, there are only two possible endings (both written from the view of a surviving Watson): Jigsaw and Holmes destroy each other (Doyle is still annoyed about Holmes' popularity, at the expense of everything else that he wrote), or Holmes has an unalloyed triumph over his canniest foe, to date.

[troop18546]

Jigsaw would beat the crap out of Holmes, just because he HAS killed someone in the past. Holmes lacks this, so head be gone in less than 10secs.

[taikara]

Didn't rlbell mention previously that Holmes has killed people, and has done so with his bare hands?

[Don Andy]

Originally posted by taikara@Apr 26 2006, 06:37 PM
Didn't rlbell mention previously that Holmes has killed people, and has done so with his bare hands?

Yep, so if it comes to a hand-to-hand fight, Sherlock would pretty much own Jigsaw.

Well, it rather depends. If Jigsaw really managed do get Sherlock into one of his deadtraps, he'd surely be a goner (depends on the trap, though).

If Sherlock however would manage to confront Jigsaw personally, Jigsaw should just run for his live

[Fawfulhasfury]

If I remember right, Jigsaw sucks in hand to hand..I read that a guy in Saw 2 knocked him into a wall. :P Holmes can bend an iron bar, so I'm sure he can bend an iron jigsaw :bleh:

[Wolf Thug]

Holmes da homie

[omg]

are we going to get a new antoginist / protaginist? whats the time scale before we bring in a new antoginist / protaginist?