I just read they're gon'na make SAW VII the last one.

As mentioned above, the main villain died in the third movie. That is a sign this series should have ended there, but we know Hollywood, they have to ride that gravy train until it derails, we they made three more sequels that they didn't need.

I've long since lost count of how many people claiming this to be their favorite film from 2008. Based on the discussions with those on another forum, these die-hard Saw fans have a (beep)ty taste in movies.

Originally posted by Balboa6 There is a strong dramatic element to the Saw films. They're basically thrillers for thinkers. People bash them because they haven't seen them. They look at the poor marketing techniques--i.e. artwork for the dvds/some of the posters, and that's about the extent of it. I also get a kick out of people who bitch about the fact that the franchise has continued. I frequently hear and read people say that it should have ended at 3. So essentially it would be perfectly fine to end something right in the middle with all kinds of things up in the air. I'm sure nobody will have a clue who I'm talking about since those who bash the movies haven't even seen them but if they had ended it at 3 like most people say, we'd be asking What happened to Dr. Gordon, to Detective Matthews, to Jeff, to Jeff's daughter, what the significance was of numerous things--which were obviously important, but not explained yet. It's an extremely clever series the way the flashbacks are seamlessly edited in, providing a complex and intricate web of mystery and intensity. If only people could think outside the box and pay attention. But I guess that's too much to ask.

"Thinkers"? The "thinkers" you are talking about are teenagers who go see the movies for the sole purpose of seeing what creative and bloody ways the filmmakers thought up to kill people. The very first "Saw" movie might have been somewhat smart, but do we really need five sequels? That's right, part six is already in the works.