Print Page | Close Window

SAW Off My Head NOW, Please!!!

Printed From: Official RAZZIEŽ Forum
Category: FORUMS on NON-NOMINATED 2008 RELEASES w/LYNX!
Forum Name: SAW V
Forum Discription: Isn't 5 Higher Than Most People to Whom This Kinda Crap Appeals Can Even Count?!?!?
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3173
Printed Date: August 01 2014 at 5:23pm


Topic: SAW Off My Head NOW, Please!!!
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: SAW Off My Head NOW, Please!!!
Date Posted: October 19 2008 at 11:43am

WHEN WILL the ERA of   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=horrortorture.htm - "TEEN TORTURE PORN"  GARBAGE FINALLY  END?!?!? 

YES, the  http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/saw/ - FIRST SAW MOVIE  DID GROSS (IN  EVERY SENSE of the WORD) http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=saw.htm - $55 MILLION (ON a BUDGET of JUST OVER $1 MILLION). AND http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=saw.htm - the SUCCESSIVE ONES HAVE EACH DONE EVEN BETTER THAN THAT...

BUT DOESN'T THERE COME a POINT in TIME WHEN YOU'VE UNLEASHED SO MUCH UNMITIGATED BAD KARMA and VISUAL SEWAGE into the WORLD THAT COMMON HUMAN DECENCY COMES INTO PLAY, and YOUR CONSCIENCE TELLS YOU to FINALLY JUST...STOP??

APPARENTLY, IF YOU'RE the FOLKS WHO MAKE THE SAW MOVIES...NO!

PLEASE FEEL FREE to VENT, RANT and RAVE AGAINST THIS ASSAULT on HUMAN TASTE and DIGNITY to YOUR HEART's CONTENT BELOW...

SCARED DUDE: "Wait a second, I only said I wanted to MIME being inside a glass box..."



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: October 19 2008 at 1:00pm

Well, from what I heard, there will be at least ONE more movie after this one. The problem is this: the movies are made dirt cheap, with no-name directors and cast, then make triple their money back. Stupid teenagers race to go see these movies because they have been so accustomed to blood and gore that they find more humor than fear in them. This is what freaks me out the most -- that a generation can actually LAUGH at the sight of people being killed in slow, painful ways. That's just sick!

You can blame the studios for greenlighting this crap as a Halloween tradition, but fault also falls squarely on the foolish teens who throw down their parents' money to see them.

Remember, paying for movies is like casting a vote for President -- The more "votes" a certain series of movies gets, the more sequels they will make... 

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: movieman
Date Posted: October 20 2008 at 10:08am
As long as they can keep finding creative ways to torture the human body,
these movies will on comin'.


Posted By: moat
Date Posted: October 20 2008 at 6:49pm

The director's name is http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0352524/ - David



Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: October 22 2008 at 1:36pm
This series would be better if they paid more attention to the philosophy present in these movies instead of the torture.

Actually, stretching that death philosophy over six films isn't a good idea. I think we get the idea that people behave noticeably different when death is close by with only one movie. Maybe the creators of the SAW series should pay attention to America's and its somewhat contradictory views on violence.


-------------
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: October 23 2008 at 10:43pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Well, from what I heard, there will be at least ONE more movie after this one.

At least one? I hate to break this to you, but the scriptwriters are already doing overtime...if they aren't, they will be in about 10 minutes...to wit:

Saw vs. Freddy

Saw vs. Jason

Saw vs. Michael

Saw vs. Alien

Saw vs. Predator

Sawma Mia!   (if nothing else, an apt title for the opening number at this year's Razzies)

Saw: The Christmas Special

Saw and Larry the Cable Guy: The Second Christmas Special

Mass Murder Musical (starring Saw, Freddy, Jason, Michael, Alien and Predator

Mass Murder Musical 2

Mass Murder Musical 3 (the first two will be released on cable on the Sci Fi Channel. You'll have to go the the theater to see the 3rd one.)

Saw vs. Rambo

Rocky VII: Rocky vs. Saw

The possibilities are endless, but this is getting out of hand. Besides, if I tell you who is going to host the MTV Movie Awards next summer, you won't be surprised.

HEY!!! What the h*ll is that guy doing wearing an aquarium on his head? And why am I suddenly reminded of Robot Monster?

I'm thinking that is the weirdest thing anyone has stuck on their head since Mr Magorium's Wonder Emporium



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 25 2008 at 7:33am
Forensics expert Hoffman goes on the hunt in order to protect the secret that he is the newest person to carry on Jigsaw's legacy.

How should I start this? Although I'm a Saw fan, I was severely disappointed by this movie. Yeah, it's not the worst. That would go to part II, although, ironically, that's the best in the series that can be watched over and over again. This movie was just...pointless, you know? Here's what you can expect: New torture devices and new characters. Of course, that's what all the Saw movies are but to devoted Saw fans, like myself, these movies are made to continue a continuous but convoluted storyline, which is, more or less, the main reason to continue to see these films. After all, part VI will be the last, right? Let's hope so.

If you have seen every Saw film so far, you can expect Saw's I-III is a trilogy AND expect Saw's III-V to be another part of a trilogy. That's really, I must say, ingenious, because I like to think the series that way but here's the problem that emerges: This movie is very pointless. If Saw's III-V is a trilogy, which they really are, this movie adds little to nothing on the storyline. Well, that's just my opinion. Many may say the best part of the film are the flashbacks. Well, these flashbacks also do not add a thing to the whole storyline. We can, more or less, assume that happened because we're smart that way. This is why I'm so disappointed about this film. In the whole franchise, this movie contributed the least to the storyline is basically what I'm trying to say.

Oh, and you cannot believe how it ends. And I say that as a bad thing because it's basically a set up to the sixth film. Think of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest's ending because that film also sets up for the third movie. If you take this film away, the whole series would still make sense. Oh, and if you think new directors and writers will at least add some originality to this franchise, they do. In fact, the first 20-30 minutes of the film had me beaming because it was less about the traps and more about the plot. That's until I realized this movie added little to nothing to the plot and the whole movie was back to torturing "unworthy" people that need to be "rehabilitated" going through elaborate torture devices. But, as crazy as this may sound, I found that the best part of the film.

The whole plot seemed to bore me. It was all uninteresting. So now, I've created a huge paradox: I wanted the movie to continue the storyline yet the storyline is uninteresting by now and I liked it that they didn't focus on more victims and torture devices for the first twenty minutes yet I found that to be the best part of the remaining of the film. Lots to take in, right? Anyway, I do think this movie were made for the fans and not for average movie goers looking for scares because if you haven't noticed these movies AREN'T scary, you shouldn't be the ones watching it. Overall, I think this film will disappoint many fans and added nothing to the storyline at all. Probably rent it if you're a fan. 5/10


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: October 25 2008 at 9:35am
Wow...this movie actually made a lot of money...almost as much as HSM3 per theater.


Posted By: tomsmo35
Date Posted: October 25 2008 at 10:22am

So there will actually be Saw VI? I guess that will come out October 23rd 2009 -- so the whole "You will never believe how it ends" was a cover up for part 6? Genius! You have to hand it to Lionsgate! 

 



-------------


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: October 25 2008 at 12:19pm
Originally posted by tomsmo35

So there will actually be Saw VI? I guess that will come out October 23rd 2009 -- so the whole "You will never believe how it ends" was a cover up for part 6? Genius! You have to hand it to Lionsgate! 

...And that is why Lionsgate is neck-and-neck with 20th Century Fox for the potential Worst Studio Razzie Award.



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: October 26 2008 at 11:59am
Don't forget saturnwatcher, SAW Movie, starring sub par comedians in a film that is supposed to spoof the SAW series, but in reality, is only loaded with unfunny pop culture references and is rated PG-13. 

-------------
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: October 26 2008 at 1:19pm
Hey, don't forget SAW WARS TOO!


Posted By: sportsartist24
Date Posted: October 28 2008 at 7:03am
How 'bout SAW TREK as well?

-------------
The Mormons were'nt really popular in the beginning, they're now becoming more popular, even in Hollywood.


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: October 28 2008 at 1:55pm
And who can forget the Sawshank Redemption? Undoubtedly a special place in hell has been created for me by virtue of starting this line of discussion.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: October 28 2008 at 3:15pm

Originally posted by saturnwatcher

And who can forget the Sawshank Redemption? Undoubtedly a special place in hell has been created for me by virtue of starting this line of discussion.

What about the porno version: "I SAW You Naked"?



Posted By: #1-Movie-Fan!
Date Posted: October 29 2008 at 2:50am
...and don't forget "I SAW What You Did last Summer"!! 


Posted By: MJ Narcy
Date Posted: November 22 2008 at 12:11pm
I've heard that the Ontario police were having a problem with the creepy robo-calls the producers of Saw V sent to Canadian phones.

The radio ads were bad enough, but hearing those messages over the phone must be incredibly scary.  Confused


Posted By: Balboa6
Date Posted: December 21 2008 at 1:31am
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.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: December 21 2008 at 2:15am

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.



Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 4:16pm

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.

SAN JUU


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Ags 8; TMNT '014. Ags 13; Let's Be Cops. Ags 15; The Giver, The Expendables 3. Ags 29; Jessabelle


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 4:46pm
Originally posted by Michaels

"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.

I think you're generalizing the audience too much. When I went to see Saw VI last year, I saw 2 old ladies and a woman (30-ish) in the screening room. I wouldn't call them teenagers. If anything, the audience is geared towards the adults and females because females is one of the main driving forces of horror films, believe it or not. And yes, I agree what that other poster said. Any horror series that are on their 4+ sequel would have poked fun at themselves now, like NOES, Final Destination, Child's Play, etc. Those films started out scary but slowly ended up trying to be funny. However, the Saw series actually stuck to the tone of the original throughout each sequel and I appreciate that.

Oh, and I made this analogy all of the time. The Saw series is like the tv show, LOST. I know many people who stopped watching LOST years ago because they thought it was stupid or because they lost interest. The same goes for Saw. The fans stayed with them because both have complex plots and make people think outside the box.

Here's a review of the film that explains what I'm trying to say:

On its sixth release, it would appear on the surface that there's not much differentiating the Saw Franchise from the other godfathers of Horror, the http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=521 - Halloween , http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=2577 - Friday the 13th , and http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=1066 - A Nightmare on Elm Street pictures that have seen their numbers increased steadily over the decades. However, Saw does take things a step further by building intricate layers of mystery atop the gore, each film slowly assembling a piece of the puzzle that always manages to bring parts of the story full circle but at the same time construct a new mystery that promises to be revealed in future segments. No matter one's opinion on the film's horrifically gruesome content, there's no denying the noble effort to make this franchise something more, and even for audiences sick and tired of the excessive gore, there's still a morbid allure to the pictures if only to discover the next secret and admire the effort -- sometimes strong, sometimes feeble, but now, mostly, somewhere in the middle -- to keep the story going with a purpose other than to simply pour blood and spill guts all over the screen. Certainly, the Saw films sometimes lack in acting and scripting, but the production values are generally superb, and even if the story has a slightly jumbled feel, it's the effort even more so than the execution that earns the films a generally high mark. Saw VI continues with the tradition, unraveling through various flashbacks both to scenes in previous films and newly-revealed details of Kramer's past that keep the story fresh and engaging, and the film once again ends with plenty of revelations but also unearths new questions that beg to be answered in future installments.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 6:21pm
MWG, you can post all the positive reviews you can find and point out the two or three post teenage years people that were in the crowd all you want. This series has ran its course. There is no point to it any more. If #7 is a success this year, it's simply because it's in 3-D and the surcharges will give the gross an extra boost and the studios will keep on beating the dead horse with a stick in the form of an 8th movie. And you will keep on defending it, regardless if it gets good or bad reviews. Some things never change.


Posted By: Balboa6
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 7:47pm
Originally posted by Michaels

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.



Why do people always say that ("do we need this many sequels?"). It depends on what the sequels are being made for. If it's something like Friday the 13th where after the 4th Jason is resurrected in numerous ways and it completely destroys any legitimacy the series had, that's one thing and I can understand the annoyance. When it comes to the Saw franchise, it is a complex, sophisticated, intricate web that is being woven full of intrigue and mystery, much of which has been resolved, but the next two are going to bring the series to a final close. Yes the series is for thinkers. You see in order to understand it, you have to actually watch and pay attention. What amazes me is that if this were, say for example, an HBO series, people would have no problem whatsoever with it, but for some reason people can't handle film franchises. Apparently the continuation of a story is only acceptable if it's on the small screen. The story isn't over. What about that doesn't make sense to you and others like you? You don't just end a damn story with everything up in the air.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 8:16pm
Originally posted by Balboa6


Why do people always say that ("do we need this many sequels?"). It depends on what the sequels are being made for. If it's something like Friday the 13th where after the 4th Jason is resurrected in numerous ways and it completely destroys any legitimacy the series had, that's one thing and I can understand the annoyance. When it comes to the Saw franchise, it is a complex, sophisticated, intricate web that is being woven full of intrigue and mystery, much of which has been resolved, but the next two are going to bring the series to a final close. Yes the series is for thinkers. You see in order to understand it, you have to actually watch and pay attention. What amazes me is that if this were, say for example, an HBO series, people would have no problem whatsoever with it, but for some reason people can't handle film franchises. Apparently the continuation of a story is only acceptable if it's on the small screen. The story isn't over. What about that doesn't make sense to you and others like you? You don't just end a damn story with everything up in the air.
1. You can count the number of movie series that were good after a third movie with one hand, "Saw" is not one of them.
2. Yes, if this was an HBO series, it would be good and praised, but it's not. It's just a studio cash cow.
3. Why do you people defend this? Why can't you see this for what it is: a studio who have found their golden eggs laying goose ... a movie that that can be cheaply made every year and has a mindlessly loyal fanbase that will flock to it no matter how bad it is. I'll said it before and I'll say it again, it's just beating a dead horse with a stick.


Posted By: Balboa6
Date Posted: January 28 2010 at 8:32pm
Originally posted by Michaels

Originally posted by Balboa6


Why do people always say that ("do we need this many sequels?"). It depends on what the sequels are being made for. If it's something like Friday the 13th where after the 4th Jason is resurrected in numerous ways and it completely destroys any legitimacy the series had, that's one thing and I can understand the annoyance. When it comes to the Saw franchise, it is a complex, sophisticated, intricate web that is being woven full of intrigue and mystery, much of which has been resolved, but the next two are going to bring the series to a final close. Yes the series is for thinkers. You see in order to understand it, you have to actually watch and pay attention. What amazes me is that if this were, say for example, an HBO series, people would have no problem whatsoever with it, but for some reason people can't handle film franchises. Apparently the continuation of a story is only acceptable if it's on the small screen. The story isn't over. What about that doesn't make sense to you and others like you? You don't just end a damn story with everything up in the air.
1. You can count the number of movie series that were good after a third movie with one hand, "Saw" is not one of them.
2. Yes, if this was an HBO series, it would be good and praised, but it's not. It's just a studio cash cow.
3. Why do you people defend this? Why can't you see this for what it is: a studio who have found their golden eggs laying goose ... a movie that that can be cheaply made every year and has a mindlessly loyal fanbase that will flock to it no matter how bad it is. I'll said it before and I'll say it again, it's just beating a dead horse with a stick.


So it's okay for tv, but not movies. Interesting.

If it were bad I wouldn't flock to it. It is almost like watching one very long movie. It's all interconnected. It's not like "oh here's another one...just more people to put in some traps...duhhhh...." That is NOT what the films are about. If they were, I certainly would have lost interest a very long time ago. Probably after the first.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 8:07am
Originally posted by Balboa6


So it's okay for tv, but not movies. Interesting.
Yes, that's right. See with a TV series, it would have been fully plotted ahead of time and it would go in a direction that would make sense and it would keep going because the plot needs it to. As a movie series, it's just keeps going because the studios want to milk that cash cow for all its worth. It's not better than "Friday The 13th"; Jason dies at the end of every movie, yet the movie makes a profit, so they make a new movie and he has to come back to life yet again. Same with "Saw", a bunch of people are kidnapped and killed and then we start over again with a new movie, same old, same old.
 
And why are we discussing this in a forum for a 2 year old movie, can't we wait until Halloween when the uncalled for 7th movie comes out and gets its own forum?


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 5:42pm
Originally posted by Michaels

MWG, you can post all the positive reviews you can find and point out the two or three post teenage years people that were in the crowd all you want.

Umm....those were the only people that were watching it. If you want me to spoon feed you every information, I was trying to imply that a total of like 6 people were there when I saw it, including the 2 other people I saw it with.

This series has ran its course. There is no point to it any more.

There is a point. The plot lines are unresolved and there are plot lines I want to see how they resolve. You may not find it interesting but it's apparent a lot of other people do and it isn't fair that you have to bash the people who enjoy this movie to make your "point."

And you will keep on defending it, regardless if it gets good or bad reviews. Some things never change.

Regardless of how bad or good the movies turn out, I defend it for a completely different reason. Re-read my other post if you have to because I'm tired of you just "skimming" through my posts than actually reading them because half the time, your responses to my posts have nothing to do with what I said before.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 5:48pm
Originally posted by Michaels

2. Yes, if this was an HBO series, it would be good and praised, but it's not. It's just a studio cash cow.

TV shows also make money, you know that? Know matter how good a movie is, Hollywood is a business. EVERY movie is meant to make money. If a movie costs more than what it makes in return, there will be an economic recession.

3. Why do you people defend this?

Here's a simple answer put: You don't get it. I'm sure there are movies and tv shows that you watch that people don't like. That's why I made the Lost analogy. Many people have stopped watching it as the seasons came but there were still others who have stayed and watched it because they were interested in the storyline.

Why can't you see this for what it is: a studio who have found their golden eggs laying goose ... a movie that that can be cheaply made every year and has a mindlessly loyal fanbase that will flock to it no matter how bad it is.

You think the movies are bad. You don't even watch the movies. So what is the problem here? You act as if those who are still seeing the movies are controlling your life.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 29 2010 at 7:13pm
I don't think movies are evil. Hollywood can make movies all they want, all I (and the other PAYING AND VOTING members of the Razzies) ask of them is to make GOOD, ORIGINAL movies, that yes, make money, but have reasoning and creativity to them. Is that all too hard to ask? But no, instead we get sequels to movies in which the originals only broke even, we get reboots and remakes to movies that were fine they way they were or simply don't need to be made. We get movies based off of amusement park rides and board games. I understand you LOVE movies, even if they only "entertain" you on some level, but we at the Razzies ask for something with more weight to in as an art form. I've said it before and I'll say it again, IMDb.com is more of the place for you where people will agree with your opinions.
 
Now, can we please drop this subject and pick it up in October when the 7th movie will get its own subforum?


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 08 2010 at 11:28am
The movies suffer a curse I don't know what's called.After 3 movies,the audience knows the pattern,especially that there will be a twist endin'(that's why Shyamalan's 1st. 3 movies THE 6TH. SENSE,UNBREAKABLE and SIGNS were hits,and the 3 last ones THE VILLAGE, http://www.razzies.com/forum/lady-in-the-water_forum129.html - LADY IN THE WATER and http://www.razzies.com/forum/m-night-shyamalans-the-happening_forum284.html - THE HAPENNING weren't).
 
The movies are the best horror movies,'cuz they're deep,but they focus a lil'too much on the blood,and people don't see what's "inside".
 
The 3rd. is the last one that's great,and I blame Leigh wannell for not writin'them anymore.The rest are O.K.,but they keep gettin'worse'cuz after JIGSAW dies,his games continue,'cuz we don't know where the saga is goin'.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 08 2010 at 1:39pm

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.

And I gotta agree with Michaels, I'll take "Paranormal Activity" over this series anyday. It was the best horror movie in decades because for the first time in who know when, it focused on what originally scared people: the unknown and people's own wild imaginations.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: February 08 2010 at 5:35pm
Actually, I disagree with you guys. In fact, Saw IV stands up to be my favorite sequel.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 08 2010 at 8:29pm
Hey, if a movie series that pops out an endless supply of sequels without any kind of closure is your thing, then this series is for you.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 09 2010 at 7:15am
Is not about closure.Is just SAW I was excellent'cuz it seemed like a typical horror flick,but it was independent,and ev'ryone could relate to it,bot to mention the deep parts.

SAW II and III got deeper,but from the beginning,they were afraid nobody would want sequels,so they created the storyline of JIGSAW being sick(I'm just guessing).

SAW IV wasn't that good'cuz of the "3rd sequel curse":
1)People already knew there was gon'na be a twist endin'.
2)Leigh Wannell didn't write it.
3)It turned into a money-makin'franchise,which isn't new.
Nevertheless,it was still good,'cuz it started revealin'JIGSAW's past.

Some of those things goes too for SAW V.

It needs to stop already.I still found them good,'cuz they're still deep,and you have to pay attention to details(like in LOST),but it seems they just wan'na make money,so they're gon'na keep creatin'JIGSAW's protegees,and killin'heroes.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 09 2010 at 12:43pm
Originally posted by Vits

Is not about closure.Is just SAW I was excellent'cuz it seemed like a typical horror flick,but it was independent,and ev'ryone could relate to it,bot to mention the deep parts.
Ah, but the same can be said about "Paranormal Activity", but it was so good, I do not wish for Hollywood to ruin it by making countless sequels of it every year. Let it to Hollywood to take something good and ruin it for a profit. But I agree with a statement above, we should wait for Halloween, when "Saw 7" gets its own forum, rather than rant on about a movie from two years ago.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 12 2010 at 2:12pm

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



-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 13 2010 at 5:15am
Originally posted by Vits

I just read they're gon'na make SAW VII the last one.
Well, that's a comforting thought. However, if it does well at the B.O. (no doubt because it's 3-D and will have surcharges), don't be surprised if Lionsgate suddenly go "Well, we said it was going to be the last, but look at those box office numbers! We have to make another!". Hollywood, man, it's like sequels are drugs to them and they can't the monkey off their back.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 13 2010 at 9:45am
They're not idiots.They know if they pull a stunt like that,no one will see SAW VIII.

And I don't think they can,even if they want.There's a lot of loose ends(especially what hapenned to DR. GORDON(Cary Elwes)),and the last one is supossed to solve them all.If they decide to mak another one,what could happen?A whole new story?

SAW VI was a flop compared to the others,but not in general.It did good.

The thing is they never really cared'bout critics,but this one had bad response from fans too.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: February 13 2010 at 1:18pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Originally posted by Vits

Is not about closure.Is just SAW I was excellent'cuz it seemed like a typical horror flick,but it was independent,and ev'ryone could relate to it,bot to mention the deep parts.
Ah, but the same can be said about "Paranormal Activity", but it was so good, I do not wish for Hollywood to ruin it by making countless sequels of it every year. Let it to Hollywood to take something good and ruin it for a profit. But I agree with a statement above, we should wait for Halloween, when "Saw 7" gets its own forum, rather than rant on about a movie from two years ago.

I just read PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 2 is on the way.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: February 13 2010 at 3:23pm
Originally posted by Vits


I just read PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 2 is on the way.
Yep, just hope it doesn't turn out to be another "Blair Witch 2" thing.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 13 2010 at 1:42pm
I just rated it on Rotten Tomatoes.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/user/812172/ratings


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 24 2010 at 4:35pm
I just watched again,and I noticed another error.At the beginnin',JIGSAW's lawyer gives JILL a box.Although I accidentally saw in the site of http://www.razzies.com/forum/saw-vi_forum392.html - SAW VI that JILL is listed as an antagonist,that was so obvious.

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 24 2010 at 5:04pm
Originally posted by Vits

I just watched again,and I noticed another error.At the beginnin',JIGSAW's lawyer gives JILL a box.Although I accidentally saw in the site of http://www.razzies.com/forum/saw-vi_forum392.html - SAW VI that JILL is listed as an antagonist,that was so obvious.
Can we please not talk about past "Saw" movies until the 7th one comes out. We can bash and/or defend them then.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: August 09 2010 at 12:59pm
[Post deleted]


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: October 20 2011 at 8:33pm
Time to review the worst Saw movie and that says a lot!
 
The good:
 
The main trap: The main trap of Saw V has characters that are actually interesting. They try to think of alternative ways to solve the trap that don't end up working, but it's nice to see them try something different. Unfortunately, they get little screen-time compared to the A-story.
 
The bad:
 
The A-story: The A-story of this is BORING! It follows Agent Strahm trying to expose Hoffman as the Jigsaw apprentice. I think that the reason this is the A-story was because they got criticism for how bland the A-stories was in the last two compared to the B-stories. The A-story is flawed for one reason that'll be exposed in the ugly and...
 
Strahm himself: I've give Strahm this: his opening scene where he breaks out of Jigsaw's trap was pretty cool. After that, he gets more and more boring, before he mercifully gets himself killed by one of Hoffman's traps. Scott Patterson's stiff performance doesn't help.
 
Meagan Good: She's bland as Luba, one of the members of the main trap.
 
The ugly:
 
Director David Hackl: One good thing about Hackl: his name isn't false-advertising!
 
The script: I already pointed out how lop-sided the A and B stories are in terms of quality, but that's not the only problem with this. The ending, in particular, was poorly written.
 
Costas Mandylor: Why is he the main villain? He can't act! Jigsaw's corpse could make a better villain!
 
Is it me, or are fifth sequels in horror series usually the worst? This, Friday The 13th, Child's Play, etc. Grade: D-
 
Next-up: Saw VI!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Winter's Tale


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: October 21 2011 at 8:33am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The A-story of this is BORING! It follows Agent Strahm trying to expose Hoffman as the Jigsaw apprentice. I think that the reason this is the A-story was because they got criticism for how bland the A-stories was in the last two compared to the B-stories.
I think that,because it received a fanbase,they thought they could make a filler episode with no problem.I admit that the admiration for the previous installents is what got me through that boring storyline.
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Is it me, or are fifth sequels in horror series usually the worst?
Fifth sequels in general are the worst...unless they were made in 2011.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: November 02 2013 at 9:59am
My review of the franchise (skip to 07:31):

[TUBE]qMCCVKUcuyE[/TUBE]

Any thoughts?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile



Print Page | Close Window