galactiboy
OT Preferist
They're okay flicks, and makes sense they're profitable as the cast is filled with nobodies and past the first film they just got to keep reusing stuff 
Most successful Horror film franchise ever is SAW
- Thread starter Shropt
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
El Skutto
Super Freak
I like the Saw movies. The quality dipped a bit after number 2, but I actually found that Saw VI went back up in quality after the disappointing parts 4 and 5. And I actually enjoy how each movie somehow ties into events that happened in the previous movies.
They're not the greatest horror movies ever, but I'd argue they stand up better than some of the more laughable installments in the Friday the 13th, Halloween or Nightmare on Elm Street franchises. Cyborg Jason, anyone?
Saw VII is going to be the last movie in the series, and it sounds like they're putting some effort into it. 3D is going to be interesting if done correctly, and I look forward to the return of Cary Elwes as Dr. Gordon.
They're not the greatest horror movies ever, but I'd argue they stand up better than some of the more laughable installments in the Friday the 13th, Halloween or Nightmare on Elm Street franchises. Cyborg Jason, anyone?
Saw VII is going to be the last movie in the series, and it sounds like they're putting some effort into it. 3D is going to be interesting if done correctly, and I look forward to the return of Cary Elwes as Dr. Gordon.
Darth_Fatso
Super Freak
Love the first one, 2 and 3 were tolerable but 4 was bleh and I haven't seen any after that.
fosing
Super Freak
that's BS.
we all know TWILIGHT is under the horror genre. SAW series cant beat that hype
Morbach
Super Freak
1 and 2 were good. Everything else sucked.
King Darkness
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2006
- Messages
- 44,456
- Reaction score
- 209
The first was was a perfect horror movie. Original, intense, well written. It had everything a kick ass horror movie needed. Still holds up after multiple viewings. Great movie.
The rest were just movie of the week knocks off of the first to try and cash in. No harm in that, same can be said of most horror movie franchises.
The rest were just movie of the week knocks off of the first to try and cash in. No harm in that, same can be said of most horror movie franchises.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
I wouldn't even call the first a horror movie. More of a thriller as the violence was more implied than shown. The rest are just pretty much soulless rehashes of the original, with new traps and gore abound to appease the torture porn fanatics.
Passion of the Christ is the better of the torture films. If only it had 6 sequels.
Saw costs like pennies, moths, and lint to make...They are gunna break even in the first weekend. It's about giving people what they want...violence. They've exploited this very well, and by hiring no name actors and filming each movie in a very short amount of time, they can make alot of money without really worrying about the quality, but rather the quantity of the movies.
The first one was pretty cool when I saw it. And I tried to keep going to seem them, but I got sick of needing a recap and thinking about how many different things are going on at the same time.
Saw costs like pennies, moths, and lint to make...They are gunna break even in the first weekend. It's about giving people what they want...violence. They've exploited this very well, and by hiring no name actors and filming each movie in a very short amount of time, they can make alot of money without really worrying about the quality, but rather the quantity of the movies.
The first one was pretty cool when I saw it. And I tried to keep going to seem them, but I got sick of needing a recap and thinking about how many different things are going on at the same time.
LChinoz
Super Freak
All you have to know about the Saw sequels is that Jigsaw dies, and they still manage to make 3 more movies after that, with his voice and everything. 
fosing
Super Freak
All you have to know about the Saw sequels is that Jigsaw dies, and they still manage to make 3 more movies after that, with his voice and everything.
yeah...nobody SAW that coming.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
Haven't seen them since they first came out, but I thought he died in the second one. I guess some kid stuck a lightning pole into his corpse and he was resurrected?
LChinoz
Super Freak
I think he died officially in the third one. Um...check that...his skull and brain were cut open so I am sure he died in the third one. Haven't seen any after that, but I guess he is still killing from beyond the GRAVE oooooooo!
Maybe he just had brain surgery in the 3rd one. . .after he died in the second one!!
Bezzerkerr
Super Freak
Terrible franchise, awful films
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 35,160
- Reaction score
- 2
This is truth. Saw's pretty good. Pretty original. ____ the rest.
Le Fantome
Freaked Out
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2009
- Messages
- 247
- Reaction score
- 0
The Saw franchise is the highest grossing Horror film franchise ever (for now)...but what exactly is your point? That it's made more money.....and.....what does that have to do with being a true horror-fan (which most of us in this thread happen to be) per se?
Using "highest grossing" as some kind of high-water mark for film, especially the horror genre, makes little, if any sense...unless you're a suit or investor I guess. Will Saw stand the test of time like the above-mentioned? Show most people a picture of Jason or Freddy, then show them anything from Saw. Who do you think they'll recognize first? Same result tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now...
"Highest grossing" may be a meaningful term to some sci-fi and action/adventure fans (I too, greatly enjoy those genres), but HORROR fans? No way. A totally different breed.
.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 35,160
- Reaction score
- 2
I wouldnt even call the Saw franchise a Horror one....Horrible maybe...
This is true. Remember John Carpenter's "The Thing" bombed in theatres because it was opening against E.T. and Blade Runner.
It's rated one of the best horror movies and is loved by many. Not to mention that it's really gross special effects were way ahead of its time and alot of people weren't ready for it. So a movie like Saw, and it's offspring of bastard sequels owes plenty to a movie like that.
at the same time, Avatar made a crap ton of money....This is a perfect example that just because something makes alot of money does not make it superior.
1. I believe that most people were attracted to the special effects over the story, which was really where all the effort in making the movie went into.
I think if they spent a quarter of the time on the characters, plot, and story that they did on making it look pretty it could have been a really great movie, especially coming from the man who made Aliens and terminator 1 & 2.
2. Ticket prices are much higher now. I just saw inception for 19 dollars in imax. Seeing avatar in 3d imax was probably around the same...and people were willing to spend it.
Last edited:
thenammagazine
Super Freak
Reason they're promoting it that way is that's all it's got. It doesn't even have "highest grossing horror movie of all time." They had to combine the first and all 6 of it's irrelevant sequels to amount for anything. I think in years to come, Saw along with Hostle will be regarded as the films that jumpstarted the mainstream torture porn frenzy. Other than that, nada.
Similar threads
