Rank The Saw Movies

Heh, I can tell you're not exactly a fan

For any fans of the series, here's a neat series of videos that attempts to piece the timeline together. The other parts of it can be found in the related videos section and on the uploader's channel.

I had some nostalgia hitting me lately because I remember since 2005 it was usually during every August up to 2010 that the trailer for the newest Saw sequel would be released. Definitely a fond memory I have of the series.

Pointless, I know. Just felt like sharing

With it nearing October, is anyone else planning a Saw marathon? I always do it every October as part of my Halloween viewing.

A little late to say this I suppose but recently an eighth installment was announced as being in development, not a total shock. I'd welcome an eighth chapter if it was done right.

I just realized this October marks the 10th anniversary of the original Saw, hard to believe it's been that long already.

My favs are definitely Saw I & II, III & VI are good too, the other meh.

__________________

Saw
Saw 2,3,4,5,6

6 was a surprising comeback for the series. By that time though a lot of people gave up on the series and didn't bother looking back.

is that for the entire series?

Sure is. I added the half box, because I liked the set-up of the first film, and the apartment scene with the camera flash was tense and well-done (I would actually give Saw btw). That's what irks me so much about Saw; It could have been a lot better than it was. Let's compare some scenes in the film that were similar in set-up to Fincher's far superior Se7en, and dissect what went wrong with Saw.

Both films partially rely on the classic trope of a police procedural to enhance the viewers connection to the crimes and killings in the film. Both films are clearly hyper-real, and extremely stylized, but Se7en grounds the viewer by placing them in the role of sort of the third detective, unraveling clues along with the detectives, which in turn ensnares the viewer in the same web of mystery and violence in which the two leads become subsumed. Everything follows realistically, choices make sense, and the reveals, scares and twists put the viewer through the wringer multiple times. This is classic audience manipulation on a level with Hitchcock. The performances are all perfectly executed, and at no point is the view jarred out of the proceedings on either a narrative or editorial level.

Saw is the complete opposite of this. The view is simply being shown and told things - they rarely experience anything along with the characters - instead, we are told or shown what had happened to people with misguided flashback mechanics. The scene with the barbed wire at first seems very similar to a scene in Se7en, and not just because the production team ripped off the set design (which they did). There are the cops, there is the crime scene, but hmmm, something is different. We don't care about any of the people in the situation. Apparently, the victim is important, because we are told we are dealing with the same killer. In case we didn't get it, we are jacked into another disconnected flashback to see yet another Rube Goldberg device torture another stranger in some depraved way. Wait! Time for a scary doll. OK, back to the room...no wait...let's introduce two cardboard cutout detectives, with pretty much zero similarity to actual characters with depth and progression, just so we have some other people not trapped in the room to talk about crimes and clues while they completely miss the target and chase the wrong guy. The only point of these guys is another outlet for exposition.

"Show me, don't tell me." - Rush

All of the above served one purpose for me: It completely destroyed any real tension that was being built in the room situation. You know what - there is actually some good stuff to be found as far as tension and mystery, if we had only stayed in the room, finding more creative ways to reveal the puzzle pieces of the mystery without constantly deflating tension. Se7en didn't show us parts of a different movie that might have been made but wasn't to explain itself - Saw does this constantly. We don;t need to see random scenes that constantly yell "SEE - LOOK HOW SICK THIS GUY IS."

Can't we get that idea from the events that matter in this narrative? Yeah, two dudes have been chained/drowned, and tormented in the room, I think the guy doing it might be nuts. Don't you? Bah - they needed to film up a feature film, and they just didn't have the material. If the back story is so interesting and creative, then make that movie instead. Weak and lazy methodology, IMO.

With two different actors and a revamped screenplay, I think James Wan had/has the vision to do something pretty damn good (see: The Conjuring). Elwes is miscast here. I like the guy, but he just CANNOT handle the freak-outs he keeps going through. Sorry, but I can't help but laugh when he tries to act freaked out. The sequence with him on the cell phone talking to his wife when they are taken hostage has me in stitches when i try to watch it. It is HILARIOUS how bad he is. But wait, he is WAY better than...

dun dun dun...the WORST actor on the face of the planet, Leigh Whannel. I am not talking about this guy again; I am just not doing it. I have flayed this guy on this site multiple times - dig it up if you wish. Short version: this guy does NOT belong in front of a camera, ever.

Danny Glover: Pretty sure they drugged this guy to get him on set. Worst performance of his career, period.

The editing: What the **** is this? Definitely the worst part of the film, the editing is straight out of an energy drink commercial. Jump cuts, stutters, aggressive rack focusing back and forth, rotations, snap zooms...man, the list goes on. They slam you with harsh audio in time with the edits too - just abysmally bad.

Wan knows it, too. Just look at his style now: Long, quiet tracking shots that build tension all on their own, very few cheap shots in both footage and audio (but still there to some extent), and an overall much more elegant approach to editing in general. He shoots differently, directs differently, and has changed his editing paradigm completely. He knows exactly how bad Saw is, and it's his film.

Wan has exceptional vision, and I think some of that came through, even in Saw, but the end result is a big old mess. A perfect example of biting off more than you can chew.

I'm chattering again. That's enough for now!

I can't find it now, but there's a clip of him shrieking on the phone where he busts out some incredibly high pitched voice. It's hysterical. He's a great actor, and I don't think it's much of a mark against a great actor to say that they can't scream and shriek and flip out, but he can't.

All of them are the best, I enjoyed watching every of them

__________________
people ask me why it's so hard to trust people, and i ask them why is it so hard to keep a promise

Saw 1. Thats it. Saw 1.

I didn't think Elwes was bad at all in the first one, I think he reacted like anyone else would in his situation. But to each their own.

The acting in the seventh installment though, yeah. Pretty atrocious for the most part :/

I like Saw I and II. Stopped watching after III

__________________
Fear and Loathing in MoFo... The Gunslinger 45's Top 50 Favorite Films

In the 10 Ring: Gunslinger45's reviews

I saw Saw and Saw is better than the rest of the Saw films. Saw, the other Saw's and the Saw that I saw are all Saw's.

I'd give the other films after 3 a chance, IMO they get better after that one, particularly 6.

I like all Saw movies except the last one. They forgot John Kramer's philosophy. The trap of Chester Bennington was terrible. And many more abysmal stuff...