That’s a whole lotta ‘Saw’
October 30th, 2008 at 09:32am Will Pfeifer
Over at the always interesting Onion AV Club, writer Sam Adams (apparently no relation to the beer) watched all five SAW movies in one sitting and, more importantly, had the energy to write about it.
I’ve only seen the first SAW, but I never felt like I was missing much. I thought it was merely a so-so horror movie, with a few clever death traps and a nice twist at the end, but there was nothing in it that made me want to rush out and see the sequels. I’ve always preferred my horror movies more in the classic mode (i.e. the Universal gems of the early 1930s and the Val Lewton movies of the 1940s) or off the beaten path (the original TEXAS CHAINSAW, the original DAWN OF THE DEAD, Cronenberg’s SHIVERS). But then again, the SAW franchise is the biggest moneymaker in horror history, so what the heck do I know?
How about you? Seen SAW? Seen ‘em all? What do you think? Am I missing something?
Entry Filed under: Horror movies
1 Comment Add your own
1. echo4charlie | October 30th, 2008 at 10:49 am
I’ve seen four of the five. I thought the character Jigsaw was a neat creation, and had some neat ideas behind why he did what he did albeit, it doesn’t excuse his actions). But, it just became more of a gorefest as it progressed. Just more of the same, in my opinion. They were all good, but, still, more of the same.
Just more and more gratuitous violence and blood. If I want to see that, honestly, I’d rather watch any of the Blade films (I think it was a trilogy). I has all the gore, and really fun action sequences, as well.
The Saw films, although good, were never fun to me. Just more of the same, with the introduction of a lot of B-cast actors.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed