Tenth Saw movie is coming

[Andrew NDB]

Set for Halloween next year. Directed by the director of Saw VI.

https://www.darkhorizons.com/tenth-s...alloween-2023/

[Turo602]

I really enjoyed the last one with Chris Rock. I can see what he meant about adding some humor into horror movies, though I don't know if I'd really consider Saw a horror franchise, but he definitely did so without compromising the tone of the film as it just made the characters more likeable and believable. The only thing I thought was weak was the twist. Without Jigsaw it just feels kinda empty and directionless.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Oh, geez. Another one?

I suppose they’ll also advertise this as the “final” Saw movie.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Cowabung-Gal

Oh, geez. Another one?

I suppose they’ll also advertise this as the “final” Saw movie.

7 was the final chapter. Jigsaw was a prequel. Spiral is a new story. What's the issue?

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Turo602

Jigsaw was a prequel.

Only part of it was.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Turo602

7 was the final chapter. Jigsaw was a prequel. Spiral is a new story. What's the issue?

I mean... that's still splitting hairs. Final means final. No more movies. The ****in' end.

Possible exception a flat out reboot/remake.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

I mean... that's still splitting hairs. Final means final. No more movies. The ****in' end.

Possible exception a flat out reboot/remake.

But the word chapter removes any doubt of it being the final film. Final chapter would indicate end of story arc, not franchise.

[Leo656]

It's still a dumb thing they do to manipulate audiences and fluff up ticket sales. I don't like it.

I partly don't like it because it exposes peoples' general ignorance and how easily they act against their own better judgment and self-interest. For example, no sane person ever truly believes it when a movie is marketed as "the final one" (I mean does anyone REALLY think "Halloween Ends" is gonna be The End of THAT series? If so, I'd like you to come see me about a bridge for sale). And yet, almost every movie that's ever billed as "the last one" does a lot more money, which means that marketing does work even though people "know" better. And thus, people are exposed as being ignorant saps and suckers. "Well, I know it won't REALLY be the last one. But... I better go anyway, even if I skipped the last couple in the series. I mean, just in case it IS the last one. I mean, I know it won't be... but it MIGHT be, and if it is, I can say I was there!" As if you get points for that. And then it never really is the last one and all of those people who went to see a bad movie because of manufactured hype look like utter fools.

The one they try and sell you as "the last one" is NEVER the last one, because that one always ends up doing huge business. The one that quietly flops without any fanfare and only makes half its budget back because audiences are just plain sick of it? THAT could possibly be The Last One in a series, otherwise no. And even in those cases, if the brand name is strong like Terminator people will overlook the repeated box office failures and still try and squeeze it for more juice even though they really need to just stop.

So anyways. I'm not shocked they're still making Saw movies, but since only the first one was any good at all I really wish they wouldn't.

[Cowabung-Gal]

IMO, “Friday the 13th The Final Chapter” is the best one of the entire series. And initially it was in fact meant to be the final one, hence the title, and it would’ve been a satisfying ending. But, because Hollywood can’t resist making more sequels like how a fly can’t resist eating dung, they decided to produce more “Friday the 13th” movies anyway, ya know, for MOAR money, and we ended up with horrible sequels and a lame reboot.

[Leo656]

Reboot wasn't bad. It worked pretty well in a "recreate all the Good Stuff from the original series and leave out all the dumb junk" kinda way.

Because let's face it, if you comb the entire F13 series and scrape off all of the stuff that's objectively awful, you're left with about two hours or so that isn't garbage, anyway. So parsing the entire series down to One Movie wasn't a bad idea.

Plus, The One Sex Scene. Whoooo. She truly did have perfect nipple placement, as odd a thing as THAT is to say to someone during sex.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Plus, The One Sex Scene. Whoooo. She truly did have perfect nipple placement, as odd a thing as THAT is to say to someone during sex.

(coughs awkwardly)

Well, if I were a lesbian, I’d probably wholeheartedly agree with you.

[Leo656]

Yeah, you're gonna get a lot of that stuff from me in case you didn't already know or realize. Just saying since you're kinda new.

I'm as the kids say, "Totes Inappropes".

I wonder how many brand new lesbians that one scene "created" out of thin air. I confess, I have trust issues with anyone who wouldn't just dive on in and motorboat a rack like that. Straight chicks and gay guys, I just don't understand either group. Who disavows Boobs? Crazy People, that's who.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by .Fugitoid.

I thought they killed off the original dude behind all the deaths, though.

They did, and yet it still went on for at least 6 more movies, it was ghastly. At one point pretty much anyone who'd ever been noteworthy was one of Jigsaw's Secret Accomplices, which while "fixing" the plot hole of how a cancer-ridden old codger could have built so many traps and dragged a bunch of unconscious bodies around to put them in said traps, it also created a ton more plot holes and other things that stretched all suspension of disbelief past the breaking point. There is NO point to these movies besides mindless splatter. Literally, if you think at all then these movies completely fall apart and become unwatchable, and while I appreciate horror I'm not such a ghoul as to be sated simply by gore for gore's sake.

That's one of the neat things with the original, there's barely any gore at all, most of it is in the one scene where the girl has to dig in the guy's guts for the key, and even then most of it is only implied or shown in shadow. People THINK it's a gore-fest, or they misremember it as being one because that's what the series immediately became with the second movie, but no, the first one is mostly psychological horror with the actual violence being heavily implied but mostly not shown. Now, I think gore has its place, but I prefer it be balanced with some semblance of an actual plot.

I confess that part of me wonders what the malfunction is of people who are hard into "gore porn" type of horror. Like, I can watch some of it once in a while, and that's fine, but it's not my preference. And I can't imagine what goes on in the minds of people who strongly prefer to just watch people get their eyes ripped out and their skulls cut in half and their brains falling out and all that kinda stuff. It's not that I'm squeamish about it, I just think it says a lot about a person, what they entertain themselves with. Someone who's seen all the Saw movies multiple times, or like if they watched Hostel as much as some people watch Star Wars... people like that probably should be kept a very close eye on by someone, that's all I can really say.

[The Deadman]

Originally Posted by Turo602

I really enjoyed the last one with Chris Rock. I can see what he meant about adding some humor into horror movies, though I don't know if I'd really consider Saw a horror franchise.

Saw is definitely a horror franchise cause it falls into damn near torture porn at times. You can't use the same traps in a different movie and say it's action.

[The Deadman]

Originally Posted by .Fugitoid.

I thought they killed off the original dude behind all the deaths, though.

They did, Saw III began the story that he had cancer and that he had accomplices. After his death, Hoffman became the killer.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by The Deadman

Saw is definitely a horror franchise cause it falls into damn near torture porn at times. You can't use the same traps in a different movie and say it's action.

I assumed he was making a distinction between "horror" and "gore porn/torture porn", as some do.

Some people say it's all horror because it is in fact horrific and designed to make the viewer uncomfortable, and that's a fair point. Some people say that stuff like Hostel and Saw isn't "actually" horror because "It's not 'scary', it's just disgusting'," and that's a fair point too.

But then maybe I misunderstood the distinction he was making; I merely assumed that's what it was.

[Andrew NDB]

If Saw is torture porn then so is F13 and the Freddys and Chuckies all of that. By their very nature they're about finding new ways to torturously kill off fresh batches of teenagers. Saw just ups the "Creativity" a bit.

[Leo656]

I think there's plenty of distinction between stuff like Saw and Hostel and stuff like Jason and Chucky.

That's like saying all super-hero movies are the same because the protagonists wear gaudy costumes and solve all their problems by punching. It's only true in the absolute broadest sense, but anyone who actually watches them can tell what the differences are between the "sub-genres".

I will concede that the Saw and Friday the 13th franchises do also have "being abhorrently stupid most of the time" in common, but if a person really can't see what separates the two types of gory horror movies then I don't know what to tell them, other than "try watching them sober for once."

[Cowabung-Gal]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

If Saw is torture porn then so is F13 and the Freddys and Chuckies all of that. By their very nature they're about finding new ways to torturously kill off fresh batches of teenagers.

Yeah but the one virgin of the group always survives.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I assumed he was making a distinction between "horror" and "gore porn/torture porn", as some do.

Some people say it's all horror because it is in fact horrific and designed to make the viewer uncomfortable, and that's a fair point. Some people say that stuff like Hostel and Saw isn't "actually" horror because "It's not 'scary', it's just disgusting'," and that's a fair point too.

But then maybe I misunderstood the distinction he was making; I merely assumed that's what it was.

Yeah, basically. They're not scary in the traditional sense so I don't really see the "horror" in them. There's a whole detective drama built into these movies that makes me view them more in-line with something like Se7en but with horror elements like over the top gore. In reality, it's probably more of a sub-genre of horror, but it's not exactly a scary film unless gore makes you uneasy. But even in video game's terms, gory games like God of War and Gears of War aren't exactly horror games either.