horrorfan_1986

Some movies aren't meant to be cinematic masterpieces. They're a way to enjoy yourself for ninety minutes. You can go all the way back to the thirties to find viewers cheering for the killers instead of the other characters. Why do you think a character like Dracula is so much more well known than Johnathan Hawker? The killers are able to be more fun than the others. Movies like the Saw series is geared towards one type of movie goer, the type that enjoys gore. Just as a wrestling company such as CZW or ECW had their cult following despite not appealing to everyone, Saw is able to make money because they're known, not for good acting, but for creative deaths. That's what draws people to the Saw series.

You remember a time when horror movies wasn't just about the blood? Well of course you do since you couldn't show much gore in past years without getting the dreaded X rating. The more times change, the more the studio's are able to show in some ways. The reason why the torture porn sub-genre became so popular was because the MPAA had strangled the horror movies of the late 80's and 90's into showing very little gore. By time Hostel and Saw came out, it felt fresh and a throw back to the 70's gritty scene. Much like with the teen slasher boom of the mid 90's, the sub-genre has been over saturated to the degree that horror movies needs to change to a new fad.

Whether you were a child growing up in the thirty's going to see Bela Lugosi or Boris Karloff on the big screen, sneaking in to see the gritty exploitation films of the 70's, renting your first campy horror vhs in the 80's, or now seeing violent kills with the Saw or Rob Zombie movies, you're hoping to have some fun scare films that offers whatever is "In" at that point in time. Go rent a Meryl Streep film if you want quality acting or writing. Horror movies are generally fairly cheap to make, yet they can bring in a good chunk of change when you stumble upon something clever. Horror's very nature of not taking itself too serious is why, despite what the critics try to claim, the genre has never died and will never die.

__________________

Jayman

I thought the first Saw was a masterpiece in almost every way. When Jigsaw got up off the floor at the end and they revealed the entire backstory in flashbacks, my mouth was wide open in shock, amazement, excitement, and horror. The one negative thing I have against the series now is that it's detracted so much away from the Jigsaw character, and now we have this revolving door of "successors" from Amanda, to Det. Hoffman, and beyond. It's a little tough keeping who is who straight, because the characters aren't well defined during the movies.

However, no matter how many of these movies they continue to churn out, I'll still be there as long as they still stay with the one component I love about these movies: the final reveal. Yes, there is a ton of gore, and yes there isn't much else....but at the very end when the puzzle comes together about why the events in that movie were done and they flashback to scenes earlier that you thought had no importance at all...I just love it.

Part of the intriuge for me is trying to figure out WHY these people are chosen and WHY he is doing what he is. It all comes together at the end of every individual Saw movie, and as a moviegoer, I enjoy that part of it -- the "why" (as well as the "how"). These movies always keep me guessing, and I enjoy that.

Tommy Platinum

Yeah I know what you mean Jay. I love seeing how everything is revealed at the end, but my main issue with V was that nothing was even shocking. They said in the poster that "you won't believe how it ends" and it was fairly predictable imo. I didn't get that "wow" feeling I got at the end of every other Saw film, including the highly underrated 4th installment, which was very well done I thought.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

I found 5 to be a lot more enjoyable than 4. 4 just didn't make much sense and I didn't care that I wasn't understanding most of it while watching it.

__________________

Brandon

This is what I thought. I'm officially done with this series. Last one I watached was part four and it was pretty brutal.

Advocate

I think you guys have to think of the series like this. 1, 2, and 3 were the main series. Like American Pie. Afterward, it is just going on as a cash cow. I am sure we be seeing several more versions, even if they are only straight to dvd

Tommy Platinum

I take your point that it was somewhat hard to follow at times, but I don't really see how it made no sense. At the end everything seemed to fall into place nicely and I thought it was very well written. It still retained the drama and excitement that the other Saw films had, especially with the ending when everything came together. With V, it just didn't really feel like I was watching a Saw film, and the ending was ridiculously anticlimactic and predictable I felt.

__________________

Crest Fall

I'm not asking for cinematic masterpieces, I was just throwing that out there because some of the horror classics are cinematic masterpieces. In the 30's horror movies were the most popular and beloved movie genres because people can relate to fear and thus, the movie as a whole. It's emotional investment and human connection that makes a good horror movie, not the nastiest death scene. Nowadays it's just some grotesque sideshow at a carnival that people can't help but look at like roadkill on the side of the road.

I'm just asking for halfway competent writing. The stuff nowadays isn't even mediocre-worthy, it's fucking horrible. I don't understand the concept of a "fun movie." I can have fun riffing Transformers but that doesn't make it a fun movie, it's still shit. It's either good or it's bad. You're SUPPOSED to have fun at a movie. That's sorta the idea.

As I said, it's okay if a few movies have monsters that the crowds will root for, but that's all it is nowadays. I could probably name the number of (good) protagonists in distress in movies from the 1980's to the present on one hand with fingers to spare.

When it comes to Lugosi and Karloff, yeah, you tend to root for Dracula or any of the other characters they've played over the years, but you still have an ounce of emotional investment in the rest of the cast. It's perfectly okay if you have lovable monsters, but you have to balance it out with an equally (if not moreso) lovable cast or else it's just cheap. For me, having fun at a horror movie is not seeing a Slasher killing off a bunch of annoying-ass teens that I do not care about. I don't even care about the Slasher either. These modern "horror" icons are fucking pathetic. They're not cool, they're not badass, they're not awesome. Kirby could take their place and kill off the rest of the cast for all I care.

"Horror" movies nowadays are pretty much pointing a camera at a line of cows about to be slaughtered only giving the cows the ability to talk and giving them the most alien and fake human personalities imaginable. That's not hard. That's not creative. That's not "fun".

Again, I have no problem with gore, but instead how they present the movie as a whole. A horror movie doesn't have to take itself seriously, that's not what I was trying to say. Some of the best horror movies were ones that didn't take themselves seriously. But "not taking themselves seriously" is not an excuse for the cinematic abortions that have cluttered the horror genre for the last few decades.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

Why are you lumping all horror movies into one group? Yeah, there are some that focuses just on the gore and unique ways to kill. But it's just that - one group. Like any other genre, there's good movies and bad ones. And just like in other genres, sometimes you have to dig a bit to find the well written ones. Take Trick 'r Treat for example. It's a campy throwback to anthology horror movies (Creepshow), but it does so throw smart scenes and characters that are fun, both good and bad.

People will generally root for the killer since they're more fun and because we see them more in a series. Take Saw for example. What character has the viewer seen the most in terms of movie? Jigsaw. The one thing you can always rely on is to see him getting into some mischief.

Movies such as Saw, Hostel and Zombie's movies are made simply to show off kills. Based on their box office returns, there are plenty of people that are interested in that. If you aren't personally into seeing gore and such, I'd advise you to search for some horror movies that are superior. Truthfully, the only Saw I'd rank as one of the best of the year was the original. Movies like Trick 'r Treat, Behind the Mask, Let the Right One In, Severance, Frontiere(s), [REC], The Orphanage, Session 9, Eden Lake and many other ones I'm currently forgetting at the moment.

Most of the current hit mainstream ones are made to make some quick cash, which they do. I just don't see the point in saying how pathetic something is for the bad acting when it's not as if people praise the acting in the first place.

__________________

DD

I have never seen a single Saw movie, but I do plan on picking up the completed DVD series when Saw XXV comes out because apparently this dude is pretty unstoppable.

Seems like a pile of shit from afar and I couldn't bother to give a series that pumps em out this quick a run. Seems like desperation.

/trolling

__________________