Saw III

[Bartwald]

Saw Saw III and gotta say it's the least logical and most gratuitously violent of all three. The final twists were almost all laughable and you can easily guess they were forced there "cause a Saw film needs a twist ending". Nice try, guys.

Part III is also rather poor as a film - there's no real suspense as Hitchcock meant it to be, the characters are either boring (the man) or unconvincing (the two killers), the editing is of the cut!-cut!cut!-kind and the script must have been a real mess. Some cheesy quality in it all, sure, but III is my lest favourite of the three Saws. 4/10

Vote for II in the poll: the one with the best acting and the finest final twist.

[knightofcydonia]

Yeah Saw III was pretty poor. IV will be out in time for Halloween.

[Bartwald]

I usually watch all the films in famous horror series, but Saw IV may seem a bit too much for me, I'm afraid...

[frankenjohn]

It was no masterpiece but it was nowhere near a failure in my opinion.

[LivingDeadGirl]

My vote goes for II. I watched III the other night & aside from the gore there's not much there.

[larrystanley]

I just wish they would stop with all the crappy sequels. After ll they should have seen the quality was heading downhill.

[Phoenix]

I watched Saw III last night. Wasn't too too bad - it was super gruesome, almost too much so! And the ending wasn't the greatest. Still, it wasn't complete crap.

My vote does go for Saw II though.

[Quorthon]

I still haven't seen Saw II. But I did see Saw III, and it had some value in redeeming a few of the many rampant plot holes from the first film. Won't vote until I see the second.

[slayrrr666]

I still need the third one, and am not in a hurry to do so. The second one was complete crap. The only thing I remembered was that the traps are somewhat cool in concept. But I couldn't remember what happened as soon as it went off. Really lame, and actually agree with all the negative reviews of it online.

[Phoenix]

slayrrr666 said:

I still need the third one, and am not in a hurry to do so. The second one was complete crap. The only thing I remembered was that the traps are somewhat cool in concept. But I couldn't remember what happened as soon as it went off. Really lame, and actually agree with all the negative reviews of it online.

I'm surprised. I thought the first one was complete crap, and the second much cooler and well executed, with a better budget. Plus, I was actually surprised by the ending (the twist). We definitely have different tastes in horror.

[slayrrr666]

I guess we do. I didn't find much of anything about it to be worthwhile. The twist was apparent five minutes in, the scenes of the father and son were a dead-giveaway, and aside from the rather cool-in-premise trap with the needle pit, I wasn't really feeling anything close to suspense or tension throughout. It just passed me by and really didn't do much to keep me wanting to play it again.

I liked the original a lot when it first came out (HERE) but I came to dislike it immensely when I saw it afterwards on TV. Don't really think of it now anyways.

[Bartwald]

quorthon said:

I still haven't seen Saw II. But I did see Saw III, and it had some value in redeeming a few of the many rampant plot holes from the first film...

Quorth! Come on - Saw III is one huge plot hole, is it not? I mean...

SPOILERS!

...the dying guy is setting all these traps to check whether his girl is going to play fair and at the same time he's not fair at all to his new victims ('cause he predicted the foul-play of his partner and expected she may kill anyone who manages to stay alive and do their job). And what's with the "*I* killed your son!" line??!

[Bartwald]

Finally saw Saw IV - a little improvement over the totally annoying III, but still far from being a good movie. 4/10, more or less.

Anyone already got through it?

[slayrrr666]

Finally saw part 3, and it's a 1 from me (half each goes to the big three tortures, The Hellraiser, The Ribspreader and The Rack, as well as the surgery scene) but this one here is just more icing on the fact that I think this series sucks donkey testicles. Crappy tortures, hardly any of them to begin with since we've got to spend the majority of the time either in the hospital bed, which means we have to listen to the endless pontificating that annoys the hell out of me, or we're stuck with revisiting the behind-the-scenes work of the other entries, and none of them are worthwhile. We only get five traps in here, which is BS, since we have a whole lot of time spent on those two areas, and it just annoys me. Plus, this one here had one of the most fatal flaws ever in a film: I just didn't give a damn what happened in it. Nothing in here made me care what was happening, nothing kept my interest in it and I never knew why I was supposed to care about what was going on. A damning flaw, and nearly wipes out the goodness all on it's own. A piece of shit in a shit series to begin with. I have now less interest in seeing part 4, since they just keep getting worse.

[Bartwald]

Good to hear you're sometimes so harsh on horror movies, slayrrr, since you like most of them much more than the rest of The Board. But you're right, of course - it's impossible to care for the characters in Saw III. Part IV is a bit better in this respect - at least Donnie Wahlberg returns there... although his role ain't that big, unfortunately.