What actually qualifies SAW as a Horror, I can understand Halloween and The Ring being more atmospherically based alongside tension build ups etc.Susan Arendt said:You seem to have a very specific view of what constitutes a horror movie. I certainly agree that The Exorcist is a horror movie, but the Saw films - gratuitous though they may be - certainly qualify, as well. [cut] in much the same way that the original Halloween (one of the best horror movies of all time, IMO), ushered in the 80s glut of slasher flicks. Horror films are cyclic - the popularity of The Ring created the PG-13 horror genre, leading to movies being cut specifically to fit that rating.Vlane said:Damn it. Why do you have to respond? I can't hurt you.Susan Arendt said:Oh, really? You're going to punch me in the face? Good to know.
No The Exorcist is a horror movie. The Saw series belongs to the torture porn genre or snuff movies. You watch a Saw movie to see the death scenes, which are good, but you don't watch them to get scared and I have no idea how you can get scared watching that.Susan Arendt said:which are horror, whether you like them or not
You get off on bloody neck stumps?Vlane said:Damn it. Why do you have to respond? I can't hurt you.Susan Arendt said:Oh, really? You're going to punch me in the face? Good to know.
No The Exorcist is a horror movie. The Saw series belongs to the torture porn genre or snuff movies. You watch a Saw movie to see the death scenes, which are good, but you don't watch them to get scared and I have no idea how you can get scared watching that.Susan Arendt said:which are horror, whether you like them or not
There is a lot of repetition to the puzzles, yeah. Even one that aren't specific repeats are very similar thematically. But I still thought they were clever, on the whole. I personally appreciated a more "in your head" approach, as opposed to running from zombies and shooting everything in sight. (Not that I don't love those games, too.)Alone Disciple said:Well, I know reviews are subjective, and I usually judge games on aggregates and averages. I'm a bit surprised you commented on the puzzles as most all other reviewers say after you figured out the first few puzzles, you more or less figured them all out....Rinse and repeat...Did you notice that when you played?
GR gave it a 67%
Metacritic a 64%
And even OXM who usually gives ridiculously higher scores for once gave it a 4.5/10.
Ok, let's all agree right now that the Saw movies aren't good movies. You are absolutely correct that the writing and acting are bad, and that they're about as sophisticated as my cat. But not being a good movie doesn't mean it's not a horror movie. You don't like the protagonist, but the godlike villain is a staple of horror, as is the dark, dreary atmosphere, the isolation, the feeling of helplessness, and so forth. Are there better examples of horror? Sure. But that doesn't mean Saw isn't horror.WHENTWOTRIBESGOTOWAR said:What actually qualifies SAW as a Horror, I can understand Halloween and The Ring being more atmospherically based alongside tension build ups etc.Susan Arendt said:You seem to have a very specific view of what constitutes a horror movie. I certainly agree that The Exorcist is a horror movie, but the Saw films - gratuitous though they may be - certainly qualify, as well. [cut] in much the same way that the original Halloween (one of the best horror movies of all time, IMO), ushered in the 80s glut of slasher flicks. Horror films are cyclic - the popularity of The Ring created the PG-13 horror genre, leading to movies being cut specifically to fit that rating.Vlane said:Damn it. Why do you have to respond? I can't hurt you.Susan Arendt said:Oh, really? You're going to punch me in the face? Good to know.
No The Exorcist is a horror movie. The Saw series belongs to the torture porn genre or snuff movies. You watch a Saw movie to see the death scenes, which are good, but you don't watch them to get scared and I have no idea how you can get scared watching that.Susan Arendt said:which are horror, whether you like them or not
SAW is pretty much
1. Puppeteer who has as much anger vs the world as an angsty teenage girl except has the means to carry out his plans.
2. Dark Dreary atmosphere
3. Over the top, unnecessary gore filler
4. Terrible writing and acting
5. A movie for kids below the age of 17.
Pretty much my thoughts. Especially since I watched the first 3 movies one after another with few of my friends and we all agreed that 1 was great, 2 was okay, 3 was meh.Catchy Slogan said:If it's anything like the first Saw movie, then I might buy it. I didn't relly like any of the movies past number 2, and that was pushing it a bit.
I'd have to say the game is probably closer to the second movie than the first. It's set between those two and uses the characters from the first, but it has the same "one large environment trap broken into a series of smaller trials" set up as the second (or probably closer to the third, since all of the trials involve one person having to try to save other people). It was, however, written by James Wan and Leigh Whannell, the writers of the first movie, and they also helped to design the traps.Abedeus said:Wow, I thought this would suck. I mean, after Saw III and IV...
Btw, this still isn't the game with the most exploded heads ever. Try playing PsiOps - every time you sneak-sap someone, their head bursts from your PSYCHIC ABILITIES!!!Pretty much my thoughts. Especially since I watched the first 3 movies one after another with few of my friends and we all agreed that 1 was great, 2 was okay, 3 was meh.Catchy Slogan said:If it's anything like the first Saw movie, then I might buy it. I didn't relly like any of the movies past number 2, and that was pushing it a bit.
...Just like Matrix.
Yeah, same here. I really like the first movie but the others aren't that great. But the game looks interesting.Catchy Slogan said:If it's anything like the first Saw movie, then I might buy it. I didn't relly like any of the movies past number 2, and that was pushing it a bit.
Hmm...I don't want to give away a lot for the folks who might enjoy playing it, but given that you play as Detective Tapp and run into more than one person from his past...it's kind of like a blend of 2 and 3. It's definitely more trap-based than the original Saw, which had a far more robust storyline.CaptainChaosify said:Good review, I didn't even know Saw the game was even out. :/
I saw two Saw movies, the first one was okay but the ending was predictable, the second movie was horrible but I couldn't guess what the ending was.
What movie was the game more along the lines of if you don't mind me asking?
Yeah, I knew I was going to get an argument on the survival horror line. Well, to my mind, at least, survival horror involves an impending threat from an outside enemy -- zombies, monsters, ghosts, whathaveyou, which is not the case with Saw. So it's not survival horror in the typical sense. That's my personal take on it, anyway, but your mileage may vary.Taerdin said:So the game has a creepy and unsettling atmosphere, it's based on a series of horror films, and the entire objective of the game itself is to survive... but it's not survival horror?
I'm incredibly confused by this concept and if someone could explain it to me then I would greatly appreciate it. Plus to narrowly define survival horror and then defend saw against other peoples narrow definitions of horror seems kinda... funny
Fools! All horror movies are inferior in the prescence of The Shining (Best horror movie ever IMO)!Susan Arendt said:*snip*