Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

There on opening night. If they would give us more choices on Halloween I might see something else but they don't so their loss.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

It's the most profitable horror franchise ever, almost the highest-earning, depending on how Friday the 13th (2009) has done in comparison, since Friday had previously held the latter title.

It's just going to continue on DTV too. Even if Lionsgate stops making money theatrically, they're probably not going to change much; just cut costs and send 'em straight to disc.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Definitely will be seeing this on opening night.

I still have a bad taste with the fifth film (which I saw in theaters), so I hope at the very least this film is better than it.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Can't they pretty much just reuse the same trailer but just stick another number on the end?

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

I honestly have no idea if I've seen all of these or not...I'm pretty sure I have with the lst one ending and I don't think I'll ever know as I would never watch one of these flicks again but for whatever reason...I always rent the latest installment. Definitely not looking forward to this but as always...a rental will be done.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

I will be there opening night. I love the series, and I don't really think they have jumped the shark just yet.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

That was V.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

I've enjoyed them and look forward to VI and then VII, which was already greenlighted.

I do think the series misses Darren Lynn Bousman, James Wan and Leigh Whannell.

I can't believe Lionsgate has kept the Project Greenlight writers for 4 movies!! (IV-VII)

II was probably my favorite one and IV was probably my least favorite.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

1 and 2 I really liked
3 I thought was still fun but the story and format started showing cracks
4 was horrible and got me to give up on the series
Never saw 5, heard mostly bad. Should I give it a chance?

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

As always, I'll wait for the Blu-ray of this in January/February.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Depends if you're still interested in the story. 5 wasn't very good and felt awfully uninspired (the characters, the traps) but did enough to move the story forward with the characters that it was still interesting to me.

I think for a horror series to still move the plot along adequately this far along is pretty darn impressive.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

If a movie title ends with a number higher than 3, it will suck. Simple rule. :)

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Not always true... Star Wars IV and V were awesome. ;)

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

The first two were decent but the rest are an embarrassment.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

This movie needs to die seriously. It was good at the start, but talk about beating a dead horse. That horse is bloody, beaten, and bruised. Think of the poor horses people.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

You can bash them all you want, but the movies make money and the producers behind the series are smart businessmen. Not counting the 1st and 2nd movies, the budget for each movie is no more than $10M and is a money making machine for Lionsgate.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

I can't fault them for taking advantage of people who are willing to pay for pretty much the exact same movie every time. I would do the same in their position.

Althought I will concede that this isn't much worse than the Friday the 13th movies, Nightmare on elm street, and Halloween movies. Wasn't a huge fan of those either though.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Ivan Drago would like you to step a little closer.
http://blog.turntablelab.com/images/..._drago__2_.jpg

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

The first and second cost less than the others, I'm not sure why you're singling them out. When I saw the original at that Q+A with Wan and Whannell, they were contractually obligated not to mention how little it cost.It's kind of condescending to assume that most people are essentially tricked into watching them. Each chapter in the Saw franchise is no more or less "the same movie" as your average sequel, and even then, this is a gross generalization, since 70% of the first Saw takes place in a single room, the second one is 50-50 on two plotlines, the third one is built around flashbacks and the fourth is focused on the chronology. The only one that doesn't introduce anything new, really, is the fifth one, and it seems to be the least-popular among fans.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Yes, and most sequels are not that good since they are usually just a rehash of the original. To me it is rare to see a sequel that is any good since they rarely break new ground, or have some kind of original story. I personally go to movies for the story. I don't go to movies to know what is going to happen 90 percent of it since I've seen it before with 1 "twist" at the end. Same reason I don't see M. Night Shama... Shamala... that guys movies anymore.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Story is the reason why I enjoy the Saw series. As I said earlier, we're 5 sequels in and they're still unraveling major plot points and developing characters (and doing so without being too absurd).

Of course, the other side of the audience is going just to see the different death traps, and in that case there's something new every time out.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Not counting marketing and distribution budgets, only production costs:

I: $2 million budget, $102 million worldwide gross.
II: $4 million budget, $155 million worldwide gross.
III: $10 million budget, $165 million worldwide gross.
IV: $10 million budget, $140 million worldwide gross.
V: $10 million budget, $135 million worldwide gross.

Even when you subtract the distribution costs, just think about how much money the films have made due to video rentals and sales. Even with the franchise losing steam at a progressive rate, the films still cost cheap enough that they're guaranteed a profit no matter what.

When I saw Zombieland the other night, I heard nothing but groans from the audience when the trailer for VI played. I still think it'll have a $25 - 30 million opening weekend; but I think it'll be the lowest grossing one in the franchise (domestically at least) unless there's a substantial jump in quality to get WOM better than the very lackluster perception of the last two.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Looks like Part VIII is the last...

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news...s.php?id=12305

As much as I would go for more, I would like to see it end before it gets beyond far fetched ;) I have enjoyed 1-5 very much and hope good things with VI. VII and VIII can close it up... but who will be the last apprentice? Jill? Gordon? Santa Claus?!

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Last one. rotfl My ass.

I don't see why they can't start fresh at this point. Tying 8 movies together on what began as a shoestring plot to begin with is preposterous.

Re: Saw VI (2009)
 

Sure, VIII will be the last one... theatrically. I have few doubts that they won't continue this series Jigsaw-less as a DTV property.