How are the Jeepers Creepers films completely different from each other and yet the Saw films are "the same movie"?
I enjoyed the first Jeepers Creepers but the second was absolutely pointless and only made the barest effort to continue the previous storyline from the first film. (Besides having the Creeper, that is.)
The Saw films, or at least the first three, were all fairly unique with each other and did a decent job continuing the storyline.
JC 1 - Killer stalks a brother and sister killing everyone in his path to get at them
JC 2 - Killer traps a group of reens in a bus and picks only certain ones to eat, thereby creating paranoia and dissension between the characters.
JC 1 - Killer stalks a brother and sister killing everyone in his path to get at them
JC 2 - Killer traps a group of reens in a bus and picks only certain ones to eat, thereby creating paranoia and dissension between the characters.
Saw 1 - People in a room with crazy killer traps.
Saw 2 - People in a room with crazy killer traps.
Saw 3 - People in a room with crazy killer traps.
Saw 4 - People in a room with crazy killer traps.
Wow...I don't know if you've even seen the films now. Obviously they're going to going to involve traps in each film because that's the premise of the film series! It'd be like saying each Dark Tower book has "Crazy gunslinger looking for Dark Tower".
Especially since "People in a room with crazy killer traps." would only really apply to the second film.
The Saw films actually build upon each and compliment each other. Yeah, "crazy killer traps" are used in each film, but there's a lot more to it than that. Compare how Jigsaw was little more than a voice in the first film and he becomes a fleshed-out character in the sequels. There's actually a sense of continuity with the films. (For example, the character of Amanda.)
The only time that I felt it started to get repetitive was with Saw IV, and that was because it had different writers than the first three. (But even Saw IV was better than the snoozefest that was Jeepers Creepers 2)
Don't get me wrong, I thought the first JC was great. It had two main characters that I cared about, was pretty scary, had a great villain and was involving. JC2 was a minimalist creature feature at best. I didn't care about ANY of the characters, except for the father. I was bored to tears throughout most of the film. Yeah, it was "different" from the first film but not in a good way.
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
Wow...I don't know if you've even seen the films now. Obviously they're going to going to involve traps in each film because that's the premise of the film series! It'd be like saying each Dark Tower book has "Crazy gunslinger looking for Dark Tower".
It is true of the SAW series. I own the first three of them and while I like them they are all really similar, they use the same formula for each movie. copy/paste story telling. The format was great the first time but it's a series where each movie could be 'people in a room with traps' but done in different fashions. That is what made the Alien series so good. Each movie (ressurection aside) provided a different experience with the same premise.
I enjoyed the change from two people chained in a room to a group of people in a house there are many factors that kill it. SAW is a character oriented series. If they weren't so concerned with pumping out a movie every year they could take the time to write a better script and better direction which would give the series that edge. The first movie had some talent to work with where the rest of the movies rely on Tobin Bell and a Donnie Whalberg cameo.
Especially since "People in a room with crazy killer traps." would only really apply to the second film.
No. Many traps are a person trapped in a room (barb wire, candle/safe, Amanda's trap, original SAW) are all trapped in a room, most with crazy killer traps. Now, while they may not be everywhere the like the second one, there was also a trap for each person in the house, which accounted for that.
The Saw films actually build upon each and compliment each other. Yeah, "crazy killer traps" are used in each film, but there's a lot more to it than that. Compare how Jigsaw was little more than a voice in the first film and he becomes a fleshed-out character in the sequels. There's actually a sense of continuity with the films. (For example, the character of Amanda.)
They've relied on Jigsaw the whole series. The cast and characters from the originals are all but gone now, the twist in the last movie had zero effect on me. The first is the best (8/10), second and third are around a 6/10 and the 4th was a 3/10. The story gets weaker and weaker. The fourth movie SHAT on everything the other movies built up.
SPOILER AHEAD SAW 4 AHEAD
Spoiler:
In saw four we see Jeff randomly get shot at the end (making the end of the third movie shit) and Eric Matthews is killed (making his test and surviving last movie moot...why wasn't he released? no explaination, at all). The ended so much with no explaination. The twist is some guy who is really a nobody is working with Jigsaw (uuh, wow?) we find out at the beginning (which is really the end) that he's now being tested. Wow, what a waste of a movie. They could have skipped all of that and summed it up in a flashback, instead of showing a few random deaths.
The only time that I felt it started to get repetitive was with Saw IV, and that was because it had different writers than the first three. (But even Saw IV was better than the snoozefest that was Jeepers Creepers 2)
I'm sure it was, but it was still shit and I'm glad someone else paid for me to see it.
Don't get me wrong, I thought the first JC was great. It had two main characters that I cared about, was pretty scary, had a great villain and was involving. JC2 was a minimalist creature feature at best. I didn't care about ANY of the characters, except for the father. I was bored to tears throughout most of the film. Yeah, it was "different" from the first film but not in a good way.
The first jeepers creepers was shit. I don't get what all the fuss was about. I take craps that are scarier than jeepers creepers.
It is true of the SAW series. I own the first three of them and while I like them they are all really similar, they use the same formula for each movie. copy/paste story telling. The format was great the first time but it's a series where each movie could be 'people in a room with traps' but done in different fashions. That is what made the Alien series so good. Each movie (ressurection aside) provided a different experience with the same premise.
Haven't seen the Alien films (I plan to in the future though) so I can't comment on that. And obviously there are certain "staples" that appear in each of the films (the directors and writers have admitted it) but I don't think that means they are following a copy-paste formula.
Originally Posted by Mattrick
SAW is a character oriented series. If they weren't so concerned with pumping out a movie every year they could take the time to write a better script and better direction which would give the series that edge. The first movie had some talent to work with where the rest of the movies rely on Tobin Bell and a Donnie Whalberg cameo.
I don't see how the first film had better 'talent'. Tobin Bell's the star of the films, but that doesn't mean the films have no talent in them. I can probably find a handful of actors who aren't the best, but the "main" ones (Shawnee Smith, Angus McFayden, etc) have all been pretty decent.
Originally Posted by Mattrick
The story gets weaker and weaker. The fourth movie SHAT on everything the other movies built up.
SPOILER AHEAD SAW 4 AHEAD
Spoiler:
In saw four we see Jeff randomly get shot at the end (making the end of the third movie shit) and Eric Matthews is killed (making his test and surviving last movie moot...why wasn't he released? no explaination, at all). The ended so much with no explaination. The twist is some guy who is really a nobody is working with Jigsaw (uuh, wow?) we find out at the beginning (which is really the end) that he's now being tested. Wow, what a waste of a movie. They could have skipped all of that and summed it up in a flashback, instead of showing a few random deaths.
I agree with you on this part. Saw IV left a bad taste in my mouth.
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
Originally Posted by CyberGhostface
It'd be like saying each Dark Tower book has "Crazy gunslinger looking for Dark Tower".
Yeah, it was "different" from the first film but not in a good way.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote