Poll: Soooo... Saw VI: Who is actually going to watch it?

Recommended Videos

I Stomp on Kittens

Don't let go!
Nov 3, 2008
4,289
0
0
LooK iTz Jinjo said:
Knight Templar said:
I love the music, but it's a bit over-used and never has the effect it did in the first movie.
That music made the movies. It was that music that got the to watch the second and third in the first place.
I love the music and the twist in the endings they are all the reason I need to watch it.
 

headshotcatcher

New member
Feb 27, 2009
1,687
0
0
fluffybacon said:
headshotcatcher said:
fluffybacon said:
No. I don't watch, follow, or care about modern mainstream cinema.
Oh goody, look at you being all special!
Firstly, why do you claim not to do those things?
Secondly, haven't you seen stuff like the Matrix, Lord of the Rings or even Harry Potter? >.>

OT: No I'm not going to watch it. The entire series looks plain retarded from a side line :)
I'm not claiming not to do these things, I don't do them.
And no I haven't seen any of those movies.

Why haven't you seen [small](insert obscure/indie film that is artistically miles ahead of anything you've ever seen)[/small]?, what is wrong with you?
Well, obscure indie films don't get broadcast on TV every week..
 

Eatbrainz

New member
Mar 2, 2009
1,016
0
0
this is ironic, my sisters downloading an illegal copy of the film right now! the stupid cow.
 

VanityGirl

New member
Apr 29, 2009
3,472
0
0
First one was good, the second one was... alright although I guesed what happened.. they kept getting worse, so I stopped watching.
 

Sallix

New member
Apr 9, 2008
291
0
0
Saw series: Snuff films for people who can't use the internet!
I watched the first film and just thought that it was bad.
I mean the doctor
1) couldn't tell that the guy in the middle was still alive and
2) when the phone was just out of reach from him, why didn't he use that saw (which he used to cut his leg of instead) to pull the phone over.
 

rokkolpo

New member
Aug 29, 2009
5,375
0
0
i kinda liked the concept but part 6 is overdoing it.

i probably already said this at part 2.
 

McNinja

New member
Sep 21, 2008
1,510
0
0
No. i saw the second one, and that was it. The movies is nothing more than gore and attempts to invoke horror, but the only time I'm ever scared at movies is the startling things where something just pops into the screen, if even that, most of the time I can predict when it happens (because of a pause, or the way the camera is angled, etc), and it just fails.

And in 99% of horror movies, most of the characters are either mentally retarded or arrogant pricks. I can't stand either, so I tend not to watch horror movies to begin with. The last horror movie i saw was 1408, and it was ok because the character wasn't a complete moron.
 

AvsJoe

Elite Member
May 28, 2009
9,055
0
41
The_Healer said:
AvsJoe said:
The_Healer said:
Kiwibloke said:
The_Healer said:
Ok. They have made 6 movies in 5 years.
6 movies in 6 years actually.
No...
First one came out in 2004.

2009 - 2004 = 5
You have to include 2009 as well. 2k4, 2k5, 2k6, 2k7, 2k8, 2k9. 6 years. Now apologize to the Kiwi.
I will absolutely not apologise, because I am still right.
Saw 1 was released in December 2004, meaning that its doesn't count as a full year, as we are not yet to December 2009 yet. The number of the years is 5.
Okay, fair enough. But in this situation you should also acknowledge the months as well to avoid confusion.
Final Answer: 6 movies in 5 years 10 months and zero apologies owed.
 

Zak-Attak

New member
Feb 24, 2009
16
0
0
I recently saw the movies as part of a special halloween event on TV. And I've got to ask why the hell do we need 8 of these movies (yes, Saw VIII has been confirmed too). Hell everything is pretty much clear after the second one, and I seriously thought number 3 would wrap everything up. Instead they drag it on just for the purpose of death and gore, which there's never really much of anyways. We get it already. Guy gets cancer, goes insane, wants to make people value life, and does so by making them to dreadful things to themselves. We don't need Saw VI, or the next two that have been confirmed.
 

The_Healer

New member
Jun 17, 2009
1,720
0
0
Eagle Est1986 said:
The_Healer said:
Eagle Est1986 said:
The_Healer said:
Kiwibloke said:
The_Healer said:
Ok. They have made 6 movies in 5 years.
6 movies in 6 years actually.
No...
First one came out in 2004.

2009 - 2004 = 5

Edit: I guess I should be more lenient, I know they don't actually teach you to count in New Zealand.
6 in 6 years.

2004 - 1st year
2005 - 2nd year
2006 - 3rd year
2007 - 4th year
2008 - 5th year
2009 - 6th year

But nice try at counting, you were only one off!
Oh for gods sake! Do you not read the other posts in the thread, I already explained this. Saw 1 was released in December 2004, meaning that its doesn't count as a full year, as we are not yet to December 2009 yet. The number of the years is 5.
Lord knows where you get your information from, but I distinctly remember watching the first film for Halloween 2004.
It was actually first shown at the Sundance Film Festival of January 2004, so if that makes you feel any better, it's actually been closer to 7 years since the first film was shown to audiences.
Well it can hardly be my fault that IMDB lied to me about it, if you're so sure you're right.
 

The_Healer

New member
Jun 17, 2009
1,720
0
0
Hexenwolf said:
Oh yea I'm gonna see it, I've seen all of them in theaters so far, I ain't stopping now.

dbrose said:
I've never understood the popularity behind slasher films . . . if I want a scary movie, I'll go to something along the lines of "Paranormal Activity."
For the record, I don't understand why people think it's a horror movie, it's not. It has more in common with a mystery or a psychological thriller than a horror movie. Oh and Paranormal Activity was not scary in the least. Well paced and well-acted? Yes. Scary? No.

The_Healer said:
Kiwibloke said:
The_Healer said:
Ok. They have made 6 movies in 5 years.
6 movies in 6 years actually.
No...
First one came out in 2004.

2009 - 2004 = 5

Edit: I guess I should be more lenient, I know they don't actually teach you to count in New Zealand.
You need to count 2004 as well, it's not a zero.

If you really need me to spell it out for you: 1 movie every October, starting in 2004 =
2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 years! Amazing!

I wouldn't normally be so caustic about it, but the arrogance shown in your edit irked me. (And no, I don't live in New Zealand).
I can't be bothered explaining again that its not 6 years so go read the other posts (this would be the third or fourth time).

BUT

Don't complain about something you don't understand. I live in Australia, therefore I have a juvenile rivalry with New Zealand. All in good humor my American friend.