Friday 09 January

BLOGS

blogCategory
Previous
Back to blog
Next

Has the Saw franchise gone too far?

Cary Elwes in Saw
  • Posted at 1:30pm
  • 24 October 2008
  • by AndrewCollins-RT
  • 4 comments

Have you seen Saw (Saturday 25 October, Channel 4)?

The horror movie that helped re-energise the genre in 2004 with its inventive methods of blood-letting and torture? The bit where a victim has to cut off one of his limbs? Brilliant!

What about the sequel, Saw II (Sunday 26 October, Channel 4)? Even more ingenious torture traps! The pit filled with hypodermic needles! Awesome!

Who could wait for the third part in the franchise, where the architect of the mayhem, Jigsaw, gets his skull drilled? Not me.

Actually, I did wait. In fact, I'm still waiting to see Saw III (Saturday 25 October, Friday 31 October, Sky Movies Sci-Fi/Horror), in which a man is torn apart by hooks.

I managed to get through last year without seeing Saw IV (from Saturday 1 November, Sky Movies Premiere), too, and thus missed out on the pleasure of seeing a character with his eyelids sewn together and another forced to choose between having his eyes gouged out or his limbs pulled off.

Enough? I'm sorry. Don't shoot the messenger. I didn't come up with this stuff.

And nor would the Saw franchise keep on coming, were it not for the millions earned by these unsavoury little exercises. Saw made over $100 million worldwide; Saw II, $147 million; Saw III even more again.

Little wonder that Saw V is now in cinemas, trailed by a screaming man with his head locked in a box.

They call it "torture porn", a blanket term helpfully designed to put off all but the least squeamish.

What bothers me about this latest trend is not the gore – such set pieces have been a staple of horror since the 1970s – but the apparent lack of any need to dress it up.

The plot is secondary to the ever-increasing need to up the sadistic ante. When I was a thrill-seeking teen, you had to fast-forward your video to the really nasty bits.

These days, you don't have to wait that long. I expect that makes me sound old. So be it.

How quaint and almost bloodless proto-slashers like the classic Halloween (Saturday 25 October, BBC1) and Halloween II (Friday 31 October, BBC1) starring Jamie Lee Curtis now seem, with their violence often implied. But still scary.

I'd hate to think that the explicit one-upmanship of the current craze for on-screen torture reflects a broader desensitisation to violence within teen audiences – at whom the Saw movies are clearly aimed.

I'm not calling for them to be banned, by the way – but we might ask ourselves where it will all end.

Don't have nightmares.

Link to this post
Post a comment | 4 comments

Comments

  • Posted on 28 October 2008
  • at 9:09pm
  • by AJ

Having watched Saw I and II on tv on the weekend, I was neither scared or impressed. The older generation of films such as Hitchcock's were much more scary. Even the more recent Seven with Brad Pitt managed to scare more than the Saw's.

  • Posted on 28 October 2008
  • at 2:28pm
  • by Guy

"I'd hate to think that the explicit one-upmanship of the current craze for on-screen torture reflects a broader desensitisation to violence within teen audiences".

You might hate to think it, but I suspect that really you do believe this to be the case.

IMHO it's a sad indictment of today's society that torture porn is such a popular, and lucrative, genre.

  • Posted on 28 October 2008
  • at 12:07pm
  • by Taz

The saw films are brilliant, the reason they keep making them is because the paying public want to see them, the financial success of these films proves that. It isn't just an excuse for gore, each trap is unique to the victim depending on what their crime was. These films actually make you think which in this day and age is no bad thing!!! Roll on Saw VI I say.

  • Posted on 25 October 2008
  • at 1:42am
  • by Dan

It is ridiculous how many sequels there have been (and it must surely hold the record for the speed in which they're released -- 5 in 4 years!) However, I stand by my opinion that the original Saw was excellent low-budget horror with some interesting twists and a brilliant climax. I didn't like Saw II, although Tobin Bell made a great villain. Saw III was a mild improvement over II for me, but it was all a bit silly. Saw IV was atrociously bad. I hear Saw V is even worse. Saw VI is due out next year, too! And the villain DIED in part 3, for crying out loud!

Post a comment

Do you have something to say about this post? Does it ring true for you or have you got different ideas? Share your thoughts…

Post a comment

(first or nickname only)

Please do not include any personal or personally identifiable information about yourself or others (including email addresses). All information you submit about yourself or others can be viewed by others.

Thank you for your comment

Thank you for your comments. All comments will be looked at by a moderator, however, due to the numbers of comments we receive, we can't promise that all will be posted on the site.

Post another comment

More


Advertisement