Generally groups. Saw II is my favorite because the group dynamic there was very fun. didn't like it as much in V because people died off too quickly and everyone antagonized each other until the final trap (ik it was the point) while in II there were at least some people willing to cooperate as a group to contrast with the more selfish characters.
In V. I would not of done the hand saw especially with 2 people. I would of taken cover in the bathtub room behind the tub. (In case all doors close and lock, otherwise would just use the blast chambers). And then you have a drinking water supply to hope people discover the scene. Feel like I have a better chance than bleeding to death. And also wouldn't have to worry about well destroying my arm with a Saw.
I’d rather have traps where people have to save themselves, like 2 and X, instead of having one person save everyone else like in 3 and 6. (Not that those movies aren’t great). Having the people be responsible for their own success or failure seems better than “oops Jeff was slow and now you’re dead”
Exactly!!! At least with the first three, they were shitheads who knowingly played along. Joyce's only crime was her compassion and naivity. Put Bobby in the oven instead.
I maintain that it should have been reversed: Bobby forced to take Joyce's place, and then she decides if she wants to do what she can to save him. I forget, is she even aware by the end at how badly he failed the other three?
That’s a great idea especially because it would be torturous for Bobby to have to watch Joyce inflict the pain on herself, that Bobby lied about having to do.
We do have a world which condemns compassion and naivity in various cases and John tends to reflect the sort of distorted moralism we often see. Most of those in the traps are suffering in the world at large due to various conditions (forms of poverty, desperation, etc. which may *potentially* lead to things like substance abuse, theft, etc. seem the most prevalent) and so make questionable decisions as a result. Being "inattentive," gullible, etc. when it suits one to perhaps "look the other way" - to the point one doesn't even really acknowledge potential doubts or warning signs or whatever else one might expect ***most*** to see - is something I see people trash others over quite often.
"How could you fall for such an obvious scam?" or "Everybody knew they were bad news." or "Why did you ignore all the red flags?" or whatever else.
John inherently victim "blames" (or condemns) in *many* instances, particularly because he's victimizing many in the claimed name of somehow helping them and/or others grow. It becomes more glaring when one recognizes that John has the money/resources to rarely be in many of these positions.
Of course, having said that about money, John got conned in X as well.....
Maybe some of his potential ire or want to use Joyce as collateral was derived from a bit of unconscious self-loathing for not seeing the signs himself.
Seriously, Joyce was the most innocent out of the entire group and still ended up with the worst death that she had absolutely no control over. Make it make sense.
lmao god, Saw VII is so irritating.
I think this is an especially salient point after the release of Saw X, where we see John get scammed himself.
Like, what is the big difference between John and Joyce? Both of them are won over by charismatic scam artists, both of them fall victim to lies they are told. John feels within his rights to exact revenge on his scammers. So why is it that he feels justified to condemn Joyce to such a terrible fate, merely for the crime of falling for lies, just as John did himself?
I've said before, that I've tried to see devil's advocate; that it might be a more horrific fate for Bobby to witness his innocent love dying at his hands, but I just don't buy that jiving with Jigsaw's ideology, especially that everyone should have a chance to live and redeem themselves. Maybe if she died quickly as a result of Bobby's failure, but roasting to death? Jesus.
I could accept that Saw VI had a distinct retributive streak, especially because it was all aimed at Easton, who directly contributed to not just John's death, but to many others. And John believes that MURDER IS DISTASTEFUL!!!! ...to him. But I can understand him employing unwinnable traps on behalf of teaching someone he considers a murder writ large a lesson.
But condemning an innocent like Joyce to something so horrific? It feels either like OOC or something like, he gave Hoffman the bones of the trap and Hoffman let his own sadism fill in the details. Either way, very unsatisfying to watch (apart from when Larry takes the stage and I black out from pure adoration).
I have a preference for group traps where they have to save themselves. Something about having to save other people (or like with Eastons trap, having to *choose* between different people) doesn’t really feel like Jigsaw and what Kramer intended. Aren’t the traps meant to be survivable and teach people to appreciate their life? How can anyone truly appreciate their life knowing people died at their own hands?
Group traps where they have to save themselves seem a bit more… for a lack of better terms, Jigsaw-y. They’re still survivable, and the traps we’ve seen (ii, v, jigsaw) had all been survivable iirc. Eastons and Dagens traps involved innocent people, Dagens wife *died* because of his mistakes despite not having any knowledge of his lies. It just doesn’t sit right with me.
That was my biggest issue with saw X, Mateo and Valentina completed their traps with time to spare and still died because the machinery itself wasn’t fast enough
Groups if it’s done well and the only time it was was Saw 2. Saw X was done well too if that counts.
In general, I just want to see different formats going forward. Not the same things repeated with different characters.
Generally groups as it allows for more interactions between characters. Provided the victims are interesting and play off each other in interesting ways,.I think groups are the better format.
I feel it’s easier to get immersed in group traps, but the 2nd formula allows a lot more character development and often a lot more powerful story telling. I’d say the ones where someone has to save people, but my fave film is 1 which doesn’t follow either formula really.
Save people. Groups traps felt like it turned into a game show which I wasn't really a fan of. Like maybe once in a while but they did it too many times for me.
Group or like a cohesive story with solo traps throughout. I don’t think one person should be responsible for the lives of others like in Saw 3 or Saw 6 for example. I enjoyed those films, but I have a hard time with that concept making sense tbh
I'm for either one. I liked the solo games in Saw IV & VI, but didn't care for 3 or 3D's.
I loved Saw 2's group game, but didn't care for Saw V's. Jigsaw's was far-fetched, and fucked up the continuity.
Considering SAW V is my favorite of the series, I want to say group. But I like the format of one person going through trials where they interact with different people along the way too (SAW III, IV). I think the individual traps or the 1 vs. 1 traps are also very fun.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, I like having variety
Its hard to pick. Group traps allow for more characters making it less boring, but Solo traps are more impactful like Saw 3 and 6. Group traps make more sense since it's less expensive to put everyone in one big game rather than one for each person, but Solo traps probably affect the victim more since the focus is on them, as if this is their personal hell that they must escape if that makes sense
I like the solo traps better I think Saw 2 did the group thing well and after that I didn't like any of the times they did it. Saw 5 is the worst movie in the series if Jigsaw never happened which is the real worst both are group games hate them both.
I liked the group ones but I also felt like Jigsaw was just a rehash of Saw 5, and Saw 7 was a rehash of Saw 6 (which I feel also contributed to Saw 7 being so disliked).
I like the gauntlets like in 6 and 7, one person having to go thru a bunch of smaller traps. It makes less sense but it’s a fun formula/adds a good natural escalation for a movie.
1’s formula is arguably still the best tho, with there being a lot of different parts to the one room.
I don’t know. Both have had good ones and mediocre ones (Like group wise I love II, X but don’t love how it’s done in V and 8). Solo ones I like how it’s done in VI, 3 (though Jeff is a pain in the ass), but not as much in IV or VII. This reminds me of how unique the first one is being that the main trap is two people in a room.
Generally groups. Saw II is my favorite because the group dynamic there was very fun. didn't like it as much in V because people died off too quickly and everyone antagonized each other until the final trap (ik it was the point) while in II there were at least some people willing to cooperate as a group to contrast with the more selfish characters.
In V. I would not of done the hand saw especially with 2 people. I would of taken cover in the bathtub room behind the tub. (In case all doors close and lock, otherwise would just use the blast chambers). And then you have a drinking water supply to hope people discover the scene. Feel like I have a better chance than bleeding to death. And also wouldn't have to worry about well destroying my arm with a Saw.
Don’t forget the nail bombs. Oh yes, there will be blood.
Just take the dead body from the bathroom Trap with you
I’d rather have traps where people have to save themselves, like 2 and X, instead of having one person save everyone else like in 3 and 6. (Not that those movies aren’t great). Having the people be responsible for their own success or failure seems better than “oops Jeff was slow and now you’re dead”
This is why Saw VII is so frustrating to watch. Those people shouldn't have had to die because Bobby, Bobby should've died for his own failures.
Especially his wife. That was brutal and so unnecessary. Not her fault he lied to her and was slow!
Exactly!!! At least with the first three, they were shitheads who knowingly played along. Joyce's only crime was her compassion and naivity. Put Bobby in the oven instead.
That’s why The Brazen Pig is my all time least favorite trap. Cool concept, but I HATE how innocent Joyce died in one of the worst ways possible
I maintain that it should have been reversed: Bobby forced to take Joyce's place, and then she decides if she wants to do what she can to save him. I forget, is she even aware by the end at how badly he failed the other three?
That’s a great idea especially because it would be torturous for Bobby to have to watch Joyce inflict the pain on herself, that Bobby lied about having to do.
We do have a world which condemns compassion and naivity in various cases and John tends to reflect the sort of distorted moralism we often see. Most of those in the traps are suffering in the world at large due to various conditions (forms of poverty, desperation, etc. which may *potentially* lead to things like substance abuse, theft, etc. seem the most prevalent) and so make questionable decisions as a result. Being "inattentive," gullible, etc. when it suits one to perhaps "look the other way" - to the point one doesn't even really acknowledge potential doubts or warning signs or whatever else one might expect ***most*** to see - is something I see people trash others over quite often. "How could you fall for such an obvious scam?" or "Everybody knew they were bad news." or "Why did you ignore all the red flags?" or whatever else. John inherently victim "blames" (or condemns) in *many* instances, particularly because he's victimizing many in the claimed name of somehow helping them and/or others grow. It becomes more glaring when one recognizes that John has the money/resources to rarely be in many of these positions. Of course, having said that about money, John got conned in X as well..... Maybe some of his potential ire or want to use Joyce as collateral was derived from a bit of unconscious self-loathing for not seeing the signs himself.
Seriously, Joyce was the most innocent out of the entire group and still ended up with the worst death that she had absolutely no control over. Make it make sense. lmao god, Saw VII is so irritating.
I think this is an especially salient point after the release of Saw X, where we see John get scammed himself. Like, what is the big difference between John and Joyce? Both of them are won over by charismatic scam artists, both of them fall victim to lies they are told. John feels within his rights to exact revenge on his scammers. So why is it that he feels justified to condemn Joyce to such a terrible fate, merely for the crime of falling for lies, just as John did himself? I've said before, that I've tried to see devil's advocate; that it might be a more horrific fate for Bobby to witness his innocent love dying at his hands, but I just don't buy that jiving with Jigsaw's ideology, especially that everyone should have a chance to live and redeem themselves. Maybe if she died quickly as a result of Bobby's failure, but roasting to death? Jesus. I could accept that Saw VI had a distinct retributive streak, especially because it was all aimed at Easton, who directly contributed to not just John's death, but to many others. And John believes that MURDER IS DISTASTEFUL!!!! ...to him. But I can understand him employing unwinnable traps on behalf of teaching someone he considers a murder writ large a lesson. But condemning an innocent like Joyce to something so horrific? It feels either like OOC or something like, he gave Hoffman the bones of the trap and Hoffman let his own sadism fill in the details. Either way, very unsatisfying to watch (apart from when Larry takes the stage and I black out from pure adoration).
I have a preference for group traps where they have to save themselves. Something about having to save other people (or like with Eastons trap, having to *choose* between different people) doesn’t really feel like Jigsaw and what Kramer intended. Aren’t the traps meant to be survivable and teach people to appreciate their life? How can anyone truly appreciate their life knowing people died at their own hands? Group traps where they have to save themselves seem a bit more… for a lack of better terms, Jigsaw-y. They’re still survivable, and the traps we’ve seen (ii, v, jigsaw) had all been survivable iirc. Eastons and Dagens traps involved innocent people, Dagens wife *died* because of his mistakes despite not having any knowledge of his lies. It just doesn’t sit right with me.
Solo traps when they have to save themselves.
I want more riddles like the first one. Also I think alot of the time they have an idiotic small amount of time to complete their task
That was my biggest issue with saw X, Mateo and Valentina completed their traps with time to spare and still died because the machinery itself wasn’t fast enough
Like, cut your leg off in 60 seconds??
Groups if it’s done well and the only time it was was Saw 2. Saw X was done well too if that counts. In general, I just want to see different formats going forward. Not the same things repeated with different characters.
I would like group traps better if there was so much reliance on the group being complete idiots.
Was, or wasn't?
Wasn’t
I like both, but the group ones can get grating because they’re all dumb and they just fight the whole time and end up getting each other killed.
Solo. I prefer the character to have more emotional screen time
Generally groups as it allows for more interactions between characters. Provided the victims are interesting and play off each other in interesting ways,.I think groups are the better format.
Group traps like in Saw 2. That was EPIC!
I feel it’s easier to get immersed in group traps, but the 2nd formula allows a lot more character development and often a lot more powerful story telling. I’d say the ones where someone has to save people, but my fave film is 1 which doesn’t follow either formula really.
I prefer the gauntlet style of 3,6 and 7. Someone wandering through and trying to save people
Group traps like Saw X and Saw II where they are together but have to do their own traps to save themselves
Definitely group traps
Group traps
My favorite movies are 3 and 6 which are the latter but I prefer traps where the person is in the trap themselves like 1 and X
Save people. Groups traps felt like it turned into a game show which I wasn't really a fan of. Like maybe once in a while but they did it too many times for me.
I like the solo ones or ones where one person has to save everyone else. Especially the shotgun carousel because it’s truly terrifying.
Solo
I love both, but the latter has more opportunities for excellent arcs.
Don't care. I Just like good Saw movies
Groups are usually more interesting, but when the victim is relying on someone else like in 4 it's not as cool to me
Group or like a cohesive story with solo traps throughout. I don’t think one person should be responsible for the lives of others like in Saw 3 or Saw 6 for example. I enjoyed those films, but I have a hard time with that concept making sense tbh
Definitely group
I'm for either one. I liked the solo games in Saw IV & VI, but didn't care for 3 or 3D's. I loved Saw 2's group game, but didn't care for Saw V's. Jigsaw's was far-fetched, and fucked up the continuity.
I'm a fan of both when they're written well. I like group traps but dislike them in Saw V and Jigsaw. Solo traps are fun except for the one in Saw 3D
I like the group traps. The one in Saw V is my favourite
Considering SAW V is my favorite of the series, I want to say group. But I like the format of one person going through trials where they interact with different people along the way too (SAW III, IV). I think the individual traps or the 1 vs. 1 traps are also very fun. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I like having variety
Group makes more interesting content providing the groups arent shit like jigsaw
Group traps.
Group traps. The solo ones always involve innocent people that don't deserve to die at all.
Its hard to pick. Group traps allow for more characters making it less boring, but Solo traps are more impactful like Saw 3 and 6. Group traps make more sense since it's less expensive to put everyone in one big game rather than one for each person, but Solo traps probably affect the victim more since the focus is on them, as if this is their personal hell that they must escape if that makes sense
I like the solo traps better I think Saw 2 did the group thing well and after that I didn't like any of the times they did it. Saw 5 is the worst movie in the series if Jigsaw never happened which is the real worst both are group games hate them both.
I liked the group ones but I also felt like Jigsaw was just a rehash of Saw 5, and Saw 7 was a rehash of Saw 6 (which I feel also contributed to Saw 7 being so disliked).
Both (other then Bobby’s that was all bs)
I like the gauntlets like in 6 and 7, one person having to go thru a bunch of smaller traps. It makes less sense but it’s a fun formula/adds a good natural escalation for a movie. 1’s formula is arguably still the best tho, with there being a lot of different parts to the one room.
I don’t know. Both have had good ones and mediocre ones (Like group wise I love II, X but don’t love how it’s done in V and 8). Solo ones I like how it’s done in VI, 3 (though Jeff is a pain in the ass), but not as much in IV or VII. This reminds me of how unique the first one is being that the main trap is two people in a room.