Saw 2

[ndeezlo]

Re: Saw 2

Best movie of the three!

uggh agree to disagree

[ExtremeGamer]

Re: Saw 2

uggh agree to disagree

Agreed..

For me, parts 2 and 3 were both utter crap.

[dieselboy]

Re: Saw 2

Agreed..

For me, parts 2 and 3 were both utter crap.

Same.

I was a fan of the first, but the other two just dropped the ball.

[mgoblue]

Re: Saw 2

Same.

I was a fan of the first, but the other two just dropped the ball.

totally...Scream 1 is a classic...I thought it was very well done and really enjoyable. 2 and 3 were hokey and just suffered from typical sequel syndrome

[BGarrett7]

Re: Saw 2

Scream was the worst of the trilogy.

[ExtremeGamer]

Re: Saw 2

Scream was the worst of the trilogy.

You might be the only person in the world to think that.

[VanCitySportsGuy]

Re: Saw 2

I saw Saw 1 and Saw 2 was a lot better.

There was less tension in Saw because there were only 2 people and they were stuck inside that room.

Watching Saw 2 first did take away from the ending of Saw 1 since I knew the kidnapper wasn't really Jigsaw.

Because Saw 2 was so great, I'm thinking about watching Saw 3 in the theatre instead of waiting for it to come out on DVD.

[Blzer]

Re: Saw 2

I saw Saw 1 and Saw 2 was a lot better.

There was less tension in Saw because there were only 2 people and they were stuck inside that room.

Watching Saw 2 first did take away from the ending of Saw 1 since I knew the kidnapper wasn't really Jigsaw.

Because Saw 2 was so great, I'm thinking about watching Saw 3 in the theatre instead of waiting for it to come out on DVD.

I understand that you like the two in that order, and it may just potentially be because of the order that you saw them. But, I'm sure that you still would like Saw II more either way.

I like Saw II more in terms of replay value. I can watch it over and over again... no problems with getting bored with it. I appreciate Saw for the originality of the franchise and the ending. I also just appreciate it more because it didn't have as much of a "Hollywood movie" feel that Saw II sort of had (and that I think Saw III will have).

[ExtremeGamer]

Re: Saw 2

New DVD this october. 2 disc uncut version of the film.

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/index.php?Show=6904&Template=newsfull

[dieselboy]

Re: Saw 2

I saw Saw 1 and Saw 2 was a lot better.

There was less tension in Saw because there were only 2 people and they were stuck inside that room.

Watching Saw 2 first did take away from the ending of Saw 1 since I knew the kidnapper wasn't really Jigsaw.

Because Saw 2 was so great, I'm thinking about watching Saw 3 in the theatre instead of waiting for it to come out on DVD.

You really screwed up by watching Saw 2 before Saw 1.

And I still think Saw1 > Saw2.

[mgoblue]

Re: Saw 2

You really screwed up by watching Saw 2 before Saw 1.

And I still think Saw1 > Saw2.

I still have to see Saw 2, but Saw 1 was great, intense, and the storyline was pretty good. I was disappointed when I read that Leigh Whannel (is that his name?) wasn't involved at all in the 2nd, that it was a somewhat unrelated movie they morphed to be a sequel to Saw...I am going to watch Saw 2 in the coming week or so though, and i've heard it's good, just not as good as the first.

[Beantown]

Re: Saw 2

If you see Saw II first you'll like Saw less because there wsn't as much action.

If you see Saw first you'll like Saw II less because there wasn't as my psychological-**** to it.

It's actually pretty interesting that you can actually watch both movies, in whatever order you want...and they'll both be good.

[Blzer]

Re: Saw 2

I was disappointed when I read that Leigh Whannel (is that his name?) wasn't involved at all in the 2nd, that it was a somewhat unrelated movie they morphed to be a sequel to Saw...

Whannel was still on set, I believe. It was James Wan that stayed out of this one until post-production (at least, to my knowledge).

And yes, Darren Lynn Bousman origianlly wrote this movie as something else five years ago, which was eventually revised to become Saw II.