<![CDATA[Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly a]]>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Feardotcom

walkerfe — 9 years ago(August 11, 2016 02:39 PM)

Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly and others had gone from my memory. It has flaws, for sure. But I think it was pretty early to the internet-horror game and I give it credit for that.
A quarter of the IMDb ratings are 1/10, and that's a joke. This movie is better than half of the studio horror films that have come out in the last five years. I also enjoy House on Haunted Hill, and this is by the same director. The main flaws in both of those films is the CGI, but that's just a product of the time.
"Do you like to watch?" and "Do you want to play?" are solidly ingrained into my brain. Even if they are a little funny, sometimes I do like a cheesy horror film. Personally I give it a 6.5/10 but I get why a lower score would be given.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/235448/saw-this-movie-for-the-second-time-yesterday-and-it-holds-up-better-than-i-expected-i-remembered-some-scenes-vividly-aRSS for NodeSat, 16 May 2026 14:37:08 GMTSun, 03 May 2026 23:53:42 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly a on Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:47 GMT]]>Vega_Lyra — 9 years ago(December 07, 2016 06:53 AM)

I give it a 4/10 which I think is pretty fair. The visuals were great, but the script was pretty bad. Stephen Dorff is a B list actor who has his moments.
2002 in general was a weak year in film. Seriously, you had Master of Disguise, XXX, Jason X, Scorpion King, Attack of the Clones (yuck), Goldmember, Spy Kids 2.
Even the Best Film went to Chicago which is mostly forgotten today.
What a bad year in film history.
Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970637https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970637Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly a on Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:46 GMT]]>saturnchick — 9 years ago(November 23, 2016 02:18 PM)

I wholeheartedly disagree. 50% is an outrageous number, unless you're purposefully being hyperbolic.
All this is neither here nor there, though, since I rate movies based on their own merits (or lack thereof) and not how they theoretically compare to films I've never seen.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970636https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970636Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:46 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly a on Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:45 GMT]]>IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970635https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970635Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Saw this movie for the second time yesterday, and it holds up better than I expected. I remembered some scenes vividly a on Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:43 GMT]]>saturnchick — 9 years ago(September 01, 2016 08:46 PM)

Nothis deserves a 1. It was absolutely horrendous. I've rated over 1,500 titles on imdb, and guess how many I've awarded a 1. Two titles. That's it. And this was one of them because there is literally
nothing
redeemable about this utter piece of trash.
Screws fall out all of the time. The world's an imperfect place.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970634https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1970634Sun, 03 May 2026 23:53:43 GMT