'Saw III' - High-Def Digest Review

[jed]

As many of you know, High-Def Digest's own Peter Bracke is a passionate fan and student of the horror film genre. In fact, back in 2005, he wrote the best selling book Crystal Lake Memories: The Complete History of Friday the 13th.

So I always look forward to his reviews of flicks like 'Saw III' (out this week on Blu-ray), because in addition to his always astute critiques of the technical aspects of the disc release, he also puts the film itself in historical context as few other reviewers can.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/sawiii.html

[ronds9]

I agree with what he said during most of his review. Where we part ways is where he lumps the Saw franchise in with the recent batch of movies "nicking from '70s exploitation cinema." He also states "that we need something new and fun." Finally, he secretly hopes that Saw IV fails. Although I do respect his opinion, I don't understand it, especially coming from a "dedicated horror movie buff." First off, the Saw movies borrow very little to nothing at all from the 70's exploitation films. If anything, it borrows more from the dark intelligent films of Seven, Silence of the Lambs, and the Usual Suspects. It simply takes aspects from those superior movies and successfully translates it from the thriller genre to the horror genre. Secondly, the Saw franchise has already done exactly what he claimed we needed. It offered us something new in its great scripts, wonderful twists, and eye opening shock values. Unlike the many other horror franchises out there, the Saw movie and its sequels are all unique films that greatly differ from each other yet all connect through their superior continuity. The one thing that I can say about these movies are that they are definitely fun to watch! Movies like the Saw films, the Ring, the Descent, and the recent films that borrow from the "70's exploitation cinema" in my opinion are what's keeping the horror genre alive today. So, as a "dedicated horror movie buff" myself it slightly irritates me to here him wish ill on the next Saw movie when quite honestly the Saw franchise is a cut above most of the horror movies out there today. As Saw IV is concerned, it might suck or it might be another excellent sequel. Instead of secretly hating on it, as "dedicated horror movie buffs" we should support it until we've had a chance to view the film and judge it for ourselves. If anything, the Saw production team has proved that it knows how to make a good sequel. Don't under estimate them...

[Mark_H]

Peter's constant marking down of video quality due to aesthetic choices of the cinematographer are getting a little tired now. I am only interested in reading about the quality of the HD transfer, not the reviewers personal aesthetic. Saw III is a very pleasing transfer - it is sharp, detail is excellent, and contrary to the review there is nothing wrong with the colour palette that wasn't intentional. The HD transfer captures the intent of the film makers perfectly and as such *is* reference quality.

Mark

[Glenmulder]

i think speaking as reference quality is taking it a bit too far, good but nor reference.

[PeteB]

I don't know if it's considered gauche to post here almost a year after this thread was started, but...

Am I the only one waiting for the 8-minute longer "Director's Cut" to make it to Blu-ray?

If you've seen both unrated (or even all three) cuts of the movie, are the extra eight minutes contained in the deleted scenes of the first unrated release, or was this completely new footage?

What else is new in the 2-disc DVD set?

I just hate being suckered into the "double dip". Now that Best Buy has a combo sale involving Saw IV, I'm getting impatient (haven't seen III or IV at all yet!) despite thinking all this time that I might just wait for a box set. Who knows how long a wait that might be...

[Moon Panda]

I picked up Saw III on blu cheaply, the first Saw I have in HD. I am wary of buying the first two on blu due to the first not being the Uncut Version, and Saw II has lost extras.

I found Saw III to be a nice presentation that offered a decent improvement over the SD, and even threw in a couple of extras over the SD.

I was a bit concerned that I was buying a version that could be outdated by a director's cut on blu when Lionsgate performs their inevitable double-dip.

After I watched it, I found out that the director's cut ending could be watched on youtube.

I watched it, and must admit to preferring the theatrical ending, which builds up a decent head of steam. The director's cut meanders somewhat, takings Jigaw's monologue and placing it after the buildup which concludes the theatrical cut.

[MasterChief3624]

Originally Posted by PeteB

I don't know if it's considered gauche to post here almost a year after this thread was started, but...

Am I the only one waiting for the 8-minute longer "Director's Cut" to make it to Blu-ray?

If you've seen both unrated (or even all three) cuts of the movie, are the extra eight minutes contained in the deleted scenes of the first unrated release, or was this completely new footage?

What else is new in the 2-disc DVD set?

I just hate being suckered into the "double dip". Now that Best Buy has a combo sale involving Saw IV, I'm getting impatient (haven't seen III or IV at all yet!) despite thinking all this time that I might just wait for a box set. Who knows how long a wait that might be...

There are actually a couple brand new scenes, a few extra bits of footage not in the Theatrical or Unrated cut. Not to mention a newer version of the ending (which I really liked, as well). They allow for a smoother pace, and I definitely wished they kept them in for the Theatrical, but what can you do?

I am also holding out for a SAW III Director's Cut Blu-ray, but it is highly doubtful. Don't get your hopes up. Possible, but not probable

[cash]

Originally Posted by Moon Panda

I picked up Saw III on blu cheaply, the first Saw I have in HD. I am wary of buying the first two on blu due to the first not being the Uncut Version, and Saw II has lost extras.

I found Saw III to be a nice presentation that offered a decent improvement over the SD, and even threw in a couple of extras over the SD.

I was a bit concerned that I was buying a version that could be outdated by a director's cut on blu when Lionsgate performs their inevitable double-dip.

After I watched it, I found out that the director's cut ending could be watched on youtube.

I watched it, and must admit to preferring the theatrical ending, which builds up a decent head of steam. The director's cut meanders somewhat, takings Jigaw's monologue and placing it after the buildup which concludes the theatrical cut.

I have the recently released Saw Trilogy box set in SD that contains all of the uncut/unrated editions. I'm waiting for a box set release of all the uncuts on blu before I jump that ship. I have Saw III on HDDVD and it looks really good.

[PeteB]

What a mess of inconsistency. It's like they want you to buy every single release of each movie just to have the fullest unrated cuts and basic, core extras, not just the try-it-once throwaways.

I have two versions of I on DVD, and the R-rated version of II on DVD. No way am I going to buy the R-rated Saw just to have it in some form on Blu, and I can't get too excited about the unrated II on Blu with all the extra stuff I never had on DVD missing.

Yeah, then there's the director's cut of III. Won't it be fun to see what shenanigans IV brings?

Who does Lionsgate's home video marketing, anyway? Interns? It's not working on me, despite how much I want to finally enjoy the second half of the story thus far.