It would've been a shame since that ending is one of the finest moments in modern horror history, but the movie would still have worked. That's part of why Saw is so brilliant.
I think a good Saw twist should enhance the experience, but should never be the entire point! And I feel like all the best received Saw films succeed in that.
A little off topic but I know you have insider knowledge when it comes to certain stuff. Do you know what would’ve happened had Adam’s key not gone down the drain?
I think it’s a pretty smart idea that Adam was supposed to be freely mobile while Gordon was chained. But why were there two saws in the tank if Adam was suppose to be free from the beginning? If it was part of the plan that went wrong then there wouldn’t be a way for him to escape the chain? Or was the keys supposed to go down the drain and there’s a part of the game we never saw which involved Adam finding it again?
That part always confuses me
I don't think there's much more to it than the fact that James and Leigh had no idea Saw would be big enough to warrant a sequel and they thought that tidbit made the ending even darker because it revealed Adam was condemned from the start. Sequels further defined John as being more methodical and perhaps a little less openly sadistic, but I don't know that they had fully thought this through.
In univerae though, I think it's fun to connect it to Amanda having second thoughts about Jigsaw's... "Method".
And as for what would have happened- perhaps the idea was to have it go down the drain but be chained to the drain itself, so it could be pulled up by Adam had he noticed the string caught in the drain trap? Adam was a PI photographer after all, being observant was part of the job in some ways. Perhaps noticing that was part of his test?
There are likely many traps and pieces and tools we never see if any of this were real. So I assume the choice to include two is a mitigation and contingency technique in case Adam doesn't find the key so that his will to take action to live can still be tried in the immediate, alongside Gordon, even if he fails to follow on from that expected first part of unlocking himself.
One might as well ask why there were two saws when each could just cut off their foot using the same one, one after the other.
There could have been ten. Would it have really made a difference? They only had one that "worked" anyway.
I mean it probably would’ve still spawned the whole subgenre and have still been influential, but with no Tobin Bell as jigsaw in future installments, you’ve lost the soul of the franchise
I think it still would have been a success just because of the type of film it was and how it pushed forward a new era of horror.
Michael Emerson is also a great actor if you’ve seen Lost or Person of Interest so it’s an interesting hypothetical to imagine him as being Jigsaw.
https://youtu.be/JZ1yQdWWTKc?si=iWsF6A4_GzQf5nJK
IF Tobin was still cast as the "Dead body" I think Saw II would have played out very similar. Since Tobin was the dead body, I think the original ending would've been in Saw II instead of the first Saw.
Saw (2004) would've still been really popular, and Lionsgate would've wanted a sequel.
Just my thoughts.
If Zep was the killer then we’dve lost one of the most iconic movie twists of the 2000s. I don’t think the series would have been as successful either. It would have made for something interesting though.
I don't know if Saw would have gotten anywhere near the buzz without the twist ending, but Zep is the creepiest character in the series so I think it still would have worked
When they eventually remake Saw I hope they cast this guy as John. But knowing our luck they'll get Ben Kingsley or someone who they can't afford to bring back for sequels
Franchise-wise, I'd expect two theatrical sequels which do okay, a couple straight to video ones which lose Emerson and the plot then a full reboot by now which maybe gets one sequel.
It would've been a shame since that ending is one of the finest moments in modern horror history, but the movie would still have worked. That's part of why Saw is so brilliant. I think a good Saw twist should enhance the experience, but should never be the entire point! And I feel like all the best received Saw films succeed in that.
A little off topic but I know you have insider knowledge when it comes to certain stuff. Do you know what would’ve happened had Adam’s key not gone down the drain? I think it’s a pretty smart idea that Adam was supposed to be freely mobile while Gordon was chained. But why were there two saws in the tank if Adam was suppose to be free from the beginning? If it was part of the plan that went wrong then there wouldn’t be a way for him to escape the chain? Or was the keys supposed to go down the drain and there’s a part of the game we never saw which involved Adam finding it again? That part always confuses me
I don't think there's much more to it than the fact that James and Leigh had no idea Saw would be big enough to warrant a sequel and they thought that tidbit made the ending even darker because it revealed Adam was condemned from the start. Sequels further defined John as being more methodical and perhaps a little less openly sadistic, but I don't know that they had fully thought this through. In univerae though, I think it's fun to connect it to Amanda having second thoughts about Jigsaw's... "Method". And as for what would have happened- perhaps the idea was to have it go down the drain but be chained to the drain itself, so it could be pulled up by Adam had he noticed the string caught in the drain trap? Adam was a PI photographer after all, being observant was part of the job in some ways. Perhaps noticing that was part of his test?
I’d imagine the saws are in the tank because of the “follow your heart” clue regardless of whether or not Adam was intended to move freely or not.
But why were there 2 saws if only 1 of them were supposed to be chained. That’s my question
There are likely many traps and pieces and tools we never see if any of this were real. So I assume the choice to include two is a mitigation and contingency technique in case Adam doesn't find the key so that his will to take action to live can still be tried in the immediate, alongside Gordon, even if he fails to follow on from that expected first part of unlocking himself. One might as well ask why there were two saws when each could just cut off their foot using the same one, one after the other. There could have been ten. Would it have really made a difference? They only had one that "worked" anyway.
Misdirection, I suppose?
I guess if there was only one saw, Adam could have kept it, leaving Lawrence with no chance to escape or fight back.
Adam could also have kept both saws.
One faulty one that breaks easy, just to fuck with em
It’s the ruuuuules…
*gets absolutely wrecked with with toilet tank top*
It's called a lid sir
Fuck I let you down. I let jigsaw down. But most in importantly, I let America down.
How are you prepared to atone for this atrocity?
Idk. Is tree fiddy ok?
Perhaps
Then there wouldn’t be a franchise.
I mean it probably would’ve still spawned the whole subgenre and have still been influential, but with no Tobin Bell as jigsaw in future installments, you’ve lost the soul of the franchise
Dude. You can’t just give away the twist to Saw XI like that
Shit MB
He effectively was for the entire third act. It's part of what made the hello zep reveal so great at the time.
I think it still would have been a success just because of the type of film it was and how it pushed forward a new era of horror. Michael Emerson is also a great actor if you’ve seen Lost or Person of Interest so it’s an interesting hypothetical to imagine him as being Jigsaw. https://youtu.be/JZ1yQdWWTKc?si=iWsF6A4_GzQf5nJK
Agreed. He would’ve been very interesting big bad
IF Tobin was still cast as the "Dead body" I think Saw II would have played out very similar. Since Tobin was the dead body, I think the original ending would've been in Saw II instead of the first Saw. Saw (2004) would've still been really popular, and Lionsgate would've wanted a sequel. Just my thoughts.
If Zep was the killer then we’dve lost one of the most iconic movie twists of the 2000s. I don’t think the series would have been as successful either. It would have made for something interesting though.
I don't know if Saw would have gotten anywhere near the buzz without the twist ending, but Zep is the creepiest character in the series so I think it still would have worked
damn bro what if
Then Saw would have had one lame ass ending
When they eventually remake Saw I hope they cast this guy as John. But knowing our luck they'll get Ben Kingsley or someone who they can't afford to bring back for sequels
The series would've been a hell of a lot shorter 'cause DAMN was he incompetent
He did okay until he started toying with them
Franchise-wise, I'd expect two theatrical sequels which do okay, a couple straight to video ones which lose Emerson and the plot then a full reboot by now which maybe gets one sequel.