Forum index / Media & Music / Saw 3??

Saw 3??

25 posts · page 1 of 1

post #1
20 March 2006, 18:42 UTC#1
QUOTE
Saw 3

Lionsgate (NYSE and TSX: LGF), the leading independent filmed entertainment studio, and Twisted Pictures today announced plans to develop and produce Saw III, the next film in the psychologically intense and disturbing horror franchise, for an October 27, 2006 wide release. The film will be directed by Darren Lynn Bousman (Saw II), with story by Leigh Whannell and James Wan (Saw, Saw II) and screenplay by Whannell. The Twisted Pictures team of Mark Burg and Oren Koules will return as producers with Whannell and Wan set to executive produce. The announcement was made by Peter Block, Lionsgate President of Acquisitions and Co-productions, Jason Constantine, Lionsgate Senior VP of Acquisitions, and the Twisted Pictures team of Mark Burg and Oren Koules.


Just found this online, but it was part of a blog with no article link, does anyone know anything else about this?

Could be interesting
post #2
20 March 2006, 18:52 UTC#2
Who was it that died who made Saw II?
post #3
20 March 2006, 18:55 UTC#3
the producer
post #4
20 March 2006, 19:00 UTC#4
Yer, adem's right. The previous director I believe, the mastermind behind the films.

QUOTE
FULL ARTICLE

Movie producer Gregg Hoffman dies at 42

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - Film producer Gregg Hoffman, who developed an eight-minute film into the horror hit "Saw" and its gory successor "Saw II," died unexpectedly after complaining of pain. He was 42.

Hoffman died Sunday at Hollywood Presbyterian Hospital, where he had been admitted after developing neck pain, his business partners said. He died of natural causes, according to a news release from Lions Gate Entertainment, which distributed his recent films. An autopsy was planned.

Hoffman and his partners at Twisted Pictures financed the low-budget films "Saw" (2004) and "Saw II" (2005) and stood to reap millions of dollars.

The first film cost about $1 million to make, opened over Halloween weekend last year at No. 3 at the box office, and grossed more than $102 million in DVD and box office revenue.

The $4 million sequel, released just before Halloween this year, ranked No. 1 at the box office in its debut weekend with $31.7 million in receipts. It has made $86 million in six weeks, according to box office figures released Monday.

The movies center around a sadistic serial killer called Jigsaw who devises intricate games to get his kidnapped victims to kill each other.

"We've won the lottery," Hoffman, a former Walt Disney Co. executive, told the Los Angeles Times in November.

Hoffman began working for Disney in 1995, rising to become a senior vice president of production and earning a producer credit on the family comedy "George of the Jungle" (1997).

He joined Koules and Mark Burg at their management and production company, Evolution Entertainment, in 2003. Soon after, he saw the eight-minute clip about a serial killer called "Saw" and proposed making it into a full-length feature. The original story was by James Wan, who went on to direct the feature "Saw," and Leigh Whannell, who starred in it.

"He discovered this movie, brought it in and talked us into making it. He was the driving force behind it," said Oren Koules, one of his Twisted Pictures partners.

The "Saw" films' success led to multi-picture development deals with Lions Gate and Dimension Films. Hoffman was working on "Saw III" and "Crawlspace" when he died.

He is survived by his wife, Lucienne; two children; his mother; and a sister.
post #5
20 March 2006, 19:01 UTC#5
They're just dragging it out now. Should've stuck with the first.
post #6
20 March 2006, 19:03 UTC#6
QUOTE(neKa @ Mar 20 2006, 07:01 PM) [snapback]305953[/snapback]

They're just dragging it out now. Should've stuck with the first.


You wouldnt say that if you were making millions :D
post #7
20 March 2006, 19:06 UTC#7
QUOTE(neKa @ Mar 20 2006, 07:01 PM) [snapback]305953[/snapback]

They're just dragging it out now. Should've stuck with the first.

Nah man, saw 2 was awesome, they didn't cease to live up to the amazing first one, and I personally think another third movie to seal them would go down great. As long as again, it was just as good as the first two.
post #8
20 March 2006, 19:13 UTC#8
QUOTE(neKa @ Mar 20 2006, 07:01 PM) [snapback]305953[/snapback]

They're just dragging it out now. Should've stuck with the first.

Hmm I would agree with you if it was any other movie to be honest as the majority of sequels suck hardcore.
But I actually thought Saw II was just as awesome as the original and I just hope that Saw 3 will live up to the previous movies. If they can pull it off it would be a nice end to the trilogy, but if they fuck up I'll be so disappointed :(
post #9
20 March 2006, 20:02 UTC#9
Yer I agree with mike, I think the second was so good because they took the basic idea and done something wholly different, it was so alone and the whole way the film ran was so different from the first, think they need to do this with the third, make it original and it will be fucking awsome.
post #10
20 March 2006, 20:08 UTC#10
ditto.

Saw was amazing. of course. I liked Saw II because it felt different to the first, not as developed, yet still managed to pull off a great storyline with some real chilling action (pit of needles, guy cutting his own flesh off, etc.)
I have mixed feelings about Saw 3, part of me doesn't want it, but then they set it up for another movie.
it's just me, but I dont think it'll work as well with that bony Amanda bitch being the killer. maybe it will. I hope it does.
post #11
20 March 2006, 20:17 UTC#11
The first saw was afull, from what I saw of it. The main guy in it, he's a doctor or something? wEll anyway his acting was so appaling he reminded me of Will Farrell from anchorman.

"Blackbeard's Delight."
"Sweet Lincoln's mullet!"
post #12
20 March 2006, 20:22 UTC#12
YOU ARE WRONG!.....Well I think so.
post #13
20 March 2006, 20:23 UTC#13
By the beard of Zeus I am right
post #14
20 March 2006, 20:26 UTC#14
QUOTE(Clint @ Mar 20 2006, 10:17 PM) [snapback]305983[/snapback]

The first saw was afull, from what I saw of it. The main guy in it, he's a doctor or something? wEll anyway his acting was so appaling he reminded me of Will Farrell from anchorman.

"Blackbeard's Delight."
"Sweet Lincoln's mullet!"

Now I will hate you for all eternity
post #15
20 March 2006, 20:35 UTC#15
"Sweet Eli Whitney's nose! It wasn't you, was it? It was Wes Mantooth. Oh, I should have known."
post #16
20 March 2006, 20:52 UTC#16
QUOTE(Clint @ Mar 20 2006, 08:23 PM) [snapback]305986[/snapback]

By the beard of Zeus I am right

By Frito's collective smegma you are wrong.
post #17
20 March 2006, 21:02 UTC#17
I swear on the Queens double ender I am true
post #18
20 March 2006, 21:48 UTC#18
This is awesome. Saw was such a good movie and then when Saw II came out it was just as good. This one better be good though If they are going to make a 3rd.
post #19
20 March 2006, 21:56 UTC#19
im waiting for this movie...
post #20
20 March 2006, 22:47 UTC#20
Goddd I like sooo blogged about this weeks ago!....
post #21
20 March 2006, 23:22 UTC#21
already?
post #22
21 March 2006, 00:44 UTC#22
Saw was a great film.... 2 was also very good but not as dark as the first.... But still better then most stuff that was out at the time.

if they can make number 3 as good and keep a good story then it would really be great... But the main bad guy is dead.... And it was his voice that made the movies.... Can a girl really do it as good?

I know ill watch it though!
post #23
21 March 2006, 02:28 UTC#23
im soo effing excited thats awesome im in love with both the saw movies...they just better make this one as awesome as the first two or it will ruin the series
post #24
21 March 2006, 06:53 UTC#24
QUOTE(Clint @ Mar 20 2006, 03:02 PM) [snapback]306018[/snapback]

I swear on the Queens double ender I am true


Uncle John's Corncob Pipe! You're ruining a good forum.
post #25
21 March 2006, 07:40 UTC#25
The reason I didn't like it was cause it follows what happens to most sequals. When the first movie pulls in loads of money, the second becomes more orientated around it and everything is focused on production techniques rather than story. Then in turn you lose the 'rawness' of the film - I'd much rather watch a low budget Japanese film over a well produced American film.

The second was good, but I preferred the first so much more.