Hello, Nerdbastard Fans. Would you like to play a game?
I’m sure the answer to this question is no. However, I’m pretty sure you would all like some answers as to where SAW is going to take us next. Let’s take a trip down memory lane for a second. Think back to October 29, 2004. SAW made its début and we all thrilled and excited and couldn’t wait until the sequel came out. Fast-forward a year later to October 28, 2005. SAW II was released and we were begging for more. Enter October 27, 2006. The third installment of SAW comes out and about ¾ of the fans are still itching for next year when 4 comes out. However, that other ¼ start to fall off the wagon and are starting to get bored. Here comes October 26, 2009. Still hoping for answers some of us can’t wait until next October and even more people are jumping the boat. And so on until most recently when, on October 23, 2009 SAW 6 was released. Now, if you’re like me you jumped off the wagon after SAW 5. I couldn’t take it anymore. And NO, I have not seen SAW 6 to this day. And actually, I still don’t have any desire to. I got tired of the same shit being portrayed in different ways. (Just like HOUSE if you ask me, same plot, different problem). But if you saw the movie, I’m giving you props for hanging in there and I hope next October comes quickly for you.
So when I heard a whisper that SAW 7 was going to be the final “episode,” (I will not tell a lie) I was relieved. I mean seriously, how much longer was this going to go on for? Anyways, you might remember Patrick Melton from when he was on the 3rd season of Project Greenlight (loved this show by-the-way). His (and partner Marcus Dunstan) screenplay was turned into FEAST. And then the two of them were hired to take on writing SAW 4, 5 and 6. Well, Matt Horn and David Murphy, of UK Radio 107.5 Demon FM, had previously interviewed Dunstan before the release of SAW 6, and now have had the opportunity to interview Melton. And although Melton doesn’t reveal any definite details, he chats about SAW 7 and hints at the series coming to an end. If you want to hear the interview (close to an hour long) click here. Otherwise, check out the short version below.
Matt Horn: Well I’m going to be going over the same generic questions I asked with Marcus. The one everyone seems to be asking is when is Saw going to end?
Patrick Melton: I mean, I think it’s going to end with Saw VII. I have a very strong feeling its going to end with Saw VII. That’s something we’re debating now. You saw in previous interviews or discussions where we thought Saw VIII would be the last one where we had the first trilogy and the second trilogy and then sort of a grand finale wrapped up in two films. But frankly because Saw VI hasn’t performed as well as we anticipated, the idea is well why make two movies when we can make one really excellent movie that wraps up as best we can? And it’s going to be in 3-D which sort of adds to the spectacle. So if you had to ask me, I don’t own the franchise, nor do I run the studio, but I have a feeling, a strong feeling that it’s going to be Saw VII which will be also known as Endgame. And nothing’s official yet, but that’s where we’re hoping things will go.
MH: Well we heard from David Hackl that it might be Saw IX.
PM: (Laughs) Uh, I don’t think so. No. And you know, a lot of it comes down to, ya know, the performance at the box-office. Had we opened at the traditional numbers, I think they would have gone with business as usual, but business was down to half that not only saw fatigue that comes with a franchise that opens, that plays every year, but also the desire of fans to have a bit more resolution and I thought we had it to a certain extent in VI, but there is of course a bit of a cliffhanger. Unsolved business, er unresolved business. And so if we’re going to do it again, I think everyone wants these films to be events and they don’t just want them to be, ya know, these sort of small little movies that don’t have as much gravitas as the previous film. But this one, discussions around camp lately have been this to be officially the last one.
MH: Okay. It’s a shame really, actually. There’s also talk of a reboot as well.
PM: I’ve never heard that. Like redo the first one?
PM: I don’t think so, no. Ya know maybe, ha, maybe ten years from now. Ah, but I don’t think so. At this point everyone is very focused on making Saw VII and seeing if we can make this sort of the grand finale.
David Murphy: Even if Saw VII is going to be in 3-D, what about the idea of releasing the series in 3-D again. Does anyone fancy that?
PM. Oh. Oh the whole thing? You mean all, every movie? Well, um when the discussions were had, the talk about 3-D started around Saw V. People started talking about it and so tests were done not only with…see like during VI David Hackl was shooting sets with the 3-D camera just seeing how they looked and felt to see if it could work…but at the same time a company had put the first Saw into 3-D using the other technique of, ya know they do it in the computer and they pull out different parts of the movie, those scenes in 3-D, it’s not authentic 3-D. But I think that that was a thought, it’s very expensive, but some people, I think Lionsgate, they were discussing maybe putting them all in 3-D so they could have the same experience, but I’ve heard it’s not, it doesn’t look as good as actually shooting in 3-D. But that’s a possibility that they would do this in 3-D and maybe do the first one in 3-D with the computer program.
MH: I also asked Marcus since you said Saw VII might be the last Saw, does that mean we’ll ever find out whatever happened to Dr. Gordon?
PM: I can’t say anything official yet, but I think the thought around the camp is that let’s solve all questions by the end. Including that question. We wanted to resolve that because it is the 700 pound gorilla in the room…with a vague end in sight as most people have had, its sort of been been pushed off with us being able to often put…we read the scripts we had, we’ve always put in certain clues from each movie what happened to him, but a lot of that has been taken out of the films, but it seems that though right now the thought is to answer that question and wrap everything up in a wonderful nice package.
MH: Does that mean that sort of his…is his fate, is it going to be something like “oh he just died of blood loss” or there’s going to be some sort of Eric Mathews type trap?
PM: Well I can’t, of course I can’t really say anything yet, but it will be resolved and it’s not going to be anti-climatic, I will guarantee that.
Dave: So it’s not going to be like “Oh my God!”
PM: Ha, ha. I can’t say.
MH:Oh, oh dear. You can never get anything out of writers can you Dave?
PM: I mean cause a lot of it…the exact nature of how it plays out is still undecided at this moment , but the question will be answered, it’s just a matter of how exactly.
DM: Well especially, a lot of the ideas they’re ever changing to the point of production as well so even if you said right now, they could change…
PM: True, I don’t want to say something that doesn’t pan out.
MH: Well from what you were saying with Saw VII, a lot of the fans have been saying “Are they just doing this for the money?” The money aspect of it or are you doing it for the storytelling? What would you say to the fans who believe that?
PM: Oh, I think anytime something is very successful, in films especially, there’s the automatic thought: “make another.” So I think the more money something makes the more likely there’s going to be a sequel. However, no one wants to see the Saw franchise beat down into the ground and opening at five million dollars and no one really caring. That’s why a decision is close to being made and an announcement is probably close to being made that this is the grand finale. I think certain powers that be will always be hesitant to say that so distinctly, but that’s where our marching orders are leaning towards. We’re not putting “Saw VII” at the top of our script books, we’re putting “Saw: Endgame”. So that’s how we feel about it. I think that people sometimes get bummed out when they see major cliffhangers at the end of the movie and they’re like “Oh, c’mon! Now, you’ve answered five questions but you just brought up six more.” So I understand it, I feel that and as a fan of the first three movies we had those same feelings sometimes. But the filmmakers on this movie, the producers and the studio too, respect the franchise quite a bit and no one wants this to be something that becomes less than its always been. There is a reaction from the last movie not opening as big as it did in that we think that perhaps if we were going to do two movies, let’s do one movie that’s big, bad that sort of wraps things up as it should on our own terms.
MH: That kinda means that you’re going to have to add a bit more running time to the film then? Really, surely?
PM: Probably. Probably It’ll probably be a little bit longer. I don’t think anyone wants to make a long boring movie. If we’re promising to answer all questions it will likely result in a movie that’s a little bit longer. Most of them have come in around ninety minutes or so. The third one was the longest although I might be mistaken on that. It’ll probably have a bit larger, bulkier running time, but hopefully that will just be because there’s so much great stuff going on. Hopefully, that won’t affect the pacing…it will just be a bigger, bigger event.
MH: Will we revisit any of the survivors (of Saw V) like Pamela, Brit or Mallick?
PM:Yes, actually we will. One thing that’s tricky with the Saw movies, because they are serialized which is good in some ways, but its difficult in other ways because it’s hard to bring back certain actors because of a scheduling conflict or they want a ton of money. It often isn’t feasible to bring them back but there is a huge centerpiece in VII that involves people that survived Jigsaw’s traps. Two who would arguably have survived, Brit (Julie Benz) and Mallick (Greg Bryk), would be a part of that. And so, I don’t know if they will specifically be in the movie, but they will be there spirit.
MH: Is the house fire that “The Fatal Five” were involved in the Saw II or the Saw I house?
PM: Yeah, its funny, the house that was in Saw II is the same house that Agent Strahm (Scott Patterson) entered in Saw V. We made a much bigger deal about it in the script and we intended it to be a much bigger deal in the movie, but when it was filmed, it didn’t really register with people for some reason. The house that was used in II was never found and the basement of the house is “the bathroom” and all that is the same place where Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) lured Agent Strahm and killed him there. Which is why he would never be found. Or he wouldn’t be found until Hoffman decided to give up the house which would in turn give up “the bathroom” and all the locations. But those are the same, that’s the same house which uh, might be a big deal in Saw VII. We’ll see.
Dave: You know that sort of fire alarm that you hear in Saw I? Is that the house fire?
PM: Yes, that was supposed to be the house fire that Mallick set that was part of the five person game in Saw V. And you know we had a lot of these little details which more tied together and often when we make the films it gets lost or it doesn’t work so they have to be cut or they feel like too much put into the shot for people. And so that was supposed to be connected to the alarm that goes off in the first movie…
Dave: Detective Tapp (Danny Glover)…
PM: Yeah that he finds out. And then throughout Saw V we had this thing where Brit was trying to find out “what’s the connection, what’s the connection between us?” And initially think “Oh it’s the fire”, but then at the end of the movie, when Agent Erickson (Mark Rolston) comes in and finds her dying she looks up and she recognizes him, essentially saying “I know you. You and the other guy are the agents that were investigating the fire that tried to arrest all of us.” So once that connection was made Erickson would realize that Strahm is the connection to her, the connection between all of them, which would sort of tie up the A story and B story. It was shot, but didn’t really work and so the filmmakers were hoping people would be able to make that connection, but they didn’t. And so that’s why the A and B stories felt like they were standalones when in fact they were supposed to be totally married and come together in that moment.
MH: Are the whereabouts of the jigsaw pieces ever gonna get explained? Is there a big wall of jigsaw pieces of skin somewhere?
PM: Yeah, yeah. We wanted to get to that, um I hope we do. We’ve been planning on it, but we’ll see. That is very astute though. We would like to answer that cause there does seem to be a great deal of skin jigsaw puzzle pieces hidden. Where are they? We would like to answer that.
DM: I have a question about the way the plot of Saw VI is related to the other Saw films, namely Saw III, because we came full circle. Saw VII for example is it inside the circle or outside the circle? Will it relate to a particular film or the whole series if its going to be the endgame?
PM: VII is going to incorporate all six films and wrap things up, that is the intent, that is the plan as of now, how we can do that as effectively as possible. Because if we’re saying this is the end it should appropriately be the end and reach back to as far back in history as the films have gone.
DM: What about the video game, would that go into it at all?
PM: Well the video game, we’ve had to keep those separate, but I really enjoyed them. I thought the video game was a lot of fun.
MH: You know Daniel Matthews and people like Mrs. Gordon and her child and Jeff’s child and Vick’s wife? All those characters that sort of, I wouldn’t say left the series, but haven’t really been like “Oh my wife or my husband’s disappeared” or anything like that. Will that be answered in VII?
PM: I don’t know if those specific actors will be in it, but they will be addressed. Especially Dr. Gordon and family.
MH: In Saw II in the bit with the eye, you see someone limping. Is it the Dr. G?
PM: I can never say anything definite upon that, but we’ll certainly find out sooner than later.