How Are The Saw Movies On Blu? (1 Viewer)

[RogerH]

Since these movies are pretty gritty looking I was wondering if the Blu-Ray transfers make it worth re-buying. Granted I have only the first 2 but I'll be looking to getting all 5 if its worth it.

 

[TravisR]

If an increase in PQ is what you're looking for, I'd say rent them first. They're not bad discs but, like you said, they're gritty looking movies so I didn't notice a big increase between the DVDs and the Blu-rays. Though obviously, the Blu-ray does look better.

 

[Bleddyn Williams]

I wouldn't buy the first one. The second DVD release ("Uncut Version") had the gore removed for the "R" rating restored, but James Wan also recut some scenes and redid the color timing. This is in effect a directors cut. The blu only offers original theatrical R.

II - I think lost features that were on the DVD, but you'd have to double-check that one.

III - I believe had actually a couple of extra features on blu.

So III onward are good, but I & II could be better - especially I.

 

[Brian Kidd]

Honestly, at least the first two are $10 at WalMart. If you're a fan of the films, they do look better on BD, just not to the point where you'd want to show it to friends as an example of the superiority of the format.

 

[Matt Thompson]

Both not true. Saw II has all of the features from the Special Edition DVD.

Also, and this is an easy mistake to make, the cut of Saw on Blu-ray is unrated. The box lists the R-rated theatrical version, but I assure you the film included on the disc is Wan's director's cut.

 

[TravisR]

I'm pretty sure that it is missing the 45 or so minute making-of doc/featurette. It has all the other stuff though.