digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

First Look: Saw IV's Gruesome Poster [PIC]

firstshowing.net — In continuing the series of great posters for the Saw franchise of films, Lionsgate has released the first Saw IV poster via Bloody Disgusting and it may be the most gruesome of them all.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • nymphetamine, on 10/10/2007, -4/+30I wonder how much a head really weighs. I guess I'll find out when I watch the movie....when it comes out on DVD or tv.
    • rstarr, on 10/10/2007, -23/+4http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/uploads/saw222072607.jpg

      Direct link to poster.
      • FizixMan, on 10/10/2007, -11/+2Yeesh people. Digging him down 'cause the site puts up the hotlinking block? Just copy/paste the URL. I figured Diggers had enough Internets sense to do that.
        • skankyBacon, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Being dugg down isn't a personal insult or anything. In this case, the link didn't work, so people dugg it down to hide it. There are other links further down that work with just a click, so there's no need for this one.
      • Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I'll digg it up just because that was an awesome hotlink block message.
    • Kookami, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14"A human head weighs eight pounds" ... Looks like the annoying kid from Jerry Maquire was right.
      • MarkOfTheDead, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2bees and dogs can smell fear too. and my neighbor's rabbit really did have bunnies.


        creepy.
      • chrismgtis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2That kid was cool. You're the annoying one. :)
      • toxicredm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They should have used half a head so the scale would be pointing to 4. Hello? Saw 4? Do I have to think of everything?
    • NoizyWun, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2well i think the human brain weighs between 3 and 5 pounds, i could be wrong though. all that other material that makes up a head would put it sum where round the 8 in the poster.
    • ScottMitchell, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Sort of reminds me of that old Kids in the Hall sketch:

      GAVIN [talking to a butcher]: "How much would be head be worth if it were made of veal?"
    • Sil369, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4It's the head of the guy who was in I, II, and III. The guy with cancer who started everything.
    • bobbyi, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1The only remaining question is how much it would weigh if I gathered all your friends and squished them into a small swimming pool.
    • Rekzai, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Wtf is this then http://www.thugonline.ulmb.com/?p=336
  • Itazura, on 10/10/2007, -5/+147"It's a trap" lol what a great ackbar tagline!
  • LarryLacuna, on 10/10/2007, -44/+156Who watches this *****?
    • Phyltre, on 10/10/2007, -8/+57Serial killers, polar bears, and some of the larger felines.
    • DubbedOver, on 10/10/2007, -5/+20People like this (taken from http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/9442) :

      "chrisby 3:44am, July 25, 2007
      lolz i have to say... that is pretty pathetic, it makes no
      sence, plus also the logos of saw are always in a sentence
      like number one was every puzzle has its pieaces and number
      2 was oh yes, there will be blood and number 3 was
      suffering? you haven't see anything yet. plus also on
      each top of the cover they had a saw blade running across
      the top where it says the comments of other ppl liek for
      number 3 it was better then saw 1 and saw 2 combinded by
      steve tilley, toronto sun. if you see what i mean. and also
      they have a number of parts of the body for each cover,
      number one was a foot or an eye peeking through the jigsaw
      pieace for the promotional short version number 2 was 2
      fingures and number 3 was 3 teeth and all this one was is a
      head, i dont think it is at all in anyways if you ask me,
      the team can do way better then that pieace of fictional
      crap!"
      • arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21the grammar and spelling is so painful i couldn't even finish it.
      • mike81890, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10there is no A in piece.....
        • BigSax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There's no I in team either, but that doesn't keep people from being selfish pricks.
    • shoeberto, on 10/10/2007, -16/+8Sheep.
      • mike81890, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7The reason he is being dugg down... sheep.
    • G-RaZoR, on 10/10/2007, -7/+29I do.
    • davidjunit, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12I watched the first and second one in theaters, then skimmed through the third one on DVD but it was just the same crap the third time around. People do stupid things and get killed. I can't really imagine the fourth time around being too much different. :|
    • LogicBomB, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Saw 1-3 made for a surprisingly good horror series. It had a plot which actually grew in each movie, it was gruesome but not mindlessly so like Hostel (awful movie imho) and there was something just plain evil about the old guy but in a way that almost made you go "that makes sense".

      I have no faith in saw 4 but it has to be the first movie series in a LONG time that went 1,2,3,4 with no multi-year breaks or "let's bring it back!" mentality so who knows, maybe they'll keep it going without it getting dull. Personally I think they should have stopped at 3.
      • karel747, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Agreed. Besides, didn't everyone die in the 3rd one anyways (Old guy and his bitch)? I'd like to see what the creators pull out of their asses this time around.
        • viggenguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i'll bet you anything it's a prequel. that'll put a twist on things, won't it?
    • parkermauney, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Well, I'm sure it still helped some guys make it to first base.
    • ohgr, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3/b/
    • Gee1004, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Who watches all the other crap?
    • cartman005, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Are you kidding me? These movies are amazing.
    • Chizz44, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2LarryLacuna, I'd like to play a game...
    • NeoTEKK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hello, LarryLacunal. You are a perfectly healthy, sane and middle-class male yet yesterday you made a dumb comment on Digg. Did you do it because you truly wanted to die or did you just want some attention? Tonight, you'll show me. The irony is that if you want to die you just have to stay where you are, but if you want to live, you'll have to cut yourself again and again. Find the path through the razor-wire to the door, but hurry, at 3:00 that door will lock and then, this room becomes your tomb. How much blood will you shed to stay alive LarryLacuna?
  • wildfire, on 10/10/2007, -3/+55Well, with his head weighing in at around 8lbs we can conclude he hasn't visited Digg.
    • virtualball, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I'm sorry for the comment abuse, but LOL at your avatar :)
      • Shorties, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Its the Lindsay Lohan Mugshot for all of you who are pulling out your glasses right now.
        • texpundit, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I have fresh contacts in and I still had to go to his profile page to recognize it. *ack*
        • chrismgtis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No one really cares. Unless they have no life.
      • wildfire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I like to change my avatar regularly. It use to be Nick Nolte, then Michael Jackson, and now to stay fashionably stupid: Lindsay Lohan.
      • zenlunatic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Windows screen magnifier here pal! Have some respect!
        • neau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2One of the few Windows utilities that actualy works! Have some respect ineed!
  • laika333, on 10/10/2007, -29/+125Saw should have ended with the first one.
    • fowleryo, on 10/10/2007, -7/+20you're being generous
    • LogicBomB, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2I think it should have stopped at 3. It made for a good horror series - perfect atmosphere, somewhat of a plot and everything seemed polished for a movie series that only seemed to take 1 year per flick.
    • Archon810, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I couldn't agree more.

      Saw I was amazing.

      Saw II was so-so but at least watchable (once).

      Saw III was excruciatingly painful to watch (or listen to).

      Saw IV shouldn't see the light of day.
    • Gee1004, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1If it's so painfull, why do you continue watching? Maybe other people liked it
  • axisofphilippe, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Finally we have a film that will answer all the lingering questions from Saw 1-3.
    • MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -0/+7Yeah, I never did find my lunch. The plot thickens.
    • CanceledCzech, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Like why people keep watching these movies?
  • MillionsLivio, on 10/10/2007, -12/+23I as a horror fan will say that the abundance of remakes, sequels and unoriginal knock-offs coming out in the "horror" genre are utter crap. While I love sadistic movies, I dislike those without meaning and would like to see a return to the days of creativity. Horror movies these days lack the plot to properly fuse the gore into good cinema. They are nothing but dull killers with no motivation or "life" to them. Just because you make a "slasher" movie doesn't mean the killer doesn't have to show emotion for it (or even a lack of and show how this affects them). I myself am trying to change this; I am writing a book and would love to be able to direct the movie of it. The issue with this is that the odds are against me and the fact that regardless if my book is good or not it would be a breath of fresh air; however most would not want to take the risk with a book of my type and would rather continue to cash in on crappy sequels like this where no matter how bad they are will continue to rake in the money.
    • indicas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I think you've just described the majority of new releases overall, not just the horror genre.
    • BobbyMC, on 07/21/2008, -2/+53 years ago everything you just said is exactly why people freaked the ***** out over the original Saw. Goes to show how quickly people like to jump on the hate bandwagon.

      You can argue that they took an original concept and immediately milked the ***** out of it, but do you actually think the world of horror movies would be better if they never made a sequel to Saw? Rather than original sequels to the best horror movie in years, you'd inevitably be watching twice as many remakes of 70s horror films.
      • boot20, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1This is a remake of 70s horror films. A bunch of people in a situation that are all too stupid to live. It's not interesting, it's not revolutionary, it isn't even that good. The people that like it are 20-somethings that don't know about horror movies from the 70s and 80s.
    • errornix, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Amen, brother!! These remakes, sequels, remakes of sequels, sequels of remakes, and cheap knock-offs are all total *****! I'll take the originals from the 70's and 80's over these new films any day.
    • Decision, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1You are completely missing the point of the SAW movies then. They're not about some psychotic KILLER, per se, but about a dying man that makes the "victims" make their own choices on whether to live or die. But I digress...this concept was original. The twist was original, and it beats the ***** out of ANY remake these days...maybe except for Rob Zombie's Halloween...that's been needing a revamp for awhile.
      • MillionsLivio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1While I completley agree on your Zombie's Halloween comment, you missed my point actually. I was not talking about "SAW", I was talking in general. The whole "killer" thing about slashers being an example.
  • IShouldBeWorkin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+34didnt you watch jerry macguire? the human head weighs eight pounds, the scale is accurate
    • crashflow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2SO it all connected, the killer is the little boy from Jerry Macguire!
  • dyslexicsUNTIED, on 10/10/2007, -18/+33i simply do not understand the enjoyment anyone can find in going to these movies
    • clickwir, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6You don't have to.
      • Malarie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Cry more, i have to watch Sex and the City with my chick every damn night (she bought 3 seasons on DVD)
  • accidental, on 10/10/2007, -16/+64Saw ruled i don't know what you all are talking about.
    • AladinSane, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1Since you think "Saw ruled", it's entirely unsurprising that you can't comprehend basic English.
      • Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9You'll be unsurprised to know that the proper basic English is "not surprising". Unsurprising would be you some how undid a surprise.
        • dslartoo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You'll be surprised to know that the proper basic English word "unsurprising" is completely acceptable.

          And "somehow" is one word, not two.
  • ButterBuddha, on 10/10/2007, -12/+15Yawn
  • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -5/+26It's Tobin Bell's head in a scale-pan. What's so gruesome about that?
  • ellabee, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I was expecting a lot worse. That looks like any photoshopped picture to me.
    • dyslexicsUNTIED, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2none of the posters are extreme at all. you have to be able to show it in public
    • CanceledCzech, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Wait, that's photoshopped? I thought they actually killed a guy and put his head on a scale!!
  • SaII, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/9442
    skip blog spam
  • NiGHTSChao, on 10/10/2007, -12/+4Direct:
    http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/9442

    Why would you not link directly to it?
  • Craz1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19mirror images
    http://i16.tinypic.com/5xxh4ra.jpg
    http://i9.tinypic.com/54ogar9.jpg
  • babykicker, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14i like the way they Incorporated the 4 into the pic.
  • Sterango, on 10/10/2007, -14/+12Sweet ***** jesus, how many times are they going to ridicule themselves by dragging this sad ass franchise out?
  • autobotguy, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6dugg down because I don't want this POS series to get any press. I've worked at a movie theater for all of the last 3 Saws and it just pisses me off how popular they are. Their is seriously something wrong with Americans. I can't believe this movies get R ratings too, NC-17 Saw for the lose. I could flame Saw for hours but I will spare you all.
    • clickwir, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Good, because people that like it aren't going to sit there, read your comments and then just start agreeing. If you think this is bad, there are worse things that are real.
  • violentvinyl, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12They did a really good job of implying something really gruesome without actually showing anything really gruesome. Props.
    • MatthewBlack, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Are you being sarcastic, or do you really think that a severed head is not gruesome? Perhaps you need to cut back on the video nasties, you seem a little desensitized. This comes from someone who loves horror, but really hates this sort of torture porn.
  • krammaii, on 10/10/2007, -3/+124 Saw movies in 4 years... what's there even to anticipate? A slight formula change?
    • diversionmary, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13They updated the roster, realtime weather and now you can 'juke' with the right thumbstick.
    • traceur, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1more sweet traps, that's the only thing that keeps me watching.
  • SebG, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Meh, this is weak.
  • Kurisuku, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1You mean like the way they didn't?
  • Iggins, on 10/10/2007, -2/+30WTF? Saw 1 had one leg, Saw 2 had two fingers, Saw 3 had three teeth (or three saw blades)... Then one head.
    I guess i just don't get it...
    • saqibnk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2It's like some sick movie poster version of hangman.
    • Adgeman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18I guess they were scared to go with Four skin?
    • Shippwreck87, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It's a trap!
    • MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -1/+1It would make more sense if the scale had a large 4 or a IV on it and the needle pointed at that.
      • emaahnova, on 08/08/2008, -0/+0But look at it this way...If you saw that in a poster everybody would probably be saying "The weight is WRONG!" and complain about that...
    • Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Forehead?
    • shortcircuit13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8The profile of the head, with the pan and hanging chain form a "4."

      Pretty clever.
  • ColinTheStrange, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3There wasn't four of anything. For Saw, there was a leg, for Saw II there were two fingers, and for Saw III there were three teeth, and on this one there's no reference (that I noticed) to the number four. His head didn't even weigh four pounds! Still, it gets me a little excited.
    • drewhoo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Well, objectively, the other SAW films also released posters not following this pattern, I'm sure the poster you talk of will come :-)
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1They should have used the metric kilogram scale. Then the weight would be more accurate at 4Kg (thats about 16 lbs) and the number '4' motif would have been continued.
    • UlicBelouve, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1See above. The outline of the head, chain, and scale make a 4.
    • superflyscb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well they say they're making 6 movies, so they're halfway done and half of 8 is four is it not?

      *Smacks self in head for obviously crazy post and then posts it anyways*
  • Somniis, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9All shock, no point.
    • rotielover, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If that's what you got out of the "Saw" series, then you missed the point. Perhaps you didn't actually see them?
  • homerj14, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I want to play a game
    • Valnar300, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2So do I. *pulls out a DS while old guy is talking*
  • Gir9000, on 10/10/2007, -5/+21As a fan of the Saw movies, i'd say they are much more creative than just your normal slasher flick. Cant wait to see 4!
    • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Amen to that.

      I think people who hated Saw tend to like crap like remakes (Hills Have Eyes and its sequel), or The Ring.

      Any horror fan can appreciate the bizarre ideas it's introduced.
    • clickwir, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I agree. Sure it's not for everyone but it's different and kind of makes you think and wonder. Something that most horror flicks lack.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The Ring was taken from a Japanese film -- as were all the well done horror flicks in the US the past two years.

      Sean of the Dead was at least a new twist. But I think its pretty clear that horror movies are not bringing in the bright new talent like they used to. This is just a hollywood bank project. The figure out how much a horror picture makes, and work backwards on the production costs. The talent must all be going to the Indies.
    • Valnar300, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, the FIRST Saw was good, anything after that was just a remake of the first one.
  • a7bat, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11I thought there would be no more Torture Porn after Captivity and Hostel 2 flopped.
    • AladinSane, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1There just won't be any SUCCESSFUL Torture Porn from this point on.
  • onestab, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5Honestly, with all the real beheadings going on around the world, do we really need ***** like this? I mean the good old days of Friday the Thirteenth were great, and good horror like Silence of the Lambs is definitely a cinematic art form, this stuff is crap.
    • clickwir, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1oh boo hoo. So there's sad things happening somewhere in the world so the rest of us have to suffer by not being allowed to watch a movie?
  • NoDivision, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Judging by the subtitle for Saw IV, it should be Admiral Ackbar's head in the scale.
    • adjustafresh, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2I don't know what's scarier... the poster, your corn-ball Star Wars joke or the fact that I got your corn-ball Star Wars joke.
  • atomicartist, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I would like to see more re-makes of the Adams Family and the Munsters. Classic 1960 remakes of the Outer Limits would be cool too.
  • vaconex, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Yippy for Tourture Porn.
  • Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -2/+51st one was cool, second one was not as cool but still cool. 3rd one was bad enough to make the other two seem not as good anymore. I can't imagine what a 4th one will do. Stupid Hollywood. They will never learn when enough is enough... actually... I guess the general mass of us is stupid. Because people will still go see this...
    • adjustafresh, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2So, you paid to see the first three Saw movies and you dare to call Hollywood stupid?! I'd say that they're giving idiots like you exactly what you want.
      • Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yes, I DARE to call Hollywood stupid... OOOOOOOOOOGAAAABOOOGAABOOOO!!
  • dackerman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8This movie cannot be good...
    • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Thats what they said about Bewitched, and boy, were they proved wrong, oh, wait....
  • Azimuth1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7"...and it may be the most gruesome of them all."

    Apparently you never actually saw any of the other posters.
  • dangerdooms, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Poster sucks = movie will suck.
  • mimbomike, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Definitely not the "most gruesome" of em all.
  • homerj14, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22Personal opinion for the win

    I enjoyed the movies
  • Chubarama, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Ah, the smell of desperation mixed with boredom and money-grubbing. The end of the torture porn craze is finally coming its end.
    • shoeberto, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Unfortunately I don't think it's that close to an end.
    • bigsteve, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Haha, Chubarama's from the Department of Redundancy Department
  • Mautty, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4After the craptastic Saw 2 I hoped they would stop making them. A film franchise that makes a new one every is crap.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I'm looking at an add for Saw IV. It made me wonder... there was a Saw III?

      These things are cheap to make - like an episode of Cops. They don't need writers, just a lot of Caro syrup and red food coloring. Why can't people just go to p0rnos, they have more value.
    • rotielover, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1While I agree that Saw 2 was not great, Saw III made me forget there was ever a Saw 2 - It took the normal horror trip and turned it inside out (he he). The poster at least has me curious.
  • feeser, on 10/10/2007, -4/+28 pounds is a little light for a human head... just sayin'.
  • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Trap, lol

    http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Trap
    • chetanthaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1DUDE, NSFW !!! ATLEAST mention that :) -- Almost got into trouble with my boss sitting RIGHT behind me :D
  • doubleoh7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8The four is there. The scale bar (left-side), the scale pan, and the chain form the "4" shape. Could be a coincidence, but it's plausible.
  • EarthBoundX5, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2LMFAO, "It's a Trap"
  • chicoer2001, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Is the tagline of it's a trap and allusion to how ***** it will be.
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I'm kind of sick of this Torture Porn.

    Are these things going to get a plot?
    • onzzz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1there is no "porn" in any of the saw movies .. friking watch one before you title them
      • NeoTEKK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Since no else did let me enlighten you on the term "torture porn"....movies of this "type" get categorized under this term. Movies like Saw, Hostel, Turistas, Devil's Rejects, etc.
    • olddirtycr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Watch the damn movies. There is an actual plot, with actual twists, and stuff that will actually make you think. (Gasp it isn't hostel!!!) Don't judge a book by its cover.
      • dark2025, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0There is a point in this movie, and it's about people taking their existence for granted.
        If you watched the first, and maybe second one you'd realize that the amount of blood and gore used is significantly less than most "regular" modern horror movies. As for the third one... well that one sucked.
        • NeoTEKK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Everything was cool about what you said up until saying that the 3rd one "sucked". And so, since there's no such thing as half-digging I won't at all. I personally liked the 3rd one. It blended well in my opinion.
  • h4mx0r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7SAW = interesting idea of victims, but lame ass movies. Would make a better book, but alas, people don't read books nowadays.
    • DCstewieG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sure they do! It just needs to be called Harry Potter and the Jigsaw Killer...
  • adamlazz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2How does this poster incorporate the number of the movie like the other ones?
  • ElGuano, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Huh? This is considered gruesome? Really?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 90 of 90 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.