SAW: The Ride

[J.S217]

Retheme it to a Haunted Mill

[Kerfuffle]

What about that announcement from 2009?

"Push your harnesses up, grab your belongings and get out to your left. This may be your only chance of escape!"

[SteveJ]

You shouldn't need to dress something in words to make it sound good!

Do you think Merlin Studios actually considered whether riders would "still be reeling from the experience" when they put the doll on the shelf? Does the fact that riders are possibly still disorientated mean you can get away with the cheapest effects possible? Do you think the experience was analysed so much as to compensate for people who have or haven't seen the movies? If these things had been considered like you claim then Saw The Ride would be a lot more substantial than it is.

As for seeing it from a guest's point of view, that's exactly what I am doing! In fact, I'd say you're the one who is not!

You are basing your point on an imagined romanticised situation in which the rider is receptive to everything around them. Stand there, in person, and watch how many people actually notice the doll and see how their attention span lasts about 0.5 seconds looking at it.

The last time I went on Saw, the "average riders" included a gang of drunk men, some bored-looking girls and a bunch of eager teenagers. Each one of them were just there to get on the ride and have a quick bit of fun, not to go around making sad excuses that "at least they did something when they could have done nothing".

I am not saying people don't enjoy the ride - it has proven to be one of Thorpe Park's most popular rides ever and was a big success with the public, regardless of my personal opinion. But it's popularity is not to do with its effects and scenic design - it's because it's a rollercoaster coaster with the "Saw" name attached. Imagine how totally taken aback riders would be if it was genuinly frightening and grim on the inside.

[TarinMaria]

You guys actually think the theming in Saw is anything decent? Its lazy, cheap-looking and only anything to do with the films on the inside. Half the reason Saw angers me so much is because people seem to worship it, when honestly, even its indoor theming is rubbish, let alone the ride itself, which just wants to kill the riders who foolishly choose to ride it.
Before you guys say anything, I've seen all seven Saw films, several times. I love the films, they are anything BUT generic, they're clever and always make you back track and go 'wait, wtf' so you have to work it all out again. Saw: The Ride makes you go 'wait, I need to see a chiropractor'.
In the outside queue line, NOT ONE OF THOSE CONTRAPTIONS FEATURE IN THE FILMS. Inside, they have The Rack (a personal favourite of mine) and the fat man in barbed wire, which looks about as cheap as it comes. Where is the reverse bear trap? I honestly believe that there wasn't a reason for this IP to exist, aside from Merlin knew that by linking it with such a large film series, it would be far more popular. Merlin love a good gimmick, aye.

P.S. Saw gave me whiplash. Its evil. Its aged awfully. End of.

[Kerfuffle]

You guys actually think the theming in Saw is anything decent? Its lazy, cheap-looking and only anything to do with the films on the inside.

I see what you mean there. The building may look huge from the front, but when you go round the back in the queue, it looks TINY! I said this somewhere in the topic before, but so much space was WASTED inside such a small building!

[Coaster]

P.S. Saw gave me whiplash. Its evil. Its aged awfully. End of.

That part I completely agree with, it runs horribly most of the time - although it was quite good last weekend.

I wouldn't say that's it's aged awfully, more that it hasn't been maintained the way that sort of ride needs to be.

[TarinMaria]

That part I completely agree with, it runs horribly most of the time - although it was quite good last weekend.

I wouldn't say that's it's aged awfully, more that it hasn't been maintained the way that sort of ride needs to be.

Which is only the fault of Thorpe and Merlin not caring, which is shown throughout the ride.

[StealthRider]

You guys can say what you like, but after ages of not feeling fear for coasters, on my first ride of SAW, it was amazing to have that fear, it's not the best ride I've ridden, not even slightly, but I don't get why people hate on it…and plus, when you say it tries to kill you, isn't it meant to, considering the theme?

[Coaster]

What about that announcement from 2009?

"Push your harnesses up, grab your belongings and get out to your left. This may be your only chance of escape!"

I completely forgot about that!

That hasn't been played for years

[JoshC.]

contradicting myself here by discussing the ride, but one of my issues is it doesn't make sense... The whole point of the SAW films is to make you value your own life because of bad things you've done in the past, and when you are put in the seat of life and death, you are in CONTROL of whether you live or die, you have the choice. I appreciate it's a ride but it doesn't work as a roller coaster, not if you're meant to be a 'victim' subjected to the ride, because you cannot control any of the events. It's just got random traps thrown together which relate to the films but don't actually make sense of the ride. They don't even use the actual SAW soundtrack which always baffled me as it builds so much more tension. The game over before the lift hill contradicts the film too because when that happens, it usually results in death, so technically you shouldn't have actually survived, but you have because you've found a loop (hole) through this very intelligent guys games

I totally agree with you about the lack of coherent story. What always gets me is how (if you're in the second car), Billy tells us 'This is what happens if you lose...' when you leave. Yet, at the end of the ride, we're told we've survived. It doesn't make sense, and it is a real shame (waits for some ironic comment saying that the Saw films don't make sense, but I'd disagree with that ). It's a real shame; they had such a good opportunity to create a good story, but they didn't.

It's also a shame about the lack of soundtrack too; it's one of the key things you associate with Saw. I think it would have been perfect as a background noise in the building; both in the queue and the ride itself.

What about that announcement from 2009?

"Push your harnesses up, grab your belongings and get out to your left. This may be your only chance of escape!"

I also forgot about this; actually can't remember the last time I heard it! Hopefully it can make a return...

Do you think Merlin Studios actually considered whether riders would "still be reeling from the experience" when they put the doll on the shelf? Does the fact that riders are possibly still disorientated mean you can get away with the cheapest effects possible? Do you think the experience was analysed so much as to compensate for people who have or haven't seen the movies? If these things had been considered like you claim then Saw The Ride would be a lot more substantial than it is.

I don't know what they would have or have not considering to be honest. But, of course, they wanted the riders to remember they're in the Saw environment, so it makes sense to have a nice little touch to end the ride. It doesn't mean they can get away with cheap effects. What they have is a small addition which keeps in line with the films, and the gist of it is well known enough outside the films in such a way that if you haven't seen the films, you can see why it relates.

Of course I think the experience was analysed so that people who haven't seen the films are kept happy - this ride is suitable for anyone over 12 apparently! The designers no doubt wanted to make sure there was actual things from the films so you see this was 'Saw - The Ride' and not 'The imitation of Saw ride'. I don't think it's a coincidence, either, that most of the traps that come from the film relate to the first film - in fact, the only that isn't is the actual Rack Trap from Saw 3. They only took things from the most iconic and likely-most seen Saw film so that there's a greater chance that more people can relate to it. Then, everything else is generic 'Oh, this can kill you if this was real'.

You are basing your point on an imagined romanticised situation in which the rider is receptive to everything around them. Stand there, in person, and watch how many people actually notice the doll and see how their attention span lasts about 0.5 seconds looking at it. I'm speaking from experience having been involved with theatrical entertinment and spent years studying art and scenic design, to understand things from the audience's point of view.

The last time I went on Saw, the "average riders" included a gang of drunk men, some bored-looking girls and a bunch of eager teenagers. Each one of them were just there to get on the ride and have a quick bit of fun, not to go around making sad excuses that "at least they did something when they could have done nothing".

I am not saying people don't enjoy the ride - it has proven to be one of Thorpe Park's most popular rides ever and was a big success with the public, regardless of my personal opinion. But it's popularity is not to do with its effects and scenic design - it's because it's a rollercoaster coaster with the "Saw" name attached. Imagine how totally taken aback riders would be if it was genuinly frightening and grim on the inside.

It is indeed an ideal situation to be in that riders are receptive to everything around them. However, that isn't just a trouble for Saw, it's a trouble for all coasters! However, just because not every rider is receptive to their surrounds and pays attention to everything, it doesn't mean everything has to been shoved in your face. There should be things which are subtle, or even just less obvious. Yes, it means people will miss some things, but their experience on the whole is still going to be good. For the 'ideal rider', or even just a rider that is really into the ride, the ending is fine.

In your last experience, I'm guessing your average riders were who were in your car, maybe one other car as well? You can't really base a view on a couple of cars. I still think that, overall, the average riders are going to be people who haven't ridden Saw many times, if at all, have maybe seen one or two Saw films and, given the audience of the ride, going to be teens / young adults who are looking forward to the ride.

[EC!]

I swear this is the most action this Saw thread has had in blummin ages! Well done guys haha

[SteveJ]

It is indeed an ideal situation to be in that riders are receptive to everything around them. However, that isn't just a trouble for Saw, it's a trouble for all coasters! However, just because not every rider is receptive to their surrounds and pays attention to everything, it doesn't mean everything has to been shoved in your face. There should be things which are subtle, or even just less obvious.

That's not what I'm saying. Riders being unreceptive is not a problem, it's just human nature - but the best themed attractions are theatrical and thrilling enough to overcome this. There's a big difference between subtlely and poor effort.

Anyway the Saw films are hardly subtle, in fact it's some of the most gratuitous silliness I've ever seen in a movie (that's the whole point it seems). The ride should have been just as exaggerated to recreate the atmosphere of the movies. That really wouldn't have been too hard to achieve. Even just some pulsing music and professional lighting in the pre-lift sequence would ramp things up a lot. Instead we have a wobbly Billy doll whose amazing mouth animation probably cost a whole £10 to create (I mean, 40 years ago John Wardley created far more convincing animatronics in his bedroom using elastic).

Well I'm glad others enjoy Saw The Ride more than I do, it's there to be enjoyed obviously. But you know everybody would enjoy it 10x more if it actually had some panache and substance to it! Plus then there wouldn't be pointless debates over whether a novelty doll with a light on its face is memorable entertainment (sorry, I'll never let it go - it never fails to amuse me how bad it is!).

[Fred]

Totally gonna go out there and say that actually the end corridor is my favourite bit of the ride. If timed right, and I get THE GAMES HAVE JUST BEGUN with the noise it gives me a right chill down my back.

Probably my only thing I enjoy from it apart from 'hello squirrel hunters'

[pluk]

Instead we have a wobbly Billy doll whose amazing mouth animation probably cost a whole £10 to create (I mean, 40 years ago John Wardley created far more convincing animatronics in his bedroom using elastic).

That Billy puppet pretty much sums up the ride for me. It's embarrassingly bad. The crossbow thing is done really poorly too, that something being fired across you trick has been done so much better elsewhere.

I do enjoy the indoor section a lot though, shame there's not more of it.

[Altitude]

To the person on the last page that said the "Here's what happens if you lose" part doesn't make sense, it does. He's saying if you lose the game, this is the sort of thing that will happen.

That's why you avoid the pendulums and the crossbows, and then you're shown what has happened to someone who lost the game.

However when he says "Game Over", that doesn't make sense. You haven't made any choices yet, you've only been shown would will happen when you lose.

[OldFarmerDean]

anyone noticed the swinging axes (or whatever you want to call them) aren't swinging properly like they used to... I noticed it at the end of the season last year, and still hasn't been fixed - they don't swing in time now, and the swinging motion is really jumpy/juddery (a bit like vortex eh aha)! just ruins the effect in my opinion!

[Ricky]

I noticed someone bring up Merlin Studios, what you need to remember is, Lionsgste would of had a much bigger say in how the ride looked than Merlin.

It would of gone something like this....

1. Thorpe Park gives an idea to Merlin Studios,

2. Merlin Studios works on the idea and brings out concept art, storylines etc etc,

3. Merlin Studios passes on ideas and concepts on to Lionsgate.

4. Lionsgate review the ideas and say either:

Yes - But this is what we want to add/remove.

No - This is what we want for you to get the IP contract.

5. Merlin studios and Lionsgate start a tug of war of ideas until both come to an understanding.

Lionsgate will get the final word as it's their brand Thorpe would be taking advantage of.

[SteveJ]

Lionsgate is a film production company and simply fund the movies and own the brands, they wouldn't get directly involved with the creative departments of either the movies or the rides. The Ride project was designed by Merlin's lead creative at the time and I would assume Lionsgate's role was to approve the final plans.

I know when the ride was first announced that there were a lot of press releases about how "Lionsgate is proud to be working with Thorpe Park to create the scariest ride in the world..." but that's mostly PR and I doubt a film distribution company actually had many creative decisions about the ride's effects and scenery.

[alexander]

Lionsgate is a film production company and simply fund the movies and own the brands, they wouldn't get directly involved with the creative departments of either the movies or the rides. The Ride project was designed by Merlin's lead creative at the time and I would assume Lionsgate's role was to approve the final plans.

I know when the ride was first announced that there were a lot of press releases about how "Lionsgate is proud to be working with Thorpe Park to create the scariest ride in the world..." but that's mostly PR and I doubt a film distribution company actually had many creative decisions about the ride's effects and scenery.

Maybe if they did we'd have got better theming

[Flipper]

Afraid to say Ricky is right; it's an IP and Lionsgate would have had to give them input as to what they could and couldn't do with the ride, and say they are happy with the final result. It isn't just a case of Lionsgate saying "Yes it's fine" it would have been endless discussions; much like Cbeebies land will be, or Angry Birds will be. At the end of the day, if someone's making an experience based on say, a book you wrote, you'd want it to be perfect.

[coaster_monkey]

Lionsgate is a film production company and simply fund the movies and own the brands, they wouldn't get directly involved with the creative departments of either the movies or the rides. The Ride project was designed by Merlin's lead creative at the time and I would assume Lionsgate's role was to approve the final plans.

This.

Lionsgate had already given the source material, the Saw movies.

The Saw construction blog that Thorpe Park updated quite regularly, spoke about how most of the theming was designed and led by one of Merlins own. I forget her name.... Which says a lot about the creative team Merlin have/had.

[tomglazed]

This.

Lionsgate had already given the source material, the Saw movies.

The Saw construction blog that Thorpe Park updated quite regularly, spoke about how most of the theming was designed and led by one of Merlins own. I forget her name.... Which says a lot about the creative team Merlin have/had.

Or to be precise, not just the creative team they have, but the budget they are allocated.

[Benin]

Candy Holland was the main team leader of the Saw project...

She was also involved in Thirteen and Smiler's creative processes... She's the modern day John Wardley I think, only with coin purses tightly fastened and market research corridors to navigate wildly...

[Flipper]

Candy Holland was the main team leader of the Saw project...

She was also involved in Thirteen and Smiler's creative processes... She's the modern day John Wardley I think, only with coin purses tightly fastened and market research corridors to navigate wildly...

So she likes to attempt to create psychological ties in her themes on a budget? Budget is pretty noticeable I'd say; and the psychological theme is apparent from the three you've named.

[SteveJ]

Candy Holland is head of Merlin's creative team and she was mentored by John, but another guy (am I allowed to post his name since he is no longer a Merlin employee?) was the lead creative designer of Saw, Swarm and Smiler.

The process these days is totally different to how John Wardley used to work. I had a nice talk to him about it last week, the theme park industry was totally different back then. The last time where one person/team had all creative control in a Tussaudes project was around Nemesis or even earlier.