The One Thing Saw's Producers Would Change If The Franchise Started Today

The chronology of the "Saw" movies is massively complicated, and only the most dedicated researchers have dared to map out when certain events occur. Everything surrounds the vengeful trap-builder Jigsaw, aka John Kramer (Tobin Bell) a character who actually died at the end of Darren Lynn Bouseman's "Saw III," but who still appeared in several sequels thereafter. Baffling chronologies have been a feature of the "Saw" movies from the start, with James Wan's 2004 original told mostly in flashback. Indeed, one of those flashbacks also had a flashback in it. 

As far as a casual observer might tell, the films take place in the following order: "Saw," then the new "Saw X," then "Saw II." "Saw III" and "Saw IV" take place over roughly the same period, with interacting timelines. The rest seem to take place more or less numerically ("Saw V," "Saw VI," "Saw 3D," "Jigsaw," "Spiral"), although each one features additional flashbacks and appearances from Bell. "Spiral" is the only film not to feature Bell in some capacity. 

There is no supernatural resurrection in the "Saw" movies, and "Saw IV" actually begins with John Kramer's autopsy. Audiences witness his body being sliced up and his organs being weighed by pathologists, indicating that he is really most sincerely dead. It massive amounts of writing creativity to keep Jigsaw involved after that. 

The death of John Kramer proved to be a burr in the boots of series producers Mark Burg and Oren Koules. Because the "Saw" movies were so successful, they clearly wanted to keep the series going, but after "Saw III," there was now always going to be a hurdle. In a recent interview with IndieWire, Koules and Burg admitted they should have kept Jigsaw alive a lot longer than they did. 

Burg said pretty plainly: "If I had to do it again, I might not have killed Tobin Bell in 'Saw III.' That might have been a mistake." The most recent film in the series, "Saw X," takes place just after the events of the first "Saw," allowing the filmmakers to resurrect Jigsaw, but such a stunt wouldn't have been needed if they weren't so hasty to raise the stakes at the end of "Saw III." 

Burg and Koules admitted that they cleaved to an old-world Hollywood idea when it came to making "Saw" sequels. There was a time several decades ago when talking about sequels during the production of a first film was considered presumptuous and taboo. Filmmakers wouldn't concern themselves with sequels until the first film had already proven successful. It wasn't until mapped-out film series like "Harry Potter" and "Lord of the Rings" came along that entire strings of films would be so openly planned in advance. Although the "Saw" movies came out on a yearly schedule — there was one "Saw" film every Halloween for seven straight years — Koules and Burg didn't want to set anything up for the next round. 

This includes any plans for a "Saw XI." When asked about the future of the series — prequels, sequels, or interquels — Burg said: 

"We're superstitious, so we've never talked about the following 'Saw' until the previous movie opens. So if this movie works on October 2, we'll sit down. [...] We left it open-ended, and I want to see what happens next."

"Saw X" was made on a budget of only $13 million, and has, as of this writing, earned over $80 million worldwide. It seems that a "Saw XI" is very much in our future.