{"id":279919,"date":"2026-02-04T08:21:10","date_gmt":"2026-02-04T08:21:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/279919\/"},"modified":"2026-02-04T08:21:10","modified_gmt":"2026-02-04T08:21:10","slug":"james-wan-and-leigh-whannell-reflect-on-saw-origins","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/279919\/","title":{"rendered":"James Wan and Leigh Whannell Reflect on ‘Saw’ Origins"},"content":{"rendered":"

In 2004, two Aussie filmmakers not only took Robert Redford\u2019s Sundance Film Festival<\/a> by storm, but the horror industry at large. That year, James Wan and Leigh Whannell stood outside Park City\u2019s Egyptian Theatre, braving the winter\u2019s biting cold while their nasty, tear-your-guts-out feature debut played to audiences for the first time. That film, the spark that\u2019d ignite a massive franchise sensation for Lionsgate, is, of course, Saw<\/a>.<\/p>\n

At this year\u2019s Sundance, Wan and Whannell returned to Utah\u2019s ski resort hub to pay homage not only to their film\u2019s anniversary, but also to Sundance\u2019s final year in Park City before the impending move to Boulder, Colorado. Saw was programmed as part of a \u201cPark City Legacy<\/a>\u201d slate, since a fateful Sundance Midnight premiere launched one of the buzziest, bloodiest intellectual properties in 2000s horror history.<\/p>\n

Speaking exclusively to Bloody Disgusting, Whannell reflects: \u201cI was standing outside the Egyptian last night, and they\u2019re not showing movies there this year. I felt melancholy about that, because that was where Saw premiered. It feels like the end of an era for Sundance, and a full circle for us, just to be back here. Things were happening to us at that age, faster than we could move, and we were going along with it.\u201d<\/p>\n

The solemnity in his voice is understood. Saw\u2019s triumphant return to Sundance 22 years later puts it among countless other monumental breakouts. Quentin Tarantino\u2019s Reservoir Dogs, Ryan Coogler\u2019s Fruitvale Station, and Mary Harron\u2019s American Psycho are in league with a trike-peddling puppet with blood-red, swirly cheeks (who also returned to Sundance<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\"Directed<\/p>\n

Leigh Whannell in Saw<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a full-circle moment for Wan, who made a promise to himself about attending film festivals.<\/p>\n

\u201cLeigh and I had this philosophy, back when we were in Australia, that we wouldn\u2019t go to a particular festival unless we had a movie showing. Sundance was our first mainstream festival. I\u2019ve always said, \u2018I\u2019m not going to come back to Sundance until I come back with a movie.\u2019 And, well, I\u2019ve never had a chance to come back with another movie until now.\u201d<\/p>\n

A lot was, in fact, happening to Wan and Whannell \u2014 but they were savvier than most rookie creators. According to Business Insider, they turned down a $5 million offer from Lionsgate<\/a> before striking a deal with the studio where they\u2019d forgo an advance, pay Lionsgate an \u201c18%-20%\u201d distribution fee, and pocket the rest. Notably, Saw grossed $104 million worldwide on a $1 million budget. These boys knew they had a hit on their hands, but to the extent that the franchise exploded? No one could predict.<\/p>\n

Part of the pomp and circumstance around Sundance releases is the reception. Sometimes filmmakers humbly accept standing ovations; other times they\u2019re verbally accosted outside theaters by furious attendees (like Lucky McKee after The Woman<\/a>). When I asked Wan and Whannell what post-screening reactions stood out to them, the Aquaman director lit up and, quite playfully (very good-natured), recalled a close-to-home memory:<\/p>\n

\u201cBloody Disgusting shit on it! [Saw] was reviewed by Brad Miska\u2019s brother, and I have held Brad to the fucking fire over that. When he got around to watching [Saw], he told his brother, \u2018What the fuck are you talking about? Did we not watch the same movie?\u2019 [Brad] said that his brother watched [Saw] when he was really drunk that night, at the premiere. [His brother] was like, \u2018I don\u2019t know what movie I just watched.\u2019 You can quote me on that one.\u201d<\/p>\n

Bloody Disgusting atoned for its sins when its managing editor Meagan Navarro ranked it among the best horror movies of the 2000s<\/a>. (Editors note: Brad Miska, who left the company last year after ceding site operations to EIC John Squires in 2021, reviewed the film favorably<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

However, critiques are merely one post-release inevitability for any filmmaker. What\u2019s more important is the almighty dollar. Ticket sales dictate a film\u2019s longevity and future possibilities. Saw\u2019s performance was so prolific that it didn\u2019t just spawn a franchise that\u2019s still beating John Kramer\u2019s dead (or alive) corpse, with entries pouring out of his cracked skull like a graveyard pi\u00f1ata. Saw was the new \u201cIt\u201d thing, horror\u2019s subgenre du jour. Studios clamored to acquire or produce their Saw lookalike\u2014your Grotesque (2009) or Captivity (2007)\u2014but, as is typically true, no copycats could dethrone Jigsaw.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Shawnee Smith as Amanda in Saw.<\/p>\n

Still, Wan and Whannell had to watch as less-than-valiant mimicry turned the public sour on Saw-esque movies. Thus, the term \u201cTorture Porn\u201d became both a subgenre classification and a low-blow critique to generalize these gore-heavy, plot-thin mutilation parades. The \u201cSplat Pack\u201d era, as Wan remembers, although he shooed away the \u201cTorture Porn\u201d phrase (rightfully so, given how Saw reached far beyond mindless gratuity). Imitation is the sincerest form of flatter after all, and per Wan, \u201cWe were honored that people felt that our movie meant something and that they wanted to imitate it. [Horror] movies don\u2019t look like that anymore, but I\u2019m sure it\u2019ll come back. Like fashion, it\u2019s cyclical.\u201d<\/p>\n

Whannell is a little more introspective about their influence over the Horrorsphere. \u201cIt was cool that we were like the tip of the spear in this movement, this trend\u2014and that was a great thing for two people who really wanted to be in the film business.\u201d Saw was a pop-culture phenomenon, thanks in part to Tobin Bell\u2018s iconic role as John Kramer, and also to everyone\u2019s favorite cackling dolly, Billy the Puppet.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere were Saw references in The Simpsons, South Park, The Sopranos \u2026 It was pretty awesome to penetrate pop culture in that way.\u201d<\/p>\n

As we all know, much of the Saw franchise was produced without Wan or Whannell\u2019s involvement despite being the concept\u2019s masterminds. \u201cI didn\u2019t do the sequels because I felt I had already made the movie I wanted to make,\u201d Wan confirms. \u201cLeigh was going to produce, and ultimately, he was going to write [Saw II] \u2026 at least one of us has a creative voice that is going to at least shepherd the next one or two movies.\u201d But that would only last Saw II and Saw III, as we all know. After that? Whannell reminisces about how Saw kept evolving without their guidance. \u201cJames and I had this strange, surreal experience once a year, driving down the street and seeing a billboard for this thing that we created in Melbourne when we were starving ex-film students, and now it\u2019s out in the world.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018It wasn\u2019t for a lack of money either,\u201d Wan interjects, regarding his declining to participate in any sequels despite Lionsgate\u2019s financial sweeteners. \u201cI\u2019m still crying about it,\u201d a fourth voice chimes in from over my shoulder. \u201cPut this in the article, \u2018A single tier fell down the face of their agent, Scott Henderson,\u2019\u201d Whannell insists with a grin.<\/p>\n

Whannell confirmed that although he lasted longer than Wan, apprehension was abound. \u201cThe true story is, I followed James\u2019s lead at first. I didn\u2019t want to be involved either.\u201d Apparently, [Lionsgate] came back to Whannell once they had a writer and begged him to \u201cpretty please get involved.\u201d With proper incentives, Whannell penned his two sequels, but by Saw III, he\u2019d reached his limitations. \u201cI was like, \u2018Yeah, I think I\u2019m done here. I can\u2019t think of any more ways to kill someone with a power drill.’\u201d<\/p>\n

So what did Whannell do? Put a stake through Jigsaw\u2019s heart.<\/p>\n

\u201cI killed Jigsaw. I was like, \u2018This is pretty definitive.\u2018 Which [Lionsgate] regrets to this day. If the producers could go back in time, they wouldn\u2019t be killing Hitler, they\u2019d be convincing me not to kill Jigsaw.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

With overnight attention came trepidation and mild paranoia. Whannell continues, \u201cWe had this fear of like, we didn\u2019t want Saw to be our epitaph.\u201d They didn\u2019t want Saw to be their legacy because that would mean nothing else connected with audiences. \u201cSo when we did Insidious, it was a big sigh of relief \u2026 because luckily we were not one-hit-wonders.\u201d In Whannell\u2019s words, they avoided the curse of Dexys Midnight Runners. \u201c[All] they get asked about is \u2018Come On Eileen,\u2019 yet they had other songs.\u201d Thankfully, as the years went by and both filmmakers bolstered their resumes, success became a perennial occurrence.<\/p>\n

Although there was one unfortunate side-effect of their meteoric rise to superstardom, in Whannell\u2019s opinion: Dead Silence<\/a>.<\/p>\n

When I asked Whannell what advice he\u2019d give to his pre-Saw self, the wide-eyed Australian lad about to rewrite horror history, he said, \u201cI would go back and tell myself, \u2018Hey, slow down. Wait until [Saw] comes out and then make some choices.\u2019\u201d When asked if that was a slight on Dead Silence, he confirmed directly, \u201cI\u2019ve been complaining about Dead Silence for 20 years, I\u2019m not going to stop.\u201d<\/p>\n

At this point, the interview turned chaotic in a completely on-brand and delightful way. Wan and Whannell are poster boys for best-friend dynamics, with energetic jesting and mutually committed bits.<\/p>\n

I tried my best, as a Dead Silence defender, to turn Whannell\u2019s disdain. Alas, he insists, \u201cI think my final words \u2026 My daughter\u2019s going to grasp my hand, and [say], \u2018I love you, Dad.\u2019 Then I\u2019m going to respond like, \u2018Me too. But that fucking puppet movie, man. What the hell were they thinking?’\u201d<\/p>\n

Wan adds fuel to Ravens Fair\u2019s fire by calling Dead Silence Whannell\u2019s Rosebud, to which the goaded scribe retorts with a smile, \u201cYeah, Rosebud. Except no one will know what it means because I\u2019ll be like, \u2018Shh.’\u201d<\/p>\n

For what it\u2019s worth, Mr. Whannell, I\u2019m still a ride-or-die Mary Shaw advocate<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Dead Silence\u2019s Billy might be a one-and-done scarer, but Saw\u2019s Billy is a creepy phenomenon. What\u2019s even funnier? He almost didn\u2019t exist.<\/p>\n

Whannell recalls pitching Wan Amanda Young\u2019s \u201cReverse Bear Trap\u201d sequence. He describes their working partnership as putting \u201ctwo ingredients together,\u201d bouncing ideas off each other from opposite perspectives. In this case, Wan\u2019s intuition was spot-on. According to Whannell, after he detailed Amanda\u2019s grueling test, Wan calmly added, \u201cThat\u2019s cool. If we put a creepy doll in there, it\u2019ll be perfect.\u201d Wan\u2019s social media handle is @creepypuppet, so duh.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u201cI didn\u2019t, at the time, think the creepy doll was necessary,\u201d Whannel confesses. It would be like, I felt like me calling Orson Welles and being like, \u2018At the end of the movie they find [Rosebud], and it says Rosebud, and the whole movie is tied up in this beautiful bow.\u201d And then Orson was like, \u201cBut then what if they had like a judo fight after that?\u201d As we know, Billy the Puppet has endured countless failed sequels and still sells merchandise at a substantial clip, so it\u2019s evident who was right. \u201cJames is clearly the smartest of the two of us. And so now, when he tells me what to do, I do it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wan and Whannell\u2019s Sundance trip is a bittersweet sendoff, yet it represents a milestone victory lap for the artists. What these two have accomplished since Saw\u2018s initial emergence is nothing short of a miracle. \u201cYou would walk down the street, and we would hear strangers talking about our film, not knowing that we were involved,\u201d Whannell fondly remembers. Fame hasn\u2019t corrupted these genuinely excellent humans, who still exude the passion and vitality of fresh-out-of-school babyfaces. Without James Wan, without Leigh Whannell, the horror landscape would\u2019ve veered into territories unknown. Twice, if you count how Wan\u2019s The Conjuring pulled theatrical horror back into the marketable haunted house era. Their ideas aren\u2019t run-of-the-mill\u2014they generate nightmares and lay groundworks for multi-entry stories that people ravenously crave.<\/p>\n

But if there\u2019s one constant in their lives, it\u2019s a very special friend who is the real celebrity of their trio. States Wan, gesturing at the remote-controlled Billy wedged between them on a generic Sheraton Inn couch, \u201cThe kickstarter of our career, really. We wouldn\u2019t be here if it weren\u2019t for this guy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Related: James Wan and Leigh Whannell tease Saw future plans.<\/a><\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t