ROTTEN TOMATOES: Scott Patterson Improvises Saw IV

Scott Patterson Improvises Saw IV

Patterson talks about Tobin Bell, too.

by Fred Topel | September 01, 2007

The Saw movies are so tightly structured to set up all their plot twists, it does not seem like there would be any room for improvisation. But actor Scott Patterson, who joins the franchise in Saw IV, gave the filmmakers some of his own material to work with.

"You improvise before the meat of the scene begins and at the end of it," said Patterson. "So if they don't like any of it, [they can delete it]. I didn't mess with the text as written, but in the beginning if they wanted a little preamble and at the end I put a button on it."

Patterson plays an FBI agent on the trail of Jigsaw. After his long stint on television, improvisation was one of the many freedoms he enjoyed on Saw IV. "Coming from a very regimented structured environment that Gilmore Girls was and walking onto that set and just being able to stretch your muscles, it was a great experience."

He had nice things to say about actor Tobin Bell too, revealing just how close his agent gets to Jigsaw. "I had one scene with him. I can't really tell you about it but he's a terrific guy. He's a really dedicated actor and a terrific human being. And a pretty good singer/songwriter."

Saw IV will be hitting theaters October 26 -- watch the teaser trailer over at Yahoo Movies.

Related Items

Celeb:	Scott Patterson
	Tobin Bell
	Darren Lynn Bausman

(1-19 of 19 posts) | Reply

BReeG writes:
on Sep 01 2007 01:50 AM

Jigsaw sings? Did not know that.

(Reply to this)

Lizard Brain writes:
on Sep 01 2007 03:47 AM

Dr. Gordon is the REAL Jigsaw. That's all you need to know...

(Reply to this)

KubrickIsG-d writes:
on Sep 01 2007 07:12 AM

This is the most fascinating story I've read all year. HE IMPROVISES SOME OF HIS LINES!!! Wow, way to bring an artistic bend to the Saw movies. This guy must be one talented actor to really bring out the "best" of the Saw movies. I just can't believe it. This totally deserves to be the headline story for today, who cares about DUNE or Stephen King, this is much more interesting.

(Reply to this)

CaptainSiberia writes:
on Sep 01 2007 09:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#1089757)
Why are we enthusiastically writing articles about a movie that's just going to suck anyway? RottenTomatoes is supposed to represent the voice of the critics, not studio hype! Stop jerking off!

(Reply to this)

PlanBFromOuterSpace writes:
on Sep 01 2007 10:54 AM

As quickly as the Saw movies are cranked out, don't they sort've have to do things on the fly anyway? I mean, these movies are really made in the editing room. I don't think there are very many shots, particularly during the torture stuff, that go for more than a couple of seconds. I can't imagine there's much in the way of lengthy monologues that need to be learned, so you probably CAN make up a lot of your own stuff.

"Oh *****, oh *****, oh *****! Nooooooooooo! HELP!".

Yeah, I made that up all by myself.

I'm sure that the "very regimented" Gilmore Girls environment was like a regular concentration camp for actors...

(Reply to this)

MatrixOutsider writes:
on Sep 01 2007 12:33 PM

In reply to this comment (#1089244)
I think we will discover that the jigsaw is not the top person of the pyramid. There is someone above him that is dictating the game.

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Sep 01 2007 03:44 PM

yeaaaa another saw movie? What I always wanted for holloween

(Reply to this)

Frown88 writes:
on Sep 02 2007 12:06 AM

yet for some dumb reason
ill always end up watching these
liked the first one
hated the second
liked the third-dont ask my why
following this trend...
fourth is bound to be S**t

(Reply to this)

jrb0013 writes:
on Sep 02 2007 10:01 PM

Has anyone noticed that many of movies this summer were sequels? (Pirates, Shrek, Fantastic 4, Bourne, Harry Potter, Spider Man, Die Hard...) Has anyone noticed that the majority of these movies sucked? Why does Hollywood keep producing this crap? Because they think that audiences are stupid and are willing to go see a pile of vomit like Pirates 3 out of nostalgia for the first one. We, as moviegoers need to stop encouraging this kind of stupidity. There are good ideas out there for good movies, but as long as sequels make money they'll keep coming out with them. Saw 4 should be an EASY movie to avoid, the first one was ok, shocking and a decent twist, Saw 2 and 3 were horrible movies which were on par with a poorly acted snuff movie. Avoid this horrible, despicable show of stupidity.

(Reply to this)

PlanBFromOuterSpace writes:
on Sep 03 2007 11:09 AM

" Has anyone noticed that many of movies this summer were sequels?"

Why the surprise? For the most part, they were sequels to movies that people liked, even sequels to SEQUELS that people liked. Barely any of these movies had me wondering "Why would they make a sequel to THAT?", and whether or not I actually wanted to see it, I understood WHY it was there. Remember, popularity doesn't necessarily equal quality. If you don't like part 1 and 2 of a particular franchise, you're most likely not going to like parts 3, 4, and so on, but a lot of people have an interest in the franchise, enough anyway to make it profitable, so that's why there's a sequel or more. A lot of people complain about the sequels, but they can gripe all they want, because this has been the biggest moneymaking summer that Hollywood has ever had, so I'm sure there are more than a few hypocrites running around out there. And please, don't even try to drag inflation into the argument. Money's money, and that's really ALL it's about, not because the filmmakers are looking to make a better world or anything. You can't go back in time and give more money to the producers of a film from 1989 because, when you adjust for increased ticket prices, etc., it would have made a lot more today.

The best we can hope for is to not be disappointed, maybe (for some of you , this could really be reaching) ENJOY a sequel or two to films that we liked, and not complain about it and say it's worst idea ever before it's ever even seen by anyone.

That said, I've thought that the Saw films have been OK, and I want to see Saw 4 before anyone (other than the filmmakers) has a chance to ruin it for me, but that'll probably be the only time I see it unless it pops up on TV or something later on.

(Reply to this)

ThunderMammoth writes:
on Sep 03 2007 08:56 PM

In reply to this comment (#1089757)
this is interesting??? the actor made up some lines that may not even end up anywhere on the film. THIS HAPPENS IN FILMMAKING ALL THE TIME.

who cares about Dune or Stephen King???

ummm, the entire industry that Saw imitates and reflects was born from the decades of the horror genre in which King is one of the innovators.

Saw is easily one of the most overrrated film series out in horror film history. Upon the 3rd film's conclusion... Jigsaw has officially helped NO ONE, or Redeemed NO ONE, and even his "apprentice" ended up learning nothing from him. zero success in 3 movies.

and isn't he dead? no, of course not... because those 3 other films ended up not meaning anything, because he's actually still alive, for who knows what reason or plausibility? and how much more money can be squeezed from people like yourself off a lukewarm, redundant series? lot's apparently.

this series should've ended after the first film. and would've been fine, because as itself, it was a tight little movie. this is another example of a good idea, corrupted by series-itis, and the greed of the industry.

(Reply to this)

PlanBFromOuterSpace writes:
on Sep 03 2007 10:19 PM

I always think its funny when kids nowadays, when they see the poster for something like "Saw IV", go "What? There's gonna be another Saw?".

I then explain that I grew up in the 80's and that there were 11 "Friday the 13th" movies (8 at the time, 2 more later, and then "Freddy vs. Jason"), 2 of which had FINAL in the title, despite the fact that neither of them would be the last. Three of the middle ones actually did have a bit of continuity between them, but for the most part, there wasn't really any sort of ongoing story. Jason would die at the end, and then he'd return at the beginning of the next one, sometimes with no explanation whatsoever. You could watch ANY of them without seeing any of the ones that came before or followed.

The "Saw" movies do have an ongoing storyline, although I'm sure it could end at any time. The good thing for Lionsgate (and fans of the series) is that even if the franchise starts to lose steam, it will never lose any money, as they've been pretty cheap to produce, and it can get a proper sendoff with just one more movie instead of being stopped dead in its tracks. Even though I'm not the biggest "Saw" fan, I do like what they're doing with the story, and the flashbacks in each new one sort of fix some of the plotholes in the previous installments. It'd be interesting, when it's all over, to see a re-edited version of the whole series, the entire SaWga if you will (ZING!).

As a movie itself, I actually thought that the first film was the weakest of the bunch. I thought the sequels were better for the most part, at least as far as production values go, but I'll re-watch a lot of other stuff before I'll watch the "Saw" movies again.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 04 2007 05:26 AM

after seeing Halloween...i'm actually ANTICIPATING seeing this horrible series, ANYTHING to rid that disgusting taste in my mouth after watching that pos. the improvising would explain the bajillion plotholes in this series... i just wish they'd charge 3 bucks because this series isn't worth a theater ticket, its rental...pure and simple. half the talent, half the story...half EVERYTHING. rent 10 horrors at your local vid store and i bet at least 6 or 7 are better, and that includes the amateur "i did this on a two dolla budget!" ones as well.

(Reply to this)

killermonkey8822 writes:
on Sep 04 2007 06:37 PM

the saw movies are ovverated..... i doubt saw 4 will be anything great.... though i didn't see saw 2 & 3.... after seeing the first movie i didn't really want too... lots of blood and gore dosen't scare me..... the movie didn't have enough suspense in it... maybe that's why i like m. night shamalyn's earlier films so much.

(Reply to this)

KubrickIsG-d writes:
on Sep 05 2007 10:32 AM

In reply to this comment (#1095797)
are you guys idiots or something. I HATE the Saw movies, Wolfcreek, Hostel and all the others with a passion. When I said "This is the most interesting article I read all year" I was being sarcastic.; Did I have to add the cliched "NOT" at the end to make you guys get that!

(Reply to this)

HFGIII writes:
on Sep 07 2007 02:35 PM

When are we gonna see "Weedwacker 1"? Think of the product placement! Instead of S&M, we could have B&D movies. A whole new genre.

(Reply to this)

Michael King writes:
on Oct 26 2007 05:42 PM

In reply to this comment (#1091804)
You're right. It was. I know I'm not supporting the Saw Franchise amymore.

(Reply to this)

Michael King writes:
on Oct 26 2007 05:44 PM

In reply to this comment (#1091804)
You're right. It was. I know I'm not supporting the Saw Franchise amymore.

(Reply to this)

Crazibutyful writes:
on Oct 27 2007 12:13 AM

I thought I'd share with all the critics here that Tobin Bell (aka Jigsaw) is not ALIVE in the fourth Saw movie. You should really have your facts straight before criticizing...well anything. As for those of you who are unsure of the storyline. There are (supposedly) a total of six movies in the series. After seeing the fourth, there is no doubt there is a fifth. One can only assume this rumor is true. Each movie is a "piece of the puzzle". I am not arguing whether the movie is good or not good. Everyone has different taste in film, everyone also expects different things out of a film. However, whether "Jigsaw" actually helps anyone, or whether or not anyone learns anything is not the point. It's all a puzzle, the storyline and the movies themselves(consisting of six movies in the series or six pieces in the puzzle). The movie is actually really creative and pure genius.

(Reply to this)