Saw: Heritage

Pros: This movie is very well made and taken serious! The plot is good and very original. Cons: The lack of budget has affected a lot the overall quality of the film, characters without backstory.

Let me explain what I mean...Quentin Tarantino's visual references to other movies have become his trademark. Tarantino's unique style is an element known as "pastiche" in postmodern cinema. "Pastiche" is art that imitates a style, but also the mix. Exactly what Arfanis did for Saw: Heritage. He mixed two of his favorite universes. Aronofsky's Requiem for a Dream and Wan's Saw. Arfanis understanding of the source material as well the respect to those sources, combined with his unique vision are what makes these pastiches so great. The writing could be way better. Don't take me wrong. Saw: Heritage is not a masterpiece, it is not oscar worthy, but it's not that bad either. Acting could be better, writing as well. But for zero budget I am happy and positive surprised that a fan film can deliver such respect to the original and uniqueness. Do I recommend it ? Not necessary. If you are Saw fan give it a watch thought keeping in mind it is director's first work as well it has zero budget and that the actors are greek. If you can survive all those factor's you may like it. It's fun to be honest.

"Saw: Heritage" is an unauthorized fan film, released in 2016. This short film attempts to pay homage to the iconic "Saw" franchise. The film does a commendable job in creating a tense atmosphere, which is crucial for any horror film. The cinematography is also notable, especially considering the low budget. The idea of exploring the "Saw" universe without relying on the central character, Jigsaw, is intriguing. It shows that the franchise's core themes can be expanded upon. "Saw: Heritage" is an ambitious project that shows potential and ultimatelly, an interesting watch for die-hard fans of the franchise who are curious about different interpretations.

Saw: Heritage is the usual mediocre fan film one might expect. Many directors, especially at the beginning of their careers, choose to shoot a fan film to test their skills or build their reels. Most of the time, these movies are hidden and never come out to the light of the day. Today, thanks to the power of the internet, many of these movies are coming to the surface and being distributed on platforms like Youtube.

Saw: Heritage is the first film ever made by director Christos Arfanis. Arfanis definitely has great skills in directing films. But the fan film called Saw: Heritage is neither his best work nor something that should define him as a creator and filmmaker. The film is more reminiscent of "Requiem for a Dream" than "Saw", on which it was based. Extreme and detailed drug use just doesn't fit in the concept of Saw films. The scenes are masterfully shot, directed, and edited, but that shouldn't be the case. Good directing, cinematography, music, editing, do not save the indifferent script and the bad actors. Arfanis managed to make his own Saw world. A world that has nothing to do with the world set on the original Saw films, but it certainly has something to offer on the wider image.

Josh Stolberg said about the fan film the following: "Very cool. I enjoyed that a lot. Well done. Great composition. Nice idea. Really good work. It takes a lot of work to put together a short. Great work", and if you ask me, he is right you know. The movie is really enjoyable. The composition is top-notch. The idea is nice, the work overall is really good and it realy should take all the cast and crew much effort to make this fan film. What went wrong you may ask? Well, the film's biggest pro is also its biggest con: It is based on "Saw" but it is not "Saw". Arfanis' fan film is exactly what happened on "Saw" franchise, after the original "Saw III": Great movies quality-wise, but they lack originality and most characters are messy and loosely are being introduced without any purpose. There is no doubt that Arfanis has skills and talent and I am confident to say that his fan film work can easily complete and be compared with the major original Hollywood-made sequels of "Saw". But he could use that skill to make an original movie. Saw: Heritage is not a bad movie. But it doesn't feel like Saw, as many reviewers say. It is more like a "Requiem for a Dream meets Saw" type of thing.

So in conclusion. Does Saw: Heritage deserve your time? I'd say yes and no. You can give it a watch if you like films with good direction and cinematography. But is a big No if you want to watch something original and a good fan film. There are better fan films out there. There are better films out there. Why you waste your time watching that fan film? I'd say only to check Arfanis on his baby steps. Many reviews claim that Arfanis could be the next Lanthimos or Aronofsky or the next big name on Entertainment Industry. Could that happen? Sure, I hope so and I wish him that. But he should really focus on making some original content too. Do I recommend it? Watch something else instead.

With practice and practice, Arfanis will inevitably become a very good film director in the end. After all, practice makes perfect! But the thing is, he already set the bar high by making his first-ever film. Sadly, it was a fan film. But it is never late. We do grow as people when we explore ideas and characters journeys, I think what would so and so do, so directing does shape you as a person and your stories in your films can tell a lot about where you are emotionally or morally as well. Hopefully, Arfanis will all grow and learn to be a good person as well as a good director. The future seems bright and promising for Arfanis. But Saw: Heritage, is a no from me.

Pros: Composition, Atmosphere, Editing, Cinematography Cons: Acting, low budget