Originally Posted by elDomenechHDG
one thing thing I'd never do is compare a new film made today to one made in the 90's - stylistically, the eras are worlds apart. Texas Chainsaw III, while not a very good movie, is still preferable (to me, at least) to anything made today because what they're making now are essentially really long music videos. It's all about the visuals, fancy editing, and now 3D gimmickry that enhances the film in absolutely zero ways. Eye candy, nothing more. I'll always prefer low-rent production values and slow-burn storytelling over 40 million dollars worth of gimmicks.
How are things like this that different from the Saw
series (now about 9 years old) and every single post mid-90's remake (going back as far as William Malone's 1999 remake of House on Haunted Hill
Otherwise: astute observations. Though, honestly? Good luck telling the low budget much apart from the "big budget." Except for, maybe, picture quality.