Three questions that will get me lynched, I hope you respect my opinion:

Why do so many people think Saw should have ended with the third movie? Why do they idolize Amanda so much? And why do they hate it when the saga doesn't focus solely on John and Amanda?

I appreciate another post I saw that encouraged me to make this one. That post asked why Saw IV is one of the least liked movies. Here’s my controversial opinion: It’s my second favorite, right after the first one.

I wonder, why do so many fans believe Saw III should have been the end of the franchise? Because of John and Amanda’s deaths? I’ll be honest—I don’t understand why so many people are so obsessed with Amanda. I mean, she was a brutal apprentice, but in the end, she became someone just as ruthless as Hoffman when it came to helping John. I’m not one of those who say Amanda is better than Hoffman, nor do I say Hoffman is better. To me, both were equally reckless, caused chaos, and their own actions led to their deaths. (Amanda’s fate is more justified because of Hoffman’s manipulation, but even so, she let Kerry die.) Hoffman is definitely more despicable than Amanda, but that doesn’t make Amanda a better person. To me, there’s a difference between being a better person and being less bad.

Now, back to the main topic—why do so many people think the franchise went downhill just because Amanda died? Saw IV developed John's arc much better, introduced Jill, the clinic, and the loss of his child. Saw V successfully continued that arc with Strahm uncovering Hoffman’s past, which explained why he turned out to be an apprentice at the end of Saw IV. And Saw VI is, in my opinion, an absolute masterpiece—though that’s a separate discussion since it excels thanks to other elements.

As for my third question—why do people only like the stories about John and Amanda? I ask this because I once polled the fandom about which main arc they preferred: the father-daughter dynamic between John and Amanda, or the rivalry between Hoffman and Strahm. Almost everyone (except for one person) chose John and Amanda. That didn’t surprise me as much as the reasoning behind it. They kept saying, "Both things aren't comparable." Dude, if they’re not comparable, then why was Hoffman vs. Strahm the main focus for two whole movies? Just like John and Amanda were the central story in Saw II and III, Hoffman and Strahm were the core of Saw IV and V. The difference? They simply weren’t as popular. So sure, maybe they’re not comparable in that sense.

But just because people hate Hoffman, does that mean he was a bad character to continue the saga? What do they want exactly? For John and Amanda to dominate the screen? I respect that some people prefer John and Amanda, but seriously—can’t they try a different "dish"? If you think Saw should have ended with the third movie, that’s fine. But I find it excessive that some people stay in the fandom just to hate on Hoffman. Yes, Hoffman is detestable, but just because you dislike him doesn’t mean he’s a bad character. In my opinion, he’s just like John—both are bitter men who take their resentment out by torturing people. So why do people hate one but worship the other? That’s what doesn’t make sense to me.