Talk:Mark Hoffman

Too much original research

I don't think this article's existence is justifiable at this stage in time. There are no citations at all, and too much original research. If no citations are provided, this article should be deleted. 123.3.138.114 (talk) 14:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Added more citations and there is much more info than just the plots of the films he is in. Firstly, there is his modus operandi, then his significance and relationship to Jigsaw. Finally, the plt sections are all focused in on the parts containing him and have more insight than would be policy for the film article plot sections. Good article, worth keeping. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 19:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

This article is still lacking and needs much improvement. The characterization and symbolic representations sections are all comprised entirely of original research. The Costas Mandylor section quotes the actor, yet it does not offer a source for that quote. Source needed on that quote. The claim that there are more citations now? I see only one. A good start, but this article needs much work. 124.176.63.153 (talk) 12:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Coat

I think it should be noted that Hoffman wore a black coat to symbolize Jigsaw's robe at various parts of Saw V. 71.17.12.142 (talk) 07:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Noted. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hoffman's current status

Call this a bunch of speculation but has it in any shape or form been confirmed that Hoffman is still alive? I know that he got out of the little Reverse Beartrap 2.0 thing but that left little to no closure as to whether he survived or not. Becoming crippled, his jaw split and massively bleeding, this might be another case of the same way Rigg died since he wasn't confirmed dead until Saw V, after he was left. If you ask me I think the status should be changed to "Unknown (Crippled/Injured)" Carbo45 (talk) 11:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Well Rigg was shot in the stomach and was bleeding quite badly. Hoffman has some of his face ripped off, and is also bleeding, but doesn't look quite as bad. Costas also said in an interview that they shot multiple endings, one with him alive and one with him dying. I think they went with the one that he survives at the end, therefore that suggests he is alive, but no -- it doesn't prove it. What does anyone else think? --MikeAllen (talk) 14:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Status is unknown. Sorry, that's how the movie ended, it was not shown if he survived or not. If he is shown alive and well in VII then you can change the status to 'Alive' THEN. But until then, objectively, 'unknown' fits best. 202.168.104.9 (talk) 16:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes sir! :-) --MikeAllen (talk) 18:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Will he still be able to talk? Anonymus, 10th November 2009 17:42 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.193.44 (talk) 17:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe! Anyway, listing his status as unknown is just stupid. Nothing suggests that he died. Some of his face was just ripped off. I'll honor the consensus but when Hoffman shows up alive in Saw VII, you are going to look stupid.

It's not about looking stupid. It's about providing facts from reliable sources. Just because he will be in Saw VII does not mean he will be ALIVE -- I mean half of his jaw was removed... who's going fix that? Dr. Gordon? Costas also commented that they shot different endings, one with him dying and the one with him not. When and if Hoffman shows up alive, then it will be changed, until then, stick to your Saw conspiracy theory forums, this is not the place. Thank you. --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 23:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory forums? Grow up and learn to accept criticism, kid. I'm not a member of any forum. One minute, you think Hoffman is alive and the next, you think that he is dead. I don't believe that Gordon survived. He sawed off his foot. There is NOTHING that suggests Hoffman is dead. When he shows up alive, you will also look stupid. Thank you and have a good day.

You just don't GET IT, do you? It doesn't matter what anyone THINKS, that's not important. What's important is that it is verifiable with reliable sources. He probably will be alive... but there's no proof to back that up. For all we know is he could die between movies, like Rigg did. Calm down and read Wikipedia policy, it's not the end of the world.. yet. --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 18:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The most recent reliable source, Saw VI, showed him alive. A person can't scream if they're dead. As of the most recent reliable source, he is alive. So if we are going by most only what is in reliable sources, then he should be listed as alive. It is speculative to suggest he died as there is nothing showing him dead. He could be dead, but that's just our speculating, not a reliable source. 66.65.74.35 (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

It has been confirmed that Mark Hoffman is indeed alive. Also, a leaked image from Saw 3D shows Hoffman with a big scar on the right side of his face, further proving that he is alive. 70.57.161.158 (talk) 07:03, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

We know now, but we didn't 11 months ago. It really doesn't matter if he's "alive" or "dead", this is a fictional character. Mike Allen 07:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

This discussion was ridiculous in 2009. In Saw VI, we last saw see him screaming at the end of the movie. He was alive. Period. Speculating that he could've died of blood loss is incomprehensible. Any character in any movie could die of anything after the plot shown to the audience. The point is he was alive in Saw VI. And now in 2014, it's still unclear. They are doing an eighth installment. --2.245.123.55 (talk) 18:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposing a change of status to ALIVE

There's plenty of instances in the series where we should presume a character is dead, but it turns out they're alive. It's a logical argument to assume that the writers want us to think the character is alive unless they are shown dying. If that is the case—and it seems to add up this way—shouldn't we ask why we didn't see Hoffman die? The answer is obvious; it's supposed to mirror the conclusion of the first film. But if that's the case, we last saw him alive. Furthermore, Hoffman was in Adam's position at the end of Saw 3D, and we learn in Saw III that Adam was alive after the events of the first saw. Since a lot of things are pointing to Hoffman being alive, can't we change his status to alive? Geeky Randy (talk) 22:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we should go by what the film presents the last time we see the character, not what we assume may happen after credits roll. He is shown to be alive (but left to die, though we did not see him die), so yes I think that is what should be listed. Mike Allen 03:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The rebuttal to that (not my argument, but seen here on Wikipedia before) is that it's shown that Rigg is alive at the end of IV, but shown to have died from blood loss in V. hbdragon88 (talk) 03:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Like I said above, this is a fictional character, not someone that is really alive or dead. Would it be best just to remove the "Status" from the infobox? Mike Allen 04:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I think status is useful for statistical purposes--I find it useful at the List of Saw characters. As for the Rigg comparison; being shot and bleeding is one things, being locked in a room and left to die is another. Hoffman's position parallels better with Adam's, not Rigg's--on a personal level, I never thought Rigg was alive at the end of IV, but perhaps I missed that. I last remember seeing Hoffman shooting Rigg from Rigg's POV, which is different than actually seeing Hoffman breathing and obviously alive when the screen goes black at the end of 3D. Perhaps if you can find another comparison, I might reconsider; but I don't find Rigg to be a good one. Geeky Randy (talk) 00:56, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I guess this argument must have plagued the Saw plot page – I noticed that there's been a recent edit war over the addition of the words "sealing Adam inside the bathroom to die" [1]. Honestly, I'd more inclined to agree with Mike and leave it out since its inclusion is so contentious.

Can't provide any other parallel examples because i've never watched a single Saw movie, only the endings and the plot summaries here. hbdragon88 (talk) 03:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)