2 out of 5

Director: Darren Lynn Bousman

I don’t know. I absolutely appreciated the original Saw for its grittiness and innovation with plot, but upon repeated viewings, it doesnt seem to hold up, coming across as rather silly. Saw II was all flash cuts and that sickly green wash, with completely unlikeable characters. Saw III looked better, and was directed with a bit more patience, though still didnt connect. But I am a horror fan, and I fully understand that these movies are more about the twisty plot and the thoughtfully gruesome traps. The traps are entertaining, for sure, with satisfactory mainstream gore. (Funny how quickly this kind of gore has become accepted though, eh?) The plot, however, is just shrug-worthy. I cant care. I get that these kind of what is evil? contemplations are cool for people who swear a lot, but it doesnt go anywhere, and so I cannot elevate this series to a higher level. At the same time, if you can get over some of the pretensions in the dialogue, the continually appearing tape-recorders from behind backs are pretty funny. And, admittedly, I am happy that the modern generation has its own horror franchise. I just wish it would either get stupider or get smarter.

Update:

3 out of 5

I believe I first watched III separate from the series, and in a review rush to see whether or not I wanted to keep the DVD.  The opening moments are in the same overly obnoxious vein as film 2, so I get how that would’ve tainted my viewing.  But now re-watching the series in sequence, 3 is much better film than the prior, and I think that stems from the source: Original writers Leigh Wannell and James Wan put it together, and the aim was to do a proper ’emotional’ sequel, since (according to Wiki) they knew the studios would be making a sequel with or without their say, and they wanted to try and make something legit instead of a straight torture porn entry.  The traps are still total torture porn, but they did do right by their characters.  This is in no way stellar writing, and still treads a silly line of nonsense grandstanding, but the development of Jigsaw and Amanda’s relationship – as half of the plot revolves around Jigsaw’s dying from cancer and his working the kidnapping of a doctor to operate him into an elaborate ‘game’ in which Amanda is partial collaborator and participant – this piece of the story shows a successful evolution of the mythology and makes for an admittedly interesting spin on Stockholm Syndrome.  The other half of the plot is a concurrent game the duo are running on Jeff, played by Angus Macfadyen, playing up to his character’s sprawling in life after the death of his son.  Angus does a good job running through some emotions which are, at points, surprisingly subtle for the series, but that’s more due to his acting and not so much the script, which is still peppered with plenty of cliches.  And go ahead and put subtle in some quotes there.  Again, Shakespeare it ain’t, but the creators deserve credit for trying to dig deeper.

It gets really overwrought at the end – which is where I think I wrap back around to my original review – with tape recorder after tape recorder and revisionist history coupled with flashbacks way over-extending the runtime.  Though we’re into the ‘noughtie’ era with this film, and the extra dollops of anguish attest to that, it’s nice that the team got rid of any sense of realism with their traps and just go for cool design.  They are brutal creations, but pretty nifty.