Saw V

I liked every episode of Saw so far, but this one can never be satisfying, no matter how badly you want it to be. It’s quite possible that there are many things I didn’t understand (it’s an incredibly confusing array of scenes set in different timelines, Strahm and Hoffman look very similar in the dark, and the behaviour of the five prisoners is impossible to comprehend), but based on what I did get, this is my opinion: a) Saw 5 has basically three storylines that intertwine in various ways, not only among themselves, but also with events from previous episodes. b) The first one tells how detective Hoffman became Jigsaw’s successor and forces the viewer to follow very annoying flashbacks that don’t contribute anything interesting but only dissect long-closed plotlines. Instead of that, Hoffman’s role in the previous episodes could have been explained with a short dialogue or monologue set in the present. c) The second line is the only one that moves the story forward a little. We follow the surviving agent Strahm’s private investigation against Hoffman, because he suspects he’s also involved. This part of the story relies way too much on coincidence (or the omniscience of certain actors), which makes it almost impossible for a sentient being to enjoy the film. Its outcome should have been the classic Saw shocking twist, but alas – this is the first time I wasn’t surprised. d) The third line could have been the most interesting one. We get to the room with the traps and the five prisoners. Unfortunately, there’s not much time left for it (the annoying first line is given priority) and the behaviour of the characters is so illogic that it’s hard to believe the creators meant it seriously. What we get in the end is a sad reminder of times gone by with a conspicuous drop in quality if we consider its obvious resemblance to the concept of Saw II. I was expecting at least one interesting twist, did I miss it or there isn’t actually any? In short, Saw 5 disappointed me, but I’m giving it three stars, it’s still a pretty well executed film ruined by the script. Next time, I hope they entrust it to someone more competent, because the potential is still great, as can be seen in the last and bloody effective (though not surprising) scene. (11.11.2008)

Lionsgate should put an end to this rusty flywheel, which constantly turns on its head what last time passed for the deepest truths. It’s not giving them a very good reputation. This film doesn't really piss me off so much. The plot goes round and round like last time but with the added bonus of tasks that are so deeply sophisticated and have moral undertones that they become a parody of themselves and don't stir the audience’s emotions deeply. A dull sequence of furiously edited images, where most of the time is spent on a guy who died many episodes ago - and the others deserve it too due to the lack of sympathy we have for them - will actually rob you of an hour and a half of your life. There are 101 ways to put it to better use... (07.12.2008)

The main storyline revolves around Jigsaw and he can't let go of it (given Bell's unwavering charisma, it's hardly surprising), but the investigative side roads and the surprisingly effective "long" trap somehow work better than the entire previous installment put together. It may have been a swan song, but that slight satisfaction was worth it (unfortunately, for the last time). (01.02.2009)