This year, the torture-friendly franchise will come to its conclusion, and in eye-gouging 3D no less. Not that they would mind milking it for more money until the end of times, but it’s obvious that the box-office response of the sixth entry was cold enough to put the producers on guard regarding the future of further Saw sequels. Which is actually ironic, since “Saw 6” is probably the best of the sequels, and, yes, that isn’t saying very much.
This time, Jigsaw is big on politics. He single-handedly (or, several-handedly, if you count the expanding number of apprentices) takes on the US’ troublesome healthcare issue. And yes, there will be blood (understatement). The grizzly game focuses on insurance executive William Easton (Peter Outerbridge), the typical corporate tool, who will have to pass a series of the late Jigsaw’s world-renowned-wicked-arm-or-leg-choice tests. Since William’s job was all about finding ways for the insurance company to NOT pay for people’s ultra-expensive and risky medical treatments, thus holding the choice of life or death in the flick of his pen, this time he will be faced with the ultimate moral judgement as he must make the same choices while dealing with the victims face-to-face as they are about to meet a horrible, gruesome death. There are still plenty of tie-ins with the rest of the franchise, complete with confusing flashbacks that will make no sense if you’ve missed all of the previous films, and of course the obligatory twist finale. If indeed you have missed all of the previous films and are trying to start with no. 6, then don’t. It’s the worst thing to do. Either start from the beginning, or thoroughly read the Wikipedia entries for all the films in the series and take notes.
Seemingly, not much has changed since the Saw-frenzy first started, so, you might wonder, why did I expand my score from the one-potato “Saw V” received to a full-blown, passing-grade, five potatoes ? “Saw V” was a self-indulgent mess, riddled with flashback sequences and terrible pacing. The series has forgotten all about cleverness after the first two-three films, so the only thing going for it is the entertainment provided by suspensful scenes where characters attempt to survive horrible traps by making equally horrible choices. Whilst “Saw V” dropped the ball in that regard, this one, while still sillly and low on credibility, amps up the tension. This time, the choices are harsh and the life-or-death situations are suspensful enough to make the film a pleasant affair (if you’re into this kind of sadistic stuff). Plus, having just one character facing the tests (William) puts us, the voyeurs, in the position to sympathize with him and be a part of the ride. Throw in Detective Hoffman’s attempts to keep his identity hidden while William runs the maze of horrors, the often surprisingly satirical social commentary, and the short running time and you have the makings of a fun thriller. The film is directed by the man who edited all the other Saws, which means someone else was assigned to handle the editing, and it feels like the editing on this one is less of a jumbled mess. Less prone to induce headaches anyway.
The acting is still rough around the edges, though it’s really not that big of an issue anymore. Everybody overacts or underacts, with the surprising exception of Peter Outerbridge’s simple, balanced performance, neither over nor under the top. Tobin Bell is still pitch-perfect as Jigsaw, even though he’s just there for flashbacks.
So, it’s better than II, III, IV, V and probably better than 3D will be. But it’s too little, too late. Even if they’re planning some sort of reboot or spin-off for next year, or the year after that, they’ve pretty much tortured this franchise to death.