Review of "SAW V"

By DIATRICUS

Warning: I give away movie details in the following...

Movie Review:

First, I need to get one item out of the way: the demise of Agent Strahm at the end is not according to Jigsaw's philosophy. Please, someone, correct me if I'm wrong, but Agent Strahm committed no crime, no infraction, no transgression against humanity, and yet he is held accountable for what? For subscribing to dilligence, discipline and the constant pursuit of the truth -- characteristics that John supposedly espoused? So either Hoffman tampered with John's original design, or John himself succumbed to a flawed scheme. Strahm is ultimately punished for perserverance -- and having survived a previous attempt on his life at that (he actually escapes a trap that was set up with no outs). I have a problem with this corruption to the basic premise of the entire trilogy.

Secondly: the "party of five" (five individuals who were separately involved in a crime involving a fire) -- sure, the remaining 'winner' of the game figured out that all five could have survived, so, why not devise a script accordingly? Why not have a script that still comprises tension elements, scare tactics, and complex variation potential, and, take the higher road with all five making it to the last step (and maybe not all surviving the blood loss of step 4 -- just to reinforce the risk inherent). Hell, even though I knew nothing of the nature of the keys for step 1, and I was not aware of the electrical properties surmised as a solution for step 3, anyone in the audience could easily assume that two people could have fit into each of the shafts in step 2, so from the perspective of the participants, especially that of the "intelligent journalist," the realization should have been near immediate. What's wrong with scary, thought-provoking horror, and a lesson learned -- and have the prospective victim(s) actually survive?

SAW V had the potential of being a wonderful capstone to a "puzzle" -- with all the horror necessary for the genre -- and come out with a positive outlook: "yes, even bad people can work together to get out of a bad situation, and yes, perserverence (as represented by Strahm) should be rewarded." But no, this turned out to be another link in a long chain of wasted opportunities...

Unauthorized Copying Is Prohibited. Ask the author first.

Published on Wednesday, October 29, 2008. Filed under: "Review"

Comments on "Review of "SAW V""

On Tuesday, February 9, 2010, lupus tenebrae (860) wrote:

Just wait I heard rumors, for a Saw VII already, and it will probably get more ridiculous than the Leprechaun movies lol. I hope not, but you never know.
On Thursday, January 28, 2010, Malcholm Dark (806) wrote:

Please! Too many re-makes, it's lke "Friday the 13" part 10? Or Jason vs. Feddy? At some point, usually after the second one made, all creativity is lost. Don't go, wait for the dvd. If it is bad you can turn it off and you are out a loww rental fee. Like the Harry Potter series it is going stale. I'll bet he doesn't kill the bad guy until he turns 50.
On Tuesday, February 9, 2010, Spiral Downward (388) wrote:

Anyone who discounts the series for the sake of too many sequels is quite brainless. At least horror is giving you a well thought-out and BELIEVABLE story and not just stupid fucking rip-offs or remakes about teenagers having sex and getting killed by someone who becomes stupid in the end and dies by the dumbest teenager who has an epiphany though THIS is never seen on screen. Don't be mad because the Saw films, especially 3 and 4 has managed to outsmart, out-earn, out-think, out-plause all the supposed greats from the past. There is a reason they have managed to make 6 films with the grand finale coming in several months: THE SERIES KICKS THAT MUCH ASS AND IS A WELL TOLD STORY! Read that correctly: STORY In A Horror Film! Who would have thought...
On Thursday, November 13, 2008, Aleas (169) wrote:

Capstone? Dont look now, but they've got recurring characters signed for Saw VI. And I've heard rumors of at least 7, though those rumors are a coupl'a years old.
On Friday, October 31, 2008, Alanarchy (1168) wrote:

I dug it. I tend to think strahm was being punished for not learning anything from his ordeal. Proclaiming his intent for revenge. "I'll kill you, you bitch!" Perserverence yes. But in Jigsaw's mind, this could have been a spiritual flaw, in need of prodding. That, or he wasn't being punished at all. It was, after all, that other fellow's game. Don't remember his name. Been awhile since I saw the fourth one.
On Friday, October 31, 2008, Alanarchy (1168) wrote:

As for the chamber room.... Well, no one wanted to save the journalist. He had heat on them all. And I liked the ending as well. The Saw devices are all really devious, and some of them are actually clever, and I usually want to see them... kick in. Would have felt cheated, say, if no one bought the farm in that scene with the collars.
A former member wrote: I don't really care, at this point. Once sequels start happening, things just gets more than just a little trite to me. I try not to waste my money on things that seem to me lose most (or all) value because the creators were so consumed with monetary value. *shrugs* Good things in small doses... blahblahblah.
On Friday, October 31, 2008, Alanarchy (1168) wrote:

Does it have to be just commercial? Jigsaw is a great character. A great antivillian. It must be extremely gratifying for the writers to keep his story alive, and running. What's superficial in playing with your art? Yeah, people have to pay to see it. That's how the world works. It's like someone complaining about a band selling out. I love the music. I say, pay them. That way they can keep making the music I love so much.
A former member wrote: I saw nothing from what I watched of the Saw films that was "art". Perhaps, there is a lot of mental foreplay involved, but I'm not gonna sit through two hours of gore for the sake of gore so another hefty wallet can deepen or for want of a brain workout. I'd rather write or read or watch something I think is worth my time. If you're willing to watch the next twenty five Saw movies and prequels and sequel-prequels, then go ahead. That is your perogative. This is my opinion, and yours is yours. You can spend your money and time on whatever you consider art, and I will do the same. Oh, and this has nothing to do with "selling out". The concept alone is pretentious. I listen to lots of bands that have "sold out". And I watch lots of popular movies. But (read: personally), the Saw movies are an example of something that lost any interest or value to me because it's all so very exhausted and overdone.
On Monday, November 3, 2008, Alanarchy (1168) wrote:

I walk out of some "gore fests" like I just got off a roller coaster. And I have nightmares from some of them. Something that touches me, so deeply I dream about it- dream about being in it- it's art. No ifs, ands or buts. Mental foreplay? Art- true art- is more visceral than that. You can sit around playing philisophical monopolly with other bigheads, or you can get your hands dirty and experience. Raw music, raw lyrics and poetry. Raw, disturbing and touching and deep paint and sculpt work- stuff like Saw is theatrical equivelant of those... genres... of art.
A former member wrote: Apparently, our opinions differ on more than just art. I'm not going to get into another long-winded debate. I respect your opinion and you, even if I don't agree with them. I'll just leave it at that. And if you do wish to pursue this, kindly take it to my inbox.
On Thursday, November 6, 2008, Alanarchy (1168) wrote:

Nah. Just throwing around thoughts about art. Nothing personal.