Saw III Review
by dnb@dca.net (dnb AT dca DOT net)November 7th, 2006
SAW III
A film review by David N. Butterworth
Copyright 2006 David N. Butterworth
*1/2 (out of ****)
It used to take several movies--at least four or five--before a series of films was referred to as a franchise (Bond, "Star Wars," "Police Academy," and so on). Nowadays it takes significantly less than that and if the genre just so happens to be horror, well... the fewer the merrier (it's almost like one film alone will meet the definition--they're already calling Eli Roth's "Hostel" a franchise and "Hostel: Part II" is barely into production).
"Saw III," the latest and very likely not the last film in the "Saw" series, was part of a franchise long before there was ever a "Saw II," and presumably only a tad after the first "Saw" cut $100 million worldwide.
It's disgusting, isn't it? Teenage, middle-aged, and (dirty?) old men--ne'er a female in sight--all shuffling awkwardly in line at 11 o'clock in the morning so that they can be one of the first to see the serial killer named Jigsaw dispose of his hapless victims using some metallic Rube Goldberg-inspired contraption. Or a rusty hacksaw.
So is that truly the draw of these male pandering films: diabolical deaths? Well, they do tend to be pretty creative for the most part, although you can see the creativity flagging a little in this, the third installment. This time around the crazed--and seriously ailing--killer (once again played by Tobin Bell with an oxygen mask at his bedside) hijacks a young doctor (Bahar Soomekh) to keep him alive while he grooms his willing apprentice Amanda (Shawnee Smith) in the fine art of torture. As in the previous two films Jigsaw's victims are captured (somehow), holed up (someplace), and "invited" to play a game, one which invariably forces them to commit some atrocious act of self-mutilation in return for the merest glimmer of hope that they'll come out of this alive (if not necessarily whole).
It's a hack/schlock/horror writer's dream project, since all it pretty much requires is coming up with one nasty little scenario after another (like hanging a woman naked in subzero temperatures and spraying her repeatedly with water until her body becomes a block of ice). But Leigh Whannell's script overcomplicates things to the point of relying too heavily on flashbacks, which upsets the film's bloody flow. And the quick-cut zoom editing, not to mention the film's upchuck content, will leave you grabbing for the Dramamine.
There's not a lot (more) to say about "Saw III." You get what you pay for, especially at bargain matinee prices. Personally I found "Saw II" a significant improvement over its predecessor partly because Donnie Wahlberg was a much more convincing (and commanding) presence than Cary Elwes. But "Saw III" didn't have to be made. It doesn't add anything. It simply extends the viscera, continues the carnage. At least "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning" (yet another horror franchise in the making) purported to explain its killers' origins, Leatherface's raison d'être.
"Saw III" simply conjures up more vile ways to kill people. And where's the fun in that?
--
David N. Butterworth
dnb@dca.net
Got beef? Visit "La Movie Boeuf"
online at http://members.dca.net/dnb
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
