Décadence V

Given that the Saw films are notable for their unexpected plot twists, the fact that this was the most predictable one makes it difficult to see why it scored the "You won't believe how it ends" tagline. Otherwise, it's decent. It blows Saw III out of the water, but I don't feel it really compares to the other three. I can appreciate that they're trying to bring it back to what the original was all about; a brilliant plot with a couple of gory scenes (the previous two have been somewhat gore-laden with little story for my liking), the problem being, unfortunately, that the plot is fairly weak. The intensity of the torture scenes is greatly increased, though, by the rest period between them.

As a horror film, this works, but don't expect Saw - and don't expect to be blown away by the ending, because it is nothing special. That said, if you're addicted to the Saw saga as so many of us are, there's no harm in going out to see it.

Like everyone else, I was expecting this movie to live up to the hype and be absolutely horrible. Since though I have seen SAW I-IV, I had to go see this at the midnight showing. What started it off, I was already impressed with that I saw. As the movie was going forward it was hard to tell how it would all add up. By the end though I was expecting to be disappointed and it really did not.

While SAW fans will appreciate this, it really depends on what you like. If you are expecting a SAW II - III where it is mainly gore and such, maybe not so much. If you are like the few who want to know more about the story, then it is a must to see this.

Now while every question is not answered, it makes up for it in its own ways. Do not be like me or most of the people who were hesitant to see this film due to people not enjoying it. I think many people would be surprised on just how great this film really is. To me, it was the best since the first one, despite the weak twist and sometimes cheesy kills. Then again, name a film that has been perfect because everyone has a fault.

I watched Saw V with a good opening night crowd here in Sydney. I've enjoyed all of the Saw films, predictably liking some episodes a lot more than others, and Saw V is, again, very watchable, with some intense moments and no shortage of grisliness. But I'd still say it's the weakest entry in the series to date. The trouble is that the main narrative addition for this episode, which has to sustain half the running time, turns out to be a dramatically weak one. I don't think a Saw film ever previously failed to create excitement or new meaning via one of its big twisty revelations, but Saw V's add next to nothing. The knowledge gained doesn't force any re-evaluation of the past events it concerns; you just see and know a bit more about them, and to no great effect, except for the fact that Tobin Bell's performance is always compelling, maybe even more so when he's talking to people who aren't stuck in Jigsaw's deathtraps.

The Saw films have demonstrated an unfeasibly high success rate over time in terms of pulling off twist after twist and having them nearly all hit home. With this track record, it seems inevitable that there'd be a significant stumble at some point. They've never been bulletproof films (and thrillers are the genre that are hardest to bulletproof), but I'd say Saw V is definitely the stumble. In spite of this, it still keeps in enough with the series in general for me to be ready for Saw VI in 2009 - which I hope will be better work.

The Saw series has always been a standard of sorts. After what I felt was an iconic debut, the series has always remained consistently interesting, with one of the most compelling and ever expanding plots in film history. People may complain that the series is in decline, but what people need to realize is that each part is astronomically better than the corresponding parts of other horror series (for example, Saw IV is better than Halloween IV, or the 4th Nightmare on Elm Street film). The same holds true for Saw V, though the film definitely shows that the series is in decline and needs to end soon before it descends into pure absurdity.

A universal truth of the Saw series is that every entry, no matter who does it, will always be well written and contain a plot twist or two at the end. Again, Saw V continues the tradition of revealing the 'huge' (if you could call it that) twist whilst "Hello Zepp" by Charlie Clouser plays in the background. The film answers as many questions as it raises, and serves as more of an origin movie, like Saw IV did. Only this time, the origin doesn't focus on John Kramer/Jigsaw, and therein lies the problem.

Why does Saw V fail to impress me? Simple. Not enough Jigsaw. Tobin Bell, who has managed to create an iconic villain over the last 5 years, delivers another sublime performance that is not to missed in the world of horror as perhaps the greatest villain of the decade. It really amazed me how Saw IV had the best acting of the series, but just one movie later, pretty much every performer falls flat on their face. This is especially sad considering most of the cast are returning characters, except your typical "why is this happening to me! AHHH!" type characters (which got unbearably annoying, considering they killed off the two least annoying ones first). Meagan Good and Costas Mandylor are acceptable in their roles, however.

Back to the lack of Jigsaw. Tobin Bell really doesn't physically appear that much in the movie, and that is far and away its biggest flaw. The film is similar to Saw II more than the others. To get my drift a little better, imagine the second film, except reduce Jigsaw's screen time by about half. Yeah. This is the only weakness of the screenplay for me, which appears to have matured from the over the top torture porn in Saw III and the ridiculous attempt to run Saw IV concurrently with its predecessor. The film's biggest flaw is in the acting and lack of Jigsaw. Besides this, I really felt that it fit the mold as a worthy entry to the series.

After watching this, however, I no longer feel that Saw is the standard of excellence in horror as it once was. That said, the film has the advantage of being short and never dragging. It's well paced and will more than deliver the thrills. Another thing I feel obligated to mention is that this is the least scariest film in the series, which is okay, because unlike every other cheap horror film, Saw V doesn't try to be scary. It's more of a thriller with some gruesome images (like the first film) than a full blown horror movie (like parts II & III).

In the end, what it comes down to as far as your ability to enjoy the movie, you have to ask yourself this question: "why do I watch the Saw series?". If you watch it for the story and plot twists, you should be at least satisfied, if not entertained. If you watch the series for pure shock and awe and disgust, you'll be disappointed, because Saw V does not try to be a horror film outside of a few scenes. It's a decent entry to the series that is tolerable, despite a lack of the iconic Jigsaw, horrid acting, and a somewhat predictable plot twist (easily the most predictable of the series).

To say the least, I was NOT disappointed. I enjoyed the film as much as I thought I would. Going in, I had some doubts, what with a new director and this being a fifth installment in a horror series (they usually start sucking by the 3rd).

As soon as the opening credits start, you can already tell that a different director had his hands on the project. Acceptence doesn't take long to sink in though. As expected, the film meets the typical Saw requirements. Multiple traps and more revealing back-story.

Simply put, Saw V should not disappoint the loyal Saw fan. I know I'll be back for the next installment with bells on.

Seeing that this is the fifth film, you simply MUST see 1-4 in order to truly understand all the flashbacks. I don't want to give anything away, so all I will say is this: The very last trap in this film is one of my new favorites. . .