L'esperto forense Hoffman nasconde un terribile segreto: è l'unico erede dell'Enigmista. Per difenderlo si mette a caccia di coloro che potrebbero rappresentare per lui una minaccia, ma l'ag... Leggi tuttoL'esperto forense Hoffman nasconde un terribile segreto: è l'unico erede dell'Enigmista. Per difenderlo si mette a caccia di coloro che potrebbero rappresentare per lui una minaccia, ma l'agente Strahm sta mettendo insieme i pezzi del puzzle per risolvere il mistero e incastrare ... Leggi tuttoL'esperto forense Hoffman nasconde un terribile segreto: è l'unico erede dell'Enigmista. Per difenderlo si mette a caccia di coloro che potrebbero rappresentare per lui una minaccia, ma l'agente Strahm sta mettendo insieme i pezzi del puzzle per risolvere il mistero e incastrare il killer.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 2 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
The traps still prove to be especially cruel, perhaps a little too cruel, but even that is worked into the story. It involves quite a bit of the past, much like Saw 4, it will give you more of the origin of the characters, whether it's needed or not. Minimizing flashbacks, it instead will fill in a number of plot and character holes.
This is David Hackl's directional debut. Considering he's been around since Saw 2 as production designer, this is a solid step forward. There's no doubt that these somehow ingenious, if not over the top story lines that interconnect were made up well after the fact, but that doesn't change the fact that the scriptwriters were keen on at least making an effort to do exactly that. Tie things in, making the package look neater, & hoping you don't think about it too much that you start to see the implausibility of it all.
If you have not seen the previous Saw's, you will be lost here, as you will be left with confusing tie in's and past incidents that mesh too well with the present. It's just not kind to new viewers.
All in all, I can't complain about Saw 5, because I got exactly what I expected. Clever, deadly traps, uncomfortable situations, & of course, the "twist" at the end. There's no denying that one particular actor that's been in all the Saw's is especially good at what he does.
For the most part, I would suggest waiting for a rental. I think that some viewers may grow tired of the series because it comes out every year. The nature of an audience viewing sequels is that it dwindles in number over time, as "sequelitis" sets in. But if you enjoyed the previous Saws & all their abusive, bloody, cruel, & heartless drama, you don't need me to suggest anything to you.
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.
The storyline in "Saw V", as written by Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan, is actually a fairly enjoyable script and storyline. "Saw V" carries on the legacy of the previous four movies in a good way, so the writers managed to carry on the torch nicely. I was adequately entertained throughout the 92 minutes that the movie ran for.
The cast ensemble in "Saw V" was good, withScott Patterson, Costas Mandylor and Tobin Bell returning to reprise their characters from the previous movies. And that was a good thing, because it definitely was in the spirit of the continuity of the franchise. And "Saw V"saw new performers make an entrance in the franchise, with the likes of talents such as Mark Rolston and Greg Bryk.
The amount of visceral scenes, mutilations, gore and deadly contraptions was good in the movie. And there were some rather brutal moments as well. So as a life-long gorehound, I was entertained.
If you have been enjoying the previous four "Saw" movies, then you certainly should carry on with this 2008 fifth movie in the franchise, because it is an enjoyable and entertaining movie from director David Hackl.
My rating of "Saw V" lands on a six out of ten stars.
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.
Of course in essence all Saw movies are more or less the same. However all previous movies still knew to keep me interested and guessing throughout the entire movie. It still featured some surprising and interesting elements, while "Saw V" really doesn't feature any. No big surprises or twists here, not even at the ending, which in my opinion was a bit weak and disappointing. Normally the end of a Saw movie provides a big twists that will leave you shocked and stunned in your chair, for a few minutes after the movie has ended. I missed this in "Saw V".
The movie is also the least interesting Saw movie as of yet because it features some lazy writing. Normally Saw scripts are airtight ones but not this one sadly. It often takes the obvious paths.
Like always it is also featuring lots of different plot-lines and characters again, although in this case not all are connected well enough to each other. Seriously, what have all those people going to the Jigsaw-trails have to do with the rest of the movie its plot? It just seems to be there because its a Saw movie and it needs to feature all these sick and twisted games. The story lines don't ever really get together well enough. The movie again is also featuring lots of flashbacks, which shows events that happened in the previous movies, often seen from a different side this time but some of these flashbacks however are quite pointless for the movie once you start thinking about it.
I also blame Hoffman for it that this movie doesn't work out as good and interesting as any of the other sequels. He's the new Jigsaw and as of yet he also is the least interesting one. It probably also has to do with the fact that he is featured a lot in the movie, while Jigsaw normally always remain on the background. Also the reasons why he became the new Jigsaw, as gets shown in this movie, are a bit shaky and not exactly believable.
The movie itself is perhaps also lacking in one clear good main hero and character.
It still is a superior genre movie of course. It's concept alone is already good and interesting enough to please the genre fans and provides the potential for an infinitive amount of Saw-sequels. All Saw movies have a great look and atmosphere over them, though this one works out as the least effective one when it comes down to its atmosphere and horror/thriller elements because of the reason that this movie features very little new elements.
The Jigsaw games themselves also seem less innovative and clever. It's still gruesome and lots of bloods and guts can be seen flying around but it's just less surprising and shocking all.
Lets hope "Saw VI" will have some fresh new good ideas and a better script with some better- and more interesting characters in it.
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Lo sapevi?
- QuizScott Patterson was apprehensive about sticking his head in a sealed box that would fill with water. The trap was tested beforehand and didn't go well, which only added to his concern. He ultimately stepped up and did the scene himself without resorting to a stuntman. The trick to the stunt is that the walls of the box were slid open by stagehands, draining the trap as soon as he signaled with his hands. Several takes were required, however, to capture the scene as he found himself uncomfortable at various points during the shooting of this scene.
- Blooper(at around 1h 7 mins) Detective Mark Hoffman steals Agent Peter Strahm's cellphone out of the evidence locker, and uses it to call Agent Dan Erickson. Erickson answers the phone thinking it was actually Agent Peter Strahm. However Erickson should have known that Strahm's cellphone was in evidence, and therefore known that it could have been someone else using the cellphone.
- Versioni alternativeAlso available in an unrated director's cut version, which restores deleted scenes and the violence originally cut for an "R" rating.
- ConnessioniEdited from Saw - L'enigmista (2004)
I più visti
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 10.800.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 56.746.769 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 30.053.954 USD
- 26 ott 2008
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 113.864.059 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 32 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1