Jigsaw

I kind of liked Jigsaw. It's almost a bit of a reboot/legacy sequel, and functions like a decent one early on. As it gets into its final half-hour, it begins to feel like a more traditional Saw sequel, for better or worse. It gets ludicrous when it tries to tie itself more to those past sequels, heading away from the reboot route, but those Saw sequels could also be stupidly fun when they continue trying to justify their existence. I guess that leaves Jigsaw functioning as an alright reboot, until it comes - by this series' standards - a good enough sequel.

I'm sure things would fall apart upon closer inspection, but the movie's fun in the moment and satisfies in the ways some of those older ones did. I don't think it's anywhere near a low point for Saw as a whole, and I did quite like the fact this one looked like an actual movie. Some of those past Saw movies looked terrible and cheap, outside the gory special effects (even those weren't always perfect), but this one's visually sharper and looks like it had more of a budget. Of course, if you prefer these movies looking grungier/sludgier, then that could be an element that proves to detract from this.

From 2004 to 2010, we were greeted with a Saw film once every Halloween. Each film built on the foundation of the previous film, literally deeming them as iterations of one another. Now that time has past between films and new films and ideas have come out since then in the torture porn genre (I hate using that phrase, especially to describe the first film), new ground had to be broken. There are die- hard Saw fans like myself who know most every little intricacy of the first seven films, but nobody cares about the old formula anymore. It tired itself out. Instead of reiterating, it was now time to innovate. Enter co-writers Josh Stolberg & Pete Goldfinger and co-directors Michael & Peter Spierig, and in Halloween of 2017 you get Jigsaw.

All of this follows an eerily similar path to the Jurassic Park franchise. JP had sequels that, while in-name they hold their own, after a while started turn away some moviegoers and even got close to jumping the shark if it continued down the beaten path. So they created some space between themselves for some years, and came back with a re-branding. Both films (Jigsaw and Jurassic World) serve as standalone films if you so want to treat them as such or jump into them anew, play off their respective first films in terms of content and paying proper homage, modernize themselves and play more to a general casual audience (Jigsaw domestically, JW globally), can and probably will churn out its own set of sequels, and let veterans of the franchises appreciate the small bits that played off any one of the previous installments. Jurassic World lives in a PG-13 setting though and caved in to more Hollywood tropes (including CGI), plus is a much higher budget film, but Jigsaw still breaks a lot of new ground that will not play familiarly to the Saw films of old.

When Darren Lynn Bousman jumped on board to direct Saw II, he noted in the commentary track what some of the 'staples' were for the franchise, including quick-cuts. While I don't agree with that assessment, this continued for his next two films in the franchise, and directors David Hackl and Kevin Greutert followed up with a similar format. The films also found themselves in flashback haven, remained almost exclusively within interior settings, and centralized a set of characters to connect within a small universe. Jigsaw opens up to the feeling that this is taking place in a larger city and environment, letting characters in and out of the games explore more and be realer people (in that they do not just serve the purpose of the film alone, like they have lives outside of what we see). The framing of the film has changed, the color palette has widened, Charlie Clouser's score is not as in-your-face, and the production simply doesn't feel as cheap. Right steps were made in making this film much more accessible, and I see this continuing in the future.

While Jurassic World actually seems to remove the sequels from canon (we will see if that's true with Jeff Goldblum's appearance in Fallen Kingdom), Jigsaw plays strongly in the sense that if you go without seeing, recalling, or keeping in mind Saw 4-7, you will be okay. Hoffman is completely out of the picture in Jigsaw, never once mentioned or concerned about. The only traits to be aware of in those films was that John lost a child, was once in a relationship with Jill Tuck, and there was an autopsy performed on his body. In fact, you could just as easily disregard specifics about Saw II and Saw III, and you will probably be okay. Knowing that John Kramer was killed in the third film just might be enough.

This one really mostly plays off the first film to be most effective, though. Aside from the elaborateness of the traps and games being made (which could transition more smoothly seeing the other seven films first), we can leave the first film understanding that a cancer- stricken individual puts victims in life-or-death scenarios because of moral sins they have committed, and if killed get a puzzle piece cut out of their bodies. Seasoned individuals will also find some of the twists in the new film somewhat predictable simply because they know how Jigsaw thinks (or really, how the writers think). There were over a half-dozen twists, and I probably guessed or suspected the majority of them. Didn't make the film any inferior because I'm sitting and thinking about the casual moviegoer experiencing this film, and I think the best thing you can do for yourself now is at least see the first film and heck even at most know the outcome of the original trilogy. Saw IV, V, VI and The Final Chapter now all end up being fan-service flicks, unless any Jigsaw sequels end up coming back to them more than they have now.

I liked this movie. It could've been a complete garbage escapade like the seventh film was, and it wasn't. This reignites the franchise after it had stalled out and breathes fresh air. Maybe we will get a couple more within the next few Halloweens, because there is something to explore but I don't know how they'll want to do it. It is up to their creative bones now, and I like that facet of it because they can make good films if they try their darnedest in doing so.

If this film interests you enough that you want to give the first film a chance and haven't yet, go to Netflix right now to check it out, consider completing the original trilogy if you loved it enough to see what happens next, and check out this film when you're able to. I've reached my 1000-word limit, so now I'll just leave you here with my franchise ranking:

1, 3, 6, 2, J, 5, 4, 7

Although its potential shines brighter than what it became, and it certainly has its clunkier moments, Jigsaw manages to shine among the Saw sequels with its ambitious approach and purely entertaining storyline. I know this film certainly has a lot of haters, and I can understand their dislike for the film to a certain level. Its ambitious, and at times feels like if just a little more effort was made, it could have been great, which is certainly disappointing. However, I appreciate Jigsaw immensely for its cleverness and well crafted storyline. It's a very entertaining film, unlike 4-6 you won't feel moments of boredom throughout. Some traps can be a bit basic, but others are incredibly well done, perhaps some of the best in the franchise in general. It's full of so many twists and turns and works on so many levels it's hard to believe that they pulled it off at least somewhat at all. The cinematography is excellent, very different from the grotesque look and atmosphere of the other films, providing a much needed and refreshing point of view. Tobin Bell's performance is excellent, with Matt Passmore and Hannah Emily Anderson providing some excellent leading performances as well. In the end, Jigsaw is a flawed puzzle, but it still makes a beautiful picture.

My Rating: 7.4/10.

Despite the last SAW movie being called "The Final Chapter" 2017 brought us yet another addition to the franchise and it's a real mixed bag.

I think the SAW series started off very well, they showed real promise were clever well constructed movies but alas alike so many other horror franchises it got milked into mediocrity.

The movies gradually got worse and worse and they felt desperate, blatant cash ins and it was such a shame that such a franchise had become tarnished. These things need to know when to call it a day and SAW didn't.

So here we have another game, another spate of killings in gruesome fashion but this time it looks like Jigsaw is really back from the grave!

Sprinkled with good ideas Jigsaw is certainly an improvement on other recent efforts and delivers a few twists along the way. It doesn't however come close to the dizzying heights of the first few films.

I'd advise fans of the franchise give this a go but truly believe that this should be the last. Let SAW die before it becomes another franchise whose credibility is gone because it's creators didn't know when to stop.

The Good:

Passable twist

Tobin Bell

The Bad:

Still not coming close to its origins

Essentially more of the same

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I still love Jigsaws style and struggle to see him as an antagonist

It was a good movie, thrilling, good mystery-puzzle and all that. I am a fan of the Saw series, I just don't see a reason why make a sequel to that and continue it while unnecessary and ruin the ''legacy''! And from what I can gather there will be Jigsaw 2 3 etc. It is a good movie, but not as a Saw sequel. Otherwise I recommend watching it to Saw fans. PS: The graphic works could be better.