CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

Saw II

Director

Darren Lynn Bousman

Year

2005

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Though I acknowledge its flaws, I’m an admirer of Saw (2004), and didn’t quite hesitate to watch its sequel when invited. Was I in for a mess… This is obviously a follow-up made on account of the first installment’s unexpected success, and done in such a reckless way, so disrespectful of the audience, that it’s twice as horrible. Ironically a grotesque film, after all. And the worst is some fans actually like and respect it.

I’ll admit that I had some fun with it, maybe because it became the kind of film that’s “so bad it’s good.” The premise is interesting: Detective Eric Matthews (played by Donnie Wahlberg, whom I hadn’t seen since The Sixth Sense (1999) and now I know I wasn’t missing much) is chosen by the evil Jigsaw (Tobin Bell) as victim for one of his diabolical games, one much larger in proportion than those we saw before: he has put several people inside a booby trapped house, including Eric’s son Daniel (Erik Knudsen), who will eventually die from a deadly gas they’re breathing unless they find the antidote. Jigsaw gives up his location too easily, but is immune to Matthews and his people since he holds those people hostage. Even as the people in the house (including Amanda, from the first film, played by Shawnee Smith now more prominently featured) play Jigsaw’s deadly games (all punished for some reason, except young Daniel), Matthews must decipher a puzzle of his own if he wants to see his son again. So it’s a game inside a game, with many surprises to behold.

Of course it sounds interesting! The possibilities are countless, just imagine the first Saw multiplied, so many people having to find the answers to the psycho’s riddles, having to work as a team perhaps, and maybe destroy each other in order to survive. It’d be great, but it’s completely blown. After having seen the film I read that it’s a reworking of a script by young director Bousman, adapted to fit a Saw-like storyline. This shows. The people inside the house just don’t make any sense, everything they do is unbelievable, their reactions are implausible, and the situations always seem to miraculously fit the plot’s necessities.

Brian Cox, playing real-life screenwriting guru Robert McKee, says in Adaptation. (2002) that if you wile the audience in the end, you got a hit, despite previous flaws and problems. I never saw a clearer case than this movie. My friend I saw it with, who agreed to every problem I pointed out, was excited when we walked out. I was pissed off, but I will admit that on my way home I enjoyed thinking back and figuring out how it all worked out.

Does that make it any better? Maybe a half star. The rest is all gore, awkwardness, and futile attempts to constantly remind us what movie this is a sequel of. There’s no sequel here, really, just an excuse to make money. But heck, that’s what the world is about, and the attempt was successful, so what can I say? People who walk into this movie should know what to expect. Hopefully they’ll enjoy it.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter