The advertising promises “You won't believe how it ends,” but the problem with Saw V isn't so much its ending, it's everything that comes before. Oddly toothless, the entire flick feels like it exists solely as preamble for Saw VI. The greatest tension I felt was waiting for the movie to begin. I kept waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and then the end credits began to roll and I realized the movie had, in fact, ended. As one of the characters says, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me”…full story [Cinematical]
Even though the story is easy to follow along it has to be interesting. Now I think this film really goes back more to the first film and explains how the traps were carried out. Despite the fact that I think this film is in on par with the first film I think it also is just more of the same. The traps after awhile just become more weapons of destruction and aren't as interesting as they once were. The film is not really horror anymore. Yes the blood does flow and there is plenty of gore but over time these films have just made that mandatory canceling out the horror of it all. In a way the audience is almost like Jigsaw. We have seen it all so much that it no longer affects us…full story [MoviesOnline.ca]
Indeed, I don't believe how it ends. I also didn't believe how it started, what happened after that or what happened after that. A packed midnight screening didn't gasp once, nor was there a moment when Jigsaw's moral policing-Want to appreciate life? Well, die!!!-registered as anything but twisted bullying. Once again going nowhere while going too far, “Saw V” embodies what happens when movies exist less as a creative enterprise than a financial investment. It doesn't just insult your intelligence; It assumes you have none…full story [Metromix Chicago]
There's a certain part of me that's envious of the average “Saw” fan. I truly wish I could appreciate this horror franchise on a more visceral level, screaming along with the rest of the crowd as mayhem arrives, lives are ended, and Jigsaw's legacy is twisted further into a mind-bending puzzle only the most patient out there have kept up with. It's criminal that I refuse entrance into the club, but, then again, when I view a “Saw” movie all I can see are bargain-basement production values, abysmal acting, and a soggy narrative that's spun completely out of control. The only elements holding the franchise together at this point are the blind enthusiasm of horror nuts, truckloads of distraction, and the forgiving nature of the Halloween season…full story [Collider]
Yes, fans, Jigsaw is indeed back for Saw V but I won't reveal how that's done. Suffice to say that he has one of the film's best scenes, an almost eight-minute long dialog exchange with Mandylor's Hoffman that's virtually unheard of for a horror film. The rest of the cast are serviceable, with a few creaky acting moments from each of them at different points…full story [IGN]
One plot point that really pissed me off involves Jigsaw's ex-wife Jill Tuck (Betsy Russell of 80's cult movies ‘Tomboy' and ‘Avenging Angel') who it was revealed played a major role in his evolution when the actions of a junkie at her clinic caused the loss of her pregnancy. When Jigsaw's lawyer presents her with his last will and testament, she is left with a video recording where he tells her that she will know what to do with the contents of the special box he has left. Although she opens the box (in ‘Kiss Me Deadly' fashion) we never get to see what's in it and she never becomes a part of the plot. Another wasted opportunity that no doubt is being held over for the next film…full story [Latinoreview]
Leaving Saw V, I couldn't help but think that maybe the Saw franchise has run its course, and is now out of decent ideas of where to go with the story. Between the revisionist history, the disconnected storylines, and traps that really don't feel up to the same disturbed creative level of the previous chapters, Saw V is a disappointing Halloween treat. Either that, or it's that same adult reminder that the candy of years past was never as good as we thought it was when we first enjoyed it…full story [CinemaBlend]
The final failure comes from the actors. Mandylor appears to be sleepwalking through the part, while Patterson's only highlight comes via a self-induced tracheotomy. The rest of the returning horde — including snippets from victims long ago dispensed — are really nothing special, and Betsy Russell's Jill is reduced to a red herring. About the only actor getting a chance is Bell, and though he is limited to playing flashback versions of the fiend, he brings a brilliant gravitas to the role. Too bad then that Melton and Dunstan give him God-awful gobbledygook to say. Several of his speeches sound like a failed philosopher after an all-night beer bash…full story [WorstPreviews]
I honestly think this movie was just, okay. Especially compared to the past Saws and how well they were planned and thought out, characters backgrounds and so on. It’s as if the writers and directors were running out of ideas as well as contraptions and the story line is becoming more complicated for the non fans to follow, or so many of my friends said when I made them go. It was like I was constantly talking to them to make sure they understood. But it does leave you wanting to see it again next year because of his wife and the box John left her with and the fact Hoffman’s still alive?
So what’s next, nobody knowns for sure I just hope it is done better, they need to be more creative.