Saw X (2023)

Score: 3.5 / 5

If you had told me to expect actual entertainment from the tenth -- tenth -- installment in this particular franchise, I'd have laughed and probably asked what drug you're taking. The first is a work of brilliance, one of the best films of the 2000s, a puzzle box of horror and cleverness that is surprisingly tame; the following two are much more violent and "icky" but seem to create a decent story altogether. Beyond those, as noted in my review of the series, I have hated each subsequent entry, including its soft reboot Jigsaw and attempted spin-off reboot Spiral, which were basically more of the same tired format of the previous sequels. As such, I had no interest in seeing this film, until a friend mentioned its placing in the franchise and the return of an iconic character and I relented.

There's something about the rote nature of so many of these films I just can't endure anymore, from the angsty music to aggressive editing, which is annoying because at first they were original. But each sequel has gotten bogged down in the same ways: crueler and nastier violence, often inflicted on characters who don't deserve such awful punishments, that is increasingly meant to titillate viewers and further distance us from the actual narrative and potential themes. Each one hinges on some surprise reveal near the end about who the Jigsaw killer is this time, usually being an acolyte or apprentice of the original killer. It's clearly a fun gauntlet and aesthetic for some, given the sheer number of entries in the series, but it's not for me.

Saw X, however, does some pretty interesting things to disrupt the formula and cater to early fans. This movie is set between the events of the first and second films in the franchise, and it's made to somewhat reflect that visually. Director Kevin Greutert and his team slow the pace down substantially, at least for the first half, keeping character drama the focus of this entry rather than endless violence. They also flood certain scenes with colored light, saturating various situations with a hazy yellow or deep blue, apparently a tip-of-the-hat to the first film.

In terms of plot and character, this film is also a franchise disruptor. Set when it is, Jigsaw is still the sole mantle of John Kramer, and he's played once again by Tobin Bell. The first half of this film is essentially limited to his experience: we know that he is established as the Jigsaw killer, but we're with him on his journey as he receives his fatal diagnosis of cancer. While attempting to come to terms with this, utilizing group therapy, he learns of an experimental but life-saving treatment, for which he will pay a ton of money and have to travel to an off-the-grid facility in Mexico. Unfortunately, once it's done, Kramer comes to understand that the surgery was a fake, the providers scam artists, and that he himself is still going to die. The king of vengeance (and dubious justice) will not permit such a slight against himself, and so begins the second half.

It's nice (can we say that?) to follow such a straightforward setup, and to actually care about the characters involved. Well, "care" might be a stretch, but this film certainly strives to make us sympathize with Kramer's situation. By the time he starts actively hunting those fraudulent doctors, we're emotionally on his side, and we want him to teach them all a lesson. It's a sly move on the writers' part, and I'd say it works shockingly well. And Kramer is not alone, either, as fan favorite Amanda (Shawnee Smith) comes to help him wreak revenge on Dr. Cecilia Pederson (Synnove Macody Lund) and her co-conspirators. Their collaboration is actually kind of fun to see, although I was surprised more than once at how obviously they interact with their victims. Once they're all chained up together in the warehouse, John and Amanda pop in regularly to discuss their rules and games with the hysterical baddies. It kind of makes the Jigsaw audio tapes unnecessary, though it wouldn't be Saw without those!

And making him appear onscreen is a good thing for Bell, who fills every moment with nuance and dread; he seems to really enjoy getting to do some dramatically meaty material, and it's a pleasure to watch. Smith is also enjoyable here, especially as I don't fully remember her antics after Saw II, and her emotional relationship with John is impressively realized. And, really, this is why I liked this movie so much.

Eventually, the second half does dive headfirst into gory territory, as expected. Notably -- and I'd need a more dedicated fan to confirm this -- but I'd hazard that this is one of the bloodiest installments in the franchise. That's not to say it's to excess; indeed, unlike most of the "games" and "traps" in this series, here the punishments largely seem to fit the crimes, which also helps the plot feel more believable than in later sequels. Then again, the self-performed craniotomy was more than I could handle, and most of the violence I couldn't fully watch; it's just too intense for me, even when it feels clever or just in making the fake doctors perform real surgeries on themselves. Then again, I'm not sure that these particular traps are escapable; maybe that's the point, as Kramer does not want these folks to survive. But it does take some suspense out of the proceedings. And there's a renewed nihilistic streak to this film in that several of the desperate victims do complete their tests, but they fall just shy of their time limits, which is a bizarre and unfortunate element to this story I found perhaps the most disturbing. Surely extracting one's own femoral bone marrow should count for success, even if the exact amount would take a few more seconds to collect. But what do I know? I'm no sociopathic mastermind.

Saw (series)

Saw (2004) ----- Score: 4.5 / 5

There's a cold, brutal brilliance to this movie that I will never shake. It's utterly original (if perhaps loosely inspired by Se7en) and fiercely conceived, wound tight as a knot of barbed wire, in which every scene is connected and every beat suggestive of potential (and potent) psychological horrors. The pale gloom of fluorescent lights and backgrounds awash in green and blue create an atmosphere as grimy and unpleasant as the sets and dressing, littered with debris, sharp angles, and lots of spiky metal. Dismal, violent, and wickedly intelligent, the film torments us along with its characters even as we are made to begrudgingly appreciate the horrors we see. Things really aren't taken to their gory extremes here, and we're drawn in by the build-ups and the aftermaths if not always the climactic moments of death or dismemberment (thank goodness). In this way -- that is, both aesthetically and in terms of pure storytelling -- the first Saw is less exploitative than you might expect, except for its delicious, cruelly nihilistic ending, and far more cognitively entrancing.

Saw II (2005) ----- Score: 3.5 / 5

Saw III (2006) ---- Score: 2.5 / 5
The next two installments are fun enough continuations of the story established by the first Saw. In the second, Tobin Bell is fleshed out a bit, making the character more than a creepy puppet and invisible criminal mastermind. You might expect him to be less terrifying in the flesh, and perhaps he is, but Bell's performance is surprisingly chilling. Moreover, the story here is rather deliciously sadistic, pruning off the slower and more dramatic impulses of the first film and ramping up the suspense, gore, and psychological torment. It doesn't work as well for me, but it still a bloody good time.
In the third, what might be seen as a sort of finale to Jigsaw's trilogy, things get a bit weirder. Specifically, Tobin Bell returns but is given precious little to do, other than suggestively tormenting his apprentice, a repeat survivor-turned-acolyte named Amanda Young (Shawnee Smith). The central plot device -- that is, excuse for gore-porn -- is of a man obsessed with vengeance on the man who killed his son while drunk driving. He goes through several trials which mostly involve watching other people suffer and die in the name of hoping to finally get his revenge. Obviously there's a lesson to be learned, but this movie is notably more somber and less entertaining. The violence finally does feel exploitative and the lessons by now are not original or interesting. This movie is the death of Jigsaw and, for me, the franchise.

Saw IV (2007) -----Score: 1 / 5

Saw V (2008) ----- Score: 0.5 / 5
In what I suppose was meant to be a clever follow-up by the same director, the story of Saw IV weaves its way around previous installments. It's an extended epilogue that feels like a sicko's fan fiction based on the premise that Jigsaw had "games" planned for after his own death. Apparently he had collected more victims-turned-friends (acolytes) who had been trained (brainwashed) into helping him spread his gospel (torture and murder), and the revelation of those folks is the mission of this movie. Other than the gruesome and notably uninspired death traps, the film falters in basic cinematography and editing techniques; it's almost incoherent in convoluted plot twists around characters we never know or care about. The only worthwhile thing in this movie is its very handsome leading man, Lyriq Bent.
We get more of the same crap in the fifth film, which follows the "hero" (last man standing) of the fourth into more traps and more sadistic games that make less sense as time continues. It becomes increasingly clear that someone is toying with him, and it's very probably a fellow officer (spoiler alert from the previous flick, which means the suspense in V is nonexistent: it is, and our hero is going to be the victim and scapegoat). I almost kind of liked the subplot this time around, in which five people are forced through a series of communal tests like in II and fail miserably. The dialogue is laughable, editing bizarre, and grimy aesthetic worn and unoriginal. This is grindhouse trash at its most base, and there's nothing here worth wasting your time.

Saw VI (2009) ----- Score: 0.5 / 5

Saw 3D: The Final Chapter (2010) ----- Score: 0 / 5
I suppose 4-6 constitute the sequel trilogy to the first three Saw flicks, and it's just disappointing, following Jigsaw's successor Hoffman working hard to continue the sadistic criminal legacy. The sixth makes pretensions to be relevant and interesting regarding the necessity of health care reform in America, but this isn't The Purge. Relevance in Saw is about as immaterial as the characters' lives; they're all only so much meat and blood. And then there's the seventh installment, a monstrous waste of time that insults long-time fans as well as its general audience. Its 3-D attempt at novelty squelches beneath muddied aesthetics and muddled storytelling, leading up to a finale that might have been a weirdly cool idea (Cary Elwes is back!) except that it's the exact same plot contrivance featured in every single installment of the series: someone "unexpected" is the real killer, a Jigsaw apprentice trying to carry on the sadistic legacy.
The series should have said "Game Over" a long time ago.

Jigsaw (2017) ----- Score: 1 / 5
Seven years later and almost no steps forward. When Jigsaw starts, I was expecting something a little different. The camera feels fresh, the atmosphere is a bit lighter, there's more explicitly stupid-funny dialogue. The kills are less gory and more absurd -- one involves being stuck in a silo, buried in grain and various sharp farm tools -- and I thought we might be in for a solid reboot. The story is structured in the same way as others in the series, with one plotline following a group of individuals getting tortured and murdered, and the other following law enforcement chasing down the big baddie. Unfortunately, this movie is exactly like the others -- read: more of the same trash -- in its excessive exposition, unwieldy plot turns, and pointless intrigue that leads to a climax in which yet another new accomplice or apprentice is unmasked. It doesn't help, this time, that there are major contrivances with the franchise timeline, as if that makes it more profound or interesting. Spoiler: it doesn't.