Simon came, he SAW, it sucked...
Release Date: 9th March 2009 So it seems we are going to have another SAW every year then There is a very definite pattern emerging in this franchise: as the numbers progress, the stars of the lead actors gleam slightly less. First off we had Cary Elwes and Danny Glover, then the talents of Donnie Wahlberg in 2005s follow-up, and since then we have been treated to a veritable smorgasbord of B and C list (at very best) actors. This next development sees Costas Mandylors (brother of Louis who played Joeys fake twin in FRIENDS) and Scott Patterson (Luke in the bile-inducing GILMORE GIRLS) add their considerable acting chops to the series. How long until the guy that got coffee for the guy that fluffed Elizabeth Berkley's body double on SHOWGIRLS gets his chance? At this rate I should be in SAW X. But of course it isnt the actors who are the real stars of the SAW franchise (apart from maybe Tobin Bell), its the inventive ways in which they are dispatched, and it has to be said the Pendulum trap, for which SAW V is now best known ranks as one of the best offerings so far. Its the perfect cringe-inducing opening, but the film peeks way too early, offering one flash of brilliance that is never revisited. Unfortunately, if you take away the traps youre left with little of note that makes SAW V memorable director David Hackl commits the cardinal sin of putting too much importance on the set-pieces to the detriment of the rest of the film. There just isnt enough intrigue in the plot that is any different from SAW III (so Jigsaw has another accomplice- big deal) and the dialogue is diabolical. To be honest, even a Tarrantino script couldnt save SAW V: when you attempt to save budget by casting little-knowns and has-beens you might as well provide them with a script that matches. The acting on show, particularly by the gruesome twosome of Mandylors and Patterson is just shoddy and makes an absolute mockery of the early performances of Elwes and Wahlberg in particular. I can understand the attraction of promoting the cult appeal of a film, considering the financial certainties that offers, and self-consciously bad acting often feeds the cult monster: but I fail to see the advantage of going to the extreme that SAW V does. The only memorable of any sort, the British investigative journalist who finds himself embroiled in Jigsaws latest game, is dispensed with too quickly (rather spectacularly I might add) leaving a group of characters that it is impossible to feel any empathy for. I suspect the anti-hero status of Jigsaw was too appealing to resist giving him a group of victims whose deaths are emotionally inconsequential- but I for one would have felt comfortable cheering Jigsaws traps even if I were attached to the unlucky ones within. Eric Matthews head-squishing death in SAW IV was particularly effective because I had become somewhat attached to Wahlbergs Job-like performance: I would struggle to even name the dead in SAW V because I just didnt care. Credit where credit is due, the depraved minds behind the Fatal Five game really thought up a corker, it is just a shame that the surrounding narrative focusing on the cat and mouse game between the two detectives felt so much like a straight to TV, little-watched thriller. Even the cinematography style is different in those sections: for some reason reverting to the days when heavily filtered lenses were de rigueur- nothing says emotional conflict quite like a soft edge to the scene. All it did for me was confuse the identity of a film series that so self-consciously highlighted its affiliations with the MTV generation (Hackl actually mentions in the Extras that he sought to make the trap scenes reflect the energy of a rock video). There are also a number of narrative problems that lead to a significant amount of head scratching- mostly to do with the ropey chronological details, making it extremely difficult to follow the non-linear chronology of the film. When exactly did Hoffman set up the Pendulum trap? And where did Jigsaws approach to make him his second accomplice actually happen- not strictly crucial to any potential enjoyment of the film, but when a film series is so committed to creating a coherent complex narrative web with the oh-so-familiar Oohhhh, thats clever moment the problem is put into perspective. The death of a franchise? Unlikely. Unfortunately. If you want my advice, leave the SAW series where it is on the shelf, and go for REPO: THE GENETIC OPERA instead. Its far more enjoyable to see Anthony Head singing about harvesting organs than to watch as another bunch of pseudo-criminals fall victim to Jigsaws fiendish games only to find out that none of them really needed to die. Once in a while, you just have to have some originality that isnt limited to the way in which identikit characters are despatched. Extras Two commentaries and some behind-the-scenes featurettes concentrating on the traps (but, of course) - why oh why do Producers and Executive Producers imagine that I want to hear what they have to say? Theyre usually vapid narcissists whose only major relationships are with their over-inflated egos and bank balances. Im torn on the issue of including detailed information on the set-ups for the traps: the repressed spirit of the film-maker within me yearns for the little gems about the editing process, the inclusion of flash frames to create frenetic energy, and the general technical process in inventing the traps. But the red-blooded SAW fan (I feel slightly grubby admitting that) is disappointed by the technicalities. Its like when you watch those awful Behind the Magic programmes with that masked prat who sets about destroying the joy of magic- sometimes its just more pleasurable not knowing. One thing that is abundantly clear from these Extras is that director David Hackl will NEVER win any awards for father of the year: the questionable way he invites his son into the creative process for SAWs iconic traps probably wont win him many friends in Social Services either. But, I understand: Im sure there are moments when any father is driven to wishing they could encase their childrens heads in a plastic box, simulating a drowning trap