 |  | Signs of a series getting tired |  |
The inventiveness is gone in this film, and while there's plenty of gore it doesn't have the ingenuity that made the first two films so effective. It's just about worth seeing but nothing great.
November 4, 2008To me, Saw III is more epic because it's longer and has more soap opera elements to Amanda and Jigsaw's character. Tobin Bell does another awesome job as Jigsaw, who is now on his death bed. Jigsaw has Lynn kidnapped and brought to him so he can stay alive long enough to see if Jeff makes it through his test. Jeff has been a depressed dad for three years because his son was killed by a driver named Timothy Young. Jeff has three tests and must learn to forgive the people responsible for the death of his child. My favorite trap in this one is the Pig Vat when Jeff has to save the judge from drowning in ground up pig intestines. I love when Lynn has to perform surgery on Jigsaw and removing some of his skull to relax his brain. Will Jeff learn to forgive? Will Jigsaw live? Let's play a game and find out! If you love Jigsaw and the Saw movies, you'll love SAW 3!!!
October 8, 2008I watched the first Saw film and found it disgusting and total trash. I didn't bother with the second but for some reason hoped the third would hold some promise. WRONG!! This new trend of horror/gore-porn is an insult to the horror/thriller genre. This movie was just one disgusting, blood soaked scene after another with no characters worth giving a damn about. It wasn't scary, there wasn't even any real tension. It was just blood and guts for the sake of blood and guts, just like the previous entries in the series. The only reason this franchise continues is because simple minded gore freaks insist on indulging in this kind of schlock cinema. The guys who created the first Saw film might be considered smart as they made a cheap movie and made a ton of money, and I guess that's where we are now. These movies aren't movies. They are products to be trotted out to the waiting public so they can plunk down their money just so the studio can make another and repeat the cycle. Lionsgate must be pretty happy knowing they can release the same movie over and over, year after year and they will always make money because of the simple minded followers they have brain washed. Now they even release special edition, multi-disc DVDs to cash in even more. That fake blood must be expensive, especially when you use it up by the tanker-full. The new breed of 'horror' movie makers, such as Eli Roth and the guys responsible for 'Saw' are not masters of horror, as some would have you think. They are silly children who think blood=fear. I don't expect a lot from a horror movie, but I expected more than this.
August 28, 2008 | | Saw 3 times as disturbing | |
The Saw series keeps movin right along, and fairly well I might add. Though there is some greatness about the first Saw that gets a little lost in each of the sequals, there is more that is added too. In the case of Saw 3, I must say the scenerios are as disturbing as ever, and becoming more complex and original. The movie begins with a bone-crunching (literally) squirming start that already leaves a nasty flavor, and quickly moves to a scene with a man standing in an old classroom, with chains inserted throughout various parts of his body. The bloodshed gets going in Saw 3, though the real scenario takes about 30 minutes to set-up.
The Saw theme still continues in the third installment - "are you grateful to be alive?" and a little more is added to the mix about obsessive vegence. Such is the case with Jeff. His son has been killed in an accident. Jeff is forced through a series of tests, placing him in contact with the various people he wishes were dead since they did nothing to help his situation (eyewitness, judge, and the killer himself). Jeff's test is to see what lengths he will go to forgive these individuals and save them before the traps they are in expire. This is where traps in Saw begin to take on a whole new level. It's not merely bloodshed anymore, and though not always gore-filled, the scenarios are quite frightful such as a naked woman in a freezer room, constantly sprayed with water. Or a man chained to the bottom of a pit, while hogs are liquified and dumped on him...yes you heard right. The scene is enough to make one vomit.
While Jeff is being tested, Jigsaw is on his deathbed, and another test is occuring. Lynn is a doctor who must keep Jigsaw alive or she dies as Jigsaw's apprentice Amanda (Shawnee Smith, who makes a recurring role from all the Saw films thus far) watches in frustration. Keeping tradition going, you can expect another surprise ending you may not have seen coming, but would say is more predictable than the previous two Saw films. People are being tested in the film, but in the end you begin to realize the bigger picture and what the bigger tests actually are.
Saw 3 does a great job of keeping things in perspective with the prior films, mostly the first Saw, which is fine by me since it is the original and I thought a stronger movie than Saw 2. There are plenty of flashbacks of Amanda, how she became Jigsaw's apprentice, and we even get to see some prequal shots that went into the making of the bathroom scene in Saw. Saw 3 even begins exactly where Saw 2 left, with detective Mathews (Donnie Wahlberg again reprising the role) locked up in that same bathroom.
Saw 3 is a good continuation to the series. The story remains fairly complex, interesting and somewhat unpredictable, though still looses the greatness of the first two movies. If you are looking for blood, gore, and terrifying traps, Saw 3 goes all out this time. I say, just be grateful with your life so you don't have to ever experience them.
Acting - 3
Characters - 3.5
Horror/Gore - 5
Story - 4
Overall - 4
August 27, 2008| | | Pretty bloody good, for beating a dead horse (or pig) | |
As far as just being a movie, this one isn't bad...much better than Saw 2 but nowhere near as good as the original. As I mentioned in previous reviews, this franchise has a built-in limited shelf life. There is only so much you can drag out a series like this. The original Saw was a beautifully gruesome idea that was worked with a brilliant touch of morbid, sick class. The second movie was a cheap sequel that made no effort to disguise its cheap, shameless capitalistic quality of just living off the reputation of the original. This third movie had an obvious influence by Saw originators L. Wannell and J. Wan. Their writing and influence in this flick shows. It is a fairly-well thought-out movie premise on its own. But as I said, this series has its limits as far as how far you can stretch the idea before it becomes ridiculous. Sure, all movies are fantasy. They all ask you to believe what can not really happen in everyday life. And the better movies can get away with asking for more "fantasy lenience" than others. But in a franchise such as this, your limits are being tested before you get to Part 3. Where does this Jigsaw guy get the resources to perform these grotesque acts on people??? On its own, this is a pretty decent gore movie. I enjoyed it. But they are really pushing it when they kidnap a doctor and ask her to conduct brain surgery on Jigsaw in some abandoned warehouse with power tools and aspirin. The main theme is clever, in a disgusting, sick way. But, we're reaching the point where continuing this franchise is beating a dead horse. Where it is obvious that Wannell and Wan put some thought into this movie, the time has come to move on. If you like that Saw series, this movie is way better than Saw 2, but it makes no effort to contend with the brilliance of the original Saw. And just so you know, Saw 4 is good, but it's really time to stop!!! I just heard that a Saw 5 is coming out in the fall. All I can say is, the horse is dead already! Seriously, it's dead!!! Stop beating the dead horse already!!! This movie is worth watching, though...just don't watch it while you're eating dinner, especially if you're having ham or pork!
August 15, 2008More reviews at Amazon.com ...
Daily Birthdays
(168 reviews)
