IMDb RATING
5.8/10
144K
YOUR RATING
Following Jigsaw's grisly demise, Mark Hoffman is commended as a hero, but Agent Strahm is suspicious, and delves into Hoffman's past. Meanwhile, another group of people are put through a se... Read allFollowing Jigsaw's grisly demise, Mark Hoffman is commended as a hero, but Agent Strahm is suspicious, and delves into Hoffman's past. Meanwhile, another group of people are put through a series of gruesome tests.Following Jigsaw's grisly demise, Mark Hoffman is commended as a hero, but Agent Strahm is suspicious, and delves into Hoffman's past. Meanwhile, another group of people are put through a series of gruesome tests.
- Awards
- 1 win & 2 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Yes, the Saw-franchise is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I'm still a fan of it thought but it needs some new fresh ideas fast.
Of course in essence all Saw movies are more or less the same. However all previous movies still knew to keep me interested and guessing throughout the entire movie. It still featured some surprising and interesting elements, while "Saw V" really doesn't feature any. No big surprises or twists here, not even at the ending, which in my opinion was a bit weak and disappointing. Normally the end of a Saw movie provides a big twists that will leave you shocked and stunned in your chair, for a few minutes after the movie has ended. I missed this in "Saw V".
The movie is also the least interesting Saw movie as of yet because it features some lazy writing. Normally Saw scripts are airtight ones but not this one sadly. It often takes the obvious paths.
Like always it is also featuring lots of different plot-lines and characters again, although in this case not all are connected well enough to each other. Seriously, what have all those people going to the Jigsaw-trails have to do with the rest of the movie its plot? It just seems to be there because its a Saw movie and it needs to feature all these sick and twisted games. The story lines don't ever really get together well enough. The movie again is also featuring lots of flashbacks, which shows events that happened in the previous movies, often seen from a different side this time but some of these flashbacks however are quite pointless for the movie once you start thinking about it.
I also blame Hoffman for it that this movie doesn't work out as good and interesting as any of the other sequels. He's the new Jigsaw and as of yet he also is the least interesting one. It probably also has to do with the fact that he is featured a lot in the movie, while Jigsaw normally always remain on the background. Also the reasons why he became the new Jigsaw, as gets shown in this movie, are a bit shaky and not exactly believable.
The movie itself is perhaps also lacking in one clear good main hero and character.
It still is a superior genre movie of course. It's concept alone is already good and interesting enough to please the genre fans and provides the potential for an infinitive amount of Saw-sequels. All Saw movies have a great look and atmosphere over them, though this one works out as the least effective one when it comes down to its atmosphere and horror/thriller elements because of the reason that this movie features very little new elements.
The Jigsaw games themselves also seem less innovative and clever. It's still gruesome and lots of bloods and guts can be seen flying around but it's just less surprising and shocking all.
Lets hope "Saw VI" will have some fresh new good ideas and a better script with some better- and more interesting characters in it.
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Of course in essence all Saw movies are more or less the same. However all previous movies still knew to keep me interested and guessing throughout the entire movie. It still featured some surprising and interesting elements, while "Saw V" really doesn't feature any. No big surprises or twists here, not even at the ending, which in my opinion was a bit weak and disappointing. Normally the end of a Saw movie provides a big twists that will leave you shocked and stunned in your chair, for a few minutes after the movie has ended. I missed this in "Saw V".
The movie is also the least interesting Saw movie as of yet because it features some lazy writing. Normally Saw scripts are airtight ones but not this one sadly. It often takes the obvious paths.
Like always it is also featuring lots of different plot-lines and characters again, although in this case not all are connected well enough to each other. Seriously, what have all those people going to the Jigsaw-trails have to do with the rest of the movie its plot? It just seems to be there because its a Saw movie and it needs to feature all these sick and twisted games. The story lines don't ever really get together well enough. The movie again is also featuring lots of flashbacks, which shows events that happened in the previous movies, often seen from a different side this time but some of these flashbacks however are quite pointless for the movie once you start thinking about it.
I also blame Hoffman for it that this movie doesn't work out as good and interesting as any of the other sequels. He's the new Jigsaw and as of yet he also is the least interesting one. It probably also has to do with the fact that he is featured a lot in the movie, while Jigsaw normally always remain on the background. Also the reasons why he became the new Jigsaw, as gets shown in this movie, are a bit shaky and not exactly believable.
The movie itself is perhaps also lacking in one clear good main hero and character.
It still is a superior genre movie of course. It's concept alone is already good and interesting enough to please the genre fans and provides the potential for an infinitive amount of Saw-sequels. All Saw movies have a great look and atmosphere over them, though this one works out as the least effective one when it comes down to its atmosphere and horror/thriller elements because of the reason that this movie features very little new elements.
The Jigsaw games themselves also seem less innovative and clever. It's still gruesome and lots of bloods and guts can be seen flying around but it's just less surprising and shocking all.
Lets hope "Saw VI" will have some fresh new good ideas and a better script with some better- and more interesting characters in it.
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
The Saw series has always been a standard of sorts. After what I felt was an iconic debut, the series has always remained consistently interesting, with one of the most compelling and ever expanding plots in film history. People may complain that the series is in decline, but what people need to realize is that each part is astronomically better than the corresponding parts of other horror series (for example, Saw IV is better than Halloween IV, or the 4th Nightmare on Elm Street film). The same holds true for Saw V, though the film definitely shows that the series is in decline and needs to end soon before it descends into pure absurdity.
A universal truth of the Saw series is that every entry, no matter who does it, will always be well written and contain a plot twist or two at the end. Again, Saw V continues the tradition of revealing the 'huge' (if you could call it that) twist whilst "Hello Zepp" by Charlie Clouser plays in the background. The film answers as many questions as it raises, and serves as more of an origin movie, like Saw IV did. Only this time, the origin doesn't focus on John Kramer/Jigsaw, and therein lies the problem.
Why does Saw V fail to impress me? Simple. Not enough Jigsaw. Tobin Bell, who has managed to create an iconic villain over the last 5 years, delivers another sublime performance that is not to missed in the world of horror as perhaps the greatest villain of the decade. It really amazed me how Saw IV had the best acting of the series, but just one movie later, pretty much every performer falls flat on their face. This is especially sad considering most of the cast are returning characters, except your typical "why is this happening to me! AHHH!" type characters (which got unbearably annoying, considering they killed off the two least annoying ones first). Meagan Good and Costas Mandylor are acceptable in their roles, however.
Back to the lack of Jigsaw. Tobin Bell really doesn't physically appear that much in the movie, and that is far and away its biggest flaw. The film is similar to Saw II more than the others. To get my drift a little better, imagine the second film, except reduce Jigsaw's screen time by about half. Yeah. This is the only weakness of the screenplay for me, which appears to have matured from the over the top torture porn in Saw III and the ridiculous attempt to run Saw IV concurrently with its predecessor. The film's biggest flaw is in the acting and lack of Jigsaw. Besides this, I really felt that it fit the mold as a worthy entry to the series.
After watching this, however, I no longer feel that Saw is the standard of excellence in horror as it once was. That said, the film has the advantage of being short and never dragging. It's well paced and will more than deliver the thrills. Another thing I feel obligated to mention is that this is the least scariest film in the series, which is okay, because unlike every other cheap horror film, Saw V doesn't try to be scary. It's more of a thriller with some gruesome images (like the first film) than a full blown horror movie (like parts II & III).
In the end, what it comes down to as far as your ability to enjoy the movie, you have to ask yourself this question: "why do I watch the Saw series?". If you watch it for the story and plot twists, you should be at least satisfied, if not entertained. If you watch the series for pure shock and awe and disgust, you'll be disappointed, because Saw V does not try to be a horror film outside of a few scenes. It's a decent entry to the series that is tolerable, despite a lack of the iconic Jigsaw, horrid acting, and a somewhat predictable plot twist (easily the most predictable of the series).
A universal truth of the Saw series is that every entry, no matter who does it, will always be well written and contain a plot twist or two at the end. Again, Saw V continues the tradition of revealing the 'huge' (if you could call it that) twist whilst "Hello Zepp" by Charlie Clouser plays in the background. The film answers as many questions as it raises, and serves as more of an origin movie, like Saw IV did. Only this time, the origin doesn't focus on John Kramer/Jigsaw, and therein lies the problem.
Why does Saw V fail to impress me? Simple. Not enough Jigsaw. Tobin Bell, who has managed to create an iconic villain over the last 5 years, delivers another sublime performance that is not to missed in the world of horror as perhaps the greatest villain of the decade. It really amazed me how Saw IV had the best acting of the series, but just one movie later, pretty much every performer falls flat on their face. This is especially sad considering most of the cast are returning characters, except your typical "why is this happening to me! AHHH!" type characters (which got unbearably annoying, considering they killed off the two least annoying ones first). Meagan Good and Costas Mandylor are acceptable in their roles, however.
Back to the lack of Jigsaw. Tobin Bell really doesn't physically appear that much in the movie, and that is far and away its biggest flaw. The film is similar to Saw II more than the others. To get my drift a little better, imagine the second film, except reduce Jigsaw's screen time by about half. Yeah. This is the only weakness of the screenplay for me, which appears to have matured from the over the top torture porn in Saw III and the ridiculous attempt to run Saw IV concurrently with its predecessor. The film's biggest flaw is in the acting and lack of Jigsaw. Besides this, I really felt that it fit the mold as a worthy entry to the series.
After watching this, however, I no longer feel that Saw is the standard of excellence in horror as it once was. That said, the film has the advantage of being short and never dragging. It's well paced and will more than deliver the thrills. Another thing I feel obligated to mention is that this is the least scariest film in the series, which is okay, because unlike every other cheap horror film, Saw V doesn't try to be scary. It's more of a thriller with some gruesome images (like the first film) than a full blown horror movie (like parts II & III).
In the end, what it comes down to as far as your ability to enjoy the movie, you have to ask yourself this question: "why do I watch the Saw series?". If you watch it for the story and plot twists, you should be at least satisfied, if not entertained. If you watch the series for pure shock and awe and disgust, you'll be disappointed, because Saw V does not try to be a horror film outside of a few scenes. It's a decent entry to the series that is tolerable, despite a lack of the iconic Jigsaw, horrid acting, and a somewhat predictable plot twist (easily the most predictable of the series).
I watched Saw V with a good opening night crowd here in Sydney. I've enjoyed all of the Saw films, predictably liking some episodes a lot more than others, and Saw V is, again, very watchable, with some intense moments and no shortage of grisliness. But I'd still say it's the weakest entry in the series to date. The trouble is that the main narrative addition for this episode, which has to sustain half the running time, turns out to be a dramatically weak one. I don't think a Saw film ever previously failed to create excitement or new meaning via one of its big twisty revelations, but Saw V's add next to nothing. The knowledge gained doesn't force any re-evaluation of the past events it concerns; you just see and know a bit more about them, and to no great effect, except for the fact that Tobin Bell's performance is always compelling, maybe even more so when he's talking to people who aren't stuck in Jigsaw's deathtraps.
The Saw films have demonstrated an unfeasibly high success rate over time in terms of pulling off twist after twist and having them nearly all hit home. With this track record, it seems inevitable that there'd be a significant stumble at some point. They've never been bulletproof films (and thrillers are the genre that are hardest to bulletproof), but I'd say Saw V is definitely the stumble. In spite of this, it still keeps in enough with the series in general for me to be ready for Saw VI in 2009 - which I hope will be better work.
The Saw films have demonstrated an unfeasibly high success rate over time in terms of pulling off twist after twist and having them nearly all hit home. With this track record, it seems inevitable that there'd be a significant stumble at some point. They've never been bulletproof films (and thrillers are the genre that are hardest to bulletproof), but I'd say Saw V is definitely the stumble. In spite of this, it still keeps in enough with the series in general for me to be ready for Saw VI in 2009 - which I hope will be better work.
While this is still a watchable, well acted movie that continues on the Saw tradition well I have to give it a lower rating because it just was not as good as the previous installments. The plot and the traps that we have come to be surprised by seemed to be a more predictable and rushed along by the makers of the movie. It seemed like this movie could have just been tossed in with part 4 to make one big movie as the prequel to the next part. So to me it seemed like the studio just split up 1 movie into 2 parts to capitalize on the profits....which they have done well I might add because myself and many other movie goers packed the theater for the 5th Saw installment. So in closing I think this movie may be adequate for the die hard saw fans, not nearly good enough for new comers, and winds up lacking far more than it gives. That is why I can only give this movie a 5 out of 10
Like everyone else, I was expecting this movie to live up to the hype and be absolutely horrible. Since though I have seen SAW I-IV, I had to go see this at the midnight showing. What started it off, I was already impressed with that I saw. As the movie was going forward it was hard to tell how it would all add up. By the end though I was expecting to be disappointed and it really did not.
While SAW fans will appreciate this, it really depends on what you like. If you are expecting a SAW II - III where it is mainly gore and such, maybe not so much. If you are like the few who want to know more about the story, then it is a must to see this.
Now while every question is not answered, it makes up for it in its own ways. Do not be like me or most of the people who were hesitant to see this film due to people not enjoying it. I think many people would be surprised on just how great this film really is. To me, it was the best since the first one, despite the weak twist and sometimes cheesy kills. Then again, name a film that has been perfect because everyone has a fault.
While SAW fans will appreciate this, it really depends on what you like. If you are expecting a SAW II - III where it is mainly gore and such, maybe not so much. If you are like the few who want to know more about the story, then it is a must to see this.
Now while every question is not answered, it makes up for it in its own ways. Do not be like me or most of the people who were hesitant to see this film due to people not enjoying it. I think many people would be surprised on just how great this film really is. To me, it was the best since the first one, despite the weak twist and sometimes cheesy kills. Then again, name a film that has been perfect because everyone has a fault.
Did you know
- TriviaScott Patterson was apprehensive about sticking his head in a sealed box that would fill with water. The trap was tested beforehand and didn't go well, which only added to his concern. He ultimately stepped up and did the scene himself without resorting to a stuntman. The trick to the stunt is that the walls of the box were slid open by stagehands, draining the trap as soon as he signaled with his hands. Several takes were required, however, to capture the scene as he found himself uncomfortable at various points during the shooting of this scene.
- Goofs(at around 1h 7 mins) Detective Mark Hoffman steals Agent Peter Strahm's cellphone out of the evidence locker, and uses it to call Agent Dan Erickson. Erickson answers the phone thinking it was actually Agent Peter Strahm. However Erickson should have known that Strahm's cellphone was in evidence, and therefore known that it could have been someone else using the cellphone.
- Alternate versionsAlso available in an unrated director's cut version, which restores deleted scenes and the violence originally cut for an "R" rating.
- ConnectionsEdited from Saw (2004)
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $10,800,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $56,746,769
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $30,053,954
- Oct 26, 2008
- Gross worldwide
- $113,864,059
- Runtime1 hour 32 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
