Saw sequel’s recipe too thin to sustain
‘‘Anyone who has seen the previous Saw films will know what to expect.’’
flick Daybreakers, but saddled with some ropey acting and predictable plotting it feels like something of a wasted effort. Wes Craven’s New Nightmare this ain’t.
It’s now a decade since serial vigilante John Kramer’s (Tobin Bell) death. However, when a Ned Kelly-helmeted body turns up hanging in a local park bearing all the hallmarks of his ‘‘Jigsaw Killer’’, police begin to suspect a copycat.
Dark web sites indicate support for his style of justice exists, while instructions on how to make his trademark traps have been circulating for years. But with their only witness in a coma, Halloran and Detective Keith Hunt (Cle Bennett) must turn to coroners Logan Nelson (Matt Passmore) and Eleanore Bonneville (Hannah Emily Anderson) for leads. However, the answers they get are certainly not the ones they were expecting.
Look, franchise fans will no doubt get a kick out of a new crop of Heath Robinson-esque torture devices and seeing all the series’ tropes present and correct, but for the rest of us it really is a thin gruel of ghoulish entertainment.
Anyone who has seen the previous Saw films will, somewhat depressingly, know what to expect.
Dictaphoned messages? Modern technology be damned. Sliding doors a go go? Present and correct. Marionette on a bicycle? You betcha.
Naturally, Jigsaw also boasts Saw’s trademark killer twist, but this one feels slightly undercooked and hampered by the fact that there really are only so many characters in our story. In the end, it all just feels like a particularly nasty episode of Law& Order or CSI. – James Croot
Anyone who has seen any of the previous Saw films will, somewhat depressingly, know what to expect from Jigsaw.