Review: Saw VI
Filed under: Horror, Lionsgate Films, Theatrical Reviews, Fandom

Sorry to break it to fans of the Saw film series, but Jigsaw, a/k/a John Kramer is a self-righteous dick. In comparison to the Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers of the horror world, whose raison d'être is causing carnage mercifully bereft of deeper moral or instructional value, Jigsaw devotes a ridiculous amount of time thinking about what other people do with themselves, and effectively (if ironically) conceives his traps as object lessons in humility, compassion, and self-awareness. Personally, I find this high-handed moralizing far more painful than any evil device he could possibly design, but then again, that's why I'm not a fan of the series; that said, the latest installment in the Saw franchise appears to fulfill all of the demands of its audience and then some, making it a worthy and faithful entry in a franchise which at this point seems expressly designed to document people dying in increasingly inventive ways.
After a cold-open sequence where two loan officers compete to dismember themselves as an alternative to being literally screwed to death, Saw VI opens as Detective Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) investigates Jigsaw's (Tobin Bell) latest crime – which, coincidentally, he helped execute. As he narrowly eludes discovery by his colleagues, across town a claims adjuster named William (Peter Outerbridge) becomes the victim of Jigsaw's next deadly game, while the long-deceased killer's widow Jill (Betsy Russell) carries out her late husband's final wishes. Soon, the paths of these various players intersect, but despite their various efforts to take control of their lives - and in some cases those of the others, it's Jigsaw himself who comfortably presides over all of them, even from beyond the grave. This time, though, his goal seems to be to drive his deadly game towards its ultimate conclusion.
Having studiously avoided most of the previous installments of the Saw series thanks to my appreciation/ distate for the original film (while I recognize its creativity, watching it felt like an endurance test), the first question that popped into my mind as I watched a young lady chop off her arm while watching a colleague cut filets from his love handles was, why is this enjoyable to anyone? As if the gore itself isn't bad enough, Jigsaw's targets are regularly subjected to lengthy speeches where he ham-fistedly tries to equate Hell's version of a "Double Dare" physical challenge with their offenses against humanity; as he unleashes the film's first two victims upon themselves, he observes that he has put them in chains "symbolic of the shackles you place on others." Mind you, when much of your work is being done in the last days of your life, it's perhaps understandable to be a little maudlin, but after six films, dozens of traps and countless victims, it's hard to determine which feels more harmful - Jigsaw's mechanical expertise, or his use of metaphor.
Meanwhile, one has to wonder what inspires folks to return to theaters annually and subject themselves to grand guignol spectacle like this – appreciation for Jigsaw's calculated motives? A certain sort of wish fulfillment? A depressing level of desensitization to human pain and suffering? It's hard for me to believe that other than a passing fascination with the character's (and by extension, the screenwriters') depravity, these movies actually make a deeper impression than delighted revulsion, gag-induced thrill, or some other such combination of excitement and horror. Especially when one of its biggest set pieces involves the prospect of six people the audience doesn't know being put on a playground ride (call it a gory-go-round) and subjected to point-blank shotgun blasts at the whim of a guy forced to make decisions about who among them lives and dies. What's sadder, maybe, is that evidenced by this chapter in Jigsaw's saga – which is stacked with at least as many flashbacks as current-story scenes – the killer isn't merely trying to exact revenge, or inspire/ inflict epiphanies upon his victims; he's doing nothing less than raging against the dying of the light. At one point, he tries to convince Jill that the junkies she treats would be better off under his care, while making the point – emphatically - that they're ungrateful and insensitive to her efforts. While it speaks to the threadbare remnants of the franchise's original concept that Jigsaw's ire runs so deep his only remaining targets for "enlightenment" are random drug addicts and folks whose lifestyles with whom he disagrees, such diatribes are a reminder that somewhere embedded in the series' mythology, there's a genuine belief that each trap examines something real and meaningful, rather than simply offering the nihilist thrill of a "smart" slasher movie. Which, brutality aside, might actually be easier to digest, even among its detractors.
Ironically, however, most of these musings on the franchise's underpinnings are irrelevant to its general effectiveness, and certainly unimportant to the folks excited to see a sixth installment. In which case, Saw VI really does deliver what it promises – buckets of agonizing gore, labyrinthine explanations/ leaps in logic, and a philosophical foundation that practically defines the difference between clever and smart. Truth be told, I really expected to hate this film, and I didn't; it all worked together as well as a sixth film in a series probably ever could, offered bloody payoffs at regular enough intervals that I was never bored, and provided enough exposition and background detail that I never wondered what was happening, even when I really had no clue.
In fact, it's entirely possible that Saw VI is the best sixth chapter in horror history, if such a distinction means anything, delivering thrills that are both unique and familiar – and most importantly, integrally connected – to its predecessors. Admirably, the screenwriters not only draw upon the rich and bloody legacy of the series for their latest installment, but additionally borrow inspiration from contemporary issues like the housing market crisis or healthcare, which, although explored in a decidedly broad and bloody way, give the film a resonance, or at least a rewarding sense of vindication that has dwindled in the intervening years since the series began. Ultimately, Saw VI is an efficient and effective thriller, and should satisfy fans new and old alike; and even if you think that the horror convention of a pontificating killer is particularly tiresome, this film manages to mostly put its money where Jigsaw's mouth is, while giving the phrase "ripped from the headlines" an altogether new meaning.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-23-2009 @ 1:26PM
Dan said...
Jason Lives is healthy competition for the best part 6.
Reply
10-23-2009 @ 11:57AM
Joseph Moore said...
It's been a long, long time since I've gone to a theater to watch a "horror" movie…and this franchise seems to epitomize why.
I know this has been said a million times, but I'm just baffled as to how we as a society are okay with handing torture-porn an "R" rating.
God forbid a "proper" theater shows consenting adults' genitalia, but if you want to show their insides being ripped-out…go for!
Reply
10-23-2009 @ 1:03PM
Reuben said...
I sort of agree with you. Society put much more pressure on sexual content than it does for violence/gore.
10-25-2009 @ 12:23AM
Kevin said...
I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why nudity and gore are the same thing...? I just fail to see why they are so frequently compared to one another. I don't agree with how sexuality and genitalia are rated by the MPAA, and I do think they should lower their standards on what constitutes indecent in that respect. But I just don't get why people say that if you can show someone being tortured than you should be able to show two people having sex. They're content is judged and viewed differently, as it should be, so the fact that ones okay doesn't preclude the possibility that the other would be judged to not be. Having said that, I do think that the torture porn genre should be given an NC-17. I can't stand watching any of those films.
10-23-2009 @ 1:29PM
Mark Rooster said...
I think it sucks that anyone's still using the term "torture porn."
Reply
10-23-2009 @ 2:00PM
jillian said...
I went to go see this last night- it was pretty awesome. It answered a lot of questions- and the traps were great.
Reply
10-25-2009 @ 3:17AM
philsfan said...
I agree..I am a fan of the series and would actually put this installment in the top 3 most entertaining so far. the traps were awesome and it was nice to finally have some old questions answered and some new ones raised. in regards to the whole "torture porn" debate, the insides that are being ripped out are prosthetic and human genitalia are not. if i wanted to see nudity, i'd see a porn. if I want to see "pretend" blood and gore, I'll see a horror film. the decision to see these films is yours, not the theatres'.
Reply
10-23-2009 @ 3:05PM
Andy said...
I think you sum it up perfectly right here...
"why is this enjoyable to anyone?"
That would look good on the posters.
Reply
10-24-2009 @ 12:01PM
Dan Thompson said...
I've seen all 6 and this was without question, my favorite. Highly entertaining, great storyline and plot, very well-connected with the previous 5 movies, and as others have already said, answered many previously unanswered questions in your mind that the first 5 movies left. I have a few questions though: #1 In the Gore-Go-Round scene, didn't he use the same hand twice? So, he "could have" save more than 2 people, right? Had he stuck his other good hand in and mangled it as well, but he chose not to, right? Or, maybe even tried taking off his shoes and sticking a foot in? So, he could have saved another, but chose to keep one good hand, right? #2 How did one person, Det. Hoffman, alone by himself now, kidnap and bag over 15 people for this "game"? The further this series goes to keep it's audience, the more extreme and unbelievable the probability of it's reality become, although never losing any of it's entertaining factor or "mind playing." #3 WHAT on earth was the reason Amanda was inside the clinic after closing that night with her "boyfriend" Cecil? I did not make the connection, but am soooo glad they finally answered the question about what was in the manilla envelope Amanda read in Part 3. That was cool.
Plot for Saw VII: Hoffman, mangled and deformed now, plots an elaborate game against Jigsaw's wife Jill, and her clinic patients and nurses, making HER the one who has to choose who lives and dies, who gets help and who doesn't, as payback for putting him in the mouth trap. Jill is now the only remaining survivor who knows anything about the truth of the Jigsaw murders other than Hoffman (the REAL Jigsaw) but who has never herself ever been tested. It would be different in that, this "game" would be hatched out of revenge and not "morality" and the audience would view her as an innocent victim, rather than someone who desperately needs to change their actions and alter their lifestyle. She helps people, right? Or does she . . . ? Would be an interesting angle for the series to take, and seemingly, the only one left. Jill has to become the main character for Part VII. I would come back a seventh time to see that one. They could either leave them both alive, or Jill could always kill off Hoffman for good in the end somehow.
Reply
10-26-2009 @ 1:09AM
Marc said...
Definitely one of the best Saw movies! In my opinion, it's right up there with the original. I didn't think the second or the fifth ones were as good as the rest. Amanda was with Cecil because it was before she was clean. She went with him to get drugs. That was my understanding anyway. My question is what was in the envelope that Jill put in the doctor's office mail slot? Who was it going to? They made a point to show that she was caught on a security camera doing this. Hopefully, there will be a Saw VII and we'll get some answers. Other than that, I was very happy to get answers to questions left from the previous films. I also wonder whatever happened to Dr. Gordon. I would assume he's dead from blood loss, but it was never confirmed.
10-24-2009 @ 10:31PM
leah said...
Loved it. I was happy that most of my questions were all answered- and I love to hate hoffman.
Reply
10-27-2009 @ 1:30PM
Paul said...
There is going to be a 7th and Ten bucks Says that the envelope she dropped off was to Dr. Gordon he lived and still practices medicine. So the movies will come full circle
Reply