Why Saw III failed to satisfy...

Rating: 3/10 (29 October 2006)

In the first two Saw films there was something there that made the movie not just about the gore or the brutality that put it head and shoulders above all the other slasher films, there was intelligence and hope. The victims of Jigsaw were almost always given a modicum of hope that they could survive what they were given and come out breathing if they acted intelligently enough. Furthermore, the ending of each film was always brutal and yet hopeful at the same time. In the first Saw unanswered questions concerning Dr Gordon and Adam gave us hope. In the second Saw, the outcomes of the lives of Daniel, Detective Matthews, Amanda and Kerry may have been brutalized (emotionally or physically), but there was still hope.
Saw III was not a depiction of a lack of hope, but rather a thorough extraction of it. None of the victims in Saw III had hope or the ability to get themselves out of the traps they were in except through the actions of others. It became more about the traps than it became about the lessons these individuals had to learn. And in the end all that's left is gore, misery and an innocent life taken needlessly.
The plot of Saw III was Machiavellian in its design to be sure, but ultimately it proceeded through the movie like a sledgehammer instead of a jigsaw.