The pros and cons of formula film-making

Rating: 6/10 (27 November 2006)

Probably the most obvious thing a viewer will notice about SAW III is that it follows the formula of the first two films. That's not always bad, of course: It worked for Last Crusade and Die Hard With A Vengeance, for instance. Unfortunately, the third film of a trilogy can often end up noticeably inferior to its predecessors. This is far more common, apparent in films such as Jurassic Park III, Final Destination 3, T-III and many others. Sadly, Saw III falls into this last category.
Don't despair, however; for there are benefits to a formula, too, namely that you can count on a movie providing an entertaining if not spectacular experience--assuming you enjoyed the first two, of course. And that's where Saw III works. If you want gory traps, daring escapes and a mysterious master plan that's not revealed until the very end, then Saw III will deliver! Also keep in mind it's not completely formulaic. The relationship between Amanda and John has been developing for some time now, and continues to do so in this new film, which adds a different dynamic. The point of view is increasingly focused on John, which also gives a unique flavor to this sequel.
The problem, though, preventing me from giving a completely positive review, is twofold: Firstly, the character development of the new faces is very lacking; secondly, for a formula based on plot twists, this film is a little too predictable. Given the pros and cons of the final product, I'd give it a six out of ten. In my rating scheme, that basically means it's worth watching, but I'd wait till it's out of the theater.