A mere shadow of its predecessors

Rating: 5/10 (20 December 2006)

In 2004 the world was treated to Saw. Saw was a brutal horror flick with excellent gore, a thrilling story and a superb plot - it combined the absolute best of a lot of things and with that became a new standard. Not too much later the follow up came - and that sequel confirmed the myth that some sequels can withstand the comparison with the original. Saw II was in my eyes just as good as the first one. Now... In 2006, Saw III sees the cinemas. Does it withstand the comparison? IMO, no. Not by a long shot.
The premise to the story stays the same: a criminal going by the handle Jigsaw puts people that deserve a lesson in his eyes to a test. The setup for the film is the same as well - lots of (excellent) gore, fear and agony burning on the screen. The background story is different. The plot attempts to make the film fit in by adding tie-ins to the other parts and succeeds to a certain level, yet it fails pretty hard as it makes a number of jumps that just don't make any sense at all. It also misses the one thing that made the previous two films twist and turn - a severe twist of plot in the end that made them unpredictable. This film is very predictable.
I guess it will now draw to a conclusion in a fourth part, but I can't say I am really looking forward to seeing it - it can only mean further downfall.
5 out of 10 mutilated victims