To me, overhype sort of killed the original "Saw."  Some films, like "Shaun of the Dead" or "Haute Tension" can be vastly helped by internet buzz.  With those two movies, I went in expecting a great film, and I recieved a great film.  With "Saw," I went in expecting something wholly worthwhile, and instead, recieved something a little on the mediocre side.  I'm not going to lie, it is that same overhype that influenced my initial review of "Saw," where I gave it three out of four stars.  Now, unfortunately, the more I see it, the more a sense of loathing creeps into my voice everytime I talk of it.

Now, exactly a year later, we have its sequel, adequately entitled "Saw II."  According to imdb.com, this sequel was filmed in twenty-five days.  This means, that in the span of a year, this entire movie was produced, written, casted, filmed, and edited.  One year.

It shows in every frame of this movie.

"Saw II" has sort of two storylines going on at once this time around.  Story #1 involves Detective Eric Mason (Donnie Wahlberg, doing his best Brad-Pitt-in-"Seven" impression) interogating a captured Jigsaw (played by, in the film's best role, Tobin Bell).  Story #2 centers around a group of completely unrelated people locked away in a house somewhere that happens to have traps set around every corner.  How do these two stories fit together?  Well, one of the unlucky few happens to be Mason's son... whoops.  So now the hard-boiled detective must get info from the killer before everyone dies from a toxin in the house that takes two hours to take effect, but they have three hours to wait to exit, blah... blah... friggin' blah.

This one just sort of plods along, doing its best to top the first one's gore factor (unfortunately, it doesn't).  There are more traps, more deaths, and more people who I could care less about.  I guess it says something about the likability of the lead characters when the serial killer is the one that I felt bad for.  As a matter of fact, there's a scene where Wahlberg is beating around the cancer-ridden Jigsaw killer like a rag doll.  Yeah, the detective's son is in danger... but considering that this same detective is such a dick and his son is such a degenerate, who gives a crap for him and his dumb kid?

Basically, I hated this movie.  Tobin Bell is good.  There, that's a compliment.  Also, the re-introduction of the room from the first film is also very well done.  Unfortunately, more of the same jump edits and horribly written/delivered dialogue kills this.

Something tells me I will be the minority here... but, well... I want my nine dollars back.

*1/2 out of ****

Not with me you're not, cause this movie did suck... it sucked worse than you even lead on. I could go on for hours at how bad this movie was but my head is ringing right now.

I'll leave it at this for now... It wasn't as bad as DAWN REMAKE or THE FOG REMAKE but it was close... really, really close.

At least they tried something original, I honestly was ready to go last night but since I don't have photo ID and this film they ask for ID I couldn't go. My brother was being a prick because he hates horror movies (Oddly he told me he enjoyed Tool Box Murders)

I know Balt hates almost everything new, it's in his nature and well people probably take what you say with a grain of salt. (I enjoy your rants and after watching the films I understand where you're coming from but you have to understand that some people just like bad movies)

So now I wait about 4 months for the DVD release of this film and judging by SyCo's review it might not be a good buy, simply put most of the time you're right in your reviews.

I really enjoyed this movie. I snuck in last night and would of been well worth the ticket price. (if i paid) The deaths were great and the whole movie kept you at the edge of your seat. I have only seen very few people that said they hated it and the rest loved it. I loved it. The writer has a very very creative mind for this. The only bad part was one of the twists. The movie had many twists, yes but one of them i did not like. If you see the movie you will know what i am talking about. Besides that the movie is great.

I'm going to try to catch it Monday, and yeah, I'm only going to see the kills. And if delivers on that angle, I'll be happy.

This movie tied with Constantine as being the worst this year and is the first movie I've seen where I've actually wanted my money back.

The question, though, wes... What TOOL BOX does he like?  Does he like Zitto's original or Hoopers remake?

It can go either way on this one... I know which one I like better "no offense Hooper, you just didn't grasp the concept"

Anyways, SAW 2... wow! What a pile of shit this one was. When... oh when... will it all end? I think they sealed the deal with this one. I simply believe this to be worse than that appauling MASTERS OF HORROR episode on the other night. The one by that jerk stain who did Phantasim... his name slips me at the moment and I don't feel like searching him up.

Saw2 = bad x mind dumbingly stupid.

Well... I'm gonna rent it on pirate DVD maybe this week... If it's anything like Evil Dead Trap then i'll buy the DVD.

I did finally see this film and I'm on the fence, I do enjoy Beverly Mitchell as an actress and all but she seemed only to be in this film to get blood on her breasts and that's it... Was I high or something or was her character pointless in this film?

If her role was acting than Tara Reid better get her chest ready for blood splatter in Saw 3...

It's not terrible but to quote what somebody said "When... oh when... will it all end?"

Here's my more in-depth review:

A lot of people liked this movie a lot, or so I imagine due to, among other things, it's rating on IMDb.  

Me, not so much.  I won't spend a lot of time describing this unoriginal mismash of better movies, but basically, imagine Cube with the DP from Saw and a little Silence of the Lambs thrown in for good measure.  

SPOILERS POSSIBLE

Cube?  Because a bunch of strangers wake up in a house together, discovering that each room is filled with traps.  The strongest of them all ends up going crazy and killing the rest.  In the end, a lone boy must team with a woman to...well, never mind.  Unlike Cube, and unfortunately for them, they're all idiots.

The DP from Saw?  Because this movie looks good.  It really does.  It's dirty, grungy...everything we want it to be.

Silence of the Lambs?  Because old Jigsaw spends all his time sitting around talking with the main character, who hopes to...well, free his son, I guess.  Mostly, the guy's a jackass.  They discuss deep philisophical points to rival The Matrix Reloaded (that was sarcasm) while Matthews knows that Jigsaw is the key to stopping the deaths...kinda like Silence of the Lambs.  Jigsaw stops short of having a nice Chianti, but he doesn't hesitate to trade questions with Detective Matthews, and the director doesn't hesitate to use intercutting between the hero going to the right house and the police going to the wrong house, which is strongly reminiscent of something, but I can't think what.  Actually, it's Silence of the Lambs.  Unfortunately, Tobin Bell is no Hopkins and Donnie Wahlberg...well, you know.  

Aside from that, Saw II proceeds to use the exact same "killer was with us the whole time" twist from the first film.  Whole SWAT teams are deployed to a metal factory because a trap has their metal in it (is that standard police procedure?).  Our hero spends the movie whining or acting like the biggest moron of the film, which is no mean feat in a film where it takes people three hours to figure out that "the back of your mind" means the backs of their heads.  Not that anyone figures it out but the crazed Cube ripoff anyway.  The scene where a woman is killed trying to remove a syringe from a glass box causes you to wonder why Jigsaw didn't just put them all in Chinese fingertraps...the end result would have been the same for these idiots.

END SPOILERS

So all in all, I feel that this movie was the biggest insult to my intelligence since I made the mistake of glancing at a tabloid headline (all I wanted was a croissant...).  Shot well, acted fairly well, but in the end, nothing could save this one.

People left the theater partway through the showing I was at.  I don't know if they were scared, revolted, or bored.  I was bored.

My sister downloaded this and I was curious enough to watch the first few minutes. If I ever finish this movie--which is really improbable considering all these comments--it'll be for Dina Meyer, that moron detective's partner? Or ex-partner, I don't remember. I didn't see the first one. Other than that, the first and this one don't really look that interesting and I don't like gory movies.

I dont NOT LIKE gory movies, i just cant watch them. I...just can't watch them...I lIKE films with a little bit of gore, but i can;t watch them with LOTS of gore. The new Texas Chainsaw Massacre was bad for two reasons; 1. It overused the gore, which made me unable to watch all of it, 2. It just generally was terrible and unorhginal (how original can u get with a remake?). I loved Saw, though, so i'm gonna try and catch this. Note, the nearest cinema (real cinema, the one in Bowen just..sucks)  to where i live is..like..anhour away.

I almost teared up from your story... it was... beautiful. Maybe the reason you're afraid of a bit of gore is that you're underage and not supposed to be watching the films anyway.

Watch Finding Nemo or lame TV comedies as they are made for you. Leave the big boy movies to the big boys and girls. I heard a new Harry Potter came out, there you go, a film made for your agegroup.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley Watch Finding Nemo or lame TV comedies as they are made for you. Leave the big boy movies to the big boys and girls. I heard a new Harry Potter came out, there you go, a film made for your agegroup.

Was that directed to the both of us? Well, thank you. I will. I've seen HP twice and I don't think I'm missing anything from your tub-o'-blood movies. And I don't think my seventeenth birthday is standing in the way of that.

I meant BigWhoop... I honestly thought this movie was less bloody and more crappy.

But if you want to watch Harry Potter that's fine, simply put it's your own fault if you watch the films that are meant for mature audiences and you yourself aren't mature enough to take away the point of that film.

I'd probably join you in Harry Potter but I'd have to go see the first 3 beforehand.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley I meant BigWhoop... I honestly thought this movie was less bloody and more crappy. But if you want to watch Harry Potter that's fine, simply put it's your own fault if you watch the films that are meant for mature audiences and you yourself aren't mature enough to take away the point of that film. I'd probably join you in Harry Potter but I'd have to go see the first 3 beforehand.

Oh :B I bet there are great films that are gory .. I just can't get past the gore part. Eh, I wouldn't waste my time watching the first HP movie -- pretty good but I was twelve when it came out; it was better back then. I'd just bother with watching the third, and if you feel like you need it, the second. The fourth, I think, is the best though. But that's another thread.  ::)

Quoted from Old Time Wesley I almost teared up from your story... it was... beautiful. Maybe the reason you're afraid of a bit of gore is that you're underage and not supposed to be watching the films anyway. Watch Finding Nemo or lame TV comedies as they are made for you. Leave the big boy movies to the big boys and girls. I heard a new Harry Potter came out, there you go, a film made for your agegroup.

At 42, I'm one of the oldest people on this board, Wes, and gore movies don't interest me either.  The problem with these movies is that they generally rely on gore and tend to skip imoprtant things like story.

And I liked the HP movies.


Phil

I don't watch horror films but a lot of normal action films have "gore" in them these days. I hate the genre and every crappy film they make just proves me right, I'm on a crusade to ruin the genre because it has no credibility.

I did not mean to offend you though Impulse as you're a valuable member of this web site. Also I wouldn't disagree with you on this film or any other gory film as they are all just gory because they want to spark that reaction out of people. I like when my movie tells me a story and if they have to take 9 hours plus as a film like Lord of the Rings did well I'm all for it.

I was watching the one Harry potter film where they rescue Harry from a window one time but had to go, I seen in Futureshop that you can buy the first 3 in a package for like 30 bucks.

(It's not really off topic chatter as this discussion died once the film was released and turned out to be the biggest let down since Chris Rocks acting career.)