| Review:
|
Funny, how perceptions change. "Saw VI" is pretty much
the same film we've seen five times before, and yet, to
my shock and amazement (and probably to yours as well),
I found that I didn't hate or even dislike this movie. It's
not good enough to recommend, but it's also not the terrible
experience I had been expecting. ***
My written reviews for "Saw IV" and "Saw V" were filled
with animosity, mostly because the whole thing seemed like
another case of sequel overload stemming from a horror film
that wasn't all that good to begin with. For once, we have
a "Saw" film that attempts to engage the audience, not only
through a few clever revelations, but also through a none-too-subtle
commentary on current political issues. It doesn't always
succeed, but this time, I could tell that an effort was
actually being made. ***
All the same, it still suffers from a lot of the previous
film's problems. I've never understood or agreed with the
idea of continuing the story when the main antagonist, John
Kramer, a.k.a. Jigsaw (Tobin Bell), has already died. When
not shown in flashback, we see police lieutenant Mark Hoffman
(Costas Mandylor) overseeing Jigsaw's "master plan." Can
you imagine a "Nightmare on Elm Street" film in which Freddy
Kruger is seen only in flashback? While someone else slices
people open with razorblades for fingers? Never mind. ***
There's also the fact that this is by no means a scary
movie--it's impossible to be genuinely frightened by situations
this preposterous. The gore is plentiful, and while I can't
say I had been expecting anything less, I never really enjoyed
looking at it. The story, while interesting, is also convoluted
and hard to follow, with far too many subplots interwoven
throughout. ***
The central conflict involves William Easton (Peter
Outerbridge), the sleazy executive of a health insurance
company who grants or denies coverage based on the probability
of a person's illness. In essence, he chooses who lives
and who dies. Unfortunately, it's for this very reason that
he ended up on Kramer's short list of people to be "rehabilitated,"
and he soon finds himself trapped in yet another series
of elaborate and painful traps, each more implausible than
the last. ***
In one, six of his junior co-workers find themselves
chained to a rotating carousel, which periodically stops
in front of a loaded shotgun; Easton has the power to prevent
only two of them from getting blasted, so it becomes a matter
of choosing who will live and who will die. ***
Also trapped in Jigsaw's lair is Pamela Jenkins (Samantha
Lemole), a shady reporter, and a mother and son (Shauna
MacDonald and Devon Bostick) who, for reasons I won't reveal,
share a connection with Easton. They wake up in a room rigged
with a tank of hydrofluoric acid and a switchbox with the
words "live" and "die" written on it. ***
Another subplot, this one involving Kramer's widow,
Jill Tuck (Betsey Russell), sheds some light on who she
is and just how much she knew about her husband's extracurricular
activities. I can't say I was completely satisfied with
what was revealed, but hey, at least I got to see the contents
of the box she was given in the last movie. We also learn
a bit more about Kramer's oldest apprentice, Amanda Young
(Shawnee Smith), and her strained affiliation with Hoffman.
***
In the final subplot, The FBI, led by Dan Erikson (Mark
Rolston) and a surprise survivor, are actively trying to
discover the identity of the person continuing the Jigsaw
killings. Hoffman tries to misdirect them by planting physical
evidence linked to the late Peter Strahm. But the more Erikson
and his team learn about Strahm, the less sense his involvement
makes. ***
One need only listen to the tone of Hoffman's voice
to know that he's the culprit, but, unfortunately, convention
dictates that law enforcement in horror movies know as little
as possible until it's too late. Otherwise, the filmmakers
wouldn't have an excuse to include more scenes of violent,
bloody torture. ***
And what of that? "Saw VI" opens with two predatory
lenders in a Jigsaw trap, one they can only survive by ...
well, let's just say it's similar in principle to "The Biggest
Loser," where the winner is the one who sheds the most pounds.
Later on, someone melts before our eyes after being injected
with lethal doses of acid. Some are shot, leaving gaping
holes in their chests, while others have their heads impaled.
***
I realize that the fans get a kick out of this, but
really, isn't there a point where enough is enough? Fortunately,
this movie takes the time to include more compelling story
ideas, such as a flashback sequence in which Kramer astutely
observes what most of us already know: Here in America,
health is not determined by patients or doctors, but by
insurance companies. ***
The ending is the film's biggest miscalculation. The
final five minutes play like an editing free-for-all, with
revelations, flashbacks, lines of dialogue, and gruesome
shots all merged together in a frenetic visual nightmare.
It's so densely packed that it soon becomes impossible to
figure out what's being revealed and why. In spite of this,
it was still more thrilling than the ending to last year's
film, which as advertised as being shocking beyond belief
but didn't deliver as such. ***
|
