Probably unbeknownst to most everyday moviegoers, movie studios like to send all sorts of promotional knickknacks and other such items to reviewers in hopes of drawing attention to their latest releases. Some are fun, others are funny and the rest are a waste of time and materials, especially if their intent is to somehow influence us to give a film a better grade.
They do have an effect, however, on our local mailman and those in his post office who always try to guess what film the next packaged knickknack might be associated with, particularly if said items gives off some sort of audible clue. Thus, I have to wonder what they thought if they accidentally activated a key chain I received this week that then spouted the ominous sounding "Oh yes, there will be blood."
If they were fans of the grisly, Rube Goldberg inspired "Saw" from 2004, they might have guessed it would be the imaginatively entitled "Saw II." In that sequel, the returning killer from the first film is heard making the above quote and you know what -- he's right. Of course, that shouldn't come as a surprise in that the first film was a bloody mess (in more ways than one) or that those helming sequels -- be they the returning director or someone new brought in to take over -- almost always follow the oft-misguided belief that "more is better."
In this case, that mantra means further blood, gore and heightened sadism standing in for "entertainment" as the "what would you do" booby-traps and potential victims are multiplied here over what was present the first time around. What's missing, however, is the novelty and mystery that the original film managed to convey. That involved two men trapped in a grungy public bathroom with the clock counting down toward their pending fate should they be unable to figure out the abstract clues that could lead to their release.
The big issues with the first film were some gargantuan plot holes and glaring lapses in logic that spoiled the "fun" -- if that's what you'd like to call it -- and caused viewers to be taken out of the moment. Accordingly, returning screenwriter Leigh Whannell (who also starred in the first film) and new co-writer/director Darren Lynn Bousman (making his feature debut) have pretty much ironed out those problems, resulting in a rather straightforward thriller.
Nonetheless, it's still just an exercise in sadism and an over-directed and over-edited one at that. With a background in commercials and music videos, Bousman joins a growing list of young (and some veteran) filmmakers who seem to think that short clips, quick cuts and such make for good and/or imaginative filmmaking.
While such an approach certainly ensures that film editors will never be looking for work, it doesn't do much for the resultant film or in engaging viewers -- at least those who learned to appreciate movies long before music videos changed filmmaking for the worse -- who can see right through such cinematic subterfuge.
The bigger problem, however, which seems to be running rampant through most contemporary horror films, is the filmmakers' inability to get us to care about the characters. I understand that most of the potential victims here -- such as those played by Franky G., Glenn Plummer and Shawnee Smith -- are purposefully unsavory or otherwise uninteresting characters of one form or another who are facing their comeuppance. I also realize that some viewers will react to the elaborate if sadistic traps in an instinctually primitive reaction. Yet, that doesn't make for compelling storytelling, and the fact is we simply don't care about those about to be offed.
The same holds true for the subplot -- lifted in part from the first film -- where a cop tries to solve the mystery before it's too late. As embodied by Donnie Wahlberg (the big brother to Marky Mark who now sounds and even looks more like his bro), the cop is yet another unlikable character and thus we similarly don't care about him accomplishing his goal.
The one sort of unsavory character that moviegoers seem to like, however, are diabolical madmen, killers and such, and in that aspect the film does not disappoint. Barely around in the first film except in spirit, by voice and, okay, lying around for most of the film (in what was the biggest credibility issue for yours truly), Jigsaw -- a.k.a. Tobin Bell gets a much meatier part this time around. Not only does the hyper direction slow down to normal speed whenever his character's on camera -- which is a godsend on its own -- but Bell also does a decent job playing the creepy madman with a God-like complex.
Of course, his survival instinct and morality based tests still feel half-baked -- just like the first time around and despite how elaborate they might be this time -- compared to what similarly occurred in the far superior "Seven." That said, fans of the first film might not mind, especially when this one finally leads back to the first setting and yet another "twist."
For everyone else, however, the slightly interesting thematic elements of playing God and how far people will go to save their own hides are overshadowed by frenetic direction and editing, and all of the nearly relentless sadism. At one point, the perpetrator states that his victims are located in the "Last House on the Left." Considering that this film shares the same sort of unsavory pain and violence found in that Wes Craven film of the same name, that doesn't come as a surprise. "Saw II" rates as a 3.5 out of 10.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
