Saw II. Juego del miedo

Sequels rarely live up to the originals. And in the horror genre that's even rarer. I reckon that 'Saw' (part I) will always be better, due to its originality and shock value, but its (first) successor does its best to expand on the mythology and give the audience something more. In short... it's definitely worth a watch if you enjoyed the original.

The first outing could be summed up best by 'two men wake up in a serial killer's lair and try to figure out how to escape.' However, there was far more to the story than just that and the amount of different twists and turns really struck a chord with audiences (that and the amount of 'body horror' that was involved.

'Part II' ups the ante in every sense. There are more victims in the killer's latest 'lair,' more gore, more traps, more police officers trying to figure out where these hapless people are, perhaps most importantly, more of the killer himself (who was surprisingly not in the first installment very much). In fact... out of all the characters in the film, it's the killer 'Jigsaw' (Tobin Bell) who steals every scene.

As with the first film, there's more to the story than just a bunch of people trying to escape from some fiendishly fatal death-traps. 'Saw II' does its best to keep the surprises coming and, like the first, you'll only have one chance to watch it without knowing all the plot twists that will be heading your way.



So, if you liked the original then you should enjoy this one, too. In fact it's almost like these two films could have been written together and filmed back to back. After this one I only stayed with the franchise for a couple more films as the quality really does go downhill after this one. For me the 'Saw' franchise was a two-picture deal.

The original Saw was probably my most favorite recent "horror" movie, so naturally I was excited when the second one came out. I saw it its opening weekend in theaters, and **THIS WAS IN PREVIEWS, SO I Don't CONSIDER IT A SPOILER** I see a man strapped to a chair, with this "Man in the Iron Mask"-like thing on with all sorts of pretty nails poking toward his face. If you've seen the first one, you can expect what it does. A TV turns on, and there's the puppet thing, and that creepy voice. I'm like "Hell yes!" and it seemed like a great beginning, and it truly does have a great idea going for it, but unfortunately it seems like they got lost in the success of the original and the new bigger budget and lost something. It became the traditional horror movie, with your typical predictable characters, and the innovation and claustrophobic feel of the original was gone. It wasn't scary, but then again I didn't think the first one was to be honest, I think they're more of a mental experience than anything. The weird acid-trip like camera shake still occurs, though thankfully less frequently, and it is like a bigger budget Saw. Think Land of the Dead. Still a Romero movie, but it didn't feel like one as much. Same thing applies here. The ending is cool for most people, but I honestly saw it coming. It gets a bit muddled, and by the end of it you really don't remember much except the very beginning and end. It's fun, and it's an interesting piece of this new Saw series, but it just doesn't seem to live up to the original for me. You watch it yourself and give it a chance. I give it a 6 1/2.

I have no idea what my title means, except that it sounded clever in my head. Hmm.

I'll assume that you've already seen the original Saw and you're wondering if this is a worthy successor. In a word: yeah. But it's a very different approach. While the first Saw was brilliantly minimalistic, the story being staged almost entirely in one room, this second installment takes us out of the box. Gone is the claustrophobic feeling of confusion and good ole existentialistic "who am I" from the original, and instead we get more of a mystery as seen from the outside, as our hero Eric (Donnie Wahlberg) tries to crack the case before it's too late.

Sure, the same elements existed in the first film, with 2 concurrent plots of victim & detective. But the draw of the first was to figure out why all these things are happening. Here the mystery is revealed in the first few minutes, the killer is apprehended, and what follows is a sort of chess game between investigator Eric and perp Jigsaw with the clock ticking to save the intended victims. It's actually a clever approach similar to the rather AWESOME film "Exorcist III" (1990) which is composed of dark dialogues between the detective and the lunatic, and this dramatic approach was repeated a year later in the more popular "Silence of the Lambs" (1991). But in this domain, in order for it to work, the film must be slow, almost painfully slow, thick and heavy.

Saw II attempts to balance the heavy, psychological "Lambs" approach with good old fashioned slashes & gore. It succeeds, I feel. But I still can't help but wonder how it would've been if the filmmakers had gone full tilt "Lambs" on us. Instead the dialogues between Eric & Jigsaw seem a bit short, rushed and not fully explored.

The result is a film which is certainly entertaining, but I don't think it will ever be considered a psychological classic like the other two I mentioned, or like "Seven"--films that are much slower in pace, with far fewer gallons of blood spilled but with oceans of drama.

I know this may sound like a negative review, but that's only because I'm comparing Saw II to the heavyweights. If instead we take Saw II at face value, a straightforward horror flick, it certainly delivers. There's the added bonus of having two nice twists at the end. In terms of sheer entertainment value, Saw II cuts a real log.

I should really quit trying to come up with witty puns.

Wow. While I enjoyed the first Saw, let me say this sequel was an utter disgrace. If its title were an anagram, as in my heading, it would be more honest. This movie was an exercise in shock video, not a horror film. Believe me, there is a difference. It looks like today's audiences have forgotten, or, judging by some poster's ages, never gotten the chance to experience, what a true horror film is.

Some reviews which gave this high ratings said they did so because it had "more movement", was "more gory and bloody" and "leaves it open for the next installment." Well, none of those suggests a superior piece of cinema. The script was poor, editing was spastic, and the characters were absent. Even in this age of sequels, need we be reminded a 90 minute film is not an episode? This is a clumsily slapped together torture fest which is missing the mystery, the characterization, and the human element of the first. Horror needs pacing, buildup, and subtlety. Apparently, bloodshed, arguing, and a tacked on twist ending which made little sense scare people nowadays. And I haven't even delved into plot yet!

In short, Saw II takes the could-be mystery and shines a light on it, takes the entities and blurs them, takes the audience and leads us by the hand to a ridiculous ending. Save your time and money, and watch some old horror on DVD instead.

This movie has just mad a quantum leap in horror films. after watching this movie i had the chills walking to my car, and lets say that i more than enjoy a scary movie. this movie kept me up for at least and hour after watching it. it was one of those movies were you cant let it out of your mind.

The movie had one of the best openings that i have seen in a long time. after a few minutes into the movie i had to put down my popcorn. i don't have a weak stomach and this movie got me to put down my popcorn, that is huge.

With a great blend of suspense, acting, and oh yes there was a lot of blood. this movie great deserves another watch, i would pay to see this movie a couple of times. not to mention one of the best twists i have seen in a movie. i would say 2nd best ending i have seen in a movie.(#1 was Fight Club). you definitely have to see this movie.