Saw II

The film has excellent gore and really makes you feel the pain. That's the end of the plus side, and all we have is a bunch of unsympathetic meat to the slaughter, which is perversely unbelievably moronic in every way and also can't even act. The first installment gets full marks for its quality contribution to the genre despite a ridiculous budget. The next installments will be nothing but calculating, reputation-raping, but the truth is that for all their filth I will watch them. Oh, and the sped-up editing sequence sux. (02/25/2006)

It’s already noticeably lacking the element of surprise that James Wan successfully pulled off in the suspenseful and psychologically charged first film. Everything is much more focused on the traps themselves, the story is brisker and bolder, and it follows the fate of the people trapped in the deadly labyrinth much more closely. If we look at it as a film on its own, it's not bad at all; Bousman put the story on the back burner a bit to focus mainly on what horror viewers want to see the most, but he still managed to make a very decent B-movie that is not marred by a more detailed depiction of human suffering. However, if we take the series into account, it is clear that the second part, like all the following ones, was made exclusively for profit, that it hardly develops the story, and that the only thing it has in common with the first one is the character of the killer and his principles. It's quite a shame that from this point onwards the Saw phenomenon would become not much more than brutal entertainment for teenagers, and the great story and atmosphere of the first episode can only be sadly remembered. The second one works, it has quite a lot to offer and has the advantage that it follows its famous predecessor, but I’d rather to avoid further parts just in case. 65% (11/18/2012)

John "Those who don't appreciate life do not deserve life" Kramer has set up another game of suffering. The biggest issue was a dislocated jaw from yawning due to the lack of suspension of disbelief and blurring before the eyes from epileptic editing. It tries to revive itself with a crucial surprise moment at the end, in the style of the first one, but I was already too exhausted. Play the song by New Kids on the Block "Let's Try It Again"… (11/30/2023)

In a way, Saw II is a pleasant surprise. The screenwriters managed to get rid of the holes in the logic in the first film, although it is true that they did leave a few of them in. In many ways, the filmmakers also managed to get away from the overly uneven parts, where one depicting the action in the room was excellent, with the others taking place elsewhere and the flashbacks being dull and grey. They manage to keep the atmosphere fairly balanced, though admittedly the whole thing is built more or less on a largely uncovered depiction of the functionality of the various tasks Jigsaw hands out to his victims. It is true that their originality is at times unpleasantly chilling, and some of them (the hole full of syringes) even made my stomach turn. Even so, Saw II is just a template thriller that has a relatively decent number of ideas and a decently dark atmosphere. On the other hand, it is also true that the hyperactive camera and clippy editing surprisingly take away from it a bit. A (non)standard above average film. (04/11/2006)

Saw IIis a bit of a drop in quality compared to the almost genius first film, but that's just how it goes. There's a lot of emphasis on making everything look gritty, some characters are very stereotypical, and the main detective is incredibly unlikeable, but the finale still shows that the creators can lead us on brilliantly. The twist still works quite well here, and you find yourself looking forward to what's yet to come. (02/17/2014)