Saw VI 4K 2009

After his questionable directorial debut (“Saw V”), David Hackl stepped down as director of the franchise, and Kevin Groter, the editor of the previous “Saw” films, took his place. And it was the right decision—the direction in “Saw VI” is quite confident, and overall, the film turned out well, far better than the lackluster fifth installment. That said, the sixth installment didn’t perform particularly well at the box office. The previous installments each grossed over $100 million at the box office (given their modest budgets, that’s not just a success—it’s a triumph). The sixth *Saw*, however, grossed only slightly more than sixty million. For a horror movie, that’s still a good haul, but the producers of “Saw” are clearly used to much bigger box office numbers. Why didn’t the sixth “Saw” do very well at the box office? Perhaps the previous installment spoiled things a bit, dampening the enthusiasm of some “Saw” fans. Perhaps “Paranormal Activity” was to blame, as horror fans were flocking to see it at the time (yet another reason to dislike the “Paranormal Activity” franchise, which I don’t care for anyway). But who cares who’s to blame? That’s all in the past.

I didn’t like the opening scene of ‘Saw VI’ back then, and I still don’t like it now. Two con artists are trapped, and only the one who cuts off the most flesh from himself will survive… The meat grinder scene turned out great, but I just don’t care for this episode. On the other hand, I do like the rest of the movie.

This time, the main test subject is a real scumbag named William Easton—an insurance agent who, by denying insurance claims, has condemned many sick people to death. He’s a total scumbag, but he’s no match for the bastards who were put through their paces in, say, the fourth “Saw” movie. Unlike those characters, you actually want to empathize with Easton. John Kramer has set him on a truly gripping quest, full of difficult moral decisions, and the character genuinely changes as the game progresses. They even cast a charming actor for the role. I was genuinely interested in watching Easton’s performance, and the ending blew me away.

The traps are great, and there’s plenty of blood again… High-quality makeup, a nauseating dismemberment scene—I highly recommend this to fans of “gory” movies. *Saw VI* often gets criticized for its unfair deaths. Supposedly, Kramer only tests the guilty and always gives the victim a chance—but here, one character fell into a trap simply because he was a heavy smoker, and was even given a test he was bound to fail... My response to these complaints is this: it’s not a flaw, it’s a feature. A maniac—even a charming one—shouldn’t be portrayed as a good guy. Kramer has been a killer and a hypocrite from the very first installment. So everything is as it should be; let the young “Saw” fans see who their idol really is. And that Kramer—who in the third “Saw” preached that revenge is a vile act and that one must be able to forgive—is himself not averse to settling scores with those who’ve wronged him in life by luring his tormentors into traps... Some people don’t like the abundance of flashbacks—but how else could they show Kramer (although in this installment he started appearing in video recordings as himself, not always hiding behind the Billy puppet)? Besides, I was glad to see Amanda return in the flashbacks.

If there’s anything to nitpick here, it’s the plot holes. Along with Easton, Detective Hoffman set traps for 13 other people. And he caught the whole bunch in a very short time, without any trouble. Guys, that’s just ridiculous! You’d be better off coming up with something like a police task force helping Hoffman or him having accomplices all over the city... The return of Special Agent Lindsay Perez (Stram’s partner) to the plot also seems questionable. No, I’m actually glad—I like this character—but she didn’t play a particularly significant role in the sixth *Saw* movie, so is there really much point in such a comeback? And finally, a matter of personal taste: the director’s cut of *Saw 6* is all over the internet, and I’m not really a fan of it. The final scene was better edited in the theatrical cut. That’s why I still treasure the DVD release with the theatrical cut like the apple of my eye.