Saw II

User Score
6.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 298 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 46 out of 298

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Apr 1, 2016
    2
    You want to know what that II and those two totally dried up fingers show up? The finalized score on my review. So totally (not) horrifying and scary.
  2. Apr 25, 2015
    4
    Silly, gratuitous, and nonsensical as they are, the Saw movies may have something to them after all. Much like The Three, the serial-killer film scripted by "Donald Kaufman" in Adaptation, they're written in full knowledge of all their bone-collecting, skin-stitching, Seven Deadly Sins-reckoning predecessors, yet the psychology has been completely stripped away, leaving only the gimmicksSilly, gratuitous, and nonsensical as they are, the Saw movies may have something to them after all. Much like The Three, the serial-killer film scripted by "Donald Kaufman" in Adaptation, they're written in full knowledge of all their bone-collecting, skin-stitching, Seven Deadly Sins-reckoning predecessors, yet the psychology has been completely stripped away, leaving only the gimmicks behind. To some extent, the Saw franchise may be the B-movie answer to classier fare like The Silence Of The Lambs and Se7en—both Saw and the new Saw II reveal their heady moral and thematic agendas as pseudo-sophisticated window dressing for the grisly contraptions they actually are. Stripped down to the barest genre essentials, Saw is a spring-loaded killing machine, packed with sadistic little deathtraps and ludicrous macabre twists, and its quickie sequel offers more of the same, which should again appease viewers who enjoy being jerked around.

    In a novel reversal on the original, evil puppetmaster Tobin Bell (nicknamed "Jigsaw" because he cuts puzzle pieces out of his victims' skin) pulls back the curtain and spends the entire movie in plain sight, but he still holds all the cards. Though not quite as tortured as Danny Glover's madman-in-the-attic in Saw, cop Donnie Wahlberg has reason for stress when he discovers that Bell has abducted his son (along with about half a dozen others), and is holding them in a booby-trapped house. Through security monitors mounted in every room, Wahlberg and his team can only watch helplessly as the hostages struggle to free themselves within the two hours before their bodies implode from the nerve gas being pumped through the vents. But Bell relishes his role as dungeonmaster, so he offers a way out in the form of a game: If the hostages can figure out the combination to the safe in the middle of the room, they'll find the antidote inside.

    As in Saw, the solutions are often just as bad as the problem: Sure, you can unlock that spiked steel trap mounted on your head, but first you have to find the key, which is planted behind your eye socket. (Here's a scalpel. Enjoy.) Bell claims he never kills anybody and that his victims are masters of their own fate, but that's a little like a schoolyard bully grabbing a weakling's arm and doing the "stop hitting yourself" routine. Co-writer Leigh Whannell, the sole creative holdover from the original, knows well enough not to mess with success, and he perpetuates Saw's sick, arbitrary formula without fail. The good news for moviegoers is that there's a way to enjoy Saw II: Simply grab the scalpel from under the chair, carve a hole in your forehead, and remove your frontal lobe.
    Expand
  3. Mar 30, 2015
    7
    Saw II is not my favorite film in the series, but the film gets gory and fun. Director Darren Lynn Bousman replaces James Wan, which why this movie sucks.The problem with "Saw" is characters are half-baked. with no proper direction like Wan did in the first "saw" fails on every level. Grade C+
  4. Feb 15, 2015
    6
    Saw II is a 2005 Canadian-American horror film, a sequel to 2004's Saw and the second installment in the seven-part Saw franchise, directed and co-written by Darren Lynn BousmanI think that the movie is not as good as the first one. The story captivates me not so much, but still makes me be quite interested. If you liked the first part of the series, I Saw ie, the second might seem to you weaker.
  5. Feb 1, 2015
    3
    Haven't even seen 30 minutes of it and I don't plan to. This film looks like complete crap. It's been made to make money due to the success of the first Saw which is probably my favourite film ever. This film sucks bollocks, and I haven't even seen most of it. I just know. Don't bother watching this crap.
  6. Sep 4, 2014
    8
    "Saw II" is one of the rare sequels that is just as good, if not better, than the original. It's slower than the first film, but it's still very interesting and intense. Another great thing about this sequel is that it's a lot different than its predecessor, and it's not just a rehash with more blood. If you're a fan of the first one, I highly recommend this one.
  7. Jul 16, 2014
    8
    Saw 2 isn't as good as the first but the movie is a decent sequel. The movie has some new actors and there
    are cool effects once again. The story is weaker in this one and the first story was much more effective.
  8. Mar 3, 2014
    8
    Saw II has a very interesting talk with meanings and a good plot. The acting is really good and the twists are amazing and nearly better than in the first Saw-movie.
  9. Feb 26, 2014
    6
    It has loss the unique and clever nature of the first one. We're used to the idea now so they tried to introduce some new and exciting traps that definitely helped the film. However, the acting is comical at times and overall it was just not that well done. At best this is an average movie, I gave it a 56.4 out of 100
  10. Dec 23, 2013
    7
    Saw I was very good, and Saw II is a very good sequel, that has a lot more to offer, such as better deaths, better story and more characters and settings. Good movie, 7/10.
  11. Nov 2, 2013
    6
    "Saw II" is just like the first film but this time, the filmmakers have come up with new plot twists that are really well designed. Jigsaw returns as the villain, and designs more gruesome traps where victims dies in all sorts of gory ways.
  12. May 3, 2013
    6
    This averaged lower than the first movie since it doesn't actually have average traps. Unlike the future Saw films, this one lacks what saw is in memory for, the torture sequences. It is very low and they really aren't that good. But it is still good enough to get a positive review.
  13. Jan 26, 2013
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The best of the Saw movies. This is probably because of the character development of Jigsaw, Eric Matthews, Amanda Young and and Daniel Matthews. What I always loved about the movies were the character development, and the story. The traps don't matter in this movie, it's all about Eric Matthews trying to find his son and doing everything he can to find him. Tobin Bell gives a great performance as Jigsaw/John Kramer. The movie may have flaws with the characters in the Nerve Gas House and some of the traps but over all it's a great detective movie & a good thriller check it out. Expand
  14. Dec 23, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Not as good as the followers but better than the original, but it has a **** up plot, father loses his son to some **** who traps him up in a room filled with gas, thats really **** up Expand
  15. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Saw II, sequel to the pretty darn good Saw, is a completely different film to its predecessor. Yes the Jigsaw killer is back and has a new game in place with a larger number of people in play this time round. The story of Detective Matthews is a fairly boring affair, a rogue cop who does whatever he can to get an arrest even planting evidence, attacking suspects and giving false statementsSaw II, sequel to the pretty darn good Saw, is a completely different film to its predecessor. Yes the Jigsaw killer is back and has a new game in place with a larger number of people in play this time round. The story of Detective Matthews is a fairly boring affair, a rogue cop who does whatever he can to get an arrest even planting evidence, attacking suspects and giving false statements is in the list of things he is known for. Jigsaw has taken his son and several others and placed them in a house with the simple premise to get the antidote to the toxin in the air for each person by completing set tasks for each person. Whist being interrogated by Matthews Jigsaw must keep his game in play and keep Matthews distracted long enough to lure him into an even bigger trap. Saw II is a crime drama with some blood thrown in here and there, nothing compared to the edge of your seat thriller the first was. Expand
  16. Aug 14, 2012
    7
    A good horror movie with a good strain on the environment and engaging characters. The scenes can be electrifying excitement and pass to anyone who is watching.
  17. Mar 18, 2012
    4
    Saw II is bigger, bloodier, but not better than its predecessor. Sure, Jigsaw's "games" are more extravagant and brutal, but the film lacks the clever plotting and tension of the original Saw. John Kramer (Tobin Bell) still makes a fantastic horror movie villain - he's charismatic, threatening and utterly deranged, and its great to get under the skin of the character a little in thisSaw II is bigger, bloodier, but not better than its predecessor. Sure, Jigsaw's "games" are more extravagant and brutal, but the film lacks the clever plotting and tension of the original Saw. John Kramer (Tobin Bell) still makes a fantastic horror movie villain - he's charismatic, threatening and utterly deranged, and its great to get under the skin of the character a little in this installment (no matter how unpalatable it might be) and understand what makes him tick. Donnie Wahlberg's Detective Eric Matthews makes a good enough protagonist, and the explosive extended dialogue scene between him and Kramer is the most compelling in the film. The rest of the cast are a bit underwhelming, and simply serve as lambs to the slaughter for the purpose of entertainment. I can't really deny that the film has moments that serve a certain deranged craving for schadenfreude found in all human beings, but the film as a whole loses a great deal of its energy and motivation after the first couple of these torture-porn-serving set-pieces. It just doesn't engage quite as the first film did, and only works on a single level. The film's big twist is also rather underwhelming when compared to the shock of the first film's - this time round, you see it coming a mile off. Still, Saw II is diverting, and makes for a decent enough Friday night gore-fest, just don't expect anything more. Expand
  18. Feb 9, 2012
    6
    Saw 2 is a decent sequel. Tobin Bell is amazing as Jigsaw and Donnie Wahlberg was a great addition too, Their two characters had a lot of great back and forths in the film. The acting is still good. The horror is good but the traps this time around are not scary at all but they do still provided a little bit of suspense because it was hard to predict the outcome. The twist ending wasSaw 2 is a decent sequel. Tobin Bell is amazing as Jigsaw and Donnie Wahlberg was a great addition too, Their two characters had a lot of great back and forths in the film. The acting is still good. The horror is good but the traps this time around are not scary at all but they do still provided a little bit of suspense because it was hard to predict the outcome. The twist ending was interesting but a little predictable (I figured it out about 1/2 way into the movie). Still, Its a suprisingly decent horror film that trys to live up to the first film but fails imo. Expand
  19. Feb 1, 2012
    10
    I love this movie the plot and the traps are so original the creators gave horror movies hope. I thought this was going to be the worst horror movie but its actually the best
  20. Dec 4, 2011
    6
    Eh it was ok, The traps werent that scary and the actors in the nerve gas house were below average. However Tobin Bell saves the day with his amazing performance as Jigsaw and Donnie Wahlberg plays a solid lead as well. Not as good as the previous film but its still a solid addition to the series.
  21. Nov 25, 2011
    5
    Actually pretty disapointing. The actors (in the nerve gas house) sucked pretty hard but the rest of the cast was good. Tobin Bell was fantastic as Jigsaw and gives a chilling performance as well. The traps were rather disapointing and didnt really frighten you at all though. Worth watching for Bell's performance but thats it.
  22. Nov 9, 2011
    7
    Wickedly fun. Not as enjoyable as the first fun in every way possible. But that's acceptable judging by the inventive deaths that make the whole things worth watching. The plot is just a little less complex to my liking.
  23. Sep 18, 2011
    4
    "Saw 2" is baked with mindless flesh and blood, grinded a barely-acceptable plot twist, and mixed with terrible character depth unlike its prequel. Consider to pass this terrible movie, for you WILL gross out.
  24. May 18, 2011
    9
    Saw II fixes just about every flaw of the first movie, the acting is better, it's set up better, and has another shocking conclusion, if you liked the first movie this is a must watch.
  25. Nov 25, 2010
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is the best Saw movie I've seen. I can't say that is the best of all, because I didn't saw the last one (Saw 3D).
    The whole Saw saga is totally underrated, no one can predict the ending of this sequel. That's one of the most unpredictable movies I've ever seen. Is quite clever.
    I really liked the first one, but Saw II is so much better. When it ended I was really impressed. Can't wait to see the last one.
    Expand
  26. Nov 22, 2010
    3
    This film is not in any way thinking outside of the box. It's just very cliché.
    Now that doesn't have to be the killing blow to a film, there are plentiful of good films that are pretty cliché.
    However, this film is not only cliché, but have a storyline which a 14 year-old could come up with. I feel genuinely embarrassing that a grown up person comes
    This film is not in any way thinking outside of the box. It's just very cliché.
    Now that doesn't have to be the killing blow to a film, there are plentiful of good films that are pretty cliché.
    However, this film is not only cliché, but have a storyline which a 14 year-old could come up with. I feel genuinely embarrassing that a grown up person comes up with something this shallow, and dare call it good film. It simply isn't a good film from a storyline perspective.

    As regard to character development, there is nearly none. It really goes to show what the real purpose is.
    The real purpose is as simple as a outlet for sadistic and primitive urges. Not that there's something wrong with that. But trying to market it as anything else than what it is, is just wrong.

    If you like blood, unrealistic scenes(in a film that tries to be realistic) and no story to speak about whatsoever, then this is a film for you.
    Expand
  27. Oct 19, 2010
    5
    it wasn't that good, but its just wasn't nearly terrible. it had a lack of style and plot, but the acting wasn't so bad and the death scenes were more grisly than the original. Saw II is pretty much worth a try.
  28. Sep 3, 2010
    7
    More fun & games with Mr. Jigsaw but this time with the "tough" one from New Kids on the Block.
    At one point it turns into a sinister version of The Crystal Maze but without Richard O'Brien with his leopard skin jacket.
    Clever & entertaining as was the first.
  29. seank
    Aug 7, 2009
    7
    It borrows a lot from the first one but it still is nearly as good.
  30. DanF
    Jan 26, 2009
    7
    I don't understand why so many people believe the saw movies have no plot. I have only seen the first three and I thought the first was boring and not as gorey as the hype. But the second was a happy surprise, and I believed the plot kept me glued to the screen much more effectively.
  31. JasonS.
    Oct 23, 2007
    5
    I loved the 1st movie but this one dropped the main reason the other one was so good. You knew why each person was kidnapped. It seems as if they cut out the back story to almost all of the characters.
  32. AB
    Aug 26, 2007
    7
    By placing more of an emphasis on the villain and his motives, "Saw II" creates a more interesting story than that of the first film. Sadly, however, because of the mediocre dialogue, the film itself is far less captivating than the original. Still, "Saw II" is great by modern horror movie standards.
  33. MattO.
    Jul 1, 2007
    5
    I absolutely hated the first Saw movie when I watched it, mainly because it seemed like a boring retread of Se7en. I had a hard time caring about the characters, and I couldn't understand how or why it became such a hit. I can't explain why I chose to see this one, but I thought it would be good for a laugh or two. However, it turns out that this is a much better movie than the I absolutely hated the first Saw movie when I watched it, mainly because it seemed like a boring retread of Se7en. I had a hard time caring about the characters, and I couldn't understand how or why it became such a hit. I can't explain why I chose to see this one, but I thought it would be good for a laugh or two. However, it turns out that this is a much better movie than the first. That being said, it isn't saying much. But, what the first Saw lacks, this one semi makes up for. I was actually interested in whether the characters lived or died. (to say I actually cared, though, is overstepping the bounds) But, either the actors (not the police, but the eight or so locked in the house) or the director had some way to keep the movie interesting enough for me to keep watching, and interesting enough for me to want to see Saw III. Expand
  34. GaborA.
    Jan 27, 2007
    1
    The worst of the first three(please don't make anymore). The whole middle section, which ultimately turns out to be pointless after the end, plays out like a really bad rendition of Cube. It doesn't even fit the Saw bill considering everyone's fate isn't tied to their own desire to live but more to the selfishness and idiocy of those around them. All the Saws are over The worst of the first three(please don't make anymore). The whole middle section, which ultimately turns out to be pointless after the end, plays out like a really bad rendition of Cube. It doesn't even fit the Saw bill considering everyone's fate isn't tied to their own desire to live but more to the selfishness and idiocy of those around them. All the Saws are over the top gross and illogical, but Saw II is the only one I've seen thats actually boring as hell. Expand
  35. RyanH.
    Jan 3, 2007
    1
    This movie thought it was much smarter than it actually was. The plot is just running some innocent people through a double dare course that actually hurts you. While there was a lot of gore that attracted most of the audience, the story itself could have been the most mindless plot ever. Pretty predictable when the writer tries to show you how ingenious the criminal is by connecting the This movie thought it was much smarter than it actually was. The plot is just running some innocent people through a double dare course that actually hurts you. While there was a lot of gore that attracted most of the audience, the story itself could have been the most mindless plot ever. Pretty predictable when the writer tries to show you how ingenious the criminal is by connecting the beginning of the story with the end. Once again all the characters in the story are stupid idiots who should have all been dead years ago by drinking poison under the sink by accident. Expand
  36. JordanG.
    Nov 4, 2006
    9
    Though the first one has a better plot and more imaginitive scenes this Saw still is a great movie. Those you say this is just disgusting gore didn't pay attention and didn't see the first movie or didn't pay attention their either. The twists and turns in this series are sick and amazing. The first one i find better but still this is a great movie
  37. RedFaceNevousNate
    Oct 20, 2006
    0
    I am hoping that the third movie will be better than the first two because the first two REALLY sucked.
  38. [Anonymous]
    Oct 20, 2006
    0
    Even worse than the first one. Just disgusting and pointless. No real plot, just one unshocking twist and a lot of bad acting. This movie has no impact but a sore stomach. Utter Garbage, a new filmmaking low. The worst film of the year.
  39. Terry
    Oct 15, 2006
    10
    Just as great as the first.
  40. Flo
    Sep 2, 2006
    10
    Great twists, great traps, just what you need. Can't wait for number 3. You know the rules to make it work.
  41. VidM.
    Jun 13, 2006
    3
    Nothing new here. If you liked the first, you'll like this too.
  42. Andrea
    Jun 4, 2006
    0
    What a dull movie! Is this suposed to be scary or completely absurd? Most of the time I actually wished Jigsaw just killed them all. And that's o.k. because stupidity is suposed to be paunfull! Complete waste of time (and money).
  43. Drew
    Jun 3, 2006
    3
    Saw the first (no pun intended...) and was really excited for the second - totally failed to live up to the original - don't bother unless you are bored or want to see liberal splashes of blood
  44. TristanL.
    Mar 31, 2006
    10
    Fantastic film, gorier than Saw, and utilising some lovely set pieces. The point is not the gore but the intricacy and the actual plot - listen and obey the rules and you win.
  45. AlexZ.
    Mar 7, 2006
    8
    I give it an 8. There were some scenes which did not make sence at all. Who can lock a door with a club to hold back somebody or other little details. Apart from those, undisturbing, flaws the movie is great. The acting was good, especially by Tobin Bell ( playing Jigsaw ). The plot twist was hard to get but once you got it, it's a brilliant and very good one. Could've been more I give it an 8. There were some scenes which did not make sence at all. Who can lock a door with a club to hold back somebody or other little details. Apart from those, undisturbing, flaws the movie is great. The acting was good, especially by Tobin Bell ( playing Jigsaw ). The plot twist was hard to get but once you got it, it's a brilliant and very good one. Could've been more scary though! That's why only an 8. Expand
  46. RichardS.
    Feb 21, 2006
    3
    Saw 2 (and 1) in a nutshell. 1) [***SPOILERS***] Hypocritical murder puts a bunch of people in a room where survival is practically nil. 2) Most of them die. 3) Crappy illegitimate twist. 4) One person in the end who isn't dead and is left alone in a room. Problems with the movie. 1) Where does this cancer ridden patient get all the time and energy to plan these things? (You might Saw 2 (and 1) in a nutshell. 1) [***SPOILERS***] Hypocritical murder puts a bunch of people in a room where survival is practically nil. 2) Most of them die. 3) Crappy illegitimate twist. 4) One person in the end who isn't dead and is left alone in a room. Problems with the movie. 1) Where does this cancer ridden patient get all the time and energy to plan these things? (You might note he is hooked up to an IV and respirator) 2) Where does he get all the money for these elaborate schemes? How in the heck can he afford several empty residencies? (Don't forget the 2 warehouses, but hey maybe he rents?) 3) How did he become an electrician, plumber, construction worker, metal working specialist, carpenter, and blacksmith so quickly? Unless of course he hired somebody? 4) Why is everyone so incredibly stupid in this movie? Expand
  47. DrewF.
    Feb 19, 2006
    8
    Surprisingly solid sequel. The way they tie up loose-ends from the first film is very neat. Nice twists, too. I was stunned by how much i liked this. Will be adding it to my collection (alongside the original).
  48. JonathanD.
    Feb 19, 2006
    9
    one of my favorite suspense movies... if your looking to be scared dont turn here its not scary just freaky... people dont pop out around corners people dont chase eachother for the most part its just a movie that you wont fully understand untill the end which makes it great. and tony b if you payed attention to the movie SPOILER(you would know that jigsaw didnt kill those people the lady one of my favorite suspense movies... if your looking to be scared dont turn here its not scary just freaky... people dont pop out around corners people dont chase eachother for the most part its just a movie that you wont fully understand untill the end which makes it great. and tony b if you payed attention to the movie SPOILER(you would know that jigsaw didnt kill those people the lady did) i wish that before people said bad things about a movie they would understand the movie first. its really a good movie for those of you who want to be freaked out or like suspence movies and its a great movie if you liked the first. Expand
  49. TylerD.
    Feb 18, 2006
    4
    What a let down. The first movie is so much better than Saw II. It tried way too hard and the ending seemed very forced. You can tell the director was changed. What a horrible ending. It turned from good to a shitty episode of CSI in minutes. I was looking foward to seeing this so much, and I have to say I'm extremely disappointing. If Saw III comes out, which I'm sure it will, What a let down. The first movie is so much better than Saw II. It tried way too hard and the ending seemed very forced. You can tell the director was changed. What a horrible ending. It turned from good to a shitty episode of CSI in minutes. I was looking foward to seeing this so much, and I have to say I'm extremely disappointing. If Saw III comes out, which I'm sure it will, let's hope it goes back to it's roots. Sure, Saw II had it's scary and disturbing parts, but the other parts of the movie just seemed poorly acted. Very poorly acted. The ending was just...ugh. I can't even begin to explain how bad it was. Forced is one word that comes to mind. Another? Well...very, very bad. Better luck next time, Darren Bousman. Better luck next time. Expand
  50. TonyB.
    Feb 17, 2006
    3
    this movie didnt completely suck on for a few saving graces however this movie is not near worth a purchase quite possibly a rental at the most. however if you enjoyed the first one greatly which i cant say i did then i recommend it to you but if u didnt like the first one much you will hate the second.
  51. BrittneyB.
    Feb 16, 2006
    9
    Saw 2 has an excellent story line, the terrifying scenes and the twisted ending, gives the movie a brilliant feel to it. I rated it a 9 because it was rather gorey but it was still a clever film. I give it two fingers up! !
  52. KyleL.
    Feb 13, 2006
    7
    Ha! Honestly, it scared the crap out of me....i always put myself in the characters situation, and this wasnt a good situation. Very 'intelligent' movie. Really gets you to think about it.
  53. AlistairD.
    Jan 17, 2006
    0
    Saw II is a horror scetch show. The plot is only there to try and justify random scenes of violance. I hope the writter of the film didn't get paid.
  54. JoelT.
    Jan 12, 2006
    8
    Good horror flick. Slightly better then the original.
  55. DarylL.
    Jan 1, 2006
    4
    Unfortunately the sequel overall doesn't compare to its superior original. Though the sequel continues the series of gruesome deaths the movie isnt as smart as its predecessor.
  56. GerronK
    Dec 15, 2005
    8
    Saw II is a well done horror flick, in an era where horror flicks are rarely well-done. I remember thinking how the hell could they make a sequel to "Saw", but they did, and it's a complete legitimate sequel. Those who did not see the first will need to see it to totall appreciate the second movie. It was pretty well done.
  57. WallyS.
    Dec 8, 2005
    7
    Dissapointing, considering the original movie was sensacional, but this sequel lacks the good plot of the original, and the characters here are highly superficial, played by actors horribly and directed with no inspiration. What saves the movie are the stong and gory scenes that to me looked very cool, but otherwise it is a completly trash film.
  58. ToynaP.
    Dec 7, 2005
    10
    Awsome movie I compleatly recomend this movie to anyone!!!!!!
  59. skrump
    Dec 2, 2005
    0
    This is properly the worst movie I've ever seen. First of all, the character roles are just ripped off from the cube movies in a halfassed way. The plot is not original and has no point. This is hollywood-boredom. Sure as hell isn't art or food for thoughts. Secondly, there's constant screaming and bad cutting trying to make up for the nonexisting thrill. Made me turn down This is properly the worst movie I've ever seen. First of all, the character roles are just ripped off from the cube movies in a halfassed way. The plot is not original and has no point. This is hollywood-boredom. Sure as hell isn't art or food for thoughts. Secondly, there's constant screaming and bad cutting trying to make up for the nonexisting thrill. Made me turn down the volume and eventually also turn off the tv. This sucks. Even worse than Saw I, which I only thought was stupid because of the 'I'll-cut-my-leg-off-for-no-damn-reason-other-than-try-to-copy-that -original-version-of-nightwatch-scene". I would really like to meet the people behind this so I could tell them face to face how much I hate this piece of crap. :( Expand
  60. mamuc
    Nov 22, 2005
    10
    Very genialitic is this film director:))
  61. SomeGuy
    Nov 22, 2005
    3
    Logic and continuity has been thrown out the window in this waste of a sequel. It feels like the filmmakers just threw a bunch of scenes together in the hope that a movie would materialise. And shouldn't it say "scene missing" before and after every scene? If not, the director and editor must have really screwed this film up. And the supposed 'connectivity' between it and Logic and continuity has been thrown out the window in this waste of a sequel. It feels like the filmmakers just threw a bunch of scenes together in the hope that a movie would materialise. And shouldn't it say "scene missing" before and after every scene? If not, the director and editor must have really screwed this film up. And the supposed 'connectivity' between it and the first film simply opens up more plot holes, bringing the total number to 3156789982533456782981976. At least they managed to include a little trailer for the film within the actual film (I am referring to that pointless montage that came before the big twist), which must be a first. It has some okay scenes, but overall, do yourself a favour and watch the first film, which was clever, original, and expertly crafted, not lazily thrown together. Expand
  62. AlanI.
    Nov 21, 2005
    9
    This movie was better in many ways then the first one. What I liked about the first movie was how clever the twist and turns the movie took the viewer until the final surprise. What I didn't like was the poor acting and a few unrealistic kill scenes . In Saw 2 the acting was way better. What I didn't like was how they rushedbrushed past some of the individual histories of some This movie was better in many ways then the first one. What I liked about the first movie was how clever the twist and turns the movie took the viewer until the final surprise. What I didn't like was the poor acting and a few unrealistic kill scenes . In Saw 2 the acting was way better. What I didn't like was how they rushedbrushed past some of the individual histories of some players ( why include them). Still all in all the story kept you guessing until the final twist. As in the first movie these final scenes flashed so quickly, it was hard to grasp the full implication of the story. I am a little suprised by some of the writers who seemed to have hated the first movie, but then went ahead anyway and spent their hard earned money to see the second- why? I wouldn't have. Expand
  63. stephyk.
    Nov 21, 2005
    1
    The film was very very not worth while going to see! it was even worse than the first one which i thought was impossible!
  64. MarcB.
    Nov 19, 2005
    10
    I don't know why you all thought this was a disaster. I loved the movie it could have been a bit more gruesome but overall such a good movie. Loved the catch at the end.
  65. KellyW
    Nov 18, 2005
    9
    The plot is again stellar, and the tension is even more gripping than in the last film!!
  66. BoboP.
    Nov 17, 2005
    10
    Great movie, loved the beginning.
  67. LindseyW.
    Nov 14, 2005
    7
    I was pleased by the ending and liked how the movies were so connected.
  68. JodyT.
    Nov 10, 2005
    7
    Fabulous.
  69. lukeg.
    Nov 9, 2005
    10
    Heaps good mvie and must see
  70. GlynnH
    Nov 9, 2005
    10
    [***SPOILERS***] If you pay attention to the film, JOE B, you would know that it was not Jigsaw who set this all up, it was the girl from the first movie. Since he had nothing to do with the setup, he is then not responsible for anyone who died. This is also what he does in the first movie, enlists someone else to set everything up so his hands are clean of any deaths. END OF SPOILER This [***SPOILERS***] If you pay attention to the film, JOE B, you would know that it was not Jigsaw who set this all up, it was the girl from the first movie. Since he had nothing to do with the setup, he is then not responsible for anyone who died. This is also what he does in the first movie, enlists someone else to set everything up so his hands are clean of any deaths. END OF SPOILER This movie was awesome. Kept my eyes glued to the screen from beginning to end. Let's just say that the syringes are alone enough reason to go see this. It rocked and I am hooked for whatever else they have to throw at us. Expand
  71. Mo
    Nov 8, 2005
    5
    [***SPOILERS***] The movie was ite. i dont knoe bout the rest but i kinda figured the big twist when WARNING SPOILER AHEAD... the girl never coughed and seemed perfectly stable while the others were dying due to the nerve gas. I did like the part of if the cop followed the rules of jigsaw while talkin to him he would have gotten his son back.
  72. BrentT.
    Nov 7, 2005
    9
    This movie grasped my attention as much as the first one did; playing Jigsaws game is something that the audience can even enjoy. I found myself trying to figure out the ending so it wouldn't catch me off guard, but to no avail. It got me good. As for the idiot writing for the Boston Globe, go get a pair and realize that watching others suffer isn't the basis of this movie.
  73. anthonyv.
    Nov 6, 2005
    7
    Movie Critic Spin 101: focus on the one thing about a movie that you hated, amplify it in your review, and brush aside everything else. This movie was nowhere near as bad as the critics said it was. Yeah, parts of it are unusually cruel and inhumane, and Jigsaw's claim that he never killed any of his victims is questionable (did the ricin find its way through the vents by itself, Movie Critic Spin 101: focus on the one thing about a movie that you hated, amplify it in your review, and brush aside everything else. This movie was nowhere near as bad as the critics said it was. Yeah, parts of it are unusually cruel and inhumane, and Jigsaw's claim that he never killed any of his victims is questionable (did the ricin find its way through the vents by itself, Jigsaw? nice try). But overall I thought it was great. The acting, dialogue, and plot are nowhere near as bad as J.R. Jones and Wesley Morris claim they are Expand
  74. dave
    Nov 6, 2005
    0
    Yet more Hollywood garbage!!!
  75. JoeB.
    Nov 5, 2005
    5
    It was alright, but not great. There were several gaping plot holes. For example: if Jigsaw insists he never kills his victims, what happened with the girl played by Beverly Mitchell? And the twist at the end is good with the son but not the other huge thing. Although more movies could be made as a result, they won't nearly have the scary overtones. And the acting in this movie sucked.
  76. CurtH.
    Nov 3, 2005
    6
    I think the movie was alright, but it could have been way better. The "games" that the jigsaw killer used in the first movie were much better. I think they shouldn't have grouped that many people in one house for the main plot. I also think that the first "game" with the nail mask was almost better than the rest of the movie.
  77. Joe
    Nov 3, 2005
    9
    " There is no way to get past the unbelievable, gaping plot gap" A- great sentence form (that is sarcasm. B- what was the 'gaping plot gap'? Because I missed it. The movie is great- makes you think. From the first scene. Here is a exercise. The whole movie, from the first scene, put yourself in the shoes of the people in the game. Try to ignore the dramatic irony when you can.
  78. Kharagh
    Nov 2, 2005
    10
    Brilliant!
  79. Amy
    Nov 2, 2005
    6
    Not as clever as the first one, well on it's way to becoming another 'slasher' flick, a group of people trapped in a house, most of them die, it's a bit old. Plus, i thought the bathroom was under a warehouse in the first one? Didn't see the ending coming though, although with hindsight it was kind of obvious.
  80. chuck76
    Nov 1, 2005
    6
    A clever twist on the original and not a bad little yarn, can see this series running and running. The acting is still pretty ropey though and I've always had a problem with the fact that not all of the victims are guilty of a serious crime, maybe that's just me.
  81. MarshallM.
    Nov 1, 2005
    9
    It was an amazingly twisted horror film. i kept thinking about it after i had already seen it, the twist were NOT unbeleivable at all. the whole movie was well with-in the "possibility" of a serial killer. it made sense, as farfetched as it may sound. P.S. the acting was waaaay better in this one then the first, that's what really pushed it up a notch for me.
  82. LaraS.
    Nov 1, 2005
    8
    Provocative & gory, yeah, but... Where are the film threat reviews in on the metascore?!
  83. Adam
    Oct 31, 2005
    8
    Good stuff.
  84. MicahA.
    Oct 31, 2005
    7
    Not bad, not great. My main problem is that the movie plays out like a television show...(one main plot, one subplot)...but it can't seem to decide which is which. Plus, maybe it's just me being overcritical, but if the Jigsaw killer is so clever, why does he leave OBVIOUS clues like "The numbers to the safe are in the back of your mind," and what's more, why don't the Not bad, not great. My main problem is that the movie plays out like a television show...(one main plot, one subplot)...but it can't seem to decide which is which. Plus, maybe it's just me being overcritical, but if the Jigsaw killer is so clever, why does he leave OBVIOUS clues like "The numbers to the safe are in the back of your mind," and what's more, why don't the people realize immediately what that means? The ending wasn't as shocking as the end of the first movie, but I gotta give respect to Tobin Bell...he played a great character. All in all, the movie drags in some areas, but if you liked the first one, you'll probably like this one as well. Expand
  85. 10SPRO
    Oct 31, 2005
    9
    This was better than SAW. I took those things which worked well in the original and made them better. If you want to be scared and understand that there will be blood shed, you will like SAW 2. Plus, in response to someone who says they saw SAW 2, you can say, "I saw SAW 2, too." An excellent movie.
  86. JimiM.
    Oct 30, 2005
    9
    Better than the first!
  87. BrianC.
    Oct 30, 2005
    10
    This movie was just as good as the original. The plot twist was amazing, and so was the story. Saw 2 is a great movie.
  88. EthanP.
    Oct 30, 2005
    9
    I can understand why people would hate this movie, but I'm surprised to see people react to it with indifference. The combination of both movies is a visceral experience superior to any other horror movie/franchise of this decade. The writing is outstanding--not so much in terms of eloquent one-liners--but in telling a story with incredible intensity, irony, and subtle reflections of I can understand why people would hate this movie, but I'm surprised to see people react to it with indifference. The combination of both movies is a visceral experience superior to any other horror movie/franchise of this decade. The writing is outstanding--not so much in terms of eloquent one-liners--but in telling a story with incredible intensity, irony, and subtle reflections of American complacency. I mean, if this movie is so bad, why is it a jillion times more riveting than the slasher crap films (which are still fun in their own way) and more shocking than the "thoughtful" mystery ghost stories being imported from Japan that're really no more than stories about the little boy or girl who drowned last week and suddenly turned evil. Saw II is sadistic, horrific, and more creative than any movie since Saw I, and more enthralling than anything M. Night Shyamalan is brooding over at the moment. And it's all the more rare in that its a sequal that builds upon everything that worked in the first movie as though the writer knows that we know that the exploration of this story line didn't end a year ago. Expand
  89. Geacag.
    Oct 30, 2005
    10
    This is the best.
  90. G
    Oct 30, 2005
    2
    I liked this movie better when it was called "Cube."
  91. RyanM
    Oct 29, 2005
    2
    Man, oh man. I went into this fully expecting some logical fallacies in the plot, but Saw 2 still managed to disappoint me. Twist endings can be cool, but not when they render most of the preceding events irrelevant. The gore and suspense are there; however, if you're looking for a meaning to the madness, you'll probably walk out scratching your head.
  92. MikeB
    Oct 29, 2005
    10
    Despite what some people missed, this was easily the most gripping, nerve shredding, edge -of-seat horror/thriller to appear this year. Admittedly, after liking the first one so much I thought this was just going to be a cash in, but Leigh Wannell and his new co writer/director have managed to surpass the twists ans shocks of the first installment. To those who argue it's not clever Despite what some people missed, this was easily the most gripping, nerve shredding, edge -of-seat horror/thriller to appear this year. Admittedly, after liking the first one so much I thought this was just going to be a cash in, but Leigh Wannell and his new co writer/director have managed to surpass the twists ans shocks of the first installment. To those who argue it's not clever or shocking - a) did you guess how, where, and why? I er.... doubt it. And b)could you come up with a smarter twist. Yes, it's a little implausible, but not impossible, and there are many more sillier movies around. If you like raw and fresh horror movies, this is for you, no doubt about it. At the end of the day, it's entertaining in the way it promises to be. Rather this than Open Water 2... there's a scary thought.... Expand
  93. KainS.
    Oct 29, 2005
    10
    Awesome...if you didnt like it you jus didnt understand it fully.
  94. JesseM.
    Oct 28, 2005
    7
    Good movie. Although the first one was better, this was still an awesome movie. Nice ending just like the first.
  95. themizofosawsucks
    Oct 28, 2005
    0
    Crapola who the heck like's this manure. the embodiment of everything wrong woth hollytown.
  96. MattR
    Oct 28, 2005
    1
    An unlikely comedic hit, Saw II is sure to be grouped with the year's most hilarious (if unintentionally so) films. I give it a 1, but only because I'm a nice guy.
  97. AMovieCritic
    Oct 28, 2005
    7
    Let me start by saying that I HATED Saw. It was boring, it was (at times) annoying to follow, and the twist ending that everyone was talking about was really no big deal at all. So I wasn't expecting much when I went into Saw II, but this movie is great! It starts off kind of dull, and takes a few minutes to really get good, but as the movie approaches the end, it's really Let me start by saying that I HATED Saw. It was boring, it was (at times) annoying to follow, and the twist ending that everyone was talking about was really no big deal at all. So I wasn't expecting much when I went into Saw II, but this movie is great! It starts off kind of dull, and takes a few minutes to really get good, but as the movie approaches the end, it's really edge-of-your-seat action. Really a cool, fun, suspense thriller with plenty of violence. And a twist ending, of course. It was a little confusing, but if someone explains it to you after seeing the movie, you'll likely get it. I didn't find either Saw or Saw II scary, but one thing I have to give the first movie credit for was that it was a bit more scary than this sequel. The death scenes in the first movie were much more scary and unsettling (IMO) than Saw II's. BUT, that's really the only advantage. I liked Saw II a lot better than the first one. It was more action packed and suspenseful, there were a lot less "flashbacks" (which I found annoying in the first Saw,) and the plot twist ending actually had something to do with the movie's story. Don't expect anything really scary, though. Just expect a violent suspense thriller. If you loved Saw, you'll probably end up not liking this sequel as much, but if you just liked Saw, or even didn't like it, this sequel's much more exciting (although maybe not as scary) which makes it more entertaining. I am taking a couple points away for the ending, though. It is really great, and was revealed in a very cool way. but it was confusing. If someone who DID get it explains it to you, it suddenly clicks, but it's never fun to leave a movie with a "huge twist ending" and to have not gotten it. Still, Saw II is a great movie. Recommended. Recommended. Expand
  98. TracyR
    Oct 28, 2005
    10
    Saw in my opinion was one of the most thought provoking unique horror films of my generation (I'm 21) I was scared that the second one wouldn't live up to the first but after the movie ended I know I loved it just as much if not more than the first. This movie did have some flaws...but the good definitely dominated the bad. I even felt as though the acting was good.
  99. ChrisM.
    Oct 28, 2005
    0
    Just saw the movie. Very disappointed. Did not like the ending at all. I was so psyched to see the sequel what a bummer. They could have done sooooo much more. Not gruesome at all. To much hype with the gore. I tried to be open minded as far as sequels go but once again another flop. I was hoping for a real torture chamber with unbelievable horror....not this time. Bottom Line If you Just saw the movie. Very disappointed. Did not like the ending at all. I was so psyched to see the sequel what a bummer. They could have done sooooo much more. Not gruesome at all. To much hype with the gore. I tried to be open minded as far as sequels go but once again another flop. I was hoping for a real torture chamber with unbelievable horror....not this time. Bottom Line If you didn't like "The Grudge" then please save your money and your time. Expand
  100. MalcomM.
    Oct 28, 2005
    0
    She sells sea hells on the see saw. Heehaw. heehaw. What an ass! This is the kind of snuff nonsense that creates senseless serial killers out there in the real world.
Metascore
40

Mixed or average reviews - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 28
  2. Negative: 10 out of 28
  1. It's not a film, it's an excuse to show victims bleeding at the mouth, or getting shot in the eye, or plucking out their own eyeballs. Most gruesome of all, the sequel oozes dialogue that is best described as "functional."
  2. 30
    What's worth noting is how much greater deliberation was given to the marketing than the screenplay of this cursory dud, rushed to theaters exactly a year after its amusing predecessor.
  3. 70
    For the most part the film succeeds in producing a frightening Halloween weekend experience.