User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 222 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 50 out of 222

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
  1. Sep 18, 2011
    6
    Surprisingly despite the gruesome cinematography and a cynically unexplained plot, "Saw 3" bests the its other 2 prequels by focusing deeply into character depth. Although the depth is shallow, at least they tried.
  2. Nov 19, 2010
    6
    Gorier than the first two combined, Saw 3 officially labels the series as torture porn. Despite the more emotional path it takes, this instalment has little else to offer asides more smart twists and well-elaborated tortures, which wouldâ
  3. Sep 1, 2010
    6
    More grizzly horror from the Jigsaw chap & his side-kick.
    This time it just seems to be a series of gore set-pieces rather than a plot like the first two.
    Some truly horrible moments & where it falls down on actual story, the effects & traps are top notch.
  4. Oct 19, 2010
    6
    it wasn't as good as the original, but it beats the second movie in just one shot. it wasn't a bad movie, but it was this close and it ended the trilogy that focuses on John Kramer also known as Jigsaw. Saw III is also worth a try.
  5. Nov 25, 2011
    7
    It was ok. I didnt like the female that played Amanda at all and I thought she overacted quite a bit in the film. The rest of the cast was ok and Bell once again steals the show as Jigsaw. The traps were a lot sicker this time around and actually pretty frightening if you ask me.
  6. Dec 3, 2010
    5
    This movie is alright, it is too long- I thought Jigsaw died in the second movie. I mean- it's gory and disgusting, this movie needs to be shorter, i saw the unrated cut, it was too long
  7. Oct 31, 2010
    9
    It's worse than the first and the second movies, but it's quite good. It's a film very exciting and the end is excellent, even better than Saw I. It wasn't the best film of the year but it's impossible take your eyes of it.
  8. May 22, 2011
    5
    Saw III is the most unique entry in the series thus far, Jigsaw's "game" takes a less important role this round for character development, in which you learn more about Amanda and how she's coping with her new life, and it really adds depth and makes her all the more enjoyable, while Jigsaw does still have a victim dealing with the tests, those parts ultimately aren't enjoyable, and one part in particular involving a lady in the freezer made me a little sick, not because it was gory (as there was none in this scene), but because it was just inappropriate, and the fantastic endings these movies are known for isn't here this time, yeah it throws a little twist in, but it was honestly just retarded, honestly it's not the best Saw yet and will divide fans sharply, but if your like me and want to know more about Amanda's character, this does a good job of that, but everything else like plot, action, and the ending all suffer in the end. Expand
  9. Apr 29, 2011
    7
    The Saw series is pretty good, and this is probably the best one of them all. But still, if you strip away the decent plot, it's just blood and guts, which is alright if you're not eating (which I was at the time). It gets a 7 because, out of all of the movies in the series, it is the only one I would go back to and watch again.
  10. Jun 13, 2012
    5
    This is probably the most "human" of the Saw films. You're actually allowed to get under the characters' skin this time round, and given time to care for the sympathetic protagonists, a melancholic surgeon (Bahar Soomekh) kidnapped to care for the dying John Kramer, and a grieving father (Angus Macfadyen) who is forced by Kramer to confront those responsible for the death of his young son. Tobin Bell is still great as Jigsaw, and steals the show despite being bedridden throughout the film, but it is Jigsaw's apprentice Amanda (Shawnee Smith) who is actually more terrifying than her mentor. Without Jigsaw's strict (if misguided) moral code, she's more like a rabid dog than a calculated killer with purpose, and actually seems to relish the misery she puts others through on her master's orders. There are some particularly nasty and inventive traps, the best of which unusually for a "torture porn" film actually doesn't involve bodily destruction, but instead rancid pig carcasses are turned into slurry and dumped on the victim. The film is generally quite engaging and keeps your interest until the final act which well and truly begins to ramble and comes across as rather preachy. The now traditional Saw "twist" doesn't come as a surprise either, making me miss the ingenuity of the first installment's spectacular ending. Saw III is far better than Saw II because it's written by series masterminds Leigh Wannell and James Wan, and only directed by Darren Lynn Bousman (one of the failures of the second film was that Bousman wrote and directed, and he is far less talented as a screenwriter than he is behind the camera) and so the film feels more connected to the first film than any other in the series. That said, the message of the franchise (if there is one) has well and truly been lost by this point, and the third film brings very few new ideas to the table. You can appreciate Saw III for decent writing, good performances and a certain perverse joy in death in cruel and unusual ways, but the twisted novelty of the series is beginning to wear off, showing a glimpse of the ugly truth at its heart. Perhaps they should have ended Jigsaw's blood-soaked saga here, but as well we know, box office returns can be ever so persuasive... Expand
  11. Mar 25, 2012
    5
    I have really mixed feelings about Saw III. As a fan of the first two Saw films, I was intrigued to see what Wan and Whenell would do with the series, and the result was somewhat unusual. Tobin Bell, once again reprising his role as Jigsaw/John Kramer, is the standout in terms of acting. It was hard to care about the other characters, with the possible exception of Amanda, simply because they're portrayed so unconvincingly. It was interesting seeing the new focus on character development come into play, as Kramer transforms Amanda from survivor to apprentice. The ending really did surprise me; it's revealed this game was truly testing Amanda, and Lynn and Jeff were merely pawns. Traps in Saw III were gruesome, especially the pig carcass pit. My only problem with them is how straightforward they are to solve. Saw III was certainly a more mature entry in the series, but as usual, the interesting premise is let down by unconvincing acting and awkward, jumpy editing Expand
  12. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    Woo! Awesome fella. Better than the previous one. Still a little shallow and too incomplete. But the deaths are quite favorable to my preference. The ending really breaks my heart though.
  13. Dec 4, 2011
    7
    A lot better then the previous film. The cast is solid and Tobin Bell once against steals the show with his performance as Jigsaw. Overall, It was scary and kept you on the edge of your seat during some traps. I enjoyed it.
  14. Feb 12, 2012
    6
    The acting was ok but no where near as good as the first two films. The traps were scary though and imo the best in the series. The plot isnt interesting though and fails to keep you entertained like the first two films did. Its an above average horror film but thats about it.
  15. Oct 30, 2012
    9
    Ok Saw II was pretty crap, Saw III however goes back to what made the original great. It begins to continue the story of detective Matthews but then loses itself in an even bigger story, someone is copying the Jigsaw killings but giving their victims no hope of escape. With Jigsaw on his death bed dying of a brain tumour and his apprentice Amanda being a pretty stubborn **** a doctor and her husband must play their own games to earn back their lives. Though the plot is pretty crappy the traps are nice and finally some good gore rather than the **** few litres of blood we have been used to over the past couple of years. Intestines, brains and even some mulched up pigs are thrown into the line up with the most disgusting Saw yet. Expand
  16. Nov 2, 2013
    7
    I have never imagined that the films would last so far. "Saw III" improves on both its predecessors, and this time includes some love features. This is one of the first horror films that made me feel disgusted and sympathetic at the same time. Oh, and there's more blood and gore here too.
  17. Oct 2, 2012
    5
    If the series ended here it could have been a very good horror franchise, becuase Saw III fits very well. It may seem like another re hash of Saw and Saw II, and watching people suffer is not really a sight for the eyes, but excluding that Saw III is actually quite good. Lightly brushing over ideas of human choice (much like Saw , and Saw II), and having a tense story line its quite a ride, although surprisingly you are actually more on edge not watching the traps but Jigsaw, Lynne and Amanda's story. By no means a horror masterpiece, and will no way win any acting awards, it still a thrill ride, but if it had just gone that bit deeper into the humanity and decision side of things instead of caring about the worse ways someone could die. Expand
  18. May 3, 2013
    9
    A nightmarish film but yet so good at its plot it is sensitively awesome. And seeing Jigsaw finally getting killed was a important part in the Saw trilogy. Definitely a must watch for die-hard Saw fans like me.
  19. Feb 27, 2014
    6
    Back on track after the second one. The story is an improvement and the ending is clever. The series is better when there is more storytelling and focus on the relationship instead of people just trying to survive. Also I must point out that the score or the theme music used in this movie is unforgettable. However, due to the extreme gore throughout this movie it is not for everyone even those who have the strongest of stomach's might turn away. In the end this is a big improvement from the second and only slightly worse than the first, I give it 61.0/100 (above average) Expand
  20. Mar 4, 2014
    7
    Saw III is just too long for the story, but the characters are pretty good and I'm glad they didn't focus on the traps. Nevertheless one trap with the naked woman doesn't fit in the series, because it's the only erotic scene!
  21. Dec 23, 2013
    6
    Saw III, which is most of the fan's favorite it seems. This was a good movie, and a worthy entry in the series, but it just wasn't as good as Saw or Saw II. The deaths are crazy graphic and fun, and it does mark the end of Jigsaw, which makes the movie interesting and fun to watch. Good movie, 6/10.
  22. Sep 4, 2014
    7
    "Saw III" is another great entry in the Saw series. It's gruesome, thrilling, and unpredictable. There's actually some good acting here and great cinematography. I felt there were too many flashbacks in this film which makes the movie less interesting, and it eventually became somewhat repetitive, but I still recommend it for fans of the series.
Metascore
48

Mixed or average reviews - based on 16 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 16
  2. Negative: 4 out of 16
  1. 63
    An improvement over the tedious "Saw II" (2005), this second sequel to the surprise 2004 hit still features the series' trademark gruesome "games" but shifts the focus to the relationships among the characters.
  2. While Saw III provides a decent number of new twists, psychological as well as torture-wise, it necessarily lacks the originality of its predecessors.
  3. The most depressing thing about this series is not the creativity of the bloodletting but the bleak view of human nature.